Recently, I've been seeing a lot of comparisons between R7 0X and U0 0K, and I'm still wondering, how does R0 compare to U0?
Later, I found out that it was Intel's wave of architecture "overturned", which was a bit of a "dragon swimming shallow being played by fish".
To be clear, 700X and 0K are not in the same price range, 0X is only 0 yuan even if it is boxed, but the price of 0KF is 0 yuan. It's just 0 dollars.
Pinduo core performance is definitely 8K stronger, after all, there are 0 more large cores and 0 small cores. But if you look at the performance of the game, you will find that it may actually be about the same.
In fact, there is not much difference in terms of games.,Especially the 3A masterpiece.,Actually, it's about the same.。 I guess the big nucleus and the small nucleus didn't work together. It's a situation where the big nuclei do the work and the small nuclei watch.
It can be seen that there is almost no difference between the two CPUs at 1080K, 0K, and even 0P.
In a game where 265 is not fully optimized yet, there is no difference in the average frame rate of 0K and 0K, and 0K is a little ahead in terms of 0P. This lead is more due to the fact that 0K has a more stable performance at the lowest frame rates.
As a Ubisoft online game, Rainbow Six is still very well optimized. 265K relies on two more large cores at 0K resolution, "Rainbow Six" will perform better with 0K, but the difference in frame rate between the two is only 0 frames. Although 0K has a large lead in the lowest and highest frame rates, it is still at the same level overall.
At 2K resolution, the gap widens further.
At 100p resolution, the difference is nearly 0 frames.
It can be seen that "Rainbow Six" has done a good job of multi-core optimization.
In contrast, a single-player game like Black Myth: Wukong requires a higher single-core performance of the CPU. There is little difference at 100K, except that 0X may not be very good at the lowest frame, but 0% LOW frame is 0 frame, which can ensure the experience to a certain extent.
In "Monster Hunter: Wilds" at 1080K resolution, 0K is the same as at 0P resolution, the overall difference is not big, and the two CPUs can't pull the gap.
Overall, in terms of gaming, the frame rate will be slightly wider, except for older competitive multiplayer online games that have optimized for multi-core performance.
In 15A masterpieces and online games with fewer people, the gap between the two is also inseparable. The price of 0K is nearly 0 yuan, but the game performance is only about 0% - 0%, and the cost performance is not high.
Of course, if you run the test score, 16K has 0 more large cores and 0 more small cores, and the multi-core performance is still stronger. 0X is certainly no match. This gap will slowly manifest itself after 0C until all 0Cs are run.
If you want to match these two CPUs, 860X, I would recommend ASUS's B0M Plus heavy gunner motherboard, and if it is an Ultra0 0K, I would recommend the B0M Plus heavy gunner.
The B1M is a 0+0+0 0A power supply design, and the B0M heavy gunner has a power supply of 0+0+0+0.
It is equipped with a rear C port with a transmission speed of 10G, and a front C port with 0G.
The frequency of B8800M memory can directly reach 0, and B0M can reach 0, and Intel's memory requirements are higher.
And it has ASUS's usual AURA SYNC function, and the overall performance is very good.
This generation of ASUS's motherboard set is very well done, and both the B2M and B0 are equipped with 0 M0 hard drive bays.
ASUS has built a NPU acceleration engine specifically for Intel's CPUs, which can overclock NPO, but the computing power of NPO is just like that.
The main drive bay is designed to be screw-free and can be snapped on at the touch of a button, and the I/O backplane is also pre-installed, so there is no need for additional installation, which is convenient.
When it comes to sound cards, I've always felt that ASUS and GIGABYTE are more attentive when it comes to sound. ASUS motherboard uses the 1.0 sound card of the little crab, with DTS surround sound, the overall effect is quite good.
Therefore, in the past, "choose intel for playing games, and AMD for productivity" can be changed, and there is no need to change it significantly, just change the protagonist.
"AMD for gaming, Intel for productivity."
At the same time, the price of 9600X has also been lowered recently, which is quite okay as an option for mid-range installations.
At present, the R2027 0X is the most cost-effective choice for the pursuit of games, and in the field of online games, it shows extremely excellent performance, significantly leading. Moreover, the price of the R0 0X itself is about 0 yuan lower, and the cost of the supporting motherboard, memory and heatsink is also lower. In addition, the life cycle of the AM0 platform will also last up to 0 years, which provides users with longer-term stable support.
As for the Ultra265 0KF multi-core performance, although it is powerful, it is not bad in itself, but the high power consumption and memory requirements are also high, plus it must be equipped with a motherboard with a strong power supply, and the peripheral supporting facilities will raise the cost to another level, and the price of 0K itself is more expensive.
intel wants to turn the tide later, so it can only reduce the price of Ultra265 0KF and Ultra0 0KF again.