• 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 ***

PCIe 4.0 seems to not be a worthwhile upgrade for me and especially if it’s adding £100+ to board costs.
Zen2 supporting it makes sense for EPYC of course but that doesn’t mean they had to use it across the board for Ryzen.
It seems as if for GPUs it will add nothing and for SSDs it takes us deep into the law of diminishing returns. The real bottleneck for consumers on SSDs is typically Q1 performance and PCIe 4.0 does nothing for that.
What it does add is better bandwidth between the CPU and the chipset but are there other ways they could have improved that without the massive price premium? Don’t Intel offer this with the Z3x0 boards!
Of course you can use a board with a cheaper chipset but then seemingly you lose a bit of performance.

CPUs at the higher end of expectations plus a £100+ PCIe 4.0 tax puts the high end 8C into Intel pricing at the platform level.
This has significantly impacted the release of this platform I feel.
I haven’t lost faith in the CPUs themselves but I will be less tolerant of any shortcomings given the above.
The 2nd generation chips and boards are looking better every day especially with more retailers offering discounts.
It’s a weird situation to be in!
Still looking forward to the reviews and especially for the 12C.
 
Pricing will be critical. I have substantially upped my budget and it's starting to sound like it may not be enough. There will be so much nerd rage come Sunday if they've misjudged the mood. The internet may implode!
 
I don't see the point of all the fancy VRMs, many layered PCB, super efficient power delivery if the CPU is languishing about at 4.4ghz, usually less and boosting to 4.7ghz annually to celebrate the anniversary of AMDs founding. From all the evidence I've seen this is going to be yet another disappointing launch from AMD. Top line CPU frequency from AMD has recently been underwhelming. With a 9900K you have a fairly decent chance of getting a 5ghz all core overclock with good cooling (it's sold as a 4.7Ghz CPU). With the 2700x you have next to no chance getting a 4.35 all core overclock with good cooling (it's sold as a 4.35ghz CPU). Just shift those goalposts to the 3700X/3800X/3900X and that's where performance will fall. I want to be wrong but I
think even the 3900X at maximum PBO on a 570 £300 is going to be 10% slower than 9900K (at 5ghz) in 95% of games.

2700 is sold as 4.35 boost, not all core.
 
Pricing will be critical. I have substantially upped my budget and it's starting to sound like it may not be enough. There will be so much nerd rage come Sunday if they've misjudged the mood. The internet may implode!

Prolly like the last expensive launch then, as Mr. Miyagi would say, wax ON wax OFF... and not in a good way either!
 
2700 is sold as 4.35 boost, not all core.[/QUOTE

That isn't how it looks to the casual buyers on this website. The 9900K ad clearly states 3.6 core, 5.0ghz single core boost
2700X is 4.35ghz. Many if not most 9900K's will do 5ghz all core (87% will do 4.9ghz at 1.3v). Few if any 2700x will do 4.35ghz all core.
Intel at least state single core max turbo, AMD imply it my well be all 4.3 all core turbo whereas it almost never is any.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely not in what the cpu is best at.....

16 cores is HEDT... So is 12 cores.....
No, Threadripper is HEDT. Ryzen 3000 is mainstream. Doesn't matter how many cores it has, Ryzen 3000 is mainstream. HEDT platforms have a boat load more PCIe lanes and quad channel RAM (at least) as a major differentiator. X570 has none of these things and therefore it is not HEDT.

Server grade PCBs and PCIe retimers will of course bump the cost of the boards up, but nowhere near this level.
 
Back
Top Bottom