AMD Zen 3 (5000 Series), rumored 17% IPC gain.

[FoxEye]

I am in the same boat, I am on a 3900X with a X370 Crosshair VI Hero. I don't think I should upgrade cpu anyway and I definitely wouldn't without upgrading my board. I kind of hope the 4000 series aren't as good as rumoured just so I don't get the same kind of itch to upgrade!

Even if they are twice as good as what you have now, if what you have now is good enough, what's the issue?

People have criticised Intel for stagnation, and personally I don't see the logic in hoping that a new generation of technology is not a large jump over existing tech. It's alien thinking to me.

 

[humbug]

Yea. I will be buying a new 3000 Nvidia card when they launch so perhaps I can just wait for that and pick up a new x670 as well because by that time they probably wouldn't be far off.

But then as this is the last series of AM4 anyway is it even worth it. I was hoping this x370 board would last me through the 4 years of AM4. Technical it will, but ASUS seem to have droped support for the board now. No AGESA 1004.

Just my OCD doesn't like being on the ABBA bios. (As if it really matters) (－‸ლ)

Asus are crap for support, even my £80 when new 3 year old B350 has a 1004B BIOS....

https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/AB350 Pro4/#BIOS

Look down that list, every BIOS is there....

 

[Doogles]

Even if they are twice as good as what you have now, if what you have now is good enough, what's the issue?

People have criticised Intel for stagnation, and personally I don't see the logic in hoping that a new generation of technology is not a large jump over existing tech. It's alien thinking to me.

I like big increases in performance, just not when I've recently bought hardware, like I want to buy a new TV as I've still got a crappy 60" 1080p but do I go for OLED at £1800 or a cheap normal budget £500 jobbie, if the OLED wasn't out I wouldn't even have to think about it. Hated Intel stagnation but at least it kept my old 3770k relevant until the 3700x, that was like 7-8 years of me not really needing to spend money except on some extra RAM and the GPU.

Suppose if you've got unlimited funds then it's not an issue, although only 0.1% of the population have that luxury.

 

[humbug]

You don't have to buy the new shiny.......

 

[FoxEye]

I like big increases in performance, just not when I've recently bought hardware

There will always be someone in that position.

If that logic was valid, then we'd have to stagnate every generation, and never progress.

Again, if what you have now is good enough to meet your needs, being angry/upset that the next gen is a large step forwards, is odd.

We should all want progress.

Otherwise why are people getting angry at Intel for their supposed deliberate stagnation? Should be thankful to them instead They gave you exactly what you wanted - hardware that was good for a decade or so!

 

[Sargatanas2511]

Even if they are twice as good as what you have now, if what you have now is good enough, what's the issue?

People have criticised Intel for stagnation, and personally I don't see the logic in hoping that a new generation of technology is not a large jump over existing tech. It's alien thinking to me.

I completely agree, I was thinking for the sake of my own pocket more than anything else!

I know if it is a jump I will want to upgrade even if I don't need to.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

I think that's pretty much spot on, the 9900K is the gaming king and tho to a lesser extent it also benefits from carefully tuned B-Die RAM making it even faster in games.

I wouldn't want to derail an AMD thread; is there a specific thread or article that discusses the fine tuning that you've mentioned?

ETA it's cool, I've found it.

 

[faceman123]

I like big increases in performance, just not when I've recently bought hardware, like I want to buy a new TV as I've still got a crappy 60" 1080p but do I go for OLED at £1800 or a cheap normal budget £500 jobbie, if the OLED wasn't out I wouldn't even have to think about it. Hated Intel stagnation but at least it kept my old 3770k relevant until the 3700x, that was like 7-8 years of me not really needing to spend money except on some extra RAM and the GPU.

Suppose if you've got unlimited funds then it's not an issue, although only 0.1% of the population have that luxury.

i plan on keeping my current set up for atleast 3 years ( which is a lift time for me ) but yes what a sensational upgrade - the thing is unlike intel who change mobo sockets each time they 'tick' you have option of a cheap 16 core ryzen 4000 in 2-3 years on call

 

[jigger]

It's the distinct impression that some here like to give, by down-playing Intel's gaming performance (and their lead in gaming) and always cherry-picking results where AMD wins.

Let's put it this way - amongst the posters here are some who will *always* recommend AMD Ryzen CPUs, and never Intel, even to those who make it clear that they're only interested in gaming.

They justify it with talk of better IPC and showing graphs where AMD will win in some game or other.

These people will literally never recommend Intel to anyone under any circumstance, and we both know there are a few here who post like this. And yes, some like @jigger will flat out say that AMD is better for gaming (and everything else you care to talk about).

No point in continuing this because I suspect we see things rather differently. I don't see the AMD fans as helpful or useful; I just see their bias.

Will I pick up a Ryzen 4000 CPU? Most likely. Will I consider a Ryzen 3000? Nah, I doubt it. They just aren't quite good enough - yet. For gaming. The only and only metric I'm judging by.

Right now I'd rather have an Intel 8700k than a Ryzen 3600/3700/3800. It's just the better gaming chip.

You seem to struggle with facts and comprehension. Some people can’t be bothered with your constant straw man arguments.

The 9900KS having a 5% lead doesn’t make Intel better at gaming.

 

[Awahwah]

You seem to struggle with facts and comprehension. Some people can’t be bothered with your constant straw man arguments.

The 9900KS having a 5% lead doesn’t make Intel better at gaming.

