Intel has published the first gaming benchmarks for its new Intel Core i9 9900K processor, however it appears that these benchies are a bit misleading. These benchmarks were contacted by Principled Technologies and the games that were tested were: Total War: Warhammer 2, Far Cry 5, Assassin’s Creed: Origins, Civilization VI, Rainbow Six Siege, PUBG, Rise of the Tomb Raider, WoW: Battle for Azeroth, Fortnite, Forza Motorsport 7, Ashes of the Singularity and Counter Strike GO.
Principled Technologies used an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti with 16GB DDR4 memory (at either 2,666MHz or 2,933MHz), and with the Windows 10 1803 build on a Samsung 970 Pro SSD. These benchmarks were shared by PCGamesN, however Hardware Unboxed claimed that the results were in favour of Intel’s hardware and that the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X is actually faster.
In order to prove his point, Hardware Unboxed tested three games (Ashes of the Singularity, Assassin’s Creed Origins and Far Cry 5) via their benchmark tools, the same way that Principled Technologies did its tests for the games that had an built-in benchmark. And according to the results, the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X is noticeably faster than what Intel is claiming.
Hardware Unboxed concluded that the Intel Core i9 9900K will be faster than the Ryzen 7 2700X and the Intel Core i7 8700K, however the performance gap between them will not be as big as Intel claims in its official benchmarks.
Those interested can find below Intel’s benchmarks and Hardware Unboxed’s video that shows the higher results for AMD’s Ryzen 7 2700X CPU.
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
True or not, time will tell.
-after more than two decade, I have been following and study the pc-market, I would says this
– “it´s far from the first time, intel have used very very dirty tricks..”
Imagine my shock !!! ….Intel abusing its market dominance !
…. sad truth is that they will get away with this as they supported by rabid fanboys just like Nvidia .
Paid benchmarks are mostly dodgy, but I won’t jump on any conclusion, as of now, since HUnboxed didn’t have the i9 9900K to test on their rig.
But nonetheless, it doesn’t matter that much, because in the end peeps are STILL going to buy INTEL, because of the brand loyalty, and this company won’t stop milking others as well.
IMO, regardless of benchmarks, these will still sell like hot cakes. INTEL just being typical INTEL…..
Thanks to AMD for bringing the competition. My next big CPU upgrade is going to be ZEN 2, or whatever AMD has in store for next year, and beyond. *fingers crossed*
AMD offers much better “bang for the buck” products.
On a serious side note, it seems “Principled Technologies” used an sub-par MEM configuration for the Ryzen 7 2700X system, making it a dual-rank memory with all 4 memory slots occupied (stock memory speeds), duh!.
Then they set the Ryzen setup’s memory clocks to 2933 MHz. But they did the reverse for the i9 9900K setup though (manually adjusting the frequency settings, to lead the INTEL CPU higher).
I would rather WAIT for other third-party benchmark results instead.
If it weren’t for Ryzen Intel would still be pushing 4 core 8 thread CPUs as the high end of mainstream. All those years they could have made 6 core 12 thread the high end of mainstream for the same price but just sat on it and said no. Now they are even stopping with the cheap TIM and going back to solder under the IHS.
Amazing how some competition pushes a company to stop holding progress back.
+1. Couldn’t agree more.
Lets be honest, most users don’t need 8-12 core cpus. They don’t use their PC for video encoding, cad or 3d modeling.
OK, so You didn’t even watched the video? HU has i9 9900K but due to the NDA they cannot show their results. Also they say that i9 is faster than 2700x but the mem config for r7 are way off intentionaly, so that i9 appears far more OP compared to 2700x. And also I don’t know how many of you are subscribed and/or watching HU videos, but I think they are awesome and one of the most trustworthy reviewers on YT. 😉
Yup, I already watched the video, and I know HU are getting the i9 9900K CPU as well, and it’s also faster. What you have just said is also correct, and I wasn’t refuting any claim either.
Don’t misunderstand me, but I just don’t want to jump on any conclusion, as of now
You can jump to conclusions. Everything about the Ryzen processor was
gimped. What he doesn’t say in the video, but does in twitter because
he found out after the fact, is they they disable half the cores on the
AMD cpu. It’s actually running as a 4 core. If that isn’t scummy, I
don’t know what is.
“Principled” Technologies
Sadly, they lack principle, lol. 😀
This is what happens when You lit fire under Intel a$$:
– take existing line up
– slap in STIM for better thermals (because now apparently issue with “micro cracks” is resolved)
– increase price (apparently suggested price is if ordered 1k bulk)
At this point HEDT refresh only arguable advantages is STIM, but seeing increased TDP from 140W to 165W don’t bode well for consumers. Everything else, at least on paper, is exactly same as i9-7___X release.
To me this launch is more for investors to make them assured that Intel can still produce “stuff”.
I hope Zen2 will kick Intel in rear end as they deserve it for shady practices as hell. If that happens then we will need to worry about AMD, and root for Intel I suppose?, as AMD is one that reached that ridiculous 1k+ CPU price territory.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/65e9f413f2183044213b1b2ce034e2aaa23413133ec9eef4c81aec8bda02c6e3.jpg
Same, it’s Intel.
Still rocking my 5930k
STILL NO REASON TO UPGRADE. Man those refreshes…
3770k here.
i7 4790 here..(non-K SKU)
Paired with a 1080 and 32GB of DDR3 🙂
Usually I game at 1620p – 4k. There are only a few games I can’t max out at 1080p/60…Kingdom Come I’m looking at you.
So much desperation from Intel that it kind of feels sad now.
Desperation? People complain that Intels CPUs increase in price due to high demand, people been talking about it last 2 months, in some countries 8700K is almost 500$.
We already know how 8700K perfoms and with its 6 cores and 12 treads it OWNS AMD 2700x in video games.
9900K is 8700K with 2c/4t more, higher clocks, more cache and hardware mitigated Meltdown.
So do you think its going to run slower vs. 8700K or faster?
Anyone who follows PC tech already knows 9900K will completely smoke the 2700x in terms of gaming performance, the benchmarks will only make it official. But the way Intel is acting is as if 9900K will not be as fast as we all expect it will be and are trying to get ahead of that realization as much as they can.
“…published by Intel…” Just like those published by Nvidia.
Marketers always scouring gaming/PC hw boards looking for what tricks they can use to con consumers.
A PC hardware/component manufacturer misleading the consumer? Madness!
Slight update on this issue.
It seems Principled Technologies has replied to the controversy surrounding their Intel i9 9900K vs AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Benchmark results.
Read the full story here, even though it doesn’t prove much about the results yet, but at least they have answered, and cleared some of the doubts which others were having:
https://wccftech.com/principled-technologies-replies-controversy/