• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

AMD Ryzen 5 3600 Beats Intel Core i9-9900KF at PassMark - CPU Mark Single-Thread

btarunr

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
47,853 (7.39/day)
Location
Dublin, Ireland
System Specs
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard Gigabyte B550 AORUS Elite V2
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 16GB DDR4-3200
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 4070 Ti EX
Storage Samsung 990 1TB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
In more evidence of AMD having finally achieved or exceeded IPC parity with Intel, a mid-range Ryzen 5 3600 processor beats Intel's current mainstream-desktop flagship processor, the Core i9-9900KF, at the PassMark - CPU Mark single-thread benchmark. The official performance chart for PassMark shows the Ryzen 5 3600 leading the pack, with 2,981 points, a score which is 1.77 percent higher than that of the Core i9-9900KF on the same chart. It also beats the Core i9-9900K by 2.86 percent. Interestingly, the chart does not mention whether the Ryzen 5 3600 is running at its stock frequency of 3.60 GHz with 4.20 GHz boost, or whether it's overclocked. The i9-9900KF boosts to 5.00 GHz. For a single-threaded benchmark, it's generally assumed that the maximum boost multiplier is engaged on both chips. The score can't be dismissed due to this uncertainty, either, because AMD achieving a 1-2 percent IPC uplift over "Skylake" (fine, "Coffee Lake,") isn't impossible given the leaps the company made in the past three years.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Seen this earlier, I question how legit benchmarks are. In single thread it says its matches a 9900 but when you look at what seems to be multithreaded. Some how that 6 core part scores on par with that i9 9900 cpu which is an 8 core part. So that intel cpu should had benchmark should had 9900k ahead unless they disabled some cores.
 
giphy.gif
 
This is an amazing time for pc hardware, finally there are some real performance gains and real competition. Doesn't even matter which side you are on you will always see the benefit of this.

Now lets hope AMD can push the ante with navi as well!
 
With Ryzen 1st and 2nd generation they pretty much knew what the fundamental flaws where of the chip, and ryzen 3rd generation makes that all up.
 
Why is the 9900K/F only running at 3.6ghz?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Will wait for real world gaming performance, but these are surely looking nice.
 
mahoney said:
This smells of an LN2 oc
Click to expand...

It does not take much for the 3600 to surpass the 9900k in some single thread apps, remember that the 3600 is turbo clocked at 4.2 on single thread apps. As far as we can say ipc wise, 4.3 ryzen 3xxx series = coffee lake 5.0. Also pay attention that even a minor 100mhz overclock on ryzen 3xxx means 115mhz for coffee lake intel.

The benchmark below shows us 3600x x 9900k single thread performance is pretty similar.

 
Last edited:
125991




 
Don't believe a single leak until the real benchmarks release on Sunday. All of this is cannon fodder until I see reliable sources.
 
God these idiotic comments..

People passmark likes CACHE which 3600 has a LOT of plus IPC amd improvements.
 
Aldain said:
God these idiotic comments..

People passmark likes CACHE which 3600 has a LOT of plus IPC amd improvements.
Click to expand...

You did read the thread title right?...
 
So the L1 instruction cache is down to 32KB now?
 
hellrazor said:
So the L1 instruction cache is down to 32KB now?
Click to expand...
Yup, AMD gave Zen2 a updated frontend, Zen1/+ borrowed some of the front end of Excavator.
 
This benchmark result is sketchy, because, how the hell does a 9900KF beat a 9900K stock? They are literally the exact same spec for spec processor except for GPU, and like, that’s not even margin of error. I will dismiss this benchmark result.
 
Berfs1 said:
This benchmark result is sketchy, because, how the hell does a 9900KF beat a 9900K stock? They are literally the exact same spec for spec processor except for GPU, and like, that’s not even margin of error. I will dismiss this benchmark result.
Click to expand...
Sometimes you wish at least a bit of thought went into the news...
 
New "beats" old by 3%. Shocking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top