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

[an0nym0us]

what do brits say?

I'm not a grammar expert by any means, but found this:
https://grammarist.com/usage/got-gotten/
"In the main varieties of English from outside North America, the past participle of get in all its senses is usually got. Gotten appears occasionally, and it is standard in a few set phrases such as ill-gotten gains, but the shorter form prevails by a large margin."

 

[Potatowithearsontheside]

Am I the only person that thinks the inclusion of such benchmarks in reviews of £400-500 CPUs is pretty stupid? People that want to browse the web or do web development will not be influenced by a processor that can run a JavaScript test the fastest. And those who want to browse the Internet (most people) will never think twice about such results. Who cares?




Fun fact; "gotten" is actually British English, but for some reason people decided to not speak properly over the later centuries and it therefore fell out of use in Britain. The US and Canada stick true to the original language.

Yup, I've never seen a meme for "Can it run Chrome?"

 

[kitfit1]

Yup, I've never seen a meme for "Can it run Chrome?"

On the other hand, if it can run Crysis.............it should be able to run Chrome

 

[Wucked]

You use “gotten”. Are you American?

Why should he tell you, what’s your point if he does, and what does it have to do with Ryzen?

 

[Kelt]

Why should he tell you, what’s your point if he does, and what does it have to do with Ryzen?

Maybe because he's gotten annoyed over its use, maybe.

 

[Kelt]

On the other hand, if it can run Crysis.............it should be able to run Chrome

Yup.

Every other benchmark < Crysis
Crysis > every other benchmark

 

[DylRicho]

Yup, I've never seen a meme for "Can it run Chrome?"

It seems like something included in the benchmarks just to make a couple of [unimportant] use cases for single-threaded performance, outside of games. Upon further inspection, it seems like the web benchmarks may have debuted when AMD's Piledriver chips hit the market; products known to be weak on single-threaded performance...

The cancer that is SYSmark has been in use for a very long time.

 

[alec]

Am I the only person that thinks the inclusion of such benchmarks in reviews of £400-500 CPUs is pretty stupid? People that want to browse the web or do web development will not be influenced by a processor that can run a JavaScript test the fastest. And those who want to browse the Internet (most people) will never think twice about such results. Who cares?

For me it has nothing to do with web browsing itself. Rather those benchmarks highlight the low latency low load tasks.
Which sums pretty well your desktop experience, where your cpu is not 100% loaded, not even on one core. But you can still tell a difference between a slow cpu and fast one by how responsive your actions feel and how fast applications load.
These are not unimportant. This is how you spend bulk of time behind the computer. Running [badly optimized] interactive programs.

 

[Phil Gr]

I’m not up to speed with new kit anymore. - would one of these new processors be a big step up from a 5280k ???

 

[N19h7m4r3]

I’m not up to speed with new kit anymore. - would one of these new processors be a big step up from a 5280k ???

Well here's the AMD 3600 vs my 5820K in geekbench. Now my 5820K is only at 4Ghz

Ryzen 3000 is looking extremely promising for performance and features.

 

[karik666]

My 2600x gets 4805 single core,23066 mult core.
Max cpu clock is 4.248 mhz.
16gb 3200 mhz memory.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

For me it has nothing to do with web browsing itself. Rather those benchmarks highlight the low latency low load tasks.
Which sums pretty well your desktop experience, where your cpu is not 100% loaded, not even on one core. But you can still tell a difference between a slow cpu and fast one by how responsive your actions feel and how fast applications load.
These are not unimportant. This is how you spend bulk of time behind the computer. Running [badly optimized] interactive programs.

For web browsing or doing word processing most people now use laptops,tablets or phones which are significantly less powerful. So a computer now means someones £300 smartphone too.

Intel wants to make people think they need some new expensive desktop CPU to do these tasks with - its not only about getting sales from AMD,but getting their own CPU users to upgrade too.

I still have an old PC at home which is used for office purposes and its over 5 years old and does a lot of the tasks Intel listed fine and I have zero need to replace it for such light usage,which is typical of most normal usage I have seen.

