AMD Ryzen 7 3700X vs. Intel Core i9-9900K: 8-Core CPUs, 4 Years Later



Today we are taking a glance returned at CPUs launched within the final four to five years, in particular the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and Intel Core i9-9900K. There's an excellent cause why we selected these two CPUs, and it is not because we consider they had been direct competitors; the purpose turns into clean in an upcoming observe up review about improve paths, however before we get to that we thought a revisit that appears at those CPUs might be exciting.

At the time of release, one should argue that the Core i9-9900K was in competition with the Ryzen 7 2700X. But this is somewhat comparable to pointing out that the Radeon RX 7900 XTX is in the equal league as the GeForce RTX 4090. While AMD's product become certainly impressive, it became truly slower and priced extra cheaply.

For instance, the 9900K was introduced with an MSRP of $600, whereas the 2700X become priced at $330. A year later, the 2700X turned into succeeded with the aid of the 3700X. So, you may examine the 9900K with both the 2700X, which arrived 6 months in advance, or the 3700X, which became up nine months later.

For this evaluation, we've got gone with the 3700X. Even although it wasn't the top of Zen 2 processors, it changed into the most logical preference for gaming fans. The twin CCD 3900X and 3950X were tailor-made more for obligations targeted around productiveness.

Comparing their MSRPs, the Intel CPU was priced about eighty% higher. However, both experienced charge reductions as time handed. The 3700X's lowest rate factor changed into $220, and the 9900K in short bought for $400. The KF model was to be had for as little as $340, maintaining a fifty five% better price than the Ryzen 7 variation.

Regrettably, we didn't behavior as much huge CPU trying out 4-five years ago, so we don't have a radical contrast among the 3700X and 9900K. However, in mid-2019, we did assemble a 36-recreation showdown between the 3900X and 9900K. The effects showed the Ryzen 9 variant lagging by way of 6%. This assessment depended on 1080p tests using the GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, with games from that duration.

Fast forward to late 2023, ready with the powerful RTX 4090 and a suite of newly launched titles: How do the 3700X and 9900K measure up? Both CPUs have been matched with dual-rank DDR4-3600 CL14 reminiscence, geared up with the latest BIOS updates, strolling on Windows 11. Let's delve in...

Benchmarks

Beginning with Assassin's Creed Mirage, the overall performance seems very competitive. The 9900K changed into merely four% quicker at 1080p. At 1440p and potentially at 4K, the outcomes appear to be CPU-restrained. The overall performance between those processors is quite comparable, marking a good outcome for the extra cheap Ryzen 7.

In Cyberpunk 2077, the dynamics change. Here, the 9900K outperforms, handing over 26-27% extra performance at 1080p and 1440p. By the time we hit 4K, the facts is generally GPU-restricted. While the 3700X does provide playable performance, attaining a high refresh rate may be difficult with this Ryzen processor. Using an RTX 4090 on the ultra preset, the overall performance hole remains considerable even if adjusting satisfactory settings with a exclusive GPU.

In Horizon Zero Dawn, the 3700X and 9900K are closely matched. The Intel processor outpaced by best eleven-12% at 1080p and 1440p. At 4K, the consequences are GPU-limited, indicating each CPUs make use of the RTX 4090 to its complete potential.

The outcomes in Far Cry 6 also are neck-and-neck. The 9900K edged out by using being five% faster on average. Performance at 1080p and 1440p was CPU-centric for each processors. Interestingly, the 9900K remained advanced at 4K.

The F1 23 dynamics reflect what we located in Cyberpunk. The 9900K displayed a super performance lead, reaching 170 fps at 1080p, marking it as 26% quicker. However, this lead faded to 16% and vanished at 4K, in which the RTX 4090 capped the overall performance barely above 90 fps.

ACC is every other sport in which the 9900K shines, specially given its CPU-extensive nature. The Intel processor maintained a 23% overall performance advantage across all resolutions.

The results for Watch Dogs: Legion are fairly near. The 9900K outperformed by a modest 8% at 1080p. Given the charge difference, the marginal gain does not seem too mind-blowing. Distinguishing among 91 and ninety eight fps at 1080p or a four% difference at 1440p could be tough for most.

In A Plague Tale: Requiem, the 9900K stands out with a 21% lead, keeping a 17% gain even at 4K. This gap is noteworthy.

The 3700X capped at eighty five fps in our Star Wars Jedi: Survivor tests, making the Intel processor 21-22% faster at 1080p and 1440p. At 4K, GPU boundaries come into play. For the ones in search of a high-refresh-price revel in, the 9900K proves superior.

The 9900K managed an 18% lead in Baldur's Gate 3, elevating overall performance from eighty fps to ninety four fps. The performance enhance was obtrusive, albeit at a premium.

In Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II, each processors finished admirably. With the 9900K pushing close to 200 fps at 1080p, the Ryzen 3700X wasn't some distance behind, ensuing within the Intel CPU being most effective 7% quicker. This recreation showcases the prowess of the older Ryzen processor.

Even with the very best quality preset, Resident Evil 4 is predominantly CPU-bound at 4K, no matter the processor used. However, the Intel CPU showcased its strength, turning in sixteen% greater performance on the evaluated resolutions.

As a nod to nostalgia, we blanketed Shadow of the Tomb Raider. This title remains CPU-restrained even at 4K because it predates the RTX 4090. The 9900K gives as much as 16% more performance, even though the 3700X plays admirably with effects nicely above one hundred fps.

The narrative in The Callisto Protocol is similar. While the 3700X is staggering, handing over over one hundred fifty fps, the 9900K nonetheless manages to be sixteen% quicker. In isolation, the Ryzen's overall performance on this game is high-quality, even though the Intel chip takes the crown.

The 3700X performs appreciably in Total War: Warhammer III, attaining slightly over one hundred sixty fps at 1080p. This makes the 9900K simplest 7% faster, indicating intently matched effects. As regularly found, overall performance at 4K is completely GPU-constrained.

In Hogwarts Legacy with ray tracing enabled, we find ourselves heavily CPU-constrained throughout all check configurations. This predicament restricts the RTX 4090's performance, even at 4K. However, the 9900K manages to be 15% quicker, indicating a significant overall performance increase.

Starfield offers a similar situation. Across all resolutions, the effects are CPU-limited, with the Intel processor outperforming via 15%.

In The Last of Us, the 9900K boasts a 15% performance lead at 1080p and 9% at 1440p. By the time we reach 4K, the RTX 4090 caps the performance at a median of 81 fps. Notably, at the same time as the Intel processor had the brink at 1080p, the 3700X nevertheless controlled a strong 99 fps on average, ensuring a clean gaming revel in.

Halo Infinite shows comparable traits with the 9900K outperforming with the aid of thirteen-14% at 1080p and 1440p and by five% at 4K. Importantly, the 3700X maintained over one hundred thirty fps, making sure every other high-quality gaming session.

Hitman three gives an fascinating scenario where the performance gap is narrower. Here, the 9900K is ahead by a trifling five%, with all results being CPU-confined, even at 4K. The 3700X showcases strong performance in this name.

Concluding with Spider-Man Remastered, the 9900K has a wonderful lead of 26% at 1080p and 21% at 1440p. Even at 4K, the Intel processor keeps a good sized 19% advantage. The 3700X does provide a playable experience, however the gaming consultation on the 9900K, in particular on excessive-refresh charge monitors, is undeniably advanced.

Performance Summary

Having tested the 21 video games examined... And wonder, surprise, the a great deal extra expensive CPU become quicker, however how a good deal faster basic? Well, let's take a glance, beginning with the 1080p statistics.

At this resolution, the 3700X lagged behind by means of as a whole lot as 21% inside the most severe cases. Given that it changed into priced at 45% less, the Ryzen 7 component nevertheless offers considerable fee. On common, it became behind by thirteen%, a noteworthy margin for a CPU.

At 1440p, the performance gap barely decreased to 12%, mirroring the results at 1080p. While there has been simplest one example where the 3700X become 21% slower, 14 games confirmed it trailing by extra than a ten% margin.

Moving directly to 4K, the outcomes had been in most cases confined through GPU performance, leading the 3700X to be a mere 6% slower. Nevertheless, in 8 of the tested games, the distinction exceeded 10%, that is extensive. It's well worth noting, however, that our checks applied an RTX 4090. Thus, for CPU benchmarking, the statistics from decrease resolutions is more applicable.

Which CPU Was or Is Better?

It's fascinating to take into account how these CPUs had been the center of numerous online debates among AMD and Intel fans. In hindsight, both the Ryzen 7 3700X and Core i9-9900K are remarkable processors that are worth of advice, in reality, we did recommend both.

The 9900K became always hailed as the final gaming CPU, the no-compromise answer for the ones seeking unrivaled overall performance. In comparison, the 3700X became prized for its stellar fee – an low-priced eight-center CPU with SMT support for sixteen threads, delivering unbeatable productivity overall performance on the $300 charge factor.

Back then we perceived this less as an AMD vs. Intel contention and more as a scenario where those CPUs could conceivably be from the identical manufacturer. They did not immediately compete, primarily due to the fact one changed into priced round $six hundred, and the alternative at approximately $300.

