Language is an important thing.
What does it even mean - “performance drop”?
I would say it should mean that you have a reference point, or a starting point, and then you measure the performance difference between that and the next point, using a relevant parameter… like the ones in the DSP and VI tests.
3900x @ 128 buffer = 760 voices, and 400 @ 64 buffer. So what is the ‘drop’? It should be:
(760-400) / 760 = 47%
So that’s even worse. The new performance dropped by 47%, not just 30%.
BUT;
(1860-500) / 1860 = 73%
(1400-480) / 1400 = 66%
for the top Intel CPUs.
There’s a good reason for why Pete at Scan doesn’t create a chart with that specific number, 30%, and that’s because all it is is “untapped” potential, maybe, and it isn’t something we should care about when buying CPUs for DAWs. It would be beyond idiotic to buy a CPU that utilizes 100% of its capacity yet performs 50% worse than its competitor at the same price, for example. What we should care about is the performance that matters which is what the charts show - instances / polyphony.
So rather than pull that piece of text out of the article, how about just pointing out what’s relevant???
98.8% of the performance of a 9960x at about 30% of the cost!..
110% the performance of the 9940x at about 37% of the cost!..
33% more performance than the 9900k at a 3% premium.
…on the DSP test. Same trend on VI test.
Language is an important thing.