Intel does support fast 4000Mhz + memory. It is also a mature platform.
If you want to see a variety of memory speeds with intel compared to ryzen start reading the various Reviews on different sites they all have a variety of speeds listed. most down clocked the memory to match what they could get on Ryzen because due to the immaturity of Ryzen, people are still having trouble getting 3200Mhz ram working reliably
Intel performance is only improved by a relatively small percentage with faster ram. Intel systems are not reliant on memory frequency to set the bandwidth for memory communications.
Ryzen, on the other hand is totally dependent on fast ram for performance because the ram frequency what sets the frequency of the Data fabric, the part of the chip that handles all communications between cores, memory controller and pcie bus
Recompiling applications to include new to the market optimization flags is not a conspiracy to hobble Ryzen. The last time Ashes released an update, Ryzen did not even exist. It is difficult to compile code specifically for something when you don't know what it is. The same thing also happens to Intel when they bring out a new CPU with a new instruction set. Old code cant use the new instructions because it doesn't know that it exists. It requires a program update that specifically targets the new instructions built into the CPU before it can take advantage of it.
It is more that people just don't know what to expect so they used intels compatible ram. If they are shills they shouldn't be reviewing products. After years of only having intel DDR4 ram and very little ram that works with AMD at full speed at launch, it is just hard to do reviews. I do agree that reviewers should re-do their work with the faster ram pairing and publish better results.
Until Ryzen, there was no DDR4 ram for AMD product so It shouldn't be surprising that there has not been many kits available at launch time and none of the Ram worked at 3200Mhz. The g.Skill Flare memory is the only kit that is AMD specific on the market that I am aware of and even that was not available at launch and people are still having trouble getting it working at 3200Mhz. The rest are still "Intel" kits whose timings are close enough that can be made fit.
AMD have not helped their cause by playing secret squirrel with the vendors that they must rely on to succeed. The project management failures and lack of proper communication left motherboard and cooler vendors scrambling.
I don't understand why AMD have hidden the secondary Ram timings. I have never heard an explanation but I assume that the architecture is more sensitive to secondary ram timing changes.
I don't think that these guys are out and out shills. I do think though that they certainly have to balance a symbiotic relationship with the vendors to stay in business themselves. I also think that the audience places their own personal spin on the guys that they subscribe to and like watching that does not necessarily match up with reality as well.
Lets face it. Nvidia, Intel, AMD, Asus, asrock, MSI etc are not going to hand out product to a reviewer unless they believe that they get some marketing value in return for the hand out. All of the YT channels who review are products are by definition infotainment channels who are reliant on being given advance review units so they have something to make content about.
Four core to eight core is not directly comparable as Ashes runs more stuff the more cores you have, they explain it in the article (and pictures).
Bottom line is that the increase is more 15% in a real save game, not using the internal GPU benchmark. The Intel 6900K also see an improvement. They also try to simulate a Ryzen four core to compare to the 7700K. I think it looks kinda good overall.
Also an update in the thread, the part of the problem seems to have been a bug in MSVC2015. Only a re-compile with MSVC2017 was needed to fix that bug.
And more talk about why nontemporal writes are a bad idea in general.