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

[humbug]

To mirror our conversation here https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...-fake-benchmark.18860895/page-4#post-32905946

chrcoluk

The 9600k is above the 3700X but isnt a 4 core chip, interestingly that in turn is above the 8700K, so basically the 8700K's single core advantage has not outweighed the 2 extra cores on the 3700X on their rating's.

Me

That's because the 9600K (4 core boost) is 4.7Ghz, the 8700K its 4.3Ghz and the 3700X i'm assuming is a little higher than mine: <4.2Ghz? My 3600 in games runs at between 4.05Ghz and 4.15Ghz and the thing is all reviewers reviewed Ryzen 3000 on box coolers which does throttle them <150Mhz (under 4Ghz) vs running on half decent coolers, i've locked mine to 4.2Ghz, i think there's more in it, i'm still playing with it. 4.3Ghz perhaps, which is a 6% overclock from what it does at stock, the idea that they don't overclock is also BS, they do.
The 3700X has, even in games, slightly higher IPC than Coffeelake, so it beats out the 8700K but it can't make up the clock speed of the 9600K, now look at what that's saying, the best gaming CPU out of those three is the 8700K, the 3700X is better than the 9600K, and yet it's the 9600K that it places above even the 8700K, that's ridiculous.

 

[humbug]

Edit: ^^^lol i need a break

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Exactly. Words can't fathom how stupid this change is.

This is done only with the single purpose to keep the sales of the cheaper i3 models, even if the sales of the more expensive models are sacrificed.



I noticed in-game stuttering with a Core 2 Quad as early as 2012-2013.
Today, this 4-core processor will be completely unusable in games.

I don't understand what they are achieving by all of this?

 

[humbug]

With 10% MT performance reflected in the charts it was pushing all the Ryzen 3000 CPU's to the top, they have a lot of compute threads.

Reducing that to 2% slapped them back down again.

If you read their 'excuses' reasons for that change its pretty clear the approach was Ryzen's high rankings on their performance tables was "a problem to be solved" this is literally what they said, its already of that mind set of "AMD faster than Intel????? that can't right"

This is how you get this ridiculous situation where the whole thing looks like its been re-engineered in such a way as to reflect that which you believe, because it has, it's a case of confirmation bias.

And to further go on the attack when people disagree with them, like children calling complainants "AMD Fanbois" or was it "shills?" confirms their religious view on what's "proper"

That's the #### AMD have to deal with.

 

[Potatowithearsontheside]

Don't forget that they ninja changed it, with zero indication that they were even considering altering things.

 

[Saltcreek]

Anyone who thinks that this change is rational or makes sense does not understand modern gaming or computing. Hardware Unboxed did a good review on why this new rating system is ridiculous and if you can watch that video and still think there is some logic to this change then you are a not a rational person.

Hell, even a lot of Intel users hate this change.

 

[Zeed]

Seems like there's BIOS issues all over the place.
This is worse than the X370 launch because at least we get updates quicker.

Deffo at lest on Asus side but thats cause Elmor left and We dont get alpha bioses sent to testo out :/

 

[humbug]

Anyone who thinks that this change is rational or makes sense does not understand modern gaming or computing. Hardware Unboxed did a good review on why this new rating system is ridiculous and if you can watch that video and still think there is some logic to this change then you are a not a rational person.

Hell, even a lot of Intel users hate this change.

yeah....

There is a contradiction in what User Bench are saying.

They are saying that applications and games above 4 cores are irrelevant because those applications don't really exist, or that they are a tiny fraction of applications / games, and yet they had to adjust the more than 4 core weighting from 10% to 2% because 'as they put it' there were getting a lot of highly threaded performance results skewing their results in favour of the highly threaded Ryzen CPU's.

Well if those application don't use all those threads on Ryzen then why are they skewing the results to such an extent that you feel you need to reduce how much that makes up the overall result by such massive margins?

Are these guys stupid or do they just think we are?

 

[4K8KW10]

I don't understand what they are achieving by all of this?

For intel it's clear - this is the beginning of the end of the big, bloated, too-big-to-fail corporation.
As per userbenchmark, maybe they want to face a class-action lawsuit?

Hell, even a lot of Intel users hate this change.

I don't think the right word is "hate".

i9-9980XE vs i3-9300KF, i3-9300KF has higher "effective CPU speed":

This is a painted global class-action lawsuit impending.

 

[DylRicho]

I think it rather depends on your game choice. I certainly found major problems with my 4770k on the BF series. It was maxed out.

https://forums.hexus.net/cpus/376546-4770k-4-3-1700x-3-8-2700x-stock-bf1.html

That goes without saying, but for the most part anyone who got their CPUs up in the mid-4.00 GHz range was more than fine for those 5 years. Sandy Bridge overclocking as well as it did pretty much negated any reason to upgrade to the newer options as well.

