Today nosotros're comparing the Ryzen 9 3950X and Cadre i9-9900KS in a massive number of games, using one of G.Skill's most premium 16GB retentivity kits, the Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600 CL14. For those of you spending $600 or $750 on a CPU, purchasing best in class DDR4 retention doesn't seem similar a stretch, merely the chief reason we went with this retentiveness was so nosotros could bring yous a caput to head comparing between AMD and Intel processors using manually tuned timings.

Information technology was discovered in the early days of AMD's Zen architecture that memory bandwidth and latency were crucial for maximizing functioning of Ryzen processors. Manually tuning up the secondary and tertiary timings can consistently ameliorate Ryzen'south performance in games.

In other words, this is a comparison of Intel and AMD'due south meridian desktop CPUs that practice not belong to their HEDT series, with both processors tweaked for maximum memory performance.

For this Ryzen nine 3950X vs. Core i9-9900KS comparison we accept tested a total of 18 games at 1080p using a GeForce RTX 2080 Ti. Both CPUs were tested in their stock out of the box configuration with XMP for the Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600 CL14 memory loaded. Then we have added a second configuration which sees the G.Skill retentivity timings manually tuned. The Cadre i9 was installed on a Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra and, while Ryzen 9 used the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master.

Before we leap into the gaming benchmarks, here's a quick look at retentivity bandwidth. Every bit y'all can see the tuned timings only boost bandwidth by iv% for the 3950X and 3% for the 9900KS.

Memory latency for the 3950X was also only reduced by 5% and 3% for the 9900KS, and so based on those figures y'all wouldn't expect much of a functioning gain in games, just every bit yous're about to see that's not the case.

Gaming Benchmarks

The first game we tested is Hitman 2 where the 9900KS is 21% faster than the 3950X out of the box, quite a meaning performance margin. Yet, the 3950X enjoys a massive 24% operation boost with the tuned retention, going from 117 fps on average upward to an impressive 145 fps.

The 9900KS likewise benefits from tuned memory though, not quite to the same degree as Ryzen simply we still come across a 10% performance uplift in this title which is enough for Intel to go on the lead, albeit a smaller 8% margin.

Next up we have Resident Evil 2 and here the 3950X performs uncommonly well with the CL14 DDR4-3600 retentiveness, slightly edging out the 9900KS both stock and tuned. For this championship the tuned retention has about no touch on on operation, at well-nigh we see a 3% increase in 1% low performance.

Moving on to Project Cars 2 we meet another mild 3% performance gain for the 9900KS.

The 3950X gained a more noteworthy 11 fps for an 8% increment in frame charge per unit. Not mind-bravado but it's enough to identify AMD ahead of Intel in this title, especially when looking at 1% low operation.

Gains in Tom Clancy's Rainbow Half dozen Siege are uneventful for both processors. Nosotros're looking at a ~3% increase which has Intel offering a iv% performance increase, though with tightly grouped 1% depression performance the feel was identical using either CPU.

Hither are some interesting results in Battlefield V. Tuning upward the memory with the 9900KS has about no impact on performance, besides a 5% improvement in 1% low functioning. That's nothing compared to the 21% increase in one% low performance seen past the 3950X. The boilerplate frame rate was also additional by 17%. This was enough to put the 3950X merely ahead of the 9900KS, though information technology was slightly downwards for the ane% depression metric. Still one time turned up, these CPUs enable an identical gaming feel.

Out of the box the 9900KS is 5% faster than the 3950X when testing with Assassin's Creed Odyssey, or an extra 3 fps. With the tuned retentiveness that margin shrinks to 2.5% and at present we're looking at a 1-2 fps difference, and then the same gaming experience with either processor.

Moving on we accept the World of Tanks results and here we're looking at up to a 4% increment from the memory tuning, pretty pointless for this title. As well these numbers can't exist compared to prior World of Tanks results as we're using an updated replay for testing.

Nosotros've also updated our Metro Exodus examination, we're now in a much latter section of the game that is more than demanding. Interestingly, although the one% low performance is identical betwixt the 3950X and 9900KS, the Intel CPU is quite a flake faster when comparing the average frame charge per unit, fourteen% faster out of the box and 9% once both CPUs are using the tuned memory timings.

In Fortnite, Intel'south Cadre i9-9900KS sees almost no improvement with the tuned retention, nosotros're talking just two-3 fps at well over 100 fps. The 3950X enjoys a 5-ten% functioning boost, but even so once tuned upwardly the 9900KS was still 9% faster when comparing 1% low data.

This time it's the 9900KS that benefits the most from the tuned retentivity as the average frame rate is increased past 5% and the one% depression effect by 14%. Nevertheless this meant the 9900KS was just 2.5% faster than the 3950X, so the aforementioned functioning then.

Performance in the The Partitioning 2 is a niggling unusual, out of the box both CPUs allowed for a 1% low result of 110 fps and withal despite that the average frame charge per unit of the 9900KS was still xv% higher. Once both CPUs were using the tuned timings though the 3950X produced a much better ane% depression result and now the 9900KS was merely half-dozen% faster when comparison the average frame rate.

The tuned DDR4 retention configuration but provided a 2 to iv% performance uplift for the 9900KS when testing with Globe State of war Z. The 3950X wasn't much better as it only saw a 5 to 7% performance boost, though that was plenty to reduce the 9900KS lead downward to 4%. And on a final note we once again we run into both CPUs enabling frame rates so high, that the unmarried digit % margins mean nigh nil.

