Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

[JEMC]

vivster said:

JEMC said:

Leaving aside what qualifies as an overclock and what doesn't, you seem to care more about an arbitrary number than the whole package. And while you may find AMD's result pathetic, the vast majority of us believe that what they've achieved is rather impressive.

I play high fps games, all I need is fast cores. When I look at the gaming benchmarks all I see is AMD lagging behind behind because of low clocks and that's frustrating. Going wide is pretty much pointless for my use case. Feels like AMD is only catching up because Intel stands still and rather than good engineering they're profiting off slow natural evolution.

Intel's advantage in gaming is not only a matter of clocks. A lot of software is optimized for Intel processors (and why not if it is leading with a huge marketshare), giving them an advantage over AMD that's most noticeable in games.

Also, given that you plan to get a 4K screen, your GPU will limit you more than the CPU. Even a 10900K with a 2080Ti can't run Rocket League above 144Hz at 4K, and that's only a handful fps more than what a 3900 does right now (source).