 

[Zeed]

Anyway considering waterblocks and zen2 We are thinking at OCN Ratatin block 90degrees right over standard position if You can Should do better for temps. Cause thats orientation CPU sits in motherboard and in my case In is like on RED getting it to Yellow so its more over ciplets should cut temps a bit... Maybe ??

On my old block I could have rotated it but in this I cant gotta wait for @8 Pack blocks to land

 

[Jokester]

I had a look into this, you need to also check what the cooling area of the block is, I ended up with a Raystorm over the EK block as the flow area covered by the fins was larger and would just about cover both chiplets and the I/O die by using your red orientation.

 

[Zeed]

I had a look into this, you need to also check what the cooling area of the block is, I ended up with a Raystorm over the EK block as the flow area covered by the fins was larger and would just about cover both chiplets and the I/O die by using your red orientation.

Cant test myself but guy at OCN rotated said it cut temps down few C also was thinking about putting TIM this way

My block operates as on RED and as You see on EK block design I cant rotate block in the mounting point:/ thinking more I could drain my loop strip the block and and try to ratate it in the mounting plate when apart. Make new hoses from pump to gpu..

Deffo better wait for new 8pack blocks hope they are full metal hehe

 

[Jokester]

Aye, the EK block is quite narrow, so in the red orientation only about half of the chiplet has water channels above it. Not ideal.

 

[roysters]

So i went for this.

https://www.techpowerup.com/257280/...chaqua-cpu-block-summit-ms-for-am4-processors

My current setup (7940x) uses the bitspower distro block / EK water block. Problem is the CPU block is not aligned. Im hoping this will not only cool then 3900x well but also align better.

current. Just waiting for the kinks to be ironed out before i replace it with the amd parts.

 

[HRL]

31c heatwave lol. Whilst not the hottest here... that is a 'not even trying' temp. Was funny just watching a live stream today of Jack from Planet Eclipse (Paintball) sweating as UK offices aren't really set up with A/C. (Right now it's 85F/29C, and i'd consider that 'warmish'.

Good time for testing for you guys

-------------

Anywho.... how is the 3xxx series stuff coming along now? It seems that clocks aren't as high as expected... but is the perf there as AMD claimed? (I stepped away for a couple of weeks really as heavy project work)

Hit 40C in my garden in Essex, UK. That’s hot enough for this country!

 

[teppic]

AMD are doing good with CPU's and they're gaining mind share.
I'd rather they had gained more clock speed though because clock speed helps with mind share.

I've owned a 1700/2700 and now a 3900X so I'm all in for giving AMD the money when I feel they're not a compromise. Given the flack I used to get because I was very anti Bulldozer/Piledriver that shows that I'm not a fanboy. I've no loyalty to anything but performance.

Ha, I remember disagreeing with you years ago over that. I'd still say that a high clocked FX 83xx is going to perform much better in games from the last couple of years than the dual core i3s people were recommending back then, even though the FX CPU is obviously not going to do well compared to anything now.

 

[4K8KW10]

Ha, I remember disagreeing with you years ago over that. I'd still say that a high clocked FX 83xx is going to perform much better in games from the last couple of years than the dual core i3s people were recommending back then, even though the FX CPU is obviously not going to do well compared to anything now.

The FX 8300 is still not full 100% 8-core, it's a 4-module, 8-thread CPU and I see some light nano-stuttering in games. If it were a real weak 16-core or 12-core, it would be much smoother than any dual-core i3.

 

[Martini1991]

Ha, I remember disagreeing with you years ago over that. I'd still say that a high clocked FX 83xx is going to perform much better in games from the last couple of years than the dual core i3s people were recommending back then, even though the FX CPU is obviously not going to do well compared to anything now.

I'd still take any i7/i5 over an FX series for gaming. They just didn't have the core for core performance. They may perform better than the i3's of years ago, but either way you'd need to upgrade. I also was pro FX83 over the i3 though. I just didn't think they were worth the compromise of saving a bit of money over the i5.

 

[4K8KW10]

I'd still take any i7/i5 over an FX series for gaming. They just didn't have the core for core performance. They may perform better than the i3's of years ago, but either way you'd need to upgrade. I also was pro FX83 over the i3 though. I just didn't think they were worth the compromise of saving a bit of money over the i5.

In well-threaded games, which ask for threads, not for GHz, the core for core performance won't matter. Try running Ashes of the Singularity or Civilization VI with the 3900X at 2GHz and compare it with an i3 at 5GHz.