• 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 ***

It might run hotter, but it’s power draw, particularly under load is way less than than the 2700x, so upgrading will improve things with his cooler.
 
Apologies if it was posted before, but it seems the BIOS that was used for reviews has a bug which prevents the chip from boosting properly, and rolling back to an older one fixes it: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cacwf9/psa_ryzen_3000_gaming_performance_is_being_gimped/

During the first three hours of testing of the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X processor, using the X570 AORUS XTREME board, I noticed the problem when PCMark 8 did not pass the first test after 40 minutes (this is a total of ten tests). I noticed WHEA error (Windows Hardware Error Architecture) in HWInfo64 (se this software for PC telemetry, highly suggested).

From there I also decided to pay more attention to HWInfo64 and also checked that the BOOST frequencies of the processor had problems, since it didn’t get to “boost” all its cores to the maximum that it should, which is 4.6 GHz. It reached 4.5 GHz to 4.575 GHz in a pair of cores and the rest of cores to 4.3-4.4 GHz… We used manufacturers chipset driver, we have used press chipsets, as more current chipset driver version, same results.



It seemed strange to me, so I first decided to write to my contact with GIGABYTE USA (Matthew Hurwitz, I thank him for all the time he has put in to find a solution) and showed him the WHEA (PCI Express) errors, as well as the rare behavior of the 3900X boost frequencies.

Midnight (Wednesday) GBT HQ gives us news and according to their tests, the new AGESA code, including NPRP BIOS (BIOS for press) replicated our results in single-core frequencies, BUT, the original BIOS (AGESA 1002, without code introduced NPRP) turbo boost was working well.

With this information, I decided to flash BIOS, the first BIOS released for the X570 AORUS MASTER board and surprise, the boost frequencies were working as they should, even beyond the processor at 4.65 GHz. The WHEA error problem in the PCI Express was still going on, so I kept pressing and trying if the problem was maybe the chipset driver.
Click to expand...
 
Minstadave said:
Haven't seen PS2 device for years, wonder why they bothered.
Click to expand...
PS/2 had a brief resurgence couple years ago, before they figured out how to do n-key rollover and polling rates above 125Hz on USB. And allow fancy keyboards into BIOS. Not relevant these days
 
Now we have some of the benching out of the way I think we can say that the 9900k is the last of an era. Should, when, if Intel moves from 14nm to a smaller node it won't (and never will be) clocking 5Ghz.
Zen 2 7nm chiplet design is the start of a new era.
Out with the old in with the new, and AMD has a head start on this.
 
opethdisciple said:
Question for a mate of mine.

He has a 2700x in a matx case. It's a 105w TDP cpu and the cooler he has seems to be struggling. It ramps up and down making a right racket.

The 3700x is attractive to him as it's 65w and I assumed would run cooler. However this benchmark makes it look like the 3700x runs hotter!
Click to expand...
The ramping up and down seems to point to the fan setting, he could try a different curve? If not a new/better cooler is also an option, or maybe it's an excuse to upgrade ;)
 
So Anandtech just posted a twitter message saying they are redoing their CPU tests because of a new bios showing very different boost behavior.

D-8fA7DXUAAmQUf
 
After looking at results, I don't think I would gain much from moving to a 3900x. I think I'll keep my 8086k for for now and let the BIOS releases mature and let the market settle.
 
Oblivion007 said:
average 200-300MHz boost from a Bios update! Nice!
Click to expand...

A lot of reviews seemed to be suffering from CPU underclocking, particular 3900X, I think as always with AMD hardware the performance will mature and become even better.

Its not the best situation, but at the same time it is also pretty good that generally with AMD hardware the performance improves over time, whereas with Intel the performance degrades mainly due to security updates really impacting performance levels.
 
ChrisD. said:
After looking at results, I don't think I would gain much from moving to a 3900x. I think I'll keep my 8086k for for now and let the BIOS releases mature and let the market settle.
Click to expand...

8086K is pretty much the best gaming processor in existence, they were cream of the crop, especially if you have a particular good one that runs around 5.2GHz all core. :)
 
Anandtech also apparently reviewed not using the latest windows build, which means features like fast time from low clocks to idle aren't enabled along with the newer scheduler. As with most releases some fairly lame stuff going on that would never be gotten away with if an Intel chip was launching.
 
Gibbo said:
8086K is pretty much the best gaming processor in existence, they were cream of the crop, especially if you have a particular good one that runs around 5.2GHz all core. :)
Click to expand...
It'll do 5.4 with enough juice but I run it at 5 for daily use.

I do a bit of VMware workstation stuff when I want to keep it away from my vSphere lab but not really enough to justify more cores.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom