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

[EsaT]

The issue with some cases re airflow is the lack of a semi open dust meshed front. There's so many cases that are decent but let down by front air intake having to rely on side slits to draw in air.

Open front is direct noise escape path leaking slightest noise out unmuffled.
Air again is pretty darn low viscosity fluid and doesn't mind much about doing couple turns if path is properly done.
Of course if fans are some pressure impotent Noctua S12s, then then any airflow impedance is problem.
Though blocking direct noise escape path would also allow increasing fan speed some.

 

[orbitalwalsh]

@Plec ... No active Chipset cooling

And can finally stop saying over and over July release



https://videocardz.com/80709/amd-confirms-radeon-navi-and-3rd-gen-ryzen-available-in-q3-2019

 

[TrixX]

as with any review benchmark take with pinch of salt. most have bias especially when they have relations with certain companies. intel have had the gaming scene cpu wise mopped up for over 10 years. we all know that. we just hoping amd have this finally caught up with these new cpus. not long now.

Take anything ~>Dg<~ says with a bucket load of salt as it's usually biased hot garbage. There's so many examples of Ryzen being good in games, it may not hit the highest averages but for the most part it does smash out those 1% and 0.1% lows far better than many of the Intel counterparts. As usual there's scenario's where single core performance is king like with X3 Albion Prelude, iRacing and CS:GO, but the usual suspects in this category are usually DX11 or older based games.

 

[~>Dg<~]

its not worth debating about. if you cant see or work out intel are faster better for gaming and have been for about 15 years then just leave it there . you wont ever be convinced.

 

[beany_bot]

its not worth debating about. if you cant see or work out intel are faster better for gaming and have been for about 15 years then just leave it there . you wont ever be convinced.

Better at gaming. in SOME games. at an archaic resolution, at silly refresh rates.

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

Better at gaming. in SOME games. at an archaic resolution, at silly refresh rates.

There's still a gap where AMD might dip to (example) 80fps in a game where Intel would be around 95+ even at 1440p. I wouldn't really say 100hz or so was silly since there's a clear difference over 60 but to each his own.

 

[welshrat]

I guess its all down to what you want from a PC but I remember buying a phenom 6 core black edition and selling its swiftly due to games being pretty rough compared to the sandybridge 2500k I replaced it with. I then stuck with intel for 8 years but having recently replaced my i4790k with a Ryzen 2600 (soon to be whatever turns out to be best bang for buck) I would not go back to intel. Gaming is great as far as I am concerned + 75fps at 1440p with a vega 56 but also productivity is much improved, as a dev who uses multiple IDEs (Visual Studio, Android Studio, Visual studio Code, SQL server PGadmin etc etc) the ability to have them all run at the same time and all be extremely responsive I would not go back to a lower core count and intels pricing.

 

[4K8KW10]

There's still a gap where AMD might dip to (example) 80fps in a game where Intel would be around 95+ even at 1440p. I wouldn't really say 100hz or so was silly since there's a clear difference over 60 but to each his own.

Huh, if the CPU load stays as low as negligible 14% during gaming, it's definitely not AMD to turn to...

The Enfusion engine is Bohemia Interactive's new game engine that DayZ Standalone is currently running on (DayZ still isnt fully optimised btw).

Heres my 2700X CPU usage while running the game with nothing else running in the background.. apart from Windows 10 of course

 

[TrixX]

its not worth debating about. if you cant see or work out intel are faster better for gaming and have been for about 15 years then just leave it there . you wont ever be convinced.

Having used both AMD and Intel CPU's during the past 15yrs and both flavours of GPU too, I can safely say with authority you are talking utter tripe. There's games that benefit Intel and there's games that don't. There's been the bulldozer and piledriver fiasco from AMD where they couldn't compete with a wet paper bag, but then there was the Pentium 4 that couldn't handle an Athlon64 so how far back do you want to go? Hell I'll go back to a Cyrix if you like which was killed off by Quake...

You keep talking like you know ****. Unfortunately we agree, you know ****.

 

[ben90]

Considering I have a Zotac GPU with the fan control problem, which makes one fan run at 100% when ever I load a game (and stay there until I restart), I think I can handle these actively cooled motherboards That's not to say I would not rather have a silent motherboard, but at least I know it won't be a deal breaker.

