• 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 ***

Stephanie Peterson said:
That is complete and utter nonsense, maybe in the DIY market its possible but i can assure you in the main pc world gaming is a tiny fraction of pc use.

I honestly dont know what is going through the minds of some folk on here, to quote Ripley its like IQs have just dropped sharply.
:(
Click to expand...
Are you talking about office PCs running Celerons.? Yeah those people won't buy £500 CPUs...
 
hominid said:
That is exactly what AMD have given you, within a few percent, and I would say for sure that there is more to come when the platform matures.
Click to expand...
I suspect against my better judgement that the 3900X may have a bit left in the tank. It's certainly a good step forward as is 3700X/3800X but I can't see me buying a new platform this year for more of the same with extra cores
for browsing or anything else. That's sort of the issue, this launch makes 8 cores/16 threads proper mainstream but 12 cores/16 threads will take another five years or certainly 2 or 3 before they really matter in gaming. 10% faster than Intel
in some or most games for the 3900X and I'd be in, both feet first. As it is it's meh especially given the low clockspeed headroom for all CPUs. Hopefully this is the start of genuine competition which drives prices down and innovation up and I can buy AMD
again soon. Part of me is really tempted to buy a 9900K now plus superfast RAM but that would be daft...like throwing toys out of the pram.
 
Last edited:
z10m said:
...let's be honest more people game on their PCs than do productivity tasks.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry.... what? Maybe that's true in the echo chamber of PC builders you know but globally that is so far from being true it's almost funny. More *gamers* game on their PC than do productivity tasks. Everyone else? Not so much.
 
Can someone explain these results:

t4MEjUw.png


At 1440p GTAV is ~5% slower on the 3900X vs the 9700K. In multi-tasking/multi-core performance the 3900X is of course much better due to the 3900X having 4 more cores / 16 extra threads, so you would think if you wanted to stream while gaming the 3900X would come out with favourable results, but...

geSSOxn.png


...while streaming the 1440p gameplay (CPU encoding, x264, fast preset, 1080p 5000kbps, no dropped frames by either processor) the 3900X is now ~13% behind the 9700K. Why is the performance while streaming suffering so much when it has more cores/threads for multi-tasking?
 
Last edited:
hominid said:
And to those complaining of clockspeeds, AMD are binning for all processors from R3/R5's to threadrippers, consoles too I guess, so you will get what you pay for and not much more at this early stage. Gone are the days of massive overclocks as the likes of PBO run the silicon close to it's maximum, coupled with binning there is little headroom in the chips.
Click to expand...

These bins are the bottom of the barrel. Priority goes to EPYC, TR4 and to some extent the Ryzen 3950X. They're also the very beginning of the ramp.

In my view, give it a few months and new chips (not just new SKUs) will clock a bit higher.

The console chips will likely be a distinct chip. Also very possibly Samsung built. No way they're binning for that yet.
 
Mensy said:
Hhhmmm now thats has made me think i wanna save £100 over the x570s, i could probably use that £100 next year and get a x670 because the price will be back down to normal
Click to expand...
Will there even be an X670? With Zen 3 seemingly the last hurrah for AM4 with AM5 probably moving to DDR5 etc it might not be worth the effort.
 
PaulM said:
Can someone explain these results:

BHVwWUY.png


At 1440p GTAV is ~5% slower on the 3900X vs the 9700K. In multi-tasking/multi-core performance the 3900X is of course much better due to the 3900X having 4 more cores / 16 extra threads, so you would think if you wanted to stream while gaming the 3900X would come out with favourable results, but...

LBKHOSU.png


...while streaming the 1440p gameplay (CPU encoding, x264, fast preset, 1080p 5000kbps, no dropped frames by either processor) the 3900X is now ~13% behind the 9700K. Why is the performance while streaming suffering so much when it has more cores/threads for multi-tasking?
Click to expand...
Knock that off dude! Drink the Cool Aid and get with the program.
 
Phil Smith said:
I'm sorry.... what? Maybe that's true in the echo chamber of PC builders you know but globally that is so far from being true it's almost funny. More *gamers* game on their PC than do productivity tasks. Everyone else? Not so much.
Click to expand...
Again I'm talking about powerful hardware and not some crap that barely runs Microsoft office and web browser.
 
PaulM said:
Can someone explain these results:

BHVwWUY.png


At 1440p GTAV is ~5% slower on the 3900X vs the 9700K. In multi-tasking/multi-core performance the 3900X is of course much better due to the 3900X having 4 more cores / 16 extra threads, so you would think if you wanted to stream while gaming the 3900X would come out with favourable results, but...

LBKHOSU.png


...while streaming the 1440p gameplay (CPU encoding, x264, fast preset, 1080p 5000kbps, no dropped frames by either processor) the 3900X is now ~13% behind the 9700K. Why is the performance while streaming suffering so much when it has more cores/threads for multi-tasking?
Click to expand...

Which review, what software was running for the streaming and what was running in the background while streaming.

you need to know those things.
 
PaulM said:
Can someone explain these results:

BHVwWUY.png


At 1440p GTAV is ~5% slower on the 3900X vs the 9700K. In multi-tasking/multi-core performance the 3900X is of course much better due to the 3900X having 4 more cores / 16 extra threads, so you would think if you wanted to stream while gaming the 3900X would come out with favourable results, but...

LBKHOSU.png


...while streaming the 1440p gameplay (CPU encoding, x264, fast preset, 1080p 5000kbps, no dropped frames by either processor) the 3900X is now ~13% behind the 9700K. Why is the performance while streaming suffering so much when it has more cores/threads for multi-tasking?
Click to expand...

Something strange. But fast encoding preset at that bit rate target isn't much extra load. Testing it at medium on a lower bit rate target would be a much better test.

I'm not sure if they're using XSplit, OBS or something else ... as this is day 1 I doubt there has been any optimisation by said software for Zen 2, which may well explain in. Also, I suspect that is using the 9900K's QuickSync (think it defaults to ON in most software now), not CPU vs CPU.
 
Pretty much all the pc's i order in are i5s these days, but i can tell you as soon as the 6 core 3600 starts popping up for purchase with Dell and Hp contracts we have i will be moving over to those.

Assuming that HP and Dell get there finger out and actually start selling desktops with these chips.
 
PaulM said:
Can someone explain these results:

BHVwWUY.png


At 1440p GTAV is ~5% slower on the 3900X vs the 9700K. In multi-tasking/multi-core performance the 3900X is of course much better due to the 3900X having 4 more cores / 16 extra threads, so you would think if you wanted to stream while gaming the 3900X would come out with favourable results, but...

LBKHOSU.png


...while streaming the 1440p gameplay (CPU encoding, x264, fast preset, 1080p 5000kbps, no dropped frames by either processor) the 3900X is now ~13% behind the 9700K. Why is the performance while streaming suffering so much when it has more cores/threads for multi-tasking?
Click to expand...

The scheduler isn't great and isn't picking the correct cores or CCXs. Basically.

Linus touched on this in his review.
 
We really should be looking at pushing past 8 Megapixel screens when people are spending huge amounts of money on a system that’s only purpose is playing games a couple of hours a day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom