I love AMD as a company. I paid $400 for the K6-233 at its release as the fastest CPU for all of thirty days before the Pentium II was released in an early panic. Owned a 486DX4-120MHz before that, went through the Durons, Athlons, Athlon XPs, 64, 64 x 2.
But I'd much rather see an eight-core Ryzen that can hit 5.5GHz than a sixteen core that hits 4.7GHz. It's a balance of cores and clockspeed for me, I need some of both. I'm sure sixteen cores is awesome for Adobe/Handbrake/CAD/Cinebench/multithreaded crunching apps, but as a gamer, how much more performance is sixteen cores going to get me over eight for what I do?
i9-9900K @4.8GHz, GIGABYTE Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi, 2 x 16GB G.Skill RipJaws V PC3000
Corsair 650D, Seasonic 1Kw Platinum PSU
2x Samsung 850 Pro 512GB, 1TB WD Black, NEC 7200 DVDRW
2x Gigabyte GTX 1070 Founders Ed. SLI, Dell 2408WFP-HC