• 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 3 (5000 Series), rumored 17% IPC gain.

Status
Not open for further replies.
MissChief said:
Are we still expecting this to launch this year? There’s not long to go and AMD have been extremely tight lipped about the desktop chips.
Click to expand...

I think it's in mass production ready-to-launch right now:

June 2020:
AMD Ryzen 4000 ‘Vermeer’ Desktop CPUs With Zen 3 Cores Going in Mass Production Soon, Already in B0 Stepping
https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-4000-vermeer-desktop-cpus-zen-3-cores-mass-production-soon/

August 2020:
AMD's Next-Gen Zen 3 Desktop CPUs Spotted With 4.9 GHz Boost Clock
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amds-next-gen-zen-3-desktop-cpus-spotted-with-49-ghz-boost-clock
 
MissChief said:
Are we still expecting this to launch this year? There’s not long to go and AMD have been extremely tight lipped about the desktop chips.
Click to expand...
Supposed to be October November last I heard, though I may be mis-remembering. I've not seen anything to say they wont be released this year as everything is supposed to be on track and in mass production as 4K8KW10 has said.

I will agree there hasnt been much in terms of marketing for them, same goes for Big Navi so I'm going to go with Jayz2cents assumption that it maybe be a new marketing approach to let the components speak for themselves rather than build up the hype for people to be let down (thats more in regards to Radeon really).

Who knows, but I'm eagerly awaiting it lol.
 
Jacknm2 said:
I've gotta say, X570 Bios was buggy as hell, I got it from launch but perhaps no more so than other new launchs but issues where present with only 1 or 2 vendors at the time keeping somewhat stable versions. Nevermind X470 and below.

I don't know any one with a 3000 series chip hitting advertised boost clocks even with custom overclocks, at least at safe voltages or daily driving, including myself, I may be worse off on the silicon lotto only managing 4.2GHz missing 200Mhz, but I know several 3700X users unable to get any more than 4.3GHz either. I know 1 person with a 3900X that is 50Mhz off their boost clock. All of this is from use of PBO and manual overclocking including some trying to get all cores which...yea ok lol. It's a relatively small sample set from myself and correlation may not always correspond to causation but the evidence is there in multiple forums, reddit, discord channels etc.... especially in regards to safe voltages for the 3000 series.

I'm not saying intel fans didnt stir up the pot and I'm not saying the 3000 series is bad or AMD is bad or evul etc... but it is not nonsensical at all, gotta argee with Dirk's response above. Despite all this I still plan on buying 4/5000 Series chips when they launch.
Click to expand...
I am saying the max boost clock saga is nonsensical because a) it is an instantaneous perform clock. Never meant to be a sustained clock speed b) the majority of people seems to be fussing over 50mhz and some times 25-33mhz our of whatever GHz they are talking about. The margin is just too small to make any real world difference.

your chip suffered more the. Fair enough but thousands ppl online waded into this because someone initially noticed that their max boost clock was 33mhz shy of the advertised speed and probably thought they could get a class action lawsuit going against AMD as AMD settled out of court on similar thing. Then the whole thing just started to take a life of its own.
 
Dirk Diggler said:
Oh, ok then if you say so..
Looks like someone needs to make their mind up?
Click to expand...
You quote me out of context and calling me to make up my mind. Mate I said the only thing was systemic was the boost clock saga which is storm in a tea cup.

motherboard manufacture writing poor coding that’s their problem. It is not AMD’s fault. The same thing happens to intel as well as AMD and to say AMD launch has teething issues is misleading.

all new launches have potential teething issues is the correct statement and associate issues with AMD that’s not AMD’s fault strikes me as someone who needs to make up their mind.
 
Hi, I really want to build a new pc with an rtx 3080, I'm thinking of going with a 3700x but not sure if it's a bad time. Is there a release date for the new amd cpus? Thanks
 
Dirk Diggler said:
That's excellent news if true, I've bought the MSI X570 Tomahawk (as recommended a couple of pages back) and am looking forward to upgrading my CPU alongside a new RTX 3000 GPU.

A good year for upgrades. :cool:
Click to expand...

Sounds like the X570 Motherboard to get. Will be buying the 3080 and a new Ryzen CPU to go with.
 
olliej82 said:
Hi, I really want to build a new pc with an rtx 3080, I'm thinking of going with a 3700x but not sure if it's a bad time. Is there a release date for the new amd cpus? Thanks
Click to expand...
If you can hold on a month or so the new Zen 3 CPU's will have launched and if rumours are true will see another significant boost in performance. Should also mean the Zen 2 chips start reducing in cost too.
 
Moving into a single 8-core CCX design will certainly allow more granular reduction in core counts, but to be honest TSMC's yields are allegedly so good I don't actually see the point, unless it's a move to up core counts across the range.

Ryzen 5: 8 cores
Ryzen 7: 10 cores
Ryzen 9: 12 and 16 cores, maybe even 14 too.

The trick with that is the Ryzen 5 requires a fully-working chiplet, but it doesn't have to be the best clocker. Or you could do 4+4 for a non-X and 8+0 for the X, the latter benefitting from having no cross-CCD latency, but then you run the risk of the Ryzen 5X actually outperforming the Ryzen 7 because that will have a latency penalty the 5X doesn't have.
 
I'd hope they have 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 core parts using every available 7nm die made, even the 2c junk for Ryzen 3000G equivalents.

Why not have a better selection, some might end up OEM only, or region specific but at lease there would be less waste and more choice.
 
Journey said:
...but at lease there would be less waste...
Click to expand...
But that's the point: how much waste is there when yields are over 90%? Is it worth the extra time to bin 7 core chiplets for a 14 core R9? Does it make for a bloated product stack if there's 10 and 14 core SKUs alongside the established 8, 12 and 16? Given how much AMD screwed up their 3000 series naming by with 3900 and 3950 before Threadripper even landed, are there enough numbers to go around before it gets a bit foggy? 4800X, 4850X, 4900X, 4920X, 4950X?
 
As I said region/OEM specific, just like the 2300X, 2500X, 3500 and 3500X etc. Lots of opportunities.

Not everything has to be for users specific to this forum. ;)
 
Current setup is the longest I have stuck with a single CPU (and GPU!) since I built my first PC in late 90s.
Was almost entirely AMD chips until the Core 2 Duo released so looking forward to a return to AMD with Zen3 :p
 
LePhuronn said:
Moving into a single 8-core CCX design will certainly allow more granular reduction in core counts, but to be honest TSMC's yields are allegedly so good I don't actually see the point, unless it's a move to up core counts across the range.

Ryzen 5: 8 cores
Ryzen 7: 10 cores
Ryzen 9: 12 and 16 cores, maybe even 14 too.

The trick with that is the Ryzen 5 requires a fully-working chiplet, but it doesn't have to be the best clocker. Or you could do 4+4 for a non-X and 8+0 for the X, the latter benefitting from having no cross-CCD latency, but then you run the risk of the Ryzen 5X actually outperforming the Ryzen 7 because that will have a latency penalty the 5X doesn't have.
Click to expand...

Sounds about right. 8 core is what I see as entry level desktop gaming CPU as soon as these new consoles launch - so it makes sense for AMD to put the 8 core at the 5600x level and priced accordingly
 
Ideally the 8 core would be good clockers though, it would be great PR to beat the 9900k in games. A multi CCX part would still have latency issues. Imagine having to buy the 4950x just to get 1 good clocking CCX!!!

Hopefully a 4800x/xt could be a better binned 1 CCX part, I’d happily pay a bit more for that, but not too much more. The 3800xt is already pretty close to 9900k prices
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom