Mine took 10 days to arrive, sat there packed waiting for UPS to collect it for 5 days. Was told by Live Chat that UPS are only doing one collection a week for worldwide expedited at the moment due to covid and if I upgraded to express (crazy expensive) they would collect same day. When it was finally collected it then crossed the US in 8 hours, got to stansted in another 9 hours then took 4 days to get from stansted to me. No import duty or anything though, just paid the VAT at point of sale. Arrived in a torn battered jiffy bag and had a bit of a mare as it got marked undeliverable at first though the driver came back at the end of his delivery run and knocked on - he was worried something had fallen out onto the floor of his van so he waited until he'd offloaded everything else then came back. Proper rollercoaster of an experience, but would do it again tbh. Good price and a really good delivery driver at my end of the journey- just wish it had said delivery delayed instead of package undeliverable lol.
-
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.
RYZEN 5000 SERIES NOW ONLINE - 5950X, 5900X, 5800X & 5600X COMING NOV 5TH AT 5PM **NO COMPETITORS**
- Thread starter Gibbo
- Start date
Look up the difference in benches and games on the 3100 compared to the 3300x. Gamers nexus have them in their cpu benchmark charts if you want a quick flick through. Exactly the same difference between the cpus and the performance delta is very noticeable.
I don't like the game AMD are playing this time around, they're trying to tempt gamers into buying the 12 and 16 core cpus by putting a single top bin core cluster on them instead of putting them into the 5800x where they would benefit gaming most. They'll save that for an XT refresh if they need to counter Rocket Lake when that hits when they've sold as many 5950x's as they can. Combined with the slide that stated "DDR4000 is the new DDR3800" being leaked then redacted and now likely untrue...well it all leaves a bit of a bitter taste.
The best gaming cpus will be 5900x and 5950x with the slow cluster disabled. Only by spending that much will you see what the architecture could have been. There's no 3600 or 3700x equivalent this time around because the build process is mature and the binning wide enough that they don't need to get rid of any "inferior" quality silicon, everything left over that lies in between the good and bad clusters on the 5900x and 5950x will fit into the 5800x and 5600x. Raises their price per sale and gives the impression of having more stock by reducing the number of SKUs the silicon is going into while creating perceived value separation between the 4 products. They'll get away with it too, every single cpu will be bought, you don't need to think of the customer first when you're not the underdog anymore. Welcome to the new age of AMD - premium hardware supplier.
So I'm not buying one right? Probably wrong, and if I do (try to) buy one it'll be a 5950x. But I'll hate myself for it.
Wow rollercoaster is aunderstatement haha! I ordered a pre build in aprill this year, first pc in forever, upon delivery day, nothing...then I got a text delivered, alarm bells were ringing by that point as no p.c was in my hands, I then called psevel force to be told, it's been delivered socially distanced, so they had a picture, it was delivered to number 5! Not 75! Un real! But wait it gets better, the label wasnt printed properly do not the drivers fault but the company's fault! I checked my delivery address and it was correct, crappy printing of the label had cut the 7 off! So I flew up the street and lucky the lady was honest and very nice about it and handed me.my £1100 p.c right away, luckily so relieved by this point I actually had it hut I wont ever be buying e
again...dreadful and I complained via email and no response... just dreadful.What is the relation in your example here? 3300x = 5800x or 5900x?
The 3300x is single CCX the 3100 is dual. So im assuming you mean 3300x = 5800x = it will be better than 5900x for gaming?
Whilst I follow the logic, is the 3100 not the lowest range, budget, with the 3300x being above it. Not like you are saying the 3300x is better than the 3600/3700 which are dual CCX also?
I dont think saying a 3300x beats a 3100 is solid proof a single CCX will beat a dual CCX?
I'm not worried. I'm happy for it to sit at 3600c16 tbh but having headroom for any bios updates in future is fine. It helps only paid £289 delivered so for price it really wasn't bad.
Plus the 4 sticks I think looks cleaner than 2. Partly this build is looks tbh. Going custom hard-line in am Antec Striker case. Although it's officially mini itx I've squeezed in an MATX board, two 240 rads and a distribution block.
Just waiting on other parts to be in stock.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 6,413
- Location
- SE England
Interesting, where have you read this regarding x570 Tomahawk limited to 3800Mhz when using 4 sticks?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,613
- Location
- Rutland
The most important thing with 4 sticks of RAM Is whether they're dual rank or single rank. 4 single rank sticks will manage decent speeds, 4 dual rank sticks are much harder on the Zen 2 memory controller.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2019
- Posts
- 11
Guru3d had a nice memory test a few months ago. They found that 4 single rank sticks or 2 dual-rank gives a 3% boost over 2 single rank at lower resolutions. Going from CL18 to CL14 gives a similar boost.
Wow rollercoaster is aunderstatement haha! I ordered a pre build in aprill this year, first pc in forever, upon delivery day, nothing...then I got a text delivered, alarm bells were ringing by that point as no p.c was in my hands, I then called psevel force to be told, it's been delivered socially distanced, so they had a picture, it was delivered to number 5! Not 75! Un real! But wait it gets better, the label wasnt printed properly do not the drivers fault but the company's fault! I checked my delivery address and it was correct, crappy printing of the label had cut the 7 off! So I flew up the street and lucky the lady was honest and very nice about it and handed me.my £1100 p.c right away, luckily so relieved by this point I actually had it hut I wont ever be buying e
Yikes! I had a similar incident with a mountain bike several years ago, waited in all day for it to arrive, no tracking with the courier. After phoning them the next day I got told it had been delivered. After several more phone calls I found out he had tried to deliver it to the wrong house, then stuffed it still boxed down the side of the wrong house behind their bins on recycling collection day. Only worth half your pc, but it took me a week to unclench enough so it didn't squeak when I pedalled
The 3100 while clocked to exactly the same speeds as a 3300x performs up to 20% slower I think it was - something around that anyway. The only difference between the CPUs is the 3100 is a dual ccx 2+2 design and the 3300x is one whole ccx with all 4 active cores. Its literally a bloodbath, the 3300x even comes very very close to beating the 3600 (3+3 dual ccx) in games despite being clocked slower. The larger cache in Ryzen 5000 offsets the difference somewhat in the new dual CCD design but does not negate it. When transfers happen between CCD's the data must be picked up and moved from one cache to another so it can be accessed by the other cluster die exactly as happens on the current 3000 series architecture when it moves between CCX's (except the data path between CCD's is slightly longer so carries a slightly higher latency penalty). Ryzen 3000 has one L3 cache block per CCX, Ryzen 5000 has one L3 cache block per CCD (and CCX's no longer exist). Both the 6 and 8 core will mirror the 3300x behaviour almost exactly while the 12 and 16 core will behave like the 3100 layout but with slightly more latency (from the longer data path). The slightly more latency will likely be completely offset by the larger L3 cache on each CCD, but the penalty from the data moving between CCD's cannot, its a by-product of the architectural design. What they've eliminated with the new design is the excess latency from moving live processing between cores within the CCDs themselves - where each CCD used to be a pair of CCX's with a physical 4+4 core and 2 separate caches they are now a single block of 8 cores with one double size cache. Where the 3900x was 3+3 and 3+3 the 5900x is now 6+6. At the same clock speeds the 5600x and 5800x will easily beat the 5900x and 5950x in games where they are not core limited. This is why they have not put high bin CCDs into the 6 and 8 core CPUs, and why they had to create a value separation - no gamer would buy a 12 or 16 core CPU when it was outperformed by a 6 or 8 core and gamers is what they are marketing Ryzen 5000 for. It also still leaves in reserve the possibility of a refresh if needed to counter Rocket Lake, but allows them to sell as many higher value CPUs as possible first based on them having higher clock speeds and therefore higher benchmarks due to binning distribution among SKUs.
This will be proved as soon as someone with a 5900x or 5950x disables a CCD and benches it in gaming against their own results with both CCDs enabled. The 5600x and 5800x could have been epic gaming chips and the 5900x and 5950x would have been no worse at productivity for having (speeds made up) 12 or 16 4.4ghz cores as they're heavily power limited when thrashing all cores anyway. The higher clock speeds in the multi CCD CPUs can only be reached when a limited number of cores are under load due to power throttling. The only reason to put the highest bin and lowest bin CCD's together on the same chip is make the most money possible. You artificially make the highest core count CPUs appeal to those who run apps that don't benefit from many cores over two CCDs by giving them the clock speed advantage, whilst also still delivering exactly the same multicore performance as if you had two average CCDs for those who do need high core counts. And those lowball bin CCDs that would otherwise have gone in cheap CPUs? Well you're now putting them in the highest cost CPUs instead and no longer even selling a value option.
I am a big AMD fan and I admire what they've achieved with the core design, as a gamer though I don't like the marketing choice that was made when they gave the multi CCD designs a 200mhz clock speed advantage over the single CCD designs and dropped the value line of CPUs altogether. It makes financial sense for them but sucks for us.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2020
- Posts
- 298
Not suprised to hear about low stocks of Zen 3 CPUs.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Posts
- 101
Are the reviews not out until 5pm on 5th then or 24hours before? Or do we not know?
At this point its almost certain that its a 2pm launch and embargo lift (UK time). More and more shops are advertising the launch time now, it would appear OCUK have the launch time wrong in the thread title unless they're planning to go live with sales 3 hours after everyone else.
Thank you for the detailed reply. This will be my first AMD in 15 years or so. So I know very little about how it all works.
I was hoping to try and get a 5900X on release. Basing that decision on reading, and videos showing the 3900/3950 beating all the other 3xxx cpus in games. At least all the bench marks Ive seen. The most fps in benchmarks comes from the 3900/3950. If what you are saying is right, shouldnt the single CCX beat them? Or is this because of a clock speed difference.
So are you saying you think the 5600/5800 will actually be faster / better in games? Like outright, not taking 'value' into account?
Would you pick a 5800 over a 5900 for only £90 less? My thinking was the 5900 will still end up beating the 5800, despite not being on a single CCX (if this is CCD I apologise, Ive only just learnt CCX
)Ive seen your posts in some other threads, you certainly seem to know your stuff. You've also now made me second guess my choice
Literally right in the manual, it's well known that the more sticks you have the slower they run. I was actually wrong on this - with 4 sticks fitted the max speed is "only" 3600MHz:
Yes, that's why I went 2x 16GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3600MHz + 2x Dummy Corsair RGB Vengeance modules. So I have the speed + the looks of 4 modules at once
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2007
- Posts
- 1,830
- Location
- Up a Tree
@MrPils don't you think AMD will release Ryzen 5600 and 5700x processors in future then?
Thank you for the detailed reply. This will be my first AMD in 15 years or so. So I know very little about how it all works.
I was hoping to try and get a 5900X on release. Basing that decision on reading, and videos showing the 3900/3950 beating all the other 3xxx cpus in games. At least all the bench marks Ive seen. The most fps in benchmarks comes from the 3900/3950. If what you are saying is right, shouldnt the single CCX beat them? Or is this because of a clock speed difference.
So are you saying you think the 5600/5800 will actually be faster / better in games? Like outright, not taking 'value' into account?
Would you pick a 5800 over a 5900 for only £90 less? My thinking was the 5900 will still end up beating the 5800, despite not being on a single CCX (if this is CCD I apologise, Ive only just learnt CCX
Ive seen your posts in some other threads, you certainly seem to know your stuff. You've also now made me second guess my choice
I can answer with what I have first hand info of, but I can't help with the decision as I'm in a similar position as you are myself. In order to get my 3900XT (which was advertised as an improvement on the 3900X) to beat my manually clocked 4.4ghz all core 3800X I had to disable multithreading in order to get the core clocks up over 4.5ghz on my "good" CCX's on the better binned CCD while my "bad" CCX's languish at 4.3ghz. It took a clock speed advantage against my 3800x of around 150mhz on the good half to overcome a clock speed deficit against my 3800x of 100mhz on the bad half of the 3900XT. Disabling multithreading gave around a 100mhz boost when overclocking, without that 100mhz boost on my good CCD I lost frames in games compared to a flat 8 cores at 4.4ghz from the 3800x. I never tested my 3800x with multithreading disabled, I probably should have but was already miffed enough at my £520 3900XT purchase at the time. With a near 20% IPC increase and improved clock speeds the performance gap should in theory now be wider as each mhz is "worth more".
I also found the extra power requirement added 20c or more to VRM temperatures and the cpu draws around 40 watts extra at the wall in a direct swap situation. The performance gain was hard work and minimal.
The decision of which to get for gaming will boil down to how much worse the 5800x CCD is compared to the good CCD on the 5900x. Out of the box the 5900XT will be slightly faster due to the large clock speed advantage. In games that benefit from more than 8 physical cores it will be a lot faster, however not many do (total war comes immediately to mind as an example of that). If we find the 5800x can overclock to 4.7 to 4.8 all core then I can see it beating the 5900x even if the 5900x is 100mhz faster on its best core. Ultimately you're comparing 6 slightly faster and 6 slower cores to 8 fast cores. When you add in the cross CCD transfers then it could get messy.
If I had to make a statement on it now, going just from what we know so far it would be that the 5900x should always beat the 5600x in gaming and the 5950x should always beat the 5800x when all the cpus are manually overclocked. I suspect some crossover between the 5800x and 5900x where manual overclocking is concerned as there is only a 100mhz "out of box" difference in binning between them. We really wont know for sure though until they get out in the wild. Putting my neck on the line here a bit lol.
These have been very carefully specced and marketed that's for certain.
Literally right in the manual, it's well known that the more sticks you have the slower they run. I was actually wrong on this - with 4 sticks fitted the max speed is "only" 3600MHz:
Yes, that's why I went 2x 16GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3600MHz + 2x Dummy Corsair RGB Vengeance modules. So I have the speed + the looks of 4 modules at once
That fair. I was after brushed black to match the mobo heatsinks and doing some custom panels for it to match too. In terms of performance shall see but Nth degree isn't required as long as decent.
Yep, for the B550 boards too.