When testing with F1 2022 we see picayune performance difference with the tuned memory timings, though the 9900KS saw its winning margin reduced from half dozen% downward to three%, so yet some other championship were the gaming experience is identical even at 1080p with an RTX 2080 Ti.

Ghost Recon Breakpoint isn't responsive to the tuned retentiveness, here we see basically no comeback for either CPU and this ways the 9900KS was still six% faster. Pretty terrible optimization in this title though nosotros have to say, less than 100 fps for both CPUs with an RTX 2080 Ti at 1080p.

We see a like thing with Red Expressionless Redemption 2 if we didn't manually set everything to high. Here we're looking at upward to a 5% performance improvement with the turned memory, and then nothing worth talking about. The performance margin between the 9900KS and 3950X is minimal.

Out of the box the 3950X lags backside quite a bit in Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Guild. The 9900KS is 18% faster when comparing one% depression performance and 12% faster for the boilerplate frame charge per unit. The tuned memory doesn't improve operation for the 9900KS but it does enable an viii to 14% operation uplift for the 3950X and now both CPUs are seen delivering comparable performance.

Very small performance gains are seen in Mod Warfare when running the tuned retention and both CPUs delivered virtually identical functioning. The 3950X did provide slightly better 1% depression performance, though the margins are then small in that location's simply no chance you'll detect the difference when gaming.

Terminal up we accept Shadow of the Tomb Raider and here the 3950X saw a massive 21% increment in i% low performance with the tuned memory and a 17% increment for the boilerplate frame rate. Meanwhile, Intel saw no improvement in 1% low performance and simply a half dozen% increase for the boilerplate frame rate. This means while the 9900KS was 11% faster out of the box, with the tuned memory the 3950X just managed to hit the lead.

Performance summary

The results seemed to be a fleck all over the place, sometimes the tuned retentivity provided strong gains, other times those gains were mild and merely as frequently we saw no gains at all. What did seem clear was the marginal performance deviation between the Ryzen ix 3950X and Core i9-9900KS for gaming. To go a better sense of that permit's check out the performance across all titles...

Out of the box the 3950X was found to exist 6% slower on boilerplate when compared to the 9900KS, exactly the same margin seen betwixt the 3900X and 9900K when using the slower DDR4-3200 retentivity (information from a previous review). Then with the tuned memory the 3950X was iv% slower on average which for all practical purposes is nearly an identical gaming feel in all modernistic titles.

Hither's a closer look at the performance departure on a per game basis, stock the 9900KS was seven% faster which as we simply saw meant the 3950X was half-dozen% slower. Out of the box the bigger wins for the 9900KS were seen in Hitman two, The Division 2, Metro Exodus, Star Wars Jedi Fallen Order, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Fortnite.

Now with both CPUs utilizing the tuned memory timings the 9900KS was just 4% faster on average and this fourth dimension it's World of Tanks, Metro Exodus and Hitman where Intel sees its biggest wins. Nosotros meet a large change for Shadow of the Tomb Raider, so let's accept a closer look at the gains Ryzen received from the tuned memory.

Across the 18 games we tested, the 3950X saw a relatively small half-dozen% performance improvement on average from the tuned DDR4 memory. The just double digit gains were seen when benchmarking Hitman 2 and Shadow of the Tomb Raider, that's about information technology. Moreover, just half the games tested saw less than a v% performance increase with the faster memory.

Wrap Up

There yous have it, if you've ever seen or become part of a discussion involving tuned memory and today'due south mainstream flagship CPUs, the Ryzen 9 3950X and Core i9-9900KS (or the regular 9900K), these benchmarks comparing stock and tuned gaming performance should give you enough of arguments.

The stock results were impressive on their own with the Trident Z Neo retentivity. If you lot were using retention with looser timings and more than headroom for tuning, at to the lowest degree relative to the out of the box timings, then the gains would be more farthermost. Equally we noted earlier, if yous're spending over $500 on your CPU and presumably $1,000 or and then on the GPU, then springing for premium DDR4 memory probably isn't a stretch.

But if you are ownership a more than affordable CPU such equally the Ryzen 9 3900X or even i of the Ryzen vii models, what we've establish is that you don't need to invest in premium DDR4 retentiveness. We confirmed this in our 3rd-gen Ryzen DDR4 memory scaling benchmark. Then we used realistic gaming weather (non 1080p with an RTX 2080 Ti) and the improved memory performance had little to no impact on frame rates.

This testing also confirms the Cadre i9-9900K remains a top gaming CPU and the fastest for the price. However, nosotros wouldn't call it the ultimate solution only because it doesn't hold the operation crown by a significant margin.

When compared to the 3900X which costs about the same, it'due south ~five% faster on boilerplate for gaming, but the Ryzen 9 comes with a cooler and it'due south miles faster in cadre heavy applications, anywhere from xx to lx% faster. We also believe the extra cores will hereafter proof the Ryzen better, only that's probably less of a business organisation for those buying now as you'll likely upgrade in three to 4 twelvemonth'southward time.

Shopping Shortcuts:
  • Intel Cadre i9-9900KS on Amazon
  • Intel Core i9-9900K on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 9 3950X on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen ix 3900X on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 7 3700X on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen v 3600 on Amazon
  • Intel Core i7-9700K on Amazon
  • Intel Core i7-8700K on Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 2080 Ti on Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 2070 Super on Amazon
  • AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT on Amazon
  • AMD Radeon RX 5700 on Amazon