edit: Below is wrong, see author of article's reply below for why. Preserving for record.
They have been holding back review samples of their latest i9s so reviewers wouldn't do head-to-heads with this new 3950X (but people have anyway, and the 3950X crushes the i9). See Linus Tech Tip's review of the 3950X this morning for citation.
Linus tested the 8-core i9-9900KS, which came out a few weeks ago, and those results are also in the link which is the title to this thread.
Intel's security flaws pushed our LCRs up at least two years and cost us extra in over-provisioning to account for real and potential performance loss. If Intel isn't actually hardware mitigating (as in, making no effort to redesign their chips with security in mind and instead playing whack a mole with vulnerabilities as they're discovered) and reviewers are not highlighting and disclosing this, they're lying by omission.
I'm not being rude, but don't give Intel a pass here because of any prior fondness you might have held for them. Every benchmark of an Intel CPU you've ever published was made false by their negligence. That's a big, confusing problem for consumers, and they rely on your clarity and diligence to bring it to their attention and correct.
What are your thoughts on the question of whether Intel may be strategically timing releases of some mitigations to favor their performance in review benchmarks?
Better phrased: won't be valid for long, if the security patches are released ;)
For those of you without really good search engines :) (Contains link to YouTube video review.)