The PC market is shrinking,with gamers being one of the brighter spots in the market. People are keeping their laptops and desktops for longer and longer as the performance is "good enough" for most tasks. People are increasingly using phones to replace many tasks,and as phones have become bigger people are buying tablets less and less.

Most people in the world are content consumers,not creators,and its mostly word processing and basic office tasks which are the most intensive creation tasks people do. Or are you telling me that a word processor which worked fine on a Q6600 10 years ago suddenly needs a £400 CPU for writing a single page document?? Just because one number looks higher than another does not equate to meaning anything in the realworld for these kind of easy to do computing tasks.

We are enthusiasts,so we like comparing all these numbers,as its our hobby and we like new shiny!!

 

[humbug]

Well here's the AMD 3600 vs with 5820K in geekbench. Now my 5820K is only at 4Ghz

Ryzen 3000 is looking extremely promising for performance and features.

3600 +25% ST, +31% MT.

 

[Potatowithearsontheside]

I can see an Intel board room discussion with the marketting team going something like this:
Director: they're crushing is at every compute heavy task.
Marketing guy: can they run Crysis?
Director: yes
Marketing guy: can they run Chrome?
Director: (pulls out a Nokia 3310) - let's run with that.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

3600 +25% ST, +31% MT.

All while the 3600 only has a 200Mhz high boost on Single core as well. Whereas my 5820K is 4Ghz all core overclock.

Ryzen 3000, is going to be a great upgrade for me.

Thinking 3900X, then 32GB RAM at 3733Mhz at least; the 8Pack Extreme 4000Mhz kit should downclock with nice timings.
Noctua are also still sending out free AM4 mounting kits, and I got myself one; so my D15s should happily keep the 3900X cool.

The 5820K is a 140W TDP CPU, and I've got it overclock, yet never breaks 60 degrees in AID64 + FPU, or Intel Burn test.

Looking forward to seeing how efficient the 3900X can be. So far the one leaked Geekbench showed an all core low frequency at 4.3Ghz underload, and peak of 4.53Ghz.

 

[B12B6]

you could get a 5820k for 220 at one point. basically as fast as a 6 core amd chip thats going to cost you £200 now. 4 years ago.

yeah 5 years ago. so 5 years on from that launch amd is giving you a £200 six core thats basically the same speed. such bad pricing.

Well here's the AMD 3600 vs my 5820K in geekbench. Now my 5820K is only at 4Ghz

Ryzen 3000 is looking extremely promising for performance and features.

3600 +25% ST, +31% MT.

 

[gronf]

Aww, I was hoping DG had recently posted - but that'll do

 

[kitfit1]

I can see an Intel board room discussion with the marketting team going something like this:
Director: they're crushing is at every compute heavy task.
Marketing guy: can they run Crysis?
Director: yes
Marketing guy: can they run Chrome?
Director: (pulls out a Nokia 3310) - let's run with that.

Lol, i just spat a mouthful of Merlot out reading that

 

[Aarrgghh]

I've just seen the Crosshair VIII Formula up for pre-order on the rainforest, £674.89.

 

[8 Pack]

I would take the potato every day its great carbs...

Now sorry an exam

This will be interesting. As I understood it, the 3800x is just a well binned 3700x. Quite why they made a confusing and misleading name system, I don't know. The prices I had been expecting was £100 more for the 3800x, which would have been an easy no for me. If it's this close, I shall have to think about it.

Can anyone explain why the 3800x has a much higher TDP than the 3700x, when it appears to be almost the same chip?

Simply higher clocks pulling TDP up.

I tested a couple of b450 boards for systems and these where fine with the 6 core with 3200mhz c14. Also fine with new apu. But in both instances efficiency was short by a fair bit clock for clock vs x570.

RAM wise 3600c16 kit of 8Pack stuff running c14 makes absolute sense 1:1 with IF. I tried this in every x570 board we have for test and working fine...