Skip to content
0
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Sketchy)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Wandering Adventure Party

  1. Home
  2. PC Gaming
  3. AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Faceoff — Battle of the Gaming Flagships

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Faceoff — Battle of the Gaming Flagships

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved PC Gaming
pcgaming
5 Posts 4 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Alphane MoonA This user is from outside of this forum
    Alphane MoonA This user is from outside of this forum
    Alphane Moon
    wrote on last edited by
    #1
    This post did not contain any content.
    Link Preview Image
    AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Faceoff — Battle of the Gaming Flagships

    Today, we pit Intel's current-gen flagship Core Ultra 9 285K vs the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, the hands-down best CPU for gaming on the market, in a heated six-round match to find the winner.

    favicon

    Tom's Hardware (www.tomshardware.com)

    U 1 Reply Last reply
    19
    • Alphane MoonA Alphane Moon
      This post did not contain any content.
      Link Preview Image
      AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Faceoff — Battle of the Gaming Flagships

      Today, we pit Intel's current-gen flagship Core Ultra 9 285K vs the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, the hands-down best CPU for gaming on the market, in a heated six-round match to find the winner.

      favicon

      Tom's Hardware (www.tomshardware.com)

      U This user is from outside of this forum
      U This user is from outside of this forum
      ultranaut@lemmy.world
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Its amazing the 9800x3d can outperform by so much even though its on a bigger node and uses significantly less power.

      W 1 Reply Last reply
      12
      • U ultranaut@lemmy.world

        Its amazing the 9800x3d can outperform by so much even though its on a bigger node and uses significantly less power.

        W This user is from outside of this forum
        W This user is from outside of this forum
        who
        wrote on last edited by who@feddit.org
        #3

        There’s a lot to like about it, but let’s not ignore drawbacks. AMD’s idle power consumption is still too high.

        AmbiguousPropsA 1 Reply Last reply
        2
        • W who

          There’s a lot to like about it, but let’s not ignore drawbacks. AMD’s idle power consumption is still too high.

          AmbiguousPropsA This user is from outside of this forum
          AmbiguousPropsA This user is from outside of this forum
          AmbiguousProps
          wrote on last edited by ambiguousprops@lemmy.today
          #4

          I mean, that’s fair, but the 285k has a TDP of 250 watts compared to 120. In practice, I think that people gaming or doing workstation tasks would use more power on the 285k, because typically, that’s what these will be used for anyway.

          For comparison’s sake, the EPYC 7702 is a 64 core (hyperthreaded) server CPU, and it has a lower TDP. The 285k’s TDP is absolutely bonkers.

          W 1 Reply Last reply
          7
          • AmbiguousPropsA AmbiguousProps

            I mean, that’s fair, but the 285k has a TDP of 250 watts compared to 120. In practice, I think that people gaming or doing workstation tasks would use more power on the 285k, because typically, that’s what these will be used for anyway.

            For comparison’s sake, the EPYC 7702 is a 64 core (hyperthreaded) server CPU, and it has a lower TDP. The 285k’s TDP is absolutely bonkers.

            W This user is from outside of this forum
            W This user is from outside of this forum
            who
            wrote on last edited by who@feddit.org
            #5

            In practice, I think that people gaming or doing workstation tasks would use more power on the 285k, because typically, that’s what these will be used for anyway.

            People doing “workstation” tasks or gaming with desktop CPUs also spend a lot of time in editor tools or basic desktop tasks, and seldom turn off their systems in between tasks. (Some don’t even turn off their systems when they leave work or go to sleep at night.) And very few games will load up all the CPU cores at once. So idle power draw remains significant. Also, many/most real-world tasks have CPU cores constantly varying their power draw, not pegged at the package’s rated TDP. So using TDP as a proxy for overall power usage is unrealistic.

            It might be interesting to study the proportion of powered-on time spent at low load vs. high load in a typical week, across a decently large sample size.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0

            Reply
            • Reply as topic
            Log in to reply
            • Oldest to Newest
            • Newest to Oldest
            • Most Votes


            • Login

            • Login or register to search.
            Powered by NodeBB Contributors
            • First post
              Last post