• 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 ***

Soldato
Joined
19 Nov 2015
Posts
4,867
Location
Glasgow Area
Did I say that!? :rolleyes: don't get your knickers in a twist...

I keep seeing that same thing being said over and over and it makes no sense.

"But the i9 is faster"
"no it's not, they are the same"
"AH but thats the i9 at stock, you can overclock the i9 and then it will win".

Makes literally zero sense until we see how well the 3900x OC's.
 

G J

G J

Associate
Joined
3 Oct 2008
Posts
1,426
These new motherboards seem to be expensive but as a side note Intel really need to bring something new to the table as dropping another Haswell/Skylake rehash isn't going to go down well even if they do what AMD have done and keep some sort of backwards compatibility with existing z390 boards.

If you think the cost for CPU and x570 combo is costly once Intel bring PCI-E 4 motherboards to market with their new chips I'm guessing its going to be a lot worse. :eek:
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Feb 2015
Posts
12,630
Im just saying for others to be aware of reviews coming from popular sites thinking they are the go to review sites.

You'd see some oc the RAM to 3466 thinking - wow thats nice. Closer look you'd see they used CL19.

yeah so many reviewers are basically "incomplete" because they get rushed out the door.

Knowing ram speed is pointless when you dont know the timings with it.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
26 May 2012
Posts
17,002
Makes literally zero sense until we see how well the 3900x OC's.
I agree. As I said:
Historically ryzen and ryzen+ aren't known for their overclocking...so unless amd pulls a rabbit out of the hat for zen2...
It would be nice to see oc ryzen 3900x vs oc 9900k.
Let the games begin!

It came across like you want MCE on with the i9 but don't use XFR/PBO with the Ryzen.
See above.
 
Permabanned
Joined
2 Sep 2017
Posts
10,490
These new motherboards seem to be expensive but as a side note Intel really need to bring something new to the table as dropping another Haswell/Skylake rehash isn't going to go down well even if they do what AMD have done and keep some sort of backwards compatibility with existing z390 boards.

If you think the cost for CPU and x570 combo is costly once Intel bring PCI-E 4 motherboards to market with their new chips I'm guessing its going to be a lot worse. :eek:

Comet Lake 10-core coming next year.

30szvya.jpg
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Jun 2009
Posts
6,847
I forgot about WIFI 6 in x570 boards. That's worth £20-£30 by itself for a lot of people without ethernet connections.

Acutally though, if you have AC wifi already, don't know how know how much of an improvement this would be.
Eww, I never use WiFi if I can help it. I'm gonna have to test which of the 8x Cat 6 runs to my office can and can't support 10 GbE soon. :D

If you're stuck with WiFi, it's a useful feature providing you're going to keep the rig for a long time. Most people won't have WiFi 6 capable routers over the next 3 years.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2012
Posts
4,162
Location
Oxfordshire
I don't share your feelings. I suspect PCIe 5.0 compliant boards will require more retimers and even higher quality PCBs.

Out of interest why. From what I have read designers are now moving to lower-loss materials such as MEGTRON to counter increasing channel loss, even at the 16GTransfer/s maximum speed of PCIe 4.0 this is being adopted which could explain the cost difference.

MEGTRON can cost 1.2 to 2.5 times more than FR4, and PCB traces may need to be further apart to improve jitter performance, resulting in a larger and more expensive PCB and that is where I think costs may well have gone. Would explain such a large price margin.

So if we get confirmation of if they are using MEGTRON or not would resolve if we are seeing them prepare for PCIE 5.0 in that both need the same spec there to work. However if not then it means you could be talking about that 1.2 to 2.5 times cost on top of PCIE 4.0.

Time frame I don't think we are going to see anything till 2021 and I feel the aim would be to get DDR5 at same point sorted with a new socket. Just my view on what is being planned from what we can see.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2012
Posts
4,162
Location
Oxfordshire
I keep seeing that same thing being said over and over and it makes no sense.

"But the i9 is faster"
"no it's not, they are the same"
"AH but thats the i9 at stock, you can overclock the i9 and then it will win".

Makes literally zero sense until we see how well the 3900x OC's.

I honestly don't think we are going to see much in terms of OC since PBO already handles it well and likely on already when they did the comparison.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 May 2012
Posts
3,633
If 3600X is as fast as i7-8700K/i7-8086K/i7-9700K, and 3700X/3800X are as fast as i9-9900K, I don't see what exactly lead AMD is taking, besides offering more cores for the most expensive tiers.



In order to saturate the PCIe lanes, there should be very intense transfer of data between ther CPU, the GPU and the memory. If the CPU can't manage to send big packets of data to the GPU and vise versa, the bus won't ever be the limitting factor. The bottleneck is not in its bandwidth.

I see what you mean. If they only match the 8700/8086k then its like AMD have released a CPU which matches a Q4 2017 CPU in the summer of 2019 with a few more cores.
 
Associate
Joined
7 Apr 2017
Posts
1,762
it wont be needed for a gpu any time soon, currently no GPU's can exceed 8 lanes of pcie3. Most dont even consume 4 lanes.

Exactly, to me it's pure gimmick at the moment and utterly pointless. That however is my view on it, as it's not something I need, similarly I find M.2 a total waste of time for my use criteria. If people look at what the need, not what they 'think' they want, then I'd be fairly confident that the majority would be fine running 1st and 2nd gen boards.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Mar 2008
Posts
9,638
Location
Ireland
I see what you mean. If they only match the 8700/8086k then its like AMD have released a CPU which matches a Q4 2017 CPU in the summer of 2019 with a few more cores.

Considering the IPC between the 8086 and 9900k is within 1%, you can say Intel haven’t improved anything really either. Outside of a clock bump.

I don’t see how that’ a negative for AMD at all, especially if they match or slightly exceed Intel IPC.

They’re offering similar or better IPC, and more cores. It’s good for everyone. Especially compared to Skylake X, which has inferior IPC to normal Skylake also. While AMD offer more cores than most Intel HEDT chips, with better IPC.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Dec 2015
Posts
18,514
:confused:
"As far as you know"? Well, what do you know? Or what do you think you know?

These boards will last until AMD adopt DDR5 on the mainstream desktop, so that's 2021 at the earliest. That's 2 generations of CPU before it would need to be replaced. But then look at the specs of these boards, look at the specs of the Ryzen 3000 series (and what that means for Ryzen 4000 next year), there's nothing more you could add to make it any more "future proof" than it already is, and X570 systems will last for donkey's years.

AMD will push DDR5 fast! Rome has been a huge push and for data centers- pushing more ram and fastest is key along with DDR speeds being tied into IF .

The'll then rapid this down to consumer to push once again ahead of Intel . Gone are the days of PCIe and DDR standard being slow to be taken up after years of being official published :D

the king is dead. long live the king
 
Associate
Joined
3 Jul 2007
Posts
113
I see what you mean. If they only match the 8700/8086k then its like AMD have released a CPU which matches a Q4 2017 CPU in the summer of 2019 with a few more cores.

To be fair Intel haven't had that much in the way of single thread gains over the last 7 years. The future is more cores with marginal IPC and frequency gains. If AMD are within 5% of Intel in single thread performance but more cores thats good enough for me.

Might take a few years for games to start utilising more than 8 cores, but they still have some uses now. I expect to keep mine for 5+ years anyhow so want some future proofing.
 
Back
Top Bottom