AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***

[Martini1991]

Some people are. Though you can see how they've slid the stack up as they know Intel don't have anything to counter it.

Some people hold AMD up as some sort of champion of the people.

I don't think I can justify the 12C and was hoping for a lower price point, but the performance potentially seems really good.

 

[davida76]

3700X is 65W and 3600X is 95W?

I would hope it's a typo seen as the 3700x is 65w with 200mhz less on the base but 2 more cores and the same boost of 4.4ghz

 

[Martini1991]

Why 105W versus 65W for 100 Mhz?

 

[TrixX]

Some people hold AMD up as some sort of champion of the people.

I don't think I can justify the 12C and was hoping for a lower price point, but the performance potentially seems really good.

TBF I think 'Moore's Law is Dead' summed it up pretty well. The 12c is double the performance of the 9900K for the same money and higher performance than the 9920K to boot.

A few people did predict AMD pushing the product stack up, and well done on that prediction, personally I thought AMD would take the mindshare route, but this could result in higher profits for them if they manage to take the market share.

I still see that 12c being a solid purchase though for it's RRP.

Why 105W versus 65W for 100 Mhz?

This is an interesting one. I think it's one of two things, first is they limited boost so the 3900X stole the show. 2nd is that they started hitting limits with the 8c CCX's. Personally I think it's the limiting but we'll see when we get testing.

 

[d_brennen]

Love they way some in here were saying no way to $500/£500 for the top end parts. Now here we are, 12 core for $499, no room to slide 16 core in anything but $600 really. It's almost like AMD know they have a compelling product or something...

 

[Cooper]

What I expect to happen is when the 16c parts are released, the other prices will fall.

The sensible thing to do would be to go for the 3700/3700X now, then (if you really need more cores) upgrade to the 16c32t when it gets released, probably at the $499 price point, with reductions in price across the current line up to allow it to slip in to the pricing structure.

 

[Deleted User 456458]

12 core for 499 is impressive. Very curious to see OC headroom.

It’s not a death sentence to intel but does put AMD is a good leading position.

The reviews should be interesting. Hopefully the performance scale everywhere without caveats. That’s always been the strength on intel.

 

[Martini1991]

Love they way some in here were saying no way to $500/£500 for the top end parts. Now here we are, 12 core for $499, no room to slide 16 core in anything but $600 really. It's almost like AMD know they have a compelling product or something...

I'm pretty sure at launch the 1800X was a 500 dollar part.

 

[alexakasloth]

https://www.amd.com/en/products/specifications/processors/11781,11756,11761,11766,11771

Product page with full specs.

3700x will likely be my next upgrade, anything with a good TDP so I can stick with my passive cooler.

 

[d_brennen]

I'm pretty sure at launch the 1800X was a 500 dollar part.

It was indeed

 

[ChrisD.]

Why is the TDP so different between the 3700X and the 3800X?

 

[Deleted User 456458]

Why is the TDP so different between the 3700X and the 3800X?

Maybe a binned part with higher headroom? I can see them artificially limiting the spec boost on the 3800 to keep it optically a lower level than the flagship 3900. In practice, would not be a surprise to see the 3800 hold a higher overclock than the 3900.

 

[HeX]

Why is the TDP so different between the 3700X and the 3800X?

More than likely just slips outside the 65W envelope, so it's marketed as the next power tier. There's no way it pulls the same juice as the Ryzen 9.

 

[d_brennen]

Why is the TDP so different between the 3700X and the 3800X?

Voltage wall. The best chips go to Epyc, then filter down. You don't need A1 silicon to hit 4.5GHz in ~105w but if you have 2 of them on package you probably do

 

[an0nym0us]

On the face of it, the 3800X doesn't look particularly appealing to me (unless it has massive overclocking headroom).

I think I'll be choosing between the 3700X and 3900X.

 

[AStaley]

Think Ill go with the 3900X, but will wait for some independent benchmarks. Will probably also wait a month after release to see what kinks need ironing out.

 

[Martini1991]

I'd have hoped closer to £400 for the 3900X. I imagine it'd fall quite quick.
Would be closer to £400 if our currency wasn't crap.

 

[ChrisD.]

I'd have hoped closer to £400 for the 3900X. I imagine it'd fall quite quick.
Would be closer to £400 if our currency wasn't crap.

Isn't it half the price of the Intel chip it’s being marketed against?

 

[Sayso]

400+??? No chance mate. Absolutely no chance. They have to get share away from Intel. They wont win mindshare charging intel prices.

Sorry i was £100 short, i did say + though!

 

[Martini1991]

It’s half the price of the Intel chip it’s being marketed against?

I don't think it's poorly priced, or anything like that.
But I'd have hoped for cheaper (But some of that is because our currency is crap)

And AMD CPU's have always historically dropped in price relatively quick.

What is AMD marketing the 3900X against?

The i9 9900K's £500.

I'd say pricing wise they're nigh on the same.

Until reviews we won't really know much, but I imagine the 3900X's is overall the better CPU.