Intel has actually brought its marketing guns to bear on AMD’s Ryzen processors, making a contrast which argues that the Core i7-10700K blows away the Ryzen 9 3900XT in terms of price in addition to performance for video gaming.
Before we come onto the concerns around the fairness of this comparison in the first location, let’s have a look at Intel’s claims here, which were provided by means of a discussion by the chip giant in the APAC region, as highlighted by Wccftech.
To set the background for this battle of the CPUs, the Core i7-10700K is an 8-core (16-thread) processor clocked at 3.8 GHz with an increase to 5.1 GHz. AMD’s Ryzen 9 3900XT presses further to 12-cores (24-threads) with the exact same base clock of 3.8 GHz, with an increase to 4.7 GHz.
Intel’s case then argues that cost-wise, the 10700K keeps up a launch cost of $387 in the US compared to the asking price of $499 for the Ryzen chip –– although that doesn’t reflect present costs at real sellers (more on that later).
So, considered that, Intel wheels out a lot of criteria for 30 games at 1080p resolution in a rig with 16GB of system RAM and an RTX 2080 Ti graphics card (the respective motherboards used aren’t discussed).
The chip giant then trumpets that the 10700K is on a par, or much better than, the 3900XT in 24 of those 30 video games, which there are some big wins for the Core i7. Those include:
- 23% quicker in Total War: Warhammer II
- 17% much faster in League of Legends
- 15% quicker in Beast Hunter World: Iceborne
- 14% faster in Rocket League
Intel’s Core i7-10700K is quicker by more than 3% in 12 video games, and 12 of the games are judged as approximately equal (3% or less difference), with AMD winning in 6 titles (including CS: GO).
Thus Intel concludes that the 10700K is a bargain faster over a selection of games, on balance, plus it’s considerably cheaper than the Ryzen chip.
Is this specific contrast a fair one? There are a variety of reasons we didn’t think that’s the case. For starters, we need to keep in mind that Intel has actually undoubtedly handpicked that library of video games (albeit from popular titles that have a benchmark mode). Concerning the price contrasts noted, the 10700K may have an advised cost of $387, however, it’s costing more like around $410 in the US. The 3900XT is selling at $479, not $499, so the price space isn’t rather as wide as Intel makes out in the presentation.
Although the 10700K is still a good piece more affordable, of course; there’s no rejecting that. There are a couple of other things to keep in mind here.
The 3900XT provides you with a great offer more efficiency when it comes to certain situations, like streaming while video gaming, for example, and those 12-cores will likewise make a difference outside of video gaming when it comes to running heavyweight apps. Those examples might be major considerations for some buyers.
If you’re talking purely video gaming, then the 10700K is definitely the winner as Intel recommends– but then the point ends up being about the fairness of the contrast. If you’re talking simply about video gaming, and absolutely nothing else, why would you purchase the 3900XT, and not the 3700X?
With the 3700X, you get 8-cores –– the same as the 10700K, and plenty enough for video gaming –– and there’s no shortage of video gaming benchmark roundups out there which show that the 3700X is just a hair behind the 3900X in terms of efficiency in popular video games (and yes, the XT design is a touch faster than the vanilla 3900X, but still, it’s only a small upgrade).
Then look at the present pricing of the 3700X –– which is $290 at Newegg US today (that’s where we’ve pulled all the rates in this post from) –– and, well, it’s a really different story in regards to price/performance compared to the 10700K (at $410) now, isn’t it? There’s no arguing that Intel’s brand-new Comet Lake chips offer a strong video gaming performance, and these benchmarks are quite eye-opening in some respects –– plus single-core speed stays a significant Intel strength, without a doubt –– but trying to argue that the 10700K somehow has Ryzen whipped in the value stakes is taking things too far on the marketing front.