Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Core i9 9900K vs. AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Linux Gaming Benchmarks

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Core i9 9900K vs. AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Linux Gaming Benchmarks

    Phoronix: Intel Core i9 9900K vs. AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Linux Gaming Benchmarks

    Complementing the just-published Intel Core i9 9900K Linux benchmarks with the launch-day embargo lift are the Linux gaming benchmarks... This article is looking at the Linux performance between the Core i9 9900K and AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X in a variety of native Linux games as well as comparing the performance-per-Watt. So if you are a Linux gamer and deciding between these sub-$500 processors, this article is for you.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=26995

  • lsatenstein
    replied
    Hi Michael. This is off topic.. Can you be more last than last? The following posted sentence irked me.

    Lastly for this launch-day comparison is a look at the AC system power consumption over the course of all these Linux games benchmarked with the Ryzen 7 2700X and Core i9 9900K paired with the Radeon RX Vega 64.

    I would never use lastly just as you do not use firstly. I trivially edited the above sentence to appear as shown below, with the inserted one comma.

    Last for this launch-day comparison is a look at the AC system power consumption over the course of all these Linux games, benchmarked with the Ryzen 7 2700X and Core i9 9900K paired with the Radeon RX Vega 64.

    Even so, I would have made two sentences from the above compound one.
    I apologize, but that lastly sentence irked me.

    Leave a comment:


  • oooverclocker
    replied
    It's a really good sign for Ryzen to being faster in several benchmarks using RadeonSI although it costs half the price. However, the RADV performance in CPU limits sucks. Either LLVM or RADV has a huge potential to improve when paired with non-monolithic CPU architectures. It should be figured out, what causes this.

    Leave a comment:


  • duby229
    replied
    Originally posted by Dr. Banana View Post
    Why is it that you're testing dota 2 at 3840x2160 when this is a CPU test? Surely one should use lower resolutions for a CPU test?

    " A variety of Linux-native games were carried out for this comparison using the Phoronix Test Suite. Rather than just running the games at low resolutions and low quality settings in order to be CPU bound, this testing was focused on being more real-world to Linux gamers and thus tested at a variety of modern resolutions and quality settings."

    And I actually thank you for that, but who plays a MOBA at 3840x2160? I mean, a lot of of people do I guess, but I think the people who play on 1080p/1440p are in the majority.
    The problem with this theory is that nobody plays games at the worst possible settings. If you benchmark at the worst possible settings then you are generating numbers that represent -Nobody- at all..... 0 people will actually experience the result that you artificially produced....

    EDIT: The first rule of benchmarking literally is, Benchmark what you use in the configuration you use it in. Nothing else you can derive matters because you don't use it that way.
    Last edited by duby229; 10-20-2018, 11:13 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • OMTDesign
    replied
    I am impressed to see that the 2700X was able to match the performance of the 9900K in many of these tests.

    I am a bit confused about the Frames per Watts graphs, while the efficiencies of the processors may be a useful metric, I don't think many gamers will care.

    Leave a comment:


  • xpue
    replied
    Originally posted by varikonniemi View Post
    i9 competes with threadripper not ryzen 7.
    Well, threadripper is slower in games too.

    Leave a comment:


  • ZUKMAN
    replied
    Maybe its good idea to have Fps per dollar graph in gaming articles.

    Leave a comment:


  • varikonniemi
    replied
    i9 competes with threadripper not ryzen 7.

    Leave a comment:


  • edwaleni
    replied
    Anandtech says the 9900 is memory bound on many tests. They also noticed that the "turbo core" function to 5Ghz is only on 2 cores at any one time. (previous version only had 1)

    I was following pretty well until Ian tried to explain how HT works relative to his tests.

    Also showed that *any* app using AVX2/AVX-512 would get gaudy numbers, so they tested both with and without.

    Leave a comment:


  • pinguinpc
    replied
    Originally posted by Dr. Banana View Post
    Why is it that you're testing dota 2 at 3840x2160 when this is a CPU test? Surely one should use lower resolutions for a CPU test?

    " A variety of Linux-native games were carried out for this comparison using the Phoronix Test Suite. Rather than just running the games at low resolutions and low quality settings in order to be CPU bound, this testing was focused on being more real-world to Linux gamers and thus tested at a variety of modern resolutions and quality settings."

    And I actually thank you for that, but who plays a MOBA at 3840x2160? I mean, a lot of of people do I guess, but I think the people who play on 1080p/1440p are in the majority.
    According steam 1440p only have 3.59% compared around 90% of 1080p and lower resolutions






    Leave a comment:

Working...
X