Sorry, had to post this. Go check this out.
So, to summarise:
My first reaction is just "What."
I mean, what?
Okay, so I can summarise my rebuttal to this as:
If you test three applications, one of which uses only 8 threads (Handbrake, H.264), can see that the 1950X scores about the same despite 8 less cores - what's this? Maybe your test isn't using the SIXTEEN OTHER CORES that the 2970WX offers over the 9900K. Just a thought.
Geekbench, don't even get me started on that pile of trash. Geekbench doesn't scale that great and I'd avoid using it as a desktop, HEDT-performance benchmark. And then they have Cinebench, which shows the 2970WX destroying the 9900K - as it would, in a render test.
But to say "9900K delivers higher multi-core scores" is absolute garbage. Let's see the 9900K in blender or scientific work that can scale to all 24 cores like someone that, you know, buys a workstation branded processor might be doing?
And to bring gaming into this, just no.
This guy clearly has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. Sorry dude, learn what this product is built for before testing lightly threaded apps then claiming the 9900K is faster in multi-core.