Choose Z690 immediately or wait for AMD Zen 4/X670
Choose Z690 immediately or wait for AMD Zen 4/X670
pay attention, end of 2022 at Raptor Lake, six months later Zen4, then another six months later Meteor Lake. But that’s irrelevant—focus on comparing Alder Lakes Refresh (ToK) versus Zen4 (AMD's Tick). It doesn’t really add up. From a tech perspective, release timelines don’t matter more than evaluating products against their cutting-edge processes and designs. Raptor Lake isn’t really a threat to Zen4.
Intel and AMD are vying for dominance in processor technology. It's common to hold off until a superior choice emerges, since improvements often arrive within a few months... But then the question arises—what's the real reason?
It doesn’t matter if you have strong performance—don’t upgrade unless needed. If you’re not performing well, go ahead and upgrade. Whether you pick AMD or Intel, focus on the fastest or most cost-effective option for your upgrade path, and align it with new GPU releases for gaming. You’ll be fine.
You're asking about the timing of Zen 4's release. Previously, both versions were expected for Q4 2022. The actual launch date is more important than manufacturing processes or architecture details. Companies can only succeed with products that are still useful. It's interesting how Intel's 10nm (Intel 7) matched TSMC's 7nm density in 2019, while AMD had it and Intel didn't. So comparing Zen 2 to the 9000 and 10000 series was the main approach, even though the 14nm+ technology was already established while Zen 2 was advancing.
This logic shows you're following a similar pattern, like a dog after its tail. Raptor Lake isn't pitting itself against Zen4, just as 10series doesn't face Zen2. It's the same situation, reversed. Zen3 had many rivals during that period, which is normal since fewer releases meant less competition. However, Intel has been lagging in releases, which feels unfair even with your logic. Debating this isn't very productive; it doesn't really matter who's correct or not.
This is wild....unless you're doing some rendering all day like previously mentioned, there's no real rush to upgrade. 10700K still has some serious grunt, even in spite of all the new stuff. If you're just gaming, and using an RTX 3070, no upgrade is going to really manifest in observable performance upgrades unless you play esports games at 1080p/low AND have a super duper high refresh monitor. MMOs might see an uplift, but for the most part, it won't be worth the $600+ you'll be sinking into it. I'm on a 10900KF and have zero plans to upgrade to either Alder Lake or Zen3+. MAYBE 13th gen. But overall, I plan to get at least 3 years out of this, which puts me in 2024+. I wouldn't consider an upgrade until you upgrade your GPU to 3090+ levels of performance. Have you overclocked your 10700K yet? There's some observable gains in doing so. ~14% here in this test. Definitely worth giving a shot. 5.1ghz isn't unrealistic, either. And keep in mind that's with a 3090, not a 3070. You'll see some better minimums and better FPS in some games, but you're still mostly limited by the 3070.
The focus isn't on tail chasing. It's clear that the main players are CPUs released over time before each new version. Usually, just a few or a couple of generations appear, though sometimes more. The FX 300 line battled against 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000, and 7000 series Zen 1000, while the 7000 series faced 7000 and 8000 series Zen 2000, the 8000 series confronted 8000 and 9000 series Zen 3000, and the 9000 series competed with 9000 and 10000 series Zen 5000.
Ah well, so here we are. You were disqualified for not having a reasonable discussion. I've tried several times now to clarify from a technical perspective that you could compare CPUs that way, but it doesn't automatically mean they're competing just because they launched around the same time. They might be vying in the market, but not necessarily in terms of technology. Two completely different matters.