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

[Journey]

When are these coming out roughly? Got my eye on the Ryzen 7 3700X 12 core CPU. At 5GHz it will finally be a sweet upgrade over my aging (but still very capable 4770K)

Should be about £300. So for a mobo and ram combo we are talking around £700?

Was thinking 16gb is still enough as this build will be purchased with keeping in mind to pass it down in 3 years time to a lighter user.

April-June, most likely May. I'd expect it to be £329 if it exists.

I read the thread but couldn't see a link about the 3700x being a 12 core part?

Distracted said the 12 core was speculation ....

Where did the 12\24 surface ?

Link?

Or is that a game entry into the "invent your perfect 3xxxx chip with price " game

Pretty EASY if you follow the thread.

 

[TNA]

I read the thread but couldn't see a link about the 3700x being a 12 core part?

Distracted said the 12 core was speculation ....

Where did the 12\24 surface ?

Link?

Or is that a game entry into the "invent your perfect 3xxxx chip with price " game

I saw it on a Adored video I think.

Pretty EASY if you follow the thread.

I only just started following it. But I will come back in May as see what’s what then. For some reason I don’t find CPU’s as fun to follow and speculate on. Actually that is Intels fault, as they killed progress and made me lose interest. We got to a point where spending more money does not yield much more performance for day to day use and gaming (on 4K at least), so I hardly ever come to the CPU section anymore.

Back in the day I used to follow CPU’s a lot more than GPU’s as there would be big jumps every year and you would feel the difference in day to day tasks.

 

[easyrider]

Pretty EASY if you follow the thread.

That's a NO then. The part doesn't exist, it's pure speculation along with the price...

 

[easyrider]

I saw it on a Adored video I think.

Figures

I only just started following it. But I will come back in May as see what’s what then. For some reason I don’t find CPU’s as fun to follow and speculate on. Actually that is Intels fault, as they killed progress and made me lose interest. We got to a point where spending more money does not yield much more performance for day to day use and gaming (on 4K at least), so I hardly ever come to the CPU section anymore.

Back in the day I used to follow CPU’s a lot more than GPU’s as there would be big jumps every year and you would feel the difference in day to day tasks.

That can be said about GFX, Intel got no competition so it stalled development ...thats basic business.

Radeon 7 two years on from 1080ti release , same performance....that's why the GFX sector is so stagnant, AMD have killed progress due to not offering NV any kind of competition. NV , that's basic business.

Looking forward to Zen 2 as, hopefully it will shake things up...for a while at least.

 

[Journey]

IF this so called 3700x 16\32 5ghz chip for £329 actually materialises

That's a NO then. The part doesn't exist, it's pure speculation along with the price...

I've quoted you again, just to show that you said 16/32 not 12/24 which is what the speculation was about, if you are going to start getting involved at least keep peoples speculation right if you are going to re-purpose it.

 

[easyrider]

I've quoted you again, just to show that you said 16/32 not 12/24 which is what the speculation was about, if you are going to start getting involved at least keep peoples speculation right if you are going to re-purpose it.

Is that one of the rules of the game?

As it's not clear?

My entry is 16/32 4.5ghz 3750x at £599

 

[Journey]

Is that one of the rules of the game?

As it's not clear?

My entry is 16/32 4.5ghz 37000x at £599

Apparently.

 

[chroniclard]

Not really too interested in more cores, more interested in the IPC/frequency uplift. However if the equivalent of my 2700X has more cores thats just a bonus.

 

[KentMan]

Not really too interested in more cores, more interested in the IPC/frequency uplift. However if the equivalent of my 2700X has more cores thats just a bonus.

Normally i go for the top end chips, went from a 4770k to a 1700, so i should be looking at the 3850x type thing, but this time around im tempted to stick with what would technically be the replacement of the 2600x, which is the 3700x (if this all makes sense?) basically the single 8c chiplet one, as we all know the CCX to CCX across chips thing with Ryzen can be an issue, im hedging if i go for a single chip this should mean latencies should be the best of all the chips and if this chip can clock up as high as the AMD chips will go, then it sounds to me like it could be the pick of the bunch for gaming.

Unless AMD have managed to drastically bring down the latencies etc between chip comms, in which case i will go for the best AM4 they do.

 

[chroniclard]

Normally i go for the top end chips, went from a 4770k to a 1700, so i should be looking at the 3850x type thing, but this time around im tempted to stick with what would technically be the replacement of the 2600x, which is the 3700x (if this all makes sense?) basically the single 8c chiplet one, as we all know the CCX to CCX across chips thing with Ryzen can be an issue, im hedging if i go for a single chip this should mean latencies should be the best of all the chips and if this chip can clock up as high as the AMD chips will go, then it sounds to me like it could be the pick of the bunch for gaming.

Unless AMD have managed to drastically bring down the latencies etc between chip comms, in which case i will go for the best AM4 they do.

A good plan.

 

[DragonQ]

Normally i go for the top end chips, went from a 4770k to a 1700, so i should be looking at the 3850x type thing, but this time around im tempted to stick with what would technically be the replacement of the 2600x, which is the 3700x (if this all makes sense?) basically the single 8c chiplet one, as we all know the CCX to CCX across chips thing with Ryzen can be an issue, im hedging if i go for a single chip this should mean latencies should be the best of all the chips and if this chip can clock up as high as the AMD chips will go, then it sounds to me like it could be the pick of the bunch for gaming.

Unless AMD have managed to drastically bring down the latencies etc between chip comms, in which case i will go for the best AM4 they do.

I doubt the latencies between a core chiplet and the I/O die will be any better than the latencies between CCXs on a single die, all else being equal. Whether they've improved infinity fabric, we'll have to see.

 

[KentMan]

I doubt the latencies between a core chiplet and the I/O die will be any better than the latencies between CCXs on a single die, all else being equal. Whether they've improved infinity fabric, we'll have to see.

See thats the issue, with Zen2 it looks like we got Chiplet to IO back to Chiplet going on, so on a single 8c Chip its Chiplet - IO - Chiplet, once you introduce more chiplets im pretty sure they all need to speak via the IO? just looks to me like its going to be more latency than what we currently have, so minimising that as much as possible is probably the smart move.

We all know AMD demo'd a like for like product, but why did they not show a larger dual chiplet product? maybe they didnt have any, but also maybe because 2 or more chiplets tanks performance due to increase in latency? im obviously just speculating here so please dont shoot me

Anyhow, i still expect Zen2 to be more than capable of surpassing Intels current junk.

 

[TrixX]

Is that one of the rules of the game?

As it's not clear?

My entry is 16/32 4.5ghz 3750x at £599

I see you didn't have that drink of water. You may need to try again.

I highly doubt the 37xx will be the 16 core part. It's not logical numerical progression and there's already a precedent for the 38xx to exist at the top of the stack from the first Ryzen generation.

Going off the leak the 37xx would be 12c parts which would also mean 4.7GHz I'd expect on these parts as the boost clock. I also wouldn't see AMD putting the 16c at 600 quid. They want to beat Intel in market share, so pricing it above the 9900K is going to look a bit stupid and crossover with the ThreadRipper parts. Maybe fore the top end ultra good silicon but not the stock 3800X. If it's a 3850X at 600 quid it makes a bit more sense, but it depends on how AMD think the market will accept the pricing and whether they want to really dig into the transient buyers and even hit the die hard Intel fans too.

 

[easyrider]

, i still expect Zen2 to be more than capable of surpassing Intels current junk.

Do you mean Intel in general or the flagship mainstream cpu?

If its the latter you think the 9900k is junk?

Considering its performance, either you are deluded or brainwashed into an AMD cult...

The Benchmarks state the 9900k to be anything but.

A clear lucid individual can easily see this fact.

 

[chroniclard]

Dont think its going to thrash a 9900K, would hope its up there for a decent price is all.