I've been in both camps (oh Mrs) for several years. Recently I switched back to AMD from an i7 8700k @ 5Ghz. Although the Ryzen does not have the peak head line FPS ever task including gaming is smoother. I have no preference to which Team I buy but this time round in my endless PC habit, AMD deserve my money. Intel have sat on their hands for too long in my humble.

 

[Skynet5]

You don't have to buy the new shiny.......

This is so true. Too many people get consumed by buying the newest when a year or two old version is still more than they need.

 

[Skynet5]

You seem to struggle with facts and comprehension. Some people can’t be bothered with your constant straw man arguments.

The 9900KS having a 5% lead doesn’t make Intel better at gaming.

And isn't that at 1080p?

People buying these chips are 1440+ where margins are no noticeable.

 

[FoxEye]

You seem to struggle with facts and comprehension. Some people can’t be bothered with your constant straw man arguments.

The 9900KS having a 5% lead doesn’t make Intel better at gaming.

Are you trying to say that only the 9900KS beats any AMD CPU in any game, and only by a max of 5%?

If I struggle with anything it's with your nonsense. You are one of the most rabid AMD shills this forum has ever seen, and certainly the most disingenuous.

 

[jigger]

I've been in both camps (oh Mrs) for several years. Recently I switched back to AMD from an i7 8700k @ 5Ghz. Although the Ryzen does not have the peak head line FPS ever task including gaming is smoother. I have no preference to which Team I buy but this time round in my endless PC habit, AMD deserve my money. Intel have sat on their hands for too long in my humble.

And isn't that at 1080p?

People buying these chips are 1440+ where margins are no noticeable.

Yeah it’s not a clear win in gaming at all.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I've been in both camps (oh Mrs) for several years. Recently I switched back to AMD from an i7 8700k @ 5Ghz. Although the Ryzen does not have the peak head line FPS ever task including gaming is smoother. I have no preference to which Team I buy but this time round in my endless PC habit, AMD deserve my money. Intel have sat on their hands for too long in my humble.

Same here - I had to upgrade 6 months earlier than what I wanted to,so bought a Ryzen 5 2600. I upgraded from a IB Xeon E3 1230 V2. Was looking at a Core i7 8700(I don't overclock),but it was well over £300,and Ryzen 5 2600,only £137,so I realised down the road I could always put something better,so when the Ryzen 4000 is released,I can hopefully get a cheaper Ryzen 7 3700X. The 8 cores will definitely help me for some non-gaming stuff.

I do a mixture of gaming and non-gaming stuff,so some of the application performance for the Ryzen 5 2600 swayed me as it was most of the performance for significant saving.

Anyway,looking at a few very AMD unfriendly games such as Fallout 4,reviews hinted it the improvement shouldn't be huge,but what I noticed is the minimums and frametimes were significantly better overall. I was shocked - the game wasn't even reinstalled due to the number of mods I used:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/33358244/

That is pretty much one of the worst games possible for Ryzen,but the IB CPU just stuttered a lot.

 

[jigger]

Same here - I had to upgrade 6 months earlier than what I wanted to,so bought a Ryzen 5 2600. I upgraded from a IB Xeon E3 1230 V2. Was looking at a Core i7 8700(I don't overclock),but it was well over £300,and Ryzen 5 2600,only £137,so I realised down the road I could always put something better,so when the Ryzen 4000 is released,I can hopefully get a cheaper Ryzen 7 3700X. The 8 cores will definitely help me for some non-gaming stuff.

I do a mixture of gaming and non-gaming stuff,so some of the application performance for the Ryzen 5 2600 swayed me as it was most of the performance for significant saving.

Anyway,looking at a few very AMD unfriendly games such as Fallout 4,reviews hinted it the improvement shouldn't be huge,but what I noticed is the minimums and frametimes were significantly better overall. I was shocked - the game wasn't even reinstalled due to the number of mods I used:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/33358244/

That is pretty much one of the worst games possible for Ryzen,but the IB CPU just stuttered a lot.

I noticed the same when I moved from my overclocked Xeon E3v5 to the 1800X.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Are you trying to say that only the 9900KS beats any AMD CPU in any game, and only by a max of 5%?

Ironically one of the big increases you saw with Ryzen 3000 was some of the games Ryzen 1000 and 2000 were not as good at,such as ARMA III,and newer,more optimised games less of an improvement. Ryzen 2000 was an improvement over Ryzen 1000 in older games as cache latencies improved. Ryzen 4000 is looking like it might change the basic CCX design,ie,might be an 8 core CCX,so the biggest beneficiaries might in fact be older games and older engines,as it might mean lower internal latencies(it should remove the inter-CCX problem). You can see that with Intel HEDT CPUs which use the same basic cores as the consumer CPUs,they could score worse in games than Ryzen,as the mesh interconnect increased latencies too(IIRC). So its not only single core performance which is the real issue here anymore IMHO.

I noticed the same when I moved from my overclocked Xeon E3v5 to the 1800X.

It was really weird. The worst thing is the Xeon E3 1230 V2 was under an AIO and the Ryzen 5 2600 was using the Wraith Spire and both were in a mini-ITX case.

 

[Grim5]

Are you trying to say that only the 9900KS beats any AMD CPU in any game, and only by a max of 5%?

Can I get any more of them frames??

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Can I get any more of them frames??

LOL!

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

Hardware Unboxed don't have high expectations for Zen 3 by the seems of it. Hope it's not just a small improvement. It's the latency/frequency still giving Intel an advantage in games, where they can be 10+% ahead in some cases.

If Intel bring something big within the next year or 2 (Golden Cove) i will probably jump back to them even if it's a bit higher cost, providing the perf difference is there.