Soldato
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***
- Thread starter Jamin280672
- Start date
So that's even more worrying, if what you are saying is that their key Gaming CPU demonstration just showed that the 3800X could saturate a low end GPU as effectively as a 9900K in PUBG !?! Sure a 15% uplift in PUBG is great but we'd need to know the differential between that and the competition to know whether it was really meaningful.
Well I'm not sure why you think its worrying. If the 3800X was beating the 9900K by a few frames, it might mean the gap is even larger with a more powerful GPU.
Soldato
Wonder when Digital Foundry will get their hands on a couple of chips for review.
Soldato
Wow pie eater, you really are pointlessly trying to pull apart the presentation with nothing more than guesses, which you keep changing and making ridiculous claims like it is "fake". To what end? Ryzen 2xxx were fantastic chips, and the extra IPC seems to have really lifted the single core perf substantially. This is shown time after time in the demos, consistently. If the the reviews come out and it isn't close to 15% on average then come back and say "I told you so" smugly. If the left is not as per there presentation then stock will tumble. .I really don't get the mentality of trying to find flaw so eagerly unless you have an agenda.
But you can't just have people flippantly saying the 3800X is probably on par with the 9900k for gaming. Doing so without the scientific results from the independent bench-marking community is nothing more than hearsay which will confuse the masses and discredit the enthusiast community for which we are all apart of.
Think about it... what if it's 5% slower on average? Then the statement is absolutely FALSE, what would we do then?
Caporegime
The 2700X was around 15% behind the 9900K in games, so unless AMD are lying about the 15% IPC uplift its quite reasonable to connect the dots that are there.
Caporegime
So theres no problem, look we all need to wait for independent reviews, but there is no reason to dismiss what is in plain sight.I mean you would think so.
I think independent reviews will confirm around 9900K performance.
That was my entire point
I thought 'hearsay which will confuse the masses' would have given the sarcasm away.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 963
The key word here is probably which is clearly not intended as a scientific evaluation.
They are obviously speculating so anyone that is confused by that is very easily befuddled so not sure why one should be concerned by that.
As for the enthusiast community, it seems discredited enough already so one more shot to the corpse will make no difference.
Caporegime
ok 
its late, past my bed time.
its late, past my bed time.pubg does smash amd cpus. so a big uplift here is good for gamers in general. i play it across many systems. i heard every excuse under the sun but many people play it as their main game most of the time so its a pretty important benchmark for many. its actually quite easy to benchmark but often its people who dont understand the game or know where to go to show the fps differences.
That's outdated, they should be using a 2080ti for those tests
Sarchasm aside - as a pure CPU comparison it really doesn't matter as long as it is a pure CPU bottleneck.
The issue as being argued in the 9900ks thread is that the intel chip manages an all core overclock at 5ghz, we have absolutely no data yet on what these chips will sustain if you throw a lot of power at them. I know there are some benches of these chips on water... have any actually leaked which would allow a comparison?
The issue as being argued in the 9900ks thread is that the intel chip manages an all core overclock at 5ghz, we have absolutely no data yet on what these chips will sustain if you throw a lot of power at them. I know there are some benches of these chips on water... have any actually leaked which would allow a comparison?
New Buildzoid video
Will be ryzen 1000 and 2000 mobo work with the ryzen 3000 cpus
8 Core: Yes most likely although we don’t know how far they can be pushed with overclocks
12 Core: Maybe-Baby. If you have a high end X470 your chances of pulling it off is higher than a low end one. Again we dont know how far the tdp gets pushed with overclocking yet.
16 Core: It’s best if you assume non X570 boards won’t work well then you won’t be disappointed and if they do work you will be pleasantly surprised
https://out.reddit.com/t3_btt6nk?url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn3rd6N9vGM&token=AQAAtLPsXEUvdGf8VCogs78dMM7Ia5Cf6iVy5ULQPek4Bl_C0kWn&app_name=reddit.com
Will be ryzen 1000 and 2000 mobo work with the ryzen 3000 cpus
8 Core: Yes most likely although we don’t know how far they can be pushed with overclocks
12 Core: Maybe-Baby. If you have a high end X470 your chances of pulling it off is higher than a low end one. Again we dont know how far the tdp gets pushed with overclocking yet.
16 Core: It’s best if you assume non X570 boards won’t work well then you won’t be disappointed and if they do work you will be pleasantly surprised
https://out.reddit.com/t3_btt6nk?url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn3rd6N9vGM&token=AQAAtLPsXEUvdGf8VCogs78dMM7Ia5Cf6iVy5ULQPek4Bl_C0kWn&app_name=reddit.com
They probably should have but that's the only benchmark I've found for both the 2700X and 9900K at low settings and resolution.
Yeah I've already seen nvme single ssd been launched with 5Gb/s speed so four in raid 0 would give you 20Gb/s. Not that you need it. Having nvme ssd at 5Gb/s is nice enough