I think AMD needs to be given a little more credit for the potential their CPU's actually hold. So many benchmarks and games have drifted to favor Intel's chipset, but it won't be long before the needle swing back to he middle and AMD won't be positioned like this on your "rankings."
I think that ryzen 1800x needs to be litlle bit upper on the list, right where 6900K is. We all seen its performance in benchmarks. And how is it that 6800K is several notches down from 7700K? 7700k isnt new architecture. Its not even a die shrink. It is skylake with 300MHz overclock and added couple features that do squat for gaming performance. 6700K skylake should be right 1 point below 7700K. I suspect this article is biased and deliberately inaccurate. How much did intel paid you off for this scam?
personally teirs lists should always be taken with a grain of salt, may it be this "cpu list and PSU lists just as guilty at time of erronerous mistakes or bias.
Antonio: if I was you, I would make your own list with the "specifications of each CPU" and why you classify it above this or under that....
Bitching at someone's attempt to make sense of such products should encouraged, and helped for accuracy.
If you have information to share to make the list more accurate do so, otherwise provide accurate and positive criticism.. calling someone " how much does intel.. " is childish at best and no one will take your comment seriously, or more than a AMD fan boy revolted his beloved Ryzen is not the top CPU on the market (and to be clear, It could be or not I don't care to be honest).
after taking a look at the list I think the "centering of each sides (intel/AMD) is causing people confusion. is you scroll down the list you will see the invers of centering happens with intel; and Amd in older product. so I believe the Tiers are not "face to face" but as general groups of CPU, not comparing Ryzen to the 3960 as on the display of the table...
Toms hardware used to be an unbiased, reliable source of information. This blatant Intel bias is disgusting. If you want REAL information, check out independent reviews and comparisons on youtube, of people playing games, side by side, to see the difference between intel and AMD. The story is always the same, people paying 100-300 dollars MORE for Intel chips to see only, MAYBE, 1-5 FPS difference in games. That was with the FX chips. Ryzen is beating Intels top chips in independent gameplay benchmarks on youtube....further exposing the big outlets/channels bias when they release complete BS articles and lists like this. For GAMING, there is no better option and value then AMD.
I used to look at that list a lot while planning my last build, so I think I should give my 2 cents: would be nice to see the tiers 3 and 4 broken into more performance levels. I own a Pentium G4400 and from everything I've seen, Haswell Core i3s and newer models have a significant advantage over the dual threaded Pentium, so I think it would make more sense if it was placed a tier below, with older Core i3 models being dropped too. Also, 6 and 8 cores FX CPUs could be one tier higher. It seems more sensible to me that a FX-6300 should be at the same level that a Core i3 4170, while a Pentium G4400 should be at same level as the Athlon x4 860K.
Also, is there a performance chart that includes newer CPUs? The last I could find dates from 2015.
I agree with CAIOKN. Pentiums G4560, G4600 and G4620 have 2 cores / 4 threads. Their position in tier 3 is understandable. Pentium G4400 and G4500 on the other hand are only 2-threaded which makes them unsuitable for most modern games. In my opinion they should be two tiers lower.
Consider that you have to slide down to tier 6 to find next 2-threaded CPU.
I'm thinking about putting together a portable windows machine for a webcam. I'm thinking along the lines of Vensmile W10 or possibly the Beelink. I'm trying to figure out what processor would be better for video recording and live streaming a feed from a webcam. Would an atom processor be strong enough? Does video need more cores or a stronger dual core? I'm really not trying to go above the cost of a NUC even though those would most likely be the strongest thing. All this thing is going to to is stream and or record video and its gotta be portable to take to different locations. I know I can go the Pi route, but you have so much more options with Windows and webcams. Can someone with a bit more knowledge about processors give me your thoughts on this? Would an Atom work for this without redlining it all the time, and if so which one? This is going to be using on chip graphics so anything I should avoid?
gamers nexus just did benchmarks with an 2600k overclocked to 4.7Ghz. Which is an easy overclock and it outperformed every Intel I5 in every benchmark. And the 2600k in the third tier with plenty of I5's above it? I think you're undervaluing threads on the intel side. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUOtTEMn-RU&t=2s