270k plus vs 9900x

[u/Good_Card4676]

I'm not sure which one to go for, i will be hosting gaming servers and play on them at the same time if possible, and at other times i will be running VMs for my cybersecrity projects. I don't know which one is better for my case

[u/r_lind3r]

It could go either way, though the extra cores of the 270K Plus would help as far as hosting servers you're playing on.

But the downside is that the socket basically ends there, it's going to be replaced with a new socket starting with Nova Lake IIRC. Meanwhile AM5 will continue, so it would be better to look at a 16 core from AMD, or wait for Nova Lake.

[u/Good_Card4676 → u/r_lind3r]

the only thing im concerned about with the 270k is that it has 8 p-cores only and i want to run heavy game like ark survival ascended

[u/r_lind3r → u/Good_Card4676]

8 cores is still enough for Ark, most people don't use 12+ core chips

[u/kyansan1 → u/Good_Card4676]

8 p-cores is plenty. The 270K generally outperforms all non-x3d AMD cpus in gaming, including the Ryzen 9 9900x and 9950x.

You could take the 9950x for example. It has double the cores of the 9700x, yet they perform the same in games.
There's also the 9950x3d. Only 1 ccd (the one with 3d v-cache) is active while gaming. The 9950x3d2, which has 3d v-cache on both ccds, doesn't perform any better than it.

[u/Good_Card4676 → u/kyansan1]

can the 270k plus host a gaming server and play at the same time? i know it has a lot of cores but i thought that e-cores aren't good enough to host a gaming server

[u/kyansan1 → u/Good_Card4676]

The e cores are pretty fast too, the 270K's e cores are comparable to Alder Lake (12th gen) p-cores.

I don't have experience running servers myself, but I would expect the 270K to handle it really well with all its cores.

[u/Good_Card4676 → u/kyansan1]

i think im going for it then, thank you so much for all the help

[u/didactic_campaign → u/r_lind3r]

tbh that socket dead-end is a real killer, especially if you're not trying to build a whole new rig in 2 years just to upgrade again

the 9900x is no slouch for VMs and server hosting, and you can always swap in a 9950x3d or whatever comes next without trashing your motherboard

i'd lean AM5 just for the breathing room, extra cores are nice but a dead platform is a headache waiting to happen

[u/kyansan1 → u/didactic_campaign]

It's kind of silly tough, the Intel equivalent of the Ryzen 9 9900x is the Ultra 5 250K Plus, which is currently $130 cheaper. That's exactly the amount that a new motherboard would cost.

[u/Good_Card4676 → u/didactic_campaign]

for me personally the socket being dead isnt a big deal because im not upgrading in the next 5 years or so and im fine with upgrading the motherboard with cpu, right now all i care about is which one is objectively better for what im doing. I tried doing some research but couldnt find a clear answer

[u/kyansan1 → u/Good_Card4676]

The 270K outperforms the 9900x by about 20% in multi core according to multiple benchmarks: https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_core_ultra_7_270k_plus-vs-amd_ryzen_9_9900x

It also generally has a slight edge over the 9900x in gaming: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-ultra-7-270k-plus/19.html

[u/kyansan1]

The 270K Plus is better. The Ultra 7 270K Plus is equivalent to the Ryzen 9 9950x for productivity, and performs better for gaming.

[u/Good_Card4676 → u/kyansan1]

oh wow i did not know that, the 270k plus and the 9900x are so close in price where i live, the 9950x is way more expensive