AMD Ryzen 9 3900X evaluate: Finally, some competitors for Intel’s Core i9-9900Ok

Should you ever spend $500 on a gaming CPU? Personally, I believe you’d be mad to spend that form of cash on a processor, particularly when Intel’s Core i7-9700K gives such unimaginable gaming efficiency for about two thirds of the associated fee. If you are certainly one of these so-called energy customers with $500-odd to spare on getting absolutely the bestest best gaming CPU cash should buy, nonetheless, then your selections have actually simply doubled with the introduction of AMD’s new Ryzen 9 3900X.

Priced at $499, AMD are positioning this chip as their Intel Core i9-9900K killer, which at time of writing is only a bit cheaper at £485 / $490. The Ryzen 9 3900X, nonetheless, is sort of a bit beefier within the outdated specs division – and comes with an honest cooler bundled within the field, which its Intel rival doesn’t. Packing 12 cores and 24 threads versus Intel’s reasonably piddly-sounding 8-core-16-thread providing, the Ryzen 9 3900X is an absolute velocity machine on the subject of basic desktop efficiency. Its gaming prowess, nonetheless? That’s a complete different story.

Unfortunately, it’s not a narrative that has a very pleased ending for AMD. Again, I ought to stress that, very similar to my different gaming CPU opinions, my essential precedence right here is discovering the perfect gaming CPU for gaming, and gaming alone. I’m not likely fussed about how briskly it will possibly render animation packages or tear by way of inventive functions. That’s not what I exploit my PC for. Instead, I wish to know which CPU is finest tuned to offer me the quickest speeds whereas enjoying games – and in that respect, having 12 cores and 24 threads at my disposal makes completely naff all distinction.

Before we dive into my check outcomes, although, a short phrase about CPU gaming benchmarks. As I defined over in my AMD Ryzen 7 3700X review, getting an correct image of a CPU’s gaming chops remains to be fairly tough. As our mates at Digital Foundry have explained in the past, quite a lot of PC benchmarks both don’t check your CPU correctly, or just aren’t very correct within the first place. Fortunately, a handful of gaming benchmarks have gotten lots higher at this just lately, with the likes of Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Forza Horizon 4, Assassin’s Creed Odyssey and extra all offering an in-depth have a look at your CPU’s efficiency in addition to what your graphics card’s doing.

That stated, there are additionally a number of different components that may influence gaming efficiency, equivalent to your graphics card, the kind of RAM you’ve obtained, and even what sort of storage you’ve put in the game on. As a consequence, getting a really correct image of a CPU’s gaming efficiency is difficult, however I’ve finished the perfect I can with the gear obtainable to me.

Now I do know my 16GB of Corsair Vengeance LED RAM isn’t the quickest stuff on the earth, but it surely is the identical stuff I used to check the Core i9-9900Ok with. I additionally saved the identical graphics card and energy provide, and used the Ryzen’s bundled AMD Wraith Prism cooler to offer me the perfect like-for-like comparability scores in opposition to the BeQuiet BK009 Pure Rock tower cooler I’ve been utilizing for all of my Intel CPU testing.

And as you’ll be able to see from the outcomes under, the Core i9-9900Ok nonetheless comes out on high – and by fairly a big margin at 1080p, too. With the exception of the ever-uniform Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, the Core i9-9900Ok managed a minimum of one other 8fps in Total War and Forza Horizon 4, and one other 15fps in Shadow of the Tomb Raider. It was a a lot nearer race at 1440p, all advised, however the Core i9-9900Ok nonetheless managed to beat the Ryzen 9 3900X in each game going.

As I stated in my Ryzen 7 3700X evaluate, although – once we’re coping with 100fps+ speeds within the first place, what’s one other 5-10fps right here and there anyway? Is it one thing you’re truly going to have the ability to see and respect with out the help of a body charge counter? Probably not.

I must also word that I used to be, the truth is, capable of match these Core i9-9900Ok scores as soon as I re-tested the Ryzen 9 3900X with the 16GB of G.Skill Trident Royal Z RAM that got here with my Ryzen testing pack. Indeed, as soon as I’d caught that in my PC and utilized its XMP profile to run at its high velocity of 3600MHz, the Ryzen 9 3900X shot as much as an identical common body charges in Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, and even surpassed the Core i9-9900Ok in Total War, averaging 124fps at 1080p and 97fps at 1440p. Forza Horizon 4, in the meantime, remained at 142fps and 124fps, exhibiting no profit in any respect.

However, as I additionally famous in my Ryzen 7 3700X evaluate, sooner RAM means the next general price. Those G.Skill Trident sticks price £214 / $190 at time of writing, which is sort of 100 quid greater than my £120 Corsair sticks. Admittedly, my specific Corsair mannequin doesn’t appear to be on sale any extra within the US, which makes it a bit tough to do an correct value comparability. For these shopping for within the UK, although, when you consider one other £100-odd on your RAM, you’re most likely paying as a lot as (if no more than) you’ll for a cooler to go together with the i9-9900Ok, placing you again at sq. one.

Viewed on this gentle, then, the one response I can actually muster for the Ryzen 9 3900X’s stonking multicore efficiency within the Cinebench benchmark is a form of bemused shoulder shrug. Yes, it’s completely huge (see under), and sure, it’s going to most likely be a good outdated whereas earlier than we see Intel give you one thing even remotely as fast of their mainstream Core line-up (I imply, it took till Core i9-9900Ok earlier than we had an Intel CPU that might beat AMD’s Ryzen 7 2700X, so it’s going to most likely be a minimum of one other 12 months earlier than Intel give you one thing even sooner, if not longer).

Does it assist the Ryzen 9 3900X’s gaming efficiency, although? Not actually. I imply, simply have a look at how shut it’s to its 8-core-16-thread cousin, the Ryzen 7 3700X. By all means knock your self out with the 3900X should you’re an elite video editor, skilled animator or another top-tier inventive particular person, however for me, the amount of cash you’re spending on each this and the Core i9-9900Ok actually isn’t mirrored within the quantity of additional efficiency you’re getting over their Core i7 / Ryzen 7 kinfolk.

Admittedly, you’ll nearly actually get higher outcomes from each CPUs by making use of higher cooling options – however when each of them price round $500, then the Core i9-9900Ok will nearly actually nonetheless come out on high for gaming. Really, although, you most likely shouldn’t purchase both CPU, as I’m simply not satisfied anyone truly wants them. Instead, I’d follow the Core i7-9700Ok if you need absolutely the bestest best gaming CPU speeds, or go for the Ryzen 7 3700X should you don’t need the faff of discovering a great cooler. You’ll be a lot happier, and your pockets will thanks for it later, too.