 

[TNA]

you think the 9900k is junk?

Yep. Way overpriced like the 2080Ti. It is the RTX of CPU's!

 

[LePhuronn]

We all know AMD demo'd a like for like product, but why did they not show a larger dual chiplet product? maybe they didnt have any, but also maybe because 2 or more chiplets tanks performance due to increase in latency? im obviously just speculating here so please dont shoot me

But why would they show a higher core/dual chiplet product? It wouldn't be impressive if a 12 or 16 core Ryzen 3 beat the 9900K in a Cinebench run because of course it would. But explicitly and solely showing a like-for-like product matching the 9900K (because let's be honest 17 points in Cinebench is margin for error, not winning) is a testament to how quickly AMD have caught back up with Intel. And THEN introducing this demo as an engineering sample, saying "clock speeds aren't final" and showing the package with space for a 2nd chiplet implies the bigger picture and suggests just how far ahead of 9900K/Intel Ryzen 300 really will be.

If you were involved in a highly competitive industry and you know you had a product with potential to seriously shake up your industry, would you be shouting your full hand very loudly so soon? Especially when you're also fighting against long-standing misconceptions and pig-headed fanboiism?

 

[TrixX]

Do you mean Intel in general or the flagship mainstream cpu?

If its the latter you think the 9900k is junk?

Considering its performance, either you are deluded or brainwashed into an AMD cult...

The Benchmarks state the 9900k to be anything but.

A clear lucid individual can easily see this fact.

So you are going to posit that the cooling capabilities of the 9900K are perfectly fine? I mean they are awesome for LN2 but for normal cooling they aren't that great. The power draw means a ton of load on that VRM. Then there's the cost, for most that's a huge turn off considering there's good competition in the 1440p range of gaming and the 9900K is less important at that resolution than 1080p. Even less important at 4K. So yeah it's got the performance but it's also got some serious drawbacks.

 

[KentMan]

Do you mean Intel in general or the flagship mainstream cpu?

If its the latter you think the 9900k is junk?

Considering its performance, either you are deluded or brainwashed into an AMD cult...

The Benchmarks state the 9900k to be anything but.

A clear lucid individual can easily see this fact.

Its junk, yes its the current fastest CPU on the market, that does not however detract from it being overpriced junk, they had to use Solder to get that chip to market and even then many people are still having all sorts of issues with it overheating, so yes its junk. Its also overpriced, but not as bad as it would have been had AMD not been around to keep Intel in check.

I am AMD biased im not ashamed to admit that either, AMD products have arguably done more for pushing tech forward in the past couple of years than Intel has, all intel seem to be able to do right now is take their existing rubbish, and refine it, no matter how much you polish a turd its still a turd.

I am glad that AMD have pushed the boundaries of a stagnant CPU market, and you should thank them for doing so or your 9900k would have been twice the price perhaps 3 times the price it currently is.

Fact is, your salty that AMD are about to make the 9900k look exactly what it is, an overpriced product from a company that has basically sat on its hands for the past few years sticking 2 fingers up at the consumers while counting their coins. If anything your the deluded brainwashed one that belongs to an Intel cult, as you seem incapable of looking past them to see better performance coming elsewhere.

Oh wait hang on, your about to launch your tired defence of "AMD have nothing to compete" backed up with "AMD has no proof what they showed at CES even exists" yada yada... to be quite honest your boring, you have bored pretty much everyone in this thread with your constant dribble, why dont you do everyone a favour and just ignore this thread and forget it exists.

im actually worried for your sanity once Zen2 lands and AMD beat that 9900k you cherish so dearly with a low to midrange offering lol, its definitely going to be popcorn worthy.

 

[LePhuronn]

im actually worried for your sanity once Zen2 lands and AMD beat that 9900k you cherish so dearly with a low to midrange offering lol, its definitely going to be popcorn worthy.

I've joked in the past about how the 3850X will drive Intel fanbois into a coma if the leaks are accurate, looks like we have a real-life test case come May 1st