Quote from: John Smith on January 12, 2021, 14:43:30
Whilst AMD is the multi-threaded king, and has very good gaming performance, Intel always wins when it comes to raw gaming performance. As stated by Linus Tech Tips, these AMD chips are going to be more expensive than their Intel counterparts, making Intel look like a better choice for people who only game and do nothing else. If only Intel could get their shiz together and add more cores to their CPUs and stop using their 14nm +++++++++ chips and start using 10nm or even 7nm chips, they could actually compete with AMD when it comes to multithreaded performance as well.

Not really.
To say Intel is the 'king in raw performance' is plain wrong.
Compared to Zen 2, Intel was barely 10% ahead of AMD (in most cases, much less) in single core performance and most games whilst badly losing to AMD in multi-core performance and efficiency.
Also, the main reason Intel got that kind of an advantage was due to very high single core clocks (because they refined the 14nm process so many times now it allows them to do that).

However, since AMD released Zen 3, Intel now started losing in both single core and multi-core performance while also further slipping down in efficiency.

Rocket lake has little to no IPC gains compared to previous uArch... its able to achieve and maintain higher clocks due to lower amount of cores, at the expense of high power consumption.

Saying that Intel is king at anything these days would be plain wrong because people mostly say that since they lack the context behind what the company is doing to get those performance numbers.

Intel has been lagging behind AMD in IPC since Zen 2.
Zen 3 further widened the chasm between itself and Intel with IPC gains, and easily beats Intel in multi-core and efficiency.

When it comes to my friends, family and acquaintances, they usually have little to no idea on what kind of technology/hw they are using and when it comes to buying new stuff, I always intervene to try and get them an affordable machine that will last them a long time - and these days, that's AMD.

Umm...  wait.  There are commenters who cite getting GeekBench 5 numbers or AMD chipz higher than 1800.  A little overclocking on stock.  And the Intel partz are what, hitting 1800s too?   Yawn! 

Seriously:  if you're one of those people endowed with enough money to purchase top-flight memory, top-shelf motherboards, nearly-impossible-to-find AMD 5900×yz processors and a 29 inch superwide monitor, its not like you're going to stuff a $99 Walmart special GRFX card in there, you know?

Myself, I tend toward a blend that is balanced.   ± $200 on the MoBo, same on the power supplies, enclosure, fans, $400 to 600 on a CPU, the same on a graphics card, and the same on memory SIMMs, and the combo of NVMe and spinning disk tech.  That homes at $2,000 for the operating-system-less box build. 

Today, you'd easily have a world-class game-winning system sporting 12 cores, 32 GB of memory, terabytes of SSD, hard disk; you'd get wicked fast GPU performance, plenty of power supply reserve capacity, a quiet box with powerful fans.  Whilst gaming, the rig would definitely be a room heater, but so whas?   It'd scream.

So, while Intel is aiming to capture the crown again, market pressure and competitive dynamics mean ... a great big yawn.   So what, Intel?  Its not like your Model 11 chip is hitting the 2500 to 3000 band, is it... Not at all.  Yet, again, for the price, if it really will be competitive with AMD's top-shelf offerings, then hey... I'd happy use Intel as well.  But not "more money for the same performance".  My money MUST go into real, not imagined, performance. 

GoatGuy

Know what pisses me off? When leaks and reviewers state 11900K is destroying AMD in geekbench single core and PURPOSEFULLY using the WORST results from Zen 3.

You can easily find results hitting 1800+ on 5950X, even my 5950X does 5.1GHz single.

Intel, the Nokia-Blackberry of 14nm+++++++++++++++++++++++!

I love how they reduce the core count to and increase power consumption in a desperate attempt to look less outdated.

AMD Ryzen 5000 all the way in 2021.

Quote from: John Smith on January 12, 2021, 14:43:30
Whilst AMD is the multi-threaded king, and has very good gaming performance, Intel always wins when it comes to raw gaming performance. As stated by Linus Tech Tips, these AMD chips are going to be more expensive than their Intel counterparts, making Intel look like a better choice for people who only game and do nothing else. If only Intel could get their shiz together and add more cores to their CPUs and stop using their 14nm +++++++++ chips and start using 10nm or even 7nm chips, they could actually compete with AMD when it comes to multithreaded performance as well.

But they don't. So they lose. Later this year their 14++++++ will have to compete with 5nm Zen4 and maybe they can reduce 2 more cores so single core score can go higher with that super high power consumption and say Hey! Our single core is more powerful with raw gaming performance.

Whilst AMD is the multi-threaded king, and has very good gaming performance, Intel always wins when it comes to raw gaming performance. As stated by Linus Tech Tips, these AMD chips are going to be more expensive than their Intel counterparts, making Intel look like a better choice for people who only game and do nothing else. If only Intel could get their shiz together and add more cores to their CPUs and stop using their 14nm +++++++++ chips and start using 10nm or even 7nm chips, they could actually compete with AMD when it comes to multithreaded performance as well.