News AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Beats $2,000 Intel Core i9-9980XE In Geekbench Test

penn919

Distinguished
Aug 24, 2010
290
2
18,865
33
If this is true then Intel is in for a hard 18 months in the HEDT and server space. AMD's efficiency is only going to prove out to be more important on really high core count chips.
I could believe that an R9 3950x could beat an i9-9960X...and that would be impressive in its own right, but there's no way it could beat a i9-9980XE. It has 18 cores with HT and Zen 2 is (allegedly) only marginally above/below skylake.

Intel would be shitting bricks if this were actually true though. It would mean AMD undercut their HEDT higher core count cpu by well over half the price...with better performance!
 

mdd1963

Champion
I'm not sure how well Geekbench really measures true performance, or to what degree it might be awarding points for clockspeed, cores, assorted cache values, RAM speed, etc; the CInebench and Blender victories by 3900X are much more tangible, at least to me...
 
Reactions: joeblowsmynose

joeblowsmynose

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2011
608
235
19,370
4
I could believe that an R9 3950x could beat an i9-9960X...and that would be impressive in its own right, but there's no way it could beat a i9-9980XE. It has 18 cores with HT and Zen 2 is (allegedly) only marginally above/below skylake.

Intel would be shitting bricks if this were actually true though. It would mean AMD undercut their HEDT higher core count cpu by well over half the price...with better performance!
Well, the $499 12 core 3900x appears (wait for 3rd party reviews!) to already be mopping the floor with the $1200 Intel HEDT 12 core ... I wonder how it fares against their 14 core?
 
Last edited:

joeblowsmynose

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2011
608
235
19,370
4
I'm not sure how well Geekbench really measures true performance, or to what degree it might be awarding points for clockspeed, cores, assorted cache values, RAM speed, etc; the CInebench and Blender victories by 3900X are much more tangible, at least to me...
Yeah geekbench is stupid, I don't know why people use it. It often makes weird results that make no sense at all. That said, it generally seems to heavily favour intel -- well at least before some of these new Zen2 benches ...

I know Intel fanboys are hating Cinebench these days because it makes AMD look good in multithreaded loads (which Ryzen easily dominates in per dollar multi performance), but the single threaded run aligns well with what you might expect from bottlenecked gaming performance differences. You'll be hearing much more crying from them about Cinebench now that Zen2 appears to be whooping Intel on both metrics, lol. (but wait for the 3rd party reviews people!)

The way I see it - if I have both the Cinebench single threaded and multi-threaded performance numbers, I pretty much got what I need - no need to look much further - I know pretty much how that will translate into the performance on the things I do.

I do a fair bit of 3D rendering and megatasking as well, so that Cinebench multi score is extremely relevant to me.
 
Last edited:

SkyBill40

Honorable
Oct 11, 2013
1,650
11
12,465
223
I could believe that an R9 3950x could beat an i9-9960X...and that would be impressive in its own right, but there's no way it could beat a i9-9980XE. It has 18 cores with HT and Zen 2 is (allegedly) only marginally above/below skylake.

Intel would be shitting bricks if this were actually true though. It would mean AMD undercut their HEDT higher core count cpu by well over half the price...with better performance!
And if it does, in fact, turn out to beat the i9-9980XE... will you come back here and admit you were wrong? Or will you just ignore your comment having been made at all?
 
Jun 14, 2019
1
0
10
0
To the editor (users): although it’s likely that some use will see a much bigger improvement than others. => although it’s likely that some users will see a much bigger improvement than others.
 

penn919

Distinguished
Aug 24, 2010
290
2
18,865
33
And if it does, in fact, turn out to beat the i9-9980XE... will you come back here and admit you were wrong? Or will you just ignore your comment having been made at all?
The math doesn't work out, so I can't be wrong...at least in general. Geekbench might be a poor bench that doesn't accurately depict cpu performance. Think about it, if IPC is roughly the same and the intel has more cores, then it couldn't possibly perform underneath the 3950x. Not in multithreaded workloads at least.
 

SkyBill40

Honorable
Oct 11, 2013
1,650
11
12,465
223
The math doesn't work out, so I can't be wrong...at least in general. Geekbench might be a poor bench that doesn't accurately depict cpu performance. Think about it, if IPC is roughly the same and the intel has more cores, then it couldn't possibly perform underneath the 3950x. Not in multithreaded workloads at least.
Well see soon enough, won't we? And when we do, should the 3950X beat the 9980XE as has been mentioned, will you admit you were wrong? That is the real question here and you've failed to answer it despite it being a rather simplistic yes or no answer.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY