AMD Zen 2 (Refresh) 3900XT/3800XT/3600XT

[eeek]

I can't see anyone buying a 3600 class chip for £250. That's bonkers.

If the 12 core 3900XT is worth £499 there is an argument that a chip with exactly half the cores and power is worth £249...

Now due to the laws of diminishing returns the argument is probably invalid (the 3700x will give you 60-70% of the power for £270 say) but it is an argument..

And these processors are really there as flagship holding points until the 4000 series arrive later this year.

 

[FoxEye]

If the 12 core 3900XT is worth £499 there is an argument that a chip with exactly half the cores and power is worth £249...

Now due to the laws of diminishing returns the argument is probably invalid (the 3700x will give you 60-70% of the power for £270 say) but it is an argument..

And these processors are really there as flagship holding points until the 4000 series arrive later this year.

The 3600XT is pretty much "up to" 4% faster than the 3600.

That 3600 has been widely available for £150 for yonks.

So tell me how the 3600 XT is worth £100 more... you might as well go for a 3700X instead (which has been £250 at various places).

I very much doubt anyone here is contemplating a 3600XT for £250

 

[jigger]

The 3600XT is pretty much "up to" 4% faster than the 3600.

That 3600 has been widely available for £150 for yonks.

So tell me how the 3600 XT is worth £100 more... you might as well go for a 3700X instead (which has been £250 at various places).

I very much doubt anyone here is contemplating a 3600XT for £250

The 3600XT is pretty much "up to" 4% faster than the 3600.

That 3600 has been widely available for £150 for yonks.

So tell me how the 3600 XT is worth £100 more... you might as well go for a 3700X instead (which has been £250 at various places).

I very much doubt anyone here is contemplating a 3600XT for £250

Lol lots of reaching in this post. A 3600 is about 5% slower than a 3600X, that’s about 5% slower than a 3600XT. Assuming 3200 memory.

A 3600 maybe went on sale for £150, once... so now that’s all any shop can sell them for.

 

[spudbynight]

Lol lots of reaching in this post. A 3600 is about 5% slower than a 3600X, that’s about 5% slower than a 3600XT. Assuming 3200 memory.

A 3600 maybe went on sale for £150, once... so now that’s all any shop can sell them for.

I bought my 3600 for just under £150 and I have seen it at around that price in multiple retailers for the last month or so.

 

[eeek]

The 3600XT is pretty much "up to" 4% faster than the 3600.

That 3600 has been widely available for £150 for yonks.

So tell me how the 3600 XT is worth £100 more... you might as well go for a 3700X instead (which has been £250 at various places).

I very much doubt anyone here is contemplating a 3600XT for £250

As I said in my original post, you can't justify it except as a price setting exercise (50% of the cores of a 3900XT so 50% of the price)

Then again I paid £238 for my 3800X (from the bay, open but unused ) so on your basis that the lowest price anyone paid is the valid market price everyone is overpaying.

 

[FoxEye]

As I said in my original post, you can't justify it except as a price setting exercise (50% of the cores of a 3900XT so 50% of the price)

Then again I paid £238 for my 3800X (from the bay, open but unused ) so on your basis that the lowest price anyone paid is the valid market price everyone is overpaying.

The 3600 is (has been) widely available for £150. Not 2nd hand from eBay either

OcUK seem to want to establish a reputation as one of the most expensive places to shop.

 

[jimferno]

There's a strange contingent who will vigilantly defend AMD price rises.

Just bought a 3600 at around £150, there isn't a chance in hell I'd pay an extra £100 for the same CPU with a slightly higher frequency.

 

[eeek]

There's a strange contingent who will vigilantly defend AMD price rises.

Just bought a 3600 at around £150, there isn't a chance in hell I'd pay an extra £100 for the same CPU with a slightly higher frequency.

But we know that other people are willing to do just that as overclockers demonstrated. Granted it wasn't 40% more but it was often more than £100 / 20% more for a 10% gain

 

[CuriousTomCat]

There's a strange contingent who will vigilantly defend AMD price rises.

Just bought a 3600 at around £150, there isn't a chance in hell I'd pay an extra £100 for the same CPU with a slightly higher frequency.

Last gen also had the 2600X part which was more expensive than the 2600 for very little gain. Then the 1600 Vs 1600X before that.

Some people (myself not included) have been happy paying lots of money for small gains for as long as I can remember. Nothing has changed. I don't know what all the fuss is about.

 

[humbug]

Last gen also had the 2600X part which was more expensive than the 2600 for very little gain. Then the 1600 Vs 1600X before that.

Some people (myself not included) have been happy paying lots of money for small gains for as long as I can remember. Nothing has changed. I don't know what all the fuss is about.

Exactly this, you can still have the 3600 at its well under £200 price, but for those who want a better version of it and are willing to pay a bit more for it they have a choice now too.

 

[LePhuronn]

I don't know what all the fuss is about.

AMD are the new Intel! Incremental updates! Fleecing the customers! Wah!

That's the general gist.

 

[humbug]

AMD are the new Intel! Incremental updates! Fleecing the customers! Wah!

That's the general gist.

You don't believe that's true do you?

 

[LePhuronn]

You don't believe that's true do you?

That I think AMD are the new Intel and fleecing their customers with incremental updates? No.

That others think this? Yes. Hence the fuss.

 

[0h_no_not_again]

AMD are the new Intel! Incremental updates! Fleecing the customers! Wah!

That's the general gist.

There's no doubt the XT release has been odd. My gut feel is that AMD needed to change the part number, ID's, etc to deal with slight changes to silicon, probably with some errata resolutions, and saw this as a way to try and market the change positively. Daft if you ask me!

Saying that AMD is the new Intel is ridiculous though. The 3 generations of Ryzen have brought huge price vs. performance improvements, and the 4th gen is rumoured to be an exceptional leap. Further, you can still buy the "X" and "non-X" version processors cheaply, soooooo why does the XT matter?

 

[Joxeon]

Exactly this, you can still have the 3600 at its well under £200 price, but for those who want a better version of it and are willing to pay a bit more for it they have a choice now too.

Isn't the better version the 3700x? Or if you want a bit more gaming perf then the 10600k what use case would benefit more from a 3600XT over either of those 2 chips?

 

[humbug]

That I think AMD are the new Intel and fleecing their customers with incremental updates? No.

That others think this? Yes. Hence the fuss.

That's what i thought

Isn't the better version the 3700x? Or if you want a bit more gaming perf then the 10600k what use case would benefit more from a 3600XT over either of those 2 chips?

You have always had THAT choice, AMD want to sell a 6 core CPU at a similar price as the 10600K, tho its still a little cheaper, AMD have released a product with higher margins, that's fine, you still have the same 3600 at a very good price you always have had, i would have a problem if they stopped selling that CPU but that is not what they are doing.

AMD are looking to make as much money as possible, so they are offering an expensive version of their range, you have always had the choice to go to Intel if you wanted to pay more for a more gaming focused CPU, and you may still do that but now AMD have a better Ryzen 5 for more money, you can still buy the original, or go Intel.

 

[jigger]

Isn't the better version the 3700x? Or if you want a bit more gaming perf then the 10600k what use case would benefit more from a 3600XT over either of those 2 chips?

If you ignore all but gaming performance at 2mp with a top heavy graphics card, the 10600K makes sense. Even though you have caveats.

 

[d_brennen]

AMD did this to up the ASP of their old processors. 3xxx series won't disappear overnight as we saw with 1xxx and 2xxx.

Since the beginning of time there have been products that stick out as poor value for money... And they still sell and still prop the price of cheaper parts up. Look at GPU pricing for reference (from both companies). Just don't buy them

 

[FoxEye]

Isn't the better version the 3700x? Or if you want a bit more gaming perf then the 10600k what use case would benefit more from a 3600XT over either of those 2 chips?

Exactly this. If you've got £250 to spend you'd opt for the 3700X, not the 3600XT. You don't have to look too find to find them at that price.

The 3600XT is too expensive for a 3600 class part, full stop, really.

 

[jigger]

Exactly this. If you've got £250 to spend you'd opt for the 3700X, not the 3600XT. You don't have to look too find to find them at that price.

The 3600XT is too expensive for a 3600 class part, full stop, really.

If you can buy a 3700X for £250, you probably should. That is a hell of a discount.