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

[Grim5]

It's pretty clear now that a chipset fan is a requirement. Which yes is annoying. But if the performance is worth it cant really complain.

Maybe we’ll see big monoblocks that cover the cpu, vrm and chipset like gigabyte has done on its Z390 WaterForce

 

[CuriousTomCat]

I'm going to get the 8 core variant then in 4 years time parhaps, I could upgrade it to 16 cores when they're really cheap on ebay. That would be a 100% CPU performance increase without changing motherboard

 

[smilingcrow]

I'm hoping a possible 16/32 runs a bit hot for most coolers so it's worse under xfr clocks compared to the possible 12/24. That way I can feel better about spending less money

Considering this is an over-clockers forum and based on the one official AMD demo of Zen 2 I doubt many people here will have a problem running a 16C Ryzen 3 at stock speeds due to cooling limitations.

 

[DragonQ]

@Plec ... No active Chipset cooling

And can finally stop saying over and over July release



https://videocardz.com/80709/amd-confirms-radeon-navi-and-3rd-gen-ryzen-available-in-q3-2019

Damn, I was really hoping they'd be available in June. July is still quite likely but it does mean that Computex might just be another teaser, with a potential paper launch at E3. At least Q3 gives a bit of certainty.

 

[Scougar]

Getting excited I must admit. I have lots of paintball videos and want to up my game with music, effects and music so am gonna need a better workhorse, but also want to game decently still.

Ended up blowing my CPU fund on my daughters Birthday lol. After my folks have been to visit (gotta spend money on new railings, door frames, doors, trim, queen bed etc before them come), I will start saving again after that (mid June). Hoping I can still purchase and run at least a 12 core in my B350 board until I save up enough for a decent 570 board. If so I will be aiming for Navi before the MB upgrade.

 

[Troezar]

Damn, I was really hoping they'd be available in June. July is still quite likely but it does mean that Computex might just be another teaser, with a potential paper launch at E3. At least Q3 gives a bit of certainty.

The sooner the better. I need motherboard, CPU and GPU now as I just sold my 1070. It will be good to have an all AMD build up once again. Last one was Athlon 4200+ and X1950pro, K8N Neo 2 Platinum modded to take faster CPU. Still running today

 

[The Asgard]

Looking to the next 5 years of tech, 8 is going to be the minimum, not the avg requirement. Just like quad was for the last decade.

So wrong.

Current processors will work just fine given the way operating systems work.

 

[TrixX]

So wrong.

Current processors will work just fine given the way operating systems work.

Given the problems I'm seeing with people still on quad cores, I'd have to disagree. Most of those having issues are gamers or content creators though, so not the avg joe, but as the people who push the requirements for PC's are gamers, content creators and data centres, it stands to reason that the default avg joe PC is going to need an upgrade as programs start using more of their system's potential.

 

[Troezar]

Given the problems I'm seeing with people still on quad cores, I'd have to disagree. Most of those having issues are gamers or content creators though, so not the avg joe, but as the people who push the requirements for PC's are gamers, content creators and data centres, it stands to reason that the default avg joe PC is going to need an upgrade as programs start using more of their system's potential.

I'd say for anything taxing 4C4T has had its day. I see 100% all core regularly now on my 2500K.

 

[MaXxBoulton]

I'd say for anything taxing 4C4T has had its day. I see 100% all core regularly now on my 2500K.

100% agree. You need a minimum 4c8t now days. 4c or 2c4t is for basic home computing now days.

 

[orbitalwalsh]

I'd say for anything taxing 4C4T has had its day. I see 100% all core regularly now on my 2500K.

This ! ^^^

4c 8t you can get away with, specially with DX12 - shows good gains .
4c 4t with DX12 gains nothing and taxes at DX11

 

[theone8181]

This ! ^^^

4c 8t you can get away with, specially with DX12 - shows good gains .
4c 4t with DX12 gains nothing and taxes at DX11

Its why i went for a 2600k over the 2500. BFV shows more than 50% usage on all 8 threads, so an i5 wouldn't manage.

 

[beany_bot]

I'd say for anything taxing 4C4T has had its day. I see 100% all core regularly now on my 2500K.

Sadly I have to agree. (or not sadly).
For example. my 4690K can play RUST just fine. But when I load a build tutorial on YouTube in a window on a second monitor and also pull up a server map I definitely have problems, the video will jump and I will lose FPS. Looking forward to Ryzen 3000

 

[Potatowithearsontheside]

I think that the 6/8c take-up will be faster than we might expect, for the simple reason of AMD's pricing structure. That being said, we still need to see high core counts in laptops before 6/8c ever becomes the standard minimum requirement for games.

 

[beany_bot]

I think moving forwards, game engines (from the ground up) won't be written for "8 cores" or "12 cores". They will simply be coded for "many" cores. And will scale, using as many cores as available. Which would lead to a massive boom in core counts for the desktop.

 

[Journey]

Well as of today you can get a first gen Ryzen 7 1700 (inc. cooler) delivered to your door for £130, that is 8c/16t so I'd say yes core counts are increasing at the lower end.

 

[beany_bot]

Well as of today you can get a first gen Ryzen 7 1700 (inc. cooler) delivered to your door for £130, that is 8c/16t so I'd say yes core counts are increasing at the lower end.

Thats mad when you think what Intel still charge for a 9900K.

 

[kitfit1]

Thats mad when you think what Intel still charge for a 9900K.

Even more so when you consider that disabling HT only gives you 8 cores anyway.

 

[DragonQ]

Thats mad when you think what Intel still charge for a 9900K.

True but remember that whilst the R7 1700 is fantastic value for people who need the cores, an i9-9900K is clocked around 50% higher (all core boost). The R7 1700 can be overclocked of course to maybe halve that gap.

 

[Illuminist]

True but remember that whilst the R7 1700 is fantastic value for people who need the cores, an i9-9900K is clocked around 50% higher (all core boost). The R7 1700 can be overclocked of course to maybe halve that gap.

Even overclocking one won't half the gap, the difference in ipc is huge between 1st gen and the i9. But if your on a budget it's ideal