• 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 ***

Associate
Joined
21 Sep 2018
Posts
895
I wasn't meaning PCIE4 - they all have that. All of them are pcie4, they all have a x570 chipset, they all support DDR4 ram and they all support Ryzen 3000. It's the smaller things that divide them.

I had a quick run down - the Formula obviously has better VRM, it's also a board that needs a custom loop to cool the VRM.

As I suspected, the Tuf only does 1g LAN, the formula 5g. The formula has in built wifi, the Tuf it seems does not. The Formula has nearly triple the amount of USB ports and the Formula can do 2 pcie4 GPU's in SLI, while the Tuf can only do 1 gpu with pcie4. While I dont care about the next one, but the Formula has a higher model Audio controller and various overclocking features the Tuf doesn't it (not sure that matters).

Some of these things may be important to people - for instance the Tuf would never cross your mind if you are going to SLI

My point is, one does not need to spend so much more on AMD more than an equivalent intel i9 system to match it like some are trying hard to portray.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Jun 2009
Posts
6,847
3229 on Cinebench R20 on Ryzen 5 3600 65W CPU that on 7nm? :confused::o

Wow that awful, it is just has same performance as i7 8700 65W CPU on 14nm.

Not very impressive and slight slower than my 8700K.

I would be impressed if it was 35W CPU.

Let see games benchmarks but I think it will have poor performance.
From a technological standpoint, it would be odd if the performance was worse for the same core count and TDP. Based on everything else we've seen that isn't the case so maybe this benchmark is just poorly performed. However, from a perf/price standpoint, even if this benchmark is accurate it still whoops the £350 i7-8700K at under £200.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
17,464
My point is, one does not need to spend so much more on AMD more than an equivalent intel i9 system to match it like some are trying hard to portray.

And my point is that your view is too narrow. You aren't considering the rest of the person's system. You may have a VR headset, you may want to crossfire/sli, you may have a fast net connection or want to transfer data around quickly.

Depending on the rest of your system, the Tuf may not work. Then it does become Formula vs Formula and if the x570 one is more expensive then so be it. I personally don't care, I think if you need the features that the formula offers then you can afford the extra $300usd it maybe costs to get setup on the Ryzen 3000 system and you still have the upside of 4 extra cpu cores.

What people are going to complain about is the perception of value. Just this generation, people moaned about Nvidia charging higher prices for higher performance and extra features. Well now we're seeing the exact same thing with CPU's and Motherboards. Everyone wants more money than they did the previous generation for the equivalent model
 
Associate
Joined
21 Sep 2018
Posts
895
And my point is that your view is too narrow. You aren't considering the rest of the person's system. You may have a VR headset, you may want to crossfire/sli, you may have a fast net connection or want to transfer data around quickly.

Depending on the rest of your system, the Tuf may not work. Then it does become Formula vs Formula and if the x570 one is more expensive then so be it. I personally don't care, I think if you need the features that the formula offers then you can afford the extra $300usd it maybe costs to get setup on the Ryzen 3000 system and you still have the upside of 4 extra cpu cores.

What people are going to complain about is the perception of value. Just this generation, people moaned about Nvidia charging higher prices for higher performance and extra features. Well now we're seeing the exact same thing with CPU's and Motherboards. Everyone wants more money than they did the previous generation for the equivalent model

Before you write another novel, i just like to clear something . . . i was responding at awaybreaktoday's post saying an equivalent AMD system will cost 350£ more compared to an i9 system.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
17,464


Did someone say C-C-Combo desk

This thread is now A post your desk picture thread :p

uyd5wr1f.rce.png
 
Joined
2 Jan 2019
Posts
617
honestly if amd doesn't lower the prices for zen 2 processors intel is still going to be the value cpu especially for those on older systems
That is not a valid argument IMO.
If AMD reduce their prices then mobo makers or retailers just price gouge.
The reality here is that AMD's CPUs are core for core cheaper than Intel, whereas the mobos are more expensive. If anyone should be reducing prices then it is mobo makers. However they have XYZ reasons for not doing so.
The reality is that you can buy an X470 or B450 mobo for your AMD CPU.
If you think that there's dubious pricing going on, vote with your feet; buying the similar performing previous gen that comes with almost exactly the same features minus PCIE4.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
17,464
Have you seen the comment section on that video? He is mauled like never before because his whole case and argument is flawed.
Steve is using slow paced ingame benchmark videos trying to make his case. Not fast paced actual gaming like AMD did, and the target of streaming is all about.

When I first saw the video those comm ets weren’t t up yet. I don’t know too much about streaming I must admit so I took the video at its word as GN is one of the few youtubers I think does an excellent job and is not biased.

The part I found really funny which Steve brought up is that Lisa Su effectively dissed her products too when she said sorry to the dudes using 8 core cpus and trying to stream. Obviously targeting Intel but maybe not the best idea to phrase it in a way that makes your own upcoming 8 core cpus look bad as well.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Nov 2009
Posts
13,252
Location
Under the hot sun.
When I first saw the video those comm ets weren’t t up yet. I don’t know too much about streaming I must admit so I took the video at its word as GN is one of the few youtubers I think does an excellent job and is not biased.

The part I found really funny which Steve brought up is that Lisa Su effectively dissed her products too when she said sorry to the dudes using 8 core cpus and trying to stream. Obviously targeting Intel but maybe not the best idea to phrase it in a way that makes your own upcoming 8 core cpus look bad as well.

Yep, however the whole argument was for the 3900X. 3800X has the same perf issues on those settings with 9900K. Nobody argues about that. :)
 

GAC

GAC

Soldato
Joined
11 Dec 2004
Posts
4,688

and yet again steves missing the point the test wasnt misleading, he even states the results are repeatable but they didnt try that because reasons, was it a fair test as to how most streamers stream today, no. but as someone who games at 1440p and streams on and off having the extra power to stream at 1440p (or 4k for others) will probably be nice to produce a better quality but hey no one will ever want to move on from 1080p i guess. this video comes across as click bait making outrage out of nothing to try and fill the void until july.
 
Back
Top Bottom