Instead, the Core i5-9600K at $260 or Core i7-9700K for $380 had been higher priced to compete with the 3700X. Strictly for gaming, the i5's and i7's were very competitive, but in case you planned on doing any center-heavy productiveness, they got rinsed by the 3700X. It might be exciting to move back and add the Core i5 to the statistics, in order that might be some thing we should do quickly.

Fast forward 4-five years, and the Core i9-9900K remains the superior gaming CPU. That said, the 3700X has stood the test of time and remains competent. Purchasing it in 2019 for $330 would've felt worthwhile, even greater so for people who were given one for round $two hundred.

In checks presenting predominantly cutting-edge video games with an RTX 4090 at 1080p, the 3700X become thirteen% slower – a decent final results considering the modest rate tag.

Some will absolute confidence question using the RTX 4090, however such complaint is out of place, in particular given the reality that during many new games GPU overall performance changed into irrelevant given how closely CPU limited we have been, in spite of the 9900K. Take the Starfield effects: the 9900K managed only sixty one fps, achievable with a 6800 XT. Thus, whether or not the usage of the RTX 4090 or 6800 XT, outcomes might be consistent, with the quicker RTX 4090 ensuring a proper CPU performance evaluation.

Hogwarts Legacy did pose demanding situations for both the 3700X and 9900K though. In Starfield, the 3700X barely overlooked the 60 fps mark, at the same time as the 9900K slightly made it. Signs that indicate the Ryzen 7 processor's diminishing prowess.

The good news for Ryzen 3700X proprietors is that you could improve to a 5800X3D, at a totally reasonable cost. Right now you could pick one up for just $320 and it will slot into and work for your current motherboard... Probabilities are, a number of you have got already executed that. Sadly, those rocking a 9900K will must purchase a new motherboard, probable new reminiscence, too, if you want to make a actual upgrade.

Parts like the Core i5-13600K provide splendid cost at $310, however you may also need a motherboard and respectable Intel Z790 forums begin at $a hundred ninety. You'll additionally want a few DDR5 memory to get the maximum out of the 13600K, so upload any other $100 for a respectable 32GB package. That's a huge fee for what is going to internet you much less than 10% more gaming performance than the 5800X3D – and that's evaluating 1080p performance the use of an RTX 4090. Of route, you may go along with a DDR4 motherboard and hold your reminiscence, and doing so might land you similar gaming performance to that of the 5800X3D.

In quick, preliminary funding in the 3700X, accompanied through an upgrade to the 5800X3D, would healthy the expense of completely purchasing the 9900K which turned into the better gaming CPU first of all. It's an thrilling manner of going about it and we're not positive which direction was the best one to take, so in component 2, as a observe up to this revisit, we'll be adding the 5800X3D to look how it compares with the 9900K.

Still, keep in mind these merchandise catered to wonderful rate brackets, so a choice among the 3700X and 9900K became relatively uncommon. But it is still an exciting look again at which alternative made the maximum economic sense: a one-time investment inside the 9900K or slow improvements with AM4? A concrete end might elude us, but the exploration remains one we plan to take on.

Shopping Shortcuts:

• AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D on Amazon
• AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D on Amazon
• AMD Ryzen 9 7900X on Amazon
• AMD Ryzen nine 7950X on Amazon
• AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D on Amazon
• Intel Core i5-14600K on Amazon
• Intel Core i7-14700K on Amazon
• Intel Core i9-14900K on Amazon

.SubDriveRevBot margin: 30px 0 0px; border-radius: 3px; line-top: 1.5; font-length: zero.9em; coloration: ssharppfff; heritage-coloration: ssharpp1d4d84; cursor: pointer; background-repeat: no-repeat; historical past-length: incorporate; historical past-role: right; .SubDriveRevBot:hover background-coloration: ssharpp245996; transition: zero.4s linear; .SubDriveRevBot a shade: ssharppfff; display: block; width: a hundred%; height: 100%; .SubDriveRevBot a:hover coloration: ssharppfff; .SubDriveRevBot .Titlerr historical past: rgba(30, 41, 51, zero.63); padding: 10px 20px 7px; color: ssharppfff; letter-spacing: -zero.1px; show: block; border-radius: 3px; font-size: 0.9em; .SubDriveRevBot .Observation font-weight: 500; colour: ssharppf29f26; font-family: Roboto; .SubDriveRevBot .Remarknew font-weight: 500; coloration: ssharppfea; font-family: Roboto; .SubDriveRevBot .Bulll margin-backside: 5px !Important; padding: 15px 5px If you experience our content, please take into account subscribing.

• Ad-loose TechSpot revel in while supporting our work
• Our promise: All reader contributions will pass toward investment more content material
• That manner: More tech features, extra benchmarks and analysis