The Core Ultra 200s seem fine. From the benchmarks I'd rather get a 265k than any AMD CPUIf you're doing work-style tasks that like parallel cores than there may be value against AMD's, but the 9800X3D is the uncontested gaming king of any game you can name. The next best gaming CPU is... the 7800X3D. The 9800X3D is provably in a league of its own.
If you're doing work-style tasks that like parallel cores than there may be value against AMD's, but the 9800X3D is the uncontested gaming king of any game you can name. The next best gaming CPU is... the 7800X3D. The 9800X3D is probably in a league of its own.Theres also the advantage that Ryzens dont tend to burn themself out.
The Core Ultra 200s seem fine. From the benchmarks I'd rather get a 265k than any AMD CPU??? The 265k is slower than a 13700k in most games lol. Frankly this reads as a troll comment.
??? The 265k is slower than a 13700k in most games lol. Frankly this reads as a troll comment.By a couple frames when testing at low resolution. Bump the resolution up to something you're actually playing at and it stops mattering, because you're GPU bound nearly all the time these days
I've bought two AMD CPUs before. One didn't work out of the box, and one died within a couple weeks. Same happened for a friend's AMD CPUWas this pre-Ryzen? AMD were indeed pretty shit back then (and even the first generation of Ryzen had its issues), but it's a very different picture nowdays.
By a couple frames when testing at low resolution. Bump the resolution up to something you're actually playing at and it stops mattering, because you're GPU bound nearly all the time these daysWell you're even more wrong here, Intel is hot garbage at power efficiency in productivity scenarios compared to AMD, around 50% less instructions per watt than the 7800X3D while consuming double the power.
The better power efficiency and productivity performance are what matter to me
Was this pre-Ryzen? AMD were indeed pretty shit back then (and even the first generation of Ryzen had its issues), but it's a very different picture nowdays.I think so? It was around the FX 4100 and FX 8350(?) days. Maybe like a decade ago
(And yeah, it'll probably change again in the future too.)
I think so? It was around the FX 4100 and FX 8350(?) days. Maybe like a decade agoYeah, AMD did not exactly have a very good reputation around that time. IIRC multiple FX-series chips regularly show up on "worst CPUs of all time" lists. I would have avoided them where possible at that time too - but right now, Intel are the ones I wouldn't even consider (even if we're going purely on the basis of the quality / reliability of their products - I might consider their GPUs, those are actually showing some promise of being good value, but not their CPUs).
Well you're even more wrong here, Intel is hot garbage at power efficiency in productivity scenarios compared to AMD, around 50% less instructions per watt than the 7800X3D while consuming double the power.The 7800x3d and 9800x3d are awful for coding. Even the 245k destroys them in compile times
At least they were aware Intel was making a product.Uh, what?
I thought they gave up on this card bullshit years ago after like only 10 people bought one.