I see the F40 bios for my X370 gaming K5 with 1.0.0.2 AGESA for Zen2 chips, is there any plans for the 1.0.0.3 people have been talking about for x370 & x470 boards?
-
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 ***
- Thread starter Jamin280672
- Start date
I see the F40 bios for my X370 gaming K5 with 1.0.0.2 AGESA for Zen2 chips, is there any plans for the 1.0.0.3 people have been talking about for x370 & x470 boards?
Soldato
Like numerous others on here, still very interested in the performance difference between the 3700X and 3800X. I get the segmentation but the numbers suggest such a small difference between the two for £60 its a bit odd (pointless?). I wonder how much difference that TDP rating will make..
As it stands the 3700X looks like the chip for me, unless reviews suggest the 3800X is a complete beast of course
The 3800X will be a better chip and for £60 more it'd be the one I'd go for. 100MHz (at least) can be a lot with Ryzen, but also for the general quality/efficiency I would consider worth it.
However, I would partially reserve my opinion until the reviews.
Associate
Is this board enough for 3600
MSI AMD Ryzen X570 A PRO AM4 PCIe 4.0 ATX
I also rather avoid the X470 bios update considering my latest build could be challenging enough.
MSI AMD Ryzen X570 A PRO AM4 PCIe 4.0 ATX
I also rather avoid the X470 bios update considering my latest build could be challenging enough.
Soldato
Seems like I've fallen in to the trap of upgrading every generation. A CPU used to last me 4 years back in the day. Now it's one year.
2700x to a 3700x / 3800x for gaming... should see a decent gain right?
Different benchmarks show different results. Some have the cpu's tightly grouped together others have them further apart.
I'm mostly interested in the minimum frame gains and dips.
2700x to a 3700x / 3800x for gaming... should see a decent gain right?
Different benchmarks show different results. Some have the cpu's tightly grouped together others have them further apart.
I'm mostly interested in the minimum frame gains and dips.
Caporegime
Bits & Chips chart showing disclosure for Ryzen 3xxx testing versions.
Look at the lack of info on OS version & build numbers. Software versions, GPU drivers & chipset drivers are extraordinary too.
They all have this information and it would be extremely minimal effort to disclose it.
So why aren't they?
Draw your own conclusions.
https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/1147996154224881664
That is interesting given that they are probably the most important aspects for performance given its well known the OS and Chipset drivers contain Zen 2 game performance optimizations, no one disclosed any of that.
Soldato
Why wouldn't it be? It's probably over specced.
Soldato
Chipset drivers where only release yesterday. (Unless they gave it too them during testing)
Soldato
Yes.
Caporegime
They did, look at the Guru3D results and quite a few others, despite the higher boost clocks Zen 2 was never more than 5% faster than Zen+, smaller reviewers had the performance difference more like +15% which is inline with the productivity performance difference.
Associate
Thanks, when you say overspecced, this is 180 Uk pounds approx, the most basic X570 I could find.
Is there anything to be taken into consideration.
From a gaming viewpoint.
I wonder if AMD and Intel would be better served sending review kits that contain say, 2 unspecified motherboards to all reviewers already set up for an ideal gaming environment and then suggest the reviewers do the same for the competitor.
Looking at the numbers from reading all of the reviews this morning most have the 9900k winning, sometimes by 10%+. I am not sure how realistic it is for most people but the odd review with a 9900k OCed at 5ghz gives the 3900x a real kicking. Then you have a minority like Anandtech who seem to have all of the CPU's in their list performing very similar and then Wendel having the 3900x winning everything. GN has better performance with SMT off in most games but I'm not sure if that suggests AMD can do something about that with a patch or gaming optimisations. All of these reviews and it's impossible to get any real idea from them beyond the fact that all CPU's tested are great (maybe that's the moral of the story).
If you like chasing the numbers the 9900k is still the one but I'd be wondering what might happen over the next couple of months with patches and other optimisations.
I wonder if AMD and Intel would be better served sending review kits that contain say, 2 unspecified motherboards to all reviewers already set up for an ideal gaming environment and then suggest the reviewers do the same for the competitor.
Looking at the numbers from reading all of the reviews this morning most have the 9900k winning, sometimes by 10%+. I am not sure how realistic it is for most people but the odd review with a 9900k OCed at 5ghz gives the 3900x a real kicking. Then you have a minority like Anandtech who seem to have all of the CPU's in their list performing very similar and then Wendel having the 3900x winning everything. GN has better performance with SMT off in most games but I'm not sure if that suggests AMD can do something about that with a patch or gaming optimisations. All of these reviews and it's impossible to get any real idea from them beyond the fact that all CPU's tested are great (maybe that's the moral of the story).
If you like chasing the numbers the 9900k is still the one but I'd be wondering what might happen over the next couple of months with patches and other optimisations.
Soldato
Oops! I assumed it being an x570 it was expensive. Ignore me then as I haven't looked close at this mobo.
My intuition would say it's fine as long as it has all the features you are looking for. (things like sata ports etc...)
Read some reviews but I'm sure it's adequate. I bought my x370 Prime Pro for about £150 so it was a cheap board and it is still going and I'm planning a 3700x or 3800x upgrade.
Soldato
Why?
Soldato
Why the discrepancy in the results?
OcUK Staff
Most reviewers have no clue..... ^^^^
Soldato
Have you had any testing time with the 3800x? Care to tell us the difference from a 3700x? Also I assume a 3800x will work just fine in my Prime Pro x370?
Will it be limited at all by the board?
AMD and Intel don't help matters though. Get reviewers to test the product under the same environment and settings and at least then we have one constant in the reviews so all we have to try to pick apart is the testing environment for the competitors CPU's.
