Although the current special edition of the Intel Core i9-9900K (almost exclusively) may fetch the imaginary crown of the fastest consumer CPU in gaming scenarios, I, as a responsible reviewer, retain a certain, very bland Taste back, so I deliberately decided against a test. Apart from the poor ratio of performance per euro or watt and a guarantee shortened to one year, it was above all the necessary the type of procurement that kept me from doing so.
Intel itself, as always, samples a well-known scheme based on vitamin B and hand-picked editorials rather than an interest in wide-ranging reviews. The alternative dealer offers would have both been linked to certain conditions that would have gone beyond vitamin B and, above all, would have ruled out follow-up tests with the same CPU. The motherboard manufacturers also have to buy all CPUs for their media work from Intel themselves and find a bundle of motherboard and CPU with the proviso both nicenot not bad, I also resisted at heart.
It is also quite remarkable that this CPU would have left me friendly influencers for a test, whose performance in the end consisted only in exploiting especially the cardboard and the unpacking of the actual box in their networks. and when it comes up to throw a game. And where, in the end, is the added value of such a review, which also steals the time for other things?
In the end, it was a consideration to weigh up whether to jump over your shadow or whether to take this superfluous stint with a predictable result (my 9900 KF also runs loosely 5 GHz with AVX) at all. I decided against it because I am rather sceptical about this kind of media presence and the necessary appeal to various sources. If you want independent tests, you have to deliver yourself beforehand and without preconditions. It is incomprehensible to me that Intel can and still wants to afford such games in the current situation.
That is why there is a clear no from my side, especially since the Ryzen 9 3950X starts to materialize slowly (spoilers). So Intel couldn't be inconvenienced to hand-picked partners for a place in the charts for upcoming reviews. A rogue, or something. The results of the published tests are consistent with what I was able to measure with the selected Core i9 from my own test pool, for which one really would not have needed a new CPU.
And it is at this point that the two exotics Core i9-9900 KS and Ryzen 9 3950 X differ, because the 3950X will have a whopping four cores more than the 3900X already on the market. So there's extreme binning on both sides, but the 3950 X will be a completely new CPU, not just a squeezed lemon. A test makes much more sense, even if it will still remain unattainable shop window ware for most readers. On both sides.
Kommentieren