Clockspeed/IPC. Intel still is a bit quicker on average in games, about 7% compared to the equivalently priced Ryzen CPU. Some games, especially older ones, it can be as much as 20% for some outliers that are still quite popular.
Intel is also tending to win in lowly threaded desktop applications because it can boost higher for longer. AMD's single-core boost is for quite short periods and only on one core with a quicker drop off as more cores are utilised, but Intel will maintain its boost in well-cooled conditions for many minutes or forever with a bios setting (many motherboards come this way by default although it's technically outside of spec) and it will happily also run the single-core overclock with all cores, again with a bios setting (also out of spec, also often comes turned on by default). AMD's CPUs are pushed much harder out of the factory and only 1 core on the chip can achieve the stated highest clock speed so it just can't do the same thing.
Intel ends up better somewhat better in low threaded stuff, games and applications, due to similar IPC but higher clock speed. But AMD CPUs beat it soundly for anything that can utilise more threads as at the same price you get 50% more cores than you do with Intel at least. Below a certain clock speed boost and price Intel just isn't worth it at all, neither are its productivity chips. 9700k, 9900K, 9900kS the soon to be released equivalent 10000 chips, those are still worth it compared to the 3900k, 3800k for certain gaming. Below that however I wouldn't bother with Intel at all and I certainly wouldn't bother with Intel at 60hz, it only really plays at high refresh rates or very particular games.
Saying that just be aware that the Intel CPU will probably age worse as threading continues to increase, all be it a very slow process. It really is going to depend on if you play AAA games or whether you play something particular or indy games and if they have problems with performance and are also lowly threaded.