Hey, you could be right, I'm not saying I know everything. It is quite possible that current individual AMD cores are enough to run all those games without any issues and their architecture works flawlessly. All I am saying is that older games were built with Intel in mind and that there is a chance that AMD might have issues, since I don't have an AMD pc I obviously can't test that.
You realise that is a far cry from how your posts started out, yeah? From "Intel is the only way to go for old games" & "AMD have compatibility issues" to "maybe they're fine" & you not really knowing. Wasn't looking for a "gotcha" here, I genuinely want to know about issues with older games on AMD chips.
Intel have spent a lot of money over the past decade pushing the idea that everything they make is premium & perfect, with the implication that any competition is cheap & nasty.
You have a 9900(K?) - I'm not trying to convince you to buy AMD, but whether you realise it or not what you're telling us is basically FUD as it stands.
If I play SimCity 4 on my old i7 980X it will silently crash to desktop unless I get it pegged to just a single core/thread. I'm not going around posting that Intel CPUs have compatibility issues with old games. I know it will happen on my AMD CPU as well, because I have a basic grasp of the problem. Phenoms & Bulldozer lacking AVX & things like that? Pretty fair but also entirely irrelevant to what Zen & onwards are like.
Blindly opting for all XCompany products are good, all YCompany products are bad/might have problems is a terrible way to view things.
The Bulldozer vs Sandy Bridge days are gone.
The onus is absolutely on AMD to ensure that they are compatible with older x86 software. Outside of Destiny 2 and software that developers couldn't have dreamed would be run on a 32 thread system, I've not seen an issue.
AMD are on an even footing now and I expect the market to transition to a healthy & competitive trading of blows with Rocket Lake & Zen 4, pushing each other forward.