m0ei wrote- Price to performance ratio: yes.
- 1440p and 4k: Negligible/on par.
- 1080p: around 10% better on intel.
AM4 is supported for 2-3 more years, you'll get a 7nm CPU next year, so short answer: yes.
The 2700x short fall against the i7 8700k in gaming and he is aiming to get the i9 9900k too which increases the gap.
i7 8700k vs i7 9700k vs R7 2700x vs i9900k tested on 13 games
https://youtu.be/NLsP5QcH4-Q
It short fall against on all across the three resolutions.
In depth i9900k vs 2700x
https://youtu.be/oV6pfSH9hO8
2160 is negligible on 60hz display , what if he decided to uograde to 2160p 144hz in the near future or 3440 × 1440p 200hz , the i 9 9900k will definitely process more frames coming from a high end graphic card causing it to pump more frames on the screen to fullfil high resfresh rates.
Remember all the hype done by Vega 64 and HBM 2.0 and when actually dropped got beaten by 1080ti although the Vega 64 has higher memory bandwidth and FP32 Tflops. Hopefully the 7nm thing is not similar too.
The i9900k is already fast without any OC
1st
2nd
on 5Ghz by default
#3 #4
on 4.8Ghz by default
#5 #6 #7 #8
on 4.7 ghz by default
Meanwhile AMD is struggling to bypass 4.4Ghz on a single core boost clock even. AAA games still love single threaded performance per clock with high Ghz.
Finally , AM4 will support AMD cpus until 2020 (31 December 2019) with DDR 4. A more rational approcah is 7nm+ and Ddr 5 (which will not be supported by AM4 - a new memory controler is required). Next major upgrade will be a 7nm+ with ddr5 if he went 2700x now thus a new board.