 

[humbug]

Intel have a clock speed advantage and where core count are not an issue that gives Intel a performance advantage.

no arguing with that but yeah ~>Dg<~ often takes that fact and runs off the rails with it.

 

[Potatowithearsontheside]

He can play Pacman at 325741 fps on his Intel CPU.

 

[TrixX]

Funny thing is no-one's denied that all thread. Just ~>Dg<~ and his Intel Superiority Complex. I had a 3930K for 6 years and it was a damn good CPU, but none of the newer Intel's offered a meaningful upgrade path that competed with Threadripper for the money. Not going back to mainstream for my main editing rig either.

 

[beany_bot]

The real question is. Why (other than trolling) is DG even in this thread? Just to constantly big up Intel? Makes no sense. This is a Ryzen 3000 discussion.

 

[Plec]

The real question is. Why (other than trolling) is DG even in this thread? Just to constantly big up Intel? Makes no sense. This is a Ryzen 3000 discussion.

Hey, don't wreck what little entertainment us voyeurs have reading this thread - as it finely tunes itself, with leaks, until eventual release.

 

[Jono8]

As anyone would AMD are going to show their products in the best light, Sniper 4 is an AMD title and Mantle which likes high core count CPU's.

But at the time this was also true for a lot of other games, at least when comparing Ryzen 5 to Core i5, Including Tomb Raider, the higher thread count gave the Ryzen 1600/X much more consistent and much higher performance in the demanding parts of AAA games making it a much better gaming CPU, in that range.

Trust me, this CPU replaced an i5 4690K @ 4.6Ghz, the 1600 is vastly better.

Man i remember those grass scenes in Crysis 3. It is what made me upgrade from an i5 (2500k to 3700k). Frame rate almost doubled in some scenes! That grass loves cores/threads.

 

[Fire_fly]

As anyone would AMD are going to show their products in the best light, Sniper 4 is an AMD title and Mantle which likes high core count CPU's.

Exactly, they picked their best case scenario. That is why if they demo zen 2 with games their choice of game is going to be as important as the frame rate. If they demo it in game where AMD are strong already (forza) you should be asking question as to why the did this. If they are show zen 2 matching a 9900k in a game where a 2700x is already very close close to a 9900K the they are not really telling you very much about how much better the new architecture is are they.
On the other hand if they go with a game that is a very strong performer on the 9900k ie Tomb Raider's inbuilt benchmark and show zen 2 matching the 9900k, like they did with Cinebench at CES, then we are in for good things. They did this at the original zen launch with the Blender render, they took an application were Intel was traditionally very strong in compared to AMDs older CPUs and showed themselves beating 6900k and demonstrating the much improved design of Zen over Piledriver and that it was now better the Intel compeating CPU.

With these type of reveal events and the leaks leading up to the them it is often more important to pay attention to what you are not being shown rater than what you are. It's not what your sure of it's what you don't know.

Trust me, this CPU replaced an i5 4690K @ 4.6Ghz, the 1600 is vastly better.

I know, check my sig, i made a similar jump from a 3570k to make BF1 playable.

 

[smilingcrow]

With Intel's new security flaws recently revealed what great timing for AMD to be releasing a new platform.
Karma!

 

[humbug]

Exactly, they picked their best case scenario. That is why if they demo zen 2 with games their choice of game is going to be as important as the frame rate. If they demo it in game where AMD are strong already (forza) you should be asking question as to why the did this. If they are show zen 2 matching a 9900k in a game where a 2700x is already very close close to a 9900K the they are not really telling you very much about how much better the new architecture is are they.
On the other hand if they go with a game that is a very strong performer on the 9900k ie Tomb Raider's inbuilt benchmark and show zen 2 matching the 9900k, like they did with Cinebench at CES, then we are in for good things. They did this at the original zen launch with the Blender render, they took an application were Intel was traditionally very strong in compared to AMDs older CPUs and showed themselves beating 6900k and demonstrating the much improved design of Zen over Piledriver and that it was now better the Intel compeating CPU.

With these type of reveal events and the leaks leading up to the them it is often more important to pay attention to what you are not being shown rater than what you are. It's not what your sure of it's what you don't know.


I know, check my sig, i made a similar jump from a 3570k to make BF1 playable.

No augment from me.

 

[Drollic]

I'm hoping a possible 16/32 runs a bit hot for most coolers so it's worse under xfr clocks compared to the possible 12/24. That way I can feel better about spending less money