You have a huge library of data to pull from to do some general comparisons, use that. Just write an article like "The first review of Intel's Core i9-10980XE 18-core chip has popped up in the wild" and talk about the strengths of the chip. Why not just write an article about its performance? Why compare it to a CPU that isn't out yet? Why compare it to CPUs that are simply NOT the competition? This thing is going to be priced more similarly (I'm saying generously, it is likely to be a lot more) to a 32 core Threadripper if Intel stays true to form. Justin.m.beauvais said:Yeah, buuuuuuuut the Ryzen 9 3900X and the 9900K are very much NOT the competition for this CPU. At the same time, we're more interested in seeing what the Ryzen 9 3950X can do, although given the segment in which the Core i9-10980XE is in, it would only be fair to compare it against AMD's Threadripper 3000-series offering. The Ryzen 9 3900X undoubtedly put up a respectable fight. Nonetheless, if we compare the Core i9-10980XE and the Ryzen 9 3900X, the results reveal that AMD's chip is better at gaming.ĭue to the significant difference in cores, it's a no-brainer that the Core i9-10980XE would come out on top in software that scales with cores and memory bandwidth. It's evident that gaming favors processors with high operating clocks, so the Core i9-9900K continues to be the fastest gaming processor on the planet. For the sake of simplicity, we'll look at the 1920 x 1080 results.
Lab501 has a pretty extensive gaming test suit.
0 kommentar(er)
