• 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 ***

Clov!s said:
Went for the elite and a 3950x with 32GB of 3600MHz memory. :)

9nFx9inh.jpg
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
I'm currently in Hong Kong and the prices are now back towards slightly depressing. X570 Elite for around £150. 3800x around £285 and so on. One day I'll risk it and buy a build here only to have the motherboard doa in UK :D
 
JediFragger said:
Guys wtf is happening here with Ryzen 1440p gaming performance? It's numbers like these that are holding me back from switching :(

Click to expand...

Which game are you referring to?

I quickly browsed through that video. Far Cry games don't run well on AMD high core CPU's - the old engine needs to be updated with a more modern core scheduling algorithm.

The rest of the games were practically identical between the 3900x and 9900k.

I don't see an issue unless all you play is Far Cry 5?
 
He's running 3200Mhz ram in them tests, stick some fast 3600 kit in there and them old ass engine games like GTA 5 and farcry will see a boost, not like they are exactly unplayable lol.
 
JediFragger said:
Sorry it's early, I didn't notice FC only were the bad ones! GTAV too? Are some of them just a clockspeed thing?
Click to expand...
GTA V and Far Cry 5 are two notable titles that heavily favour Intel's architecture - if you play those a lot, sticking with Intel is probably the best thing to do. In GTA V's case it's kind of expected since the game is over 6 years old. Far Cry 5 is newer so more of a mystery, but then there are other newer games that heavily favour AMD too (e.g. Forza series) so it's just one of those things.
 
JediFragger said:
Ok thanks, guessing their will be a few anomalies around for a bit.
Click to expand...

That review is from October - been a few BIOS updates and a new AGESA since then. Not that they'd make that much difference to gaming perf anyway. Probably best look for a 3950X review which is more recent and see where the 9900k and the 3900X are in the comparison graphs against each other.
 
JediFragger said:
Good idea, thanks. I'm also thinking tight mem timings on 3800 mem and IF@1900 would give it a boost too generally? If the mem controller is up to it of course.
Click to expand...

If you can get your IF to 1900 - That is a bit of silicon lottery and down to the MOBO. 3600 with low timings will often beat 3800Mhz. Higher frequency the looser the timings. Very good 3200Mhz memory will score higher than some 3600Mhz. 3600 is the sweet spot and fairly easily acheivable. With the price of the 8 pack 3600 CL16 stuff down at £109 currently (16GB) then you can either tighten the timings of that up or go for 3800Mhz if your IF will do 1900. Gaming wise between them there will be single figure FPS differences between them.

HArdware unboxed did a review early on in Ryzen 3000 showing the differences of RAM speed. I only tried 1900 early on and havent tried since. HAppy that my memory now runs natively on XMP @ 3600Mhz. Didnt back in August on early BIOS's.

Doubt you'll see or feel much of a gaming upgrade from that 8700k @ 5Ghz will you? Or you upgrading just coz you can?
 
Anyone have an idea why i seem to be getting higher latency than others? I'm just testing different speeds. But I've seen other people with 3600 ram get lower latency than this

latency.png
 
Have you tuned the sub timings? some mobos can run them lose. Below is my 3600 at 4.4Ghz and mem at 3633. I have slack primary timings compared to you but I have tightened up the sub timings. I have similar latency to you with no sub timing tuning.

D0a7KFu.png
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Have you tuned the sub timings? some mobos can run them lose. Below is my 3600 at 4.4Ghz and mem at 3633. I have slack primary timings compared to you but I have tightened up the sub timings. I have similar latency to you with no sub timing tuning.

D0a7KFu.png
Click to expand...
By sub timings i assumed the ones that mattered were the 5 after CL, everything else i left on auto.

Going to set them back to default to see what latency i get, pretty sure it was 70 or so.

latency2.png

Hardly any difference even with slacker timings
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom