Retested Ryzen 7 2700X VS i9-9900K benchmarks from PT reveals smaller performance gap

lol over priced

well still runing a i7 5830 at 5 ghz and 2 maritex in sli monator asus swif G sync so why would need to speend £ 6000 to replace it for best 30% fps lol
 
well still runing a i7 5830 at 5 ghz and 2 maritex in sli monator asus swif G sync so why would need to speend £ 6000 to replace it for best 30% fps lol

Same as you spent decent chunk of money few years back, and your rig still serves you well someone who's upgrade is due to happen will spend now and have a rig that will last him few years.
 
I've read that the 2700X was also on a stock cooler, something which can affect performance with modern CPUs that tend to boost/overclock themselves out of the box based on temperature headroom.

I do think (and hope) AMD have a "2800X" in the works that will be cherry picked 2700Xs that I reckon they've been building stock of since release. At least 4GHz out of the box.

That would make these completely pointless benchmarks a little more interesting.
 
Yep, AMD has released Ryzen 2 chips with turbos as high as 4.4Ghz now, but that's generally 1-core boost, so the real jump comes in the base clock rise, and if 4.3Ghz boosts and regular 4.2Ghz overclocks are possible on current 2700X's, then well binned could come in with a base of 4.0-4.1Ghz, or around a 10% boost. If a 4-core boost of 4.4Ghz can be reached then that should help many games. If necessary there's also room to bump the TDP, with most B350 or higher motherboards are probably being capable of supporting a little jump, with their top end stock coolers going to over 125W.
 
My 2700x tops out at 4.35Ghz on all 8 cores. I don't daily drive it at those speeds though, but it's bench stable. The new precision boost turbo whatyamacallit thingy is no joke.
 
Back
Top