• 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.

So is the Ryzen 3900X as good as expected?

Personally I am very happy with mine. Slightly disappointed on the poor boost frequencies currently. But running an all core OC of 4.35GHz it's smashing everything I can throw at it. I don't really care that it's 5-10% a 9900k in gaming, I do believe the performance will get better in time and the 3900x is a more future proof chip, as games are likely to rely more and more on threads than frequency in the future (hopefully!). But in anything productive, the 3900x blows anything else out the water pretty easily.
 
Sc00p007 said:
The hype and speculation was 5.0ghz + much better ipc for £250.
Myself, I just care about gaming performance. The higher prices don't bother me, it was always expensive when I first got into pc's, I'm an early adopter. Vr, physx cards etc. This is my main hobby and I feel it to be very good value for the hrs I get out of it.
Sadly I won't be picking up a new Ryzen. For my use and current setup it would be a downgrade. I see 5ghz ahead of 3900x in most games, I run 5.2.
1080p with 2080ti shows me what I may be getting a couple of gpus down the line at 1440p.
By the time 3900x pulls ahead in a majority of games due to cores, I feel will be towards the end of my cpu life or already moved on.

However, I'm a small minority. I would recommend the ryzen to 90+% of friends, although outside of gaming not many need cores and so I'd recommend a lower ryzen chip.

Now we have a real competition + consoles coming with higher core count. Fingers crossed. I'm interested to see what effect this will have in future games :)
Click to expand...

Once the new consles come out with 8 cores, I feel like game developers will really start making use of the extra cores by which times 8 cores for gaming on PC will be somewhat the norm. And ofc then, you'd want something like a 3900x with its 12 cores, instead of having the bare minimum of 8 cores. We are still a while away from that though, a few years at least
 
Praz94 said:
Once the new consles come out with 8 cores, I feel like game developers will really start making use of the extra cores by which times 8 cores for gaming on PC will be somewhat the norm. And ofc then, you'd want something like a 3900x with its 12 cores, instead of having the bare minimum of 8 cores. We are still a while away from that though, a few years at least
Click to expand...

We've had 8-core consoles for over 5 years now.

But yes, hopefully developers will progress (probably not though).
 
Rossi~ said:
We've had 8-core consoles for over 5 years now.

But yes, hopefully developers will progress (probably not though).
Click to expand...

Those 8 cores were utter garbage tbh. Compared to the proper AMD based 8 cores we're getting now, made on Zen2 Architecture, are a completely different animal and I feel game developers can fully utilise the console power now. And the sooner they do that, the sooner its better for PC
 
Sc00p007 said:
The hype and speculation was 5.0ghz + much better ipc for £250.
Myself, I just care about gaming performance. The higher prices don't bother me, it was always expensive when I first got into pc's, I'm an early adopter. Vr, physx cards etc. This is my main hobby and I feel it to be very good value for the hrs I get out of it.
Sadly I won't be picking up a new Ryzen. For my use and current setup it would be a downgrade. I see 5ghz ahead of 3900x in most games, I run 5.2.
1080p with 2080ti shows me what I may be getting a couple of gpus down the line at 1440p.
By the time 3900x pulls ahead in a majority of games due to cores, I feel will be towards the end of my cpu life or already moved on.

However, I'm a small minority. I would recommend the ryzen to 90+% of friends, although outside of gaming not many need cores and so I'd recommend a lower ryzen chip.

Now we have a real competition + consoles coming with higher core count. Fingers crossed. I'm interested to see what effect this will have in future games :)
Click to expand...

To correct you - by the time you need a 3900x, the 5900x will be for sale
 
Rossi~ said:
We've had 8-core consoles for over 5 years now.

But yes, hopefully developers will progress (probably not though).
Click to expand...

I don't trust game developers to use more threads. I do trust engine vendors to make it easier though, so we'll see.
Don't expect much for several years though, development timescales are such that we've only just moved on from the Quad core era.
Also there's a big difference between true Octo core like you get in a modern CPU and the Octo Core CPU's AMD claimed to have made years ago. They've recently been sued for it in the US.
 
Last edited:
It's better than I expected but then I didn't listen to any of the pre-release hype or rumours so didn't have any distorted expectations like many. As I only use it for video and multicore workloads, to have a CPU that scores 3000+ in CBr15 and 7000+ in CBr20 for the £474 it cost me is pretty astounding. Also the amount of power it draws to achieve this is also ground breaking.

Added to that I can do all this in a motherboard that cost me less than £90 is another major plus.
 
Cooler running said:
I don't trust game developers to use more threads. I do trust engine vendors to make it easier though, so we'll see.
Don't expect much for several years though, development timescales are such that we've only just moved on from the Quad core era.
Also there's a big difference between true Octo core like you get in a modern CPU and the Octo Core CPU's AMD claimed to have made years ago. They've recently been sued for it in the US.
Click to expand...

I think game development will take a jump with Xbox 2 and ps5 though since they will have a ryzen 8 core cpu and game devolipment allways seems to be better on consoles then pc. That 8 core and more threads will become the norm.

Not saying it will happen over night but with Xbox properly using dx12 I can see games using more of the cpu. Pc games are meant to scale though and I’m sure they still will so I don’t think 4 and 6 core cpu will die either I do think they will hold on exp at mid range range but I think anything higher and it will hold you back.

It’s not just the apu in consoles it being a true 8 cores cpu it’s the fact that it’s not very powerful per core to start off with on pc they clocked up to 5ghz on consoles there half that the normal consoles. And I honestly think a very good quad core cpu had hell of a lot more power per core they multithreading on pc wasn’t truly needed but that will change with new consoles even if there modestly clocked at 3.5ghz or even 3ghz that’s still a massive cpu power jump over PS4 and put it up against a ryzen 7 cpu range on pc or intel i7 range
 
If developers focus a lot more on DX12, then I think we're in for a treat.

Cooler running said:
I don't trust game developers to use more threads. I do trust engine vendors to make it easier though, so we'll see.
Don't expect much for several years though, development timescales are such that we've only just moved on from the Quad core era.
Also there's a big difference between true Octo core like you get in a modern CPU and the Octo Core CPU's AMD claimed to have made years ago. They've recently been sued for it in the US.
Click to expand...

Whilst the design of the Jaguar octa core differs drastically to the like of Ryzen, It's also not the same as Bulldozer which is the design that AMD was sued for. The Jaguar octa core is essentially 2x quad core Jaguar's stuck together with each quad core part having a shared L2 cache.

Praz94 said:
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-not--advertised-boost-speeds-survey,40291.html

Is there any truth to this?
Click to expand...

Yes. Though make sure you read the article fully, including this bit:

De8auer does make it clear that the survey was not perfectly scientific, however. Firstly, not all users used the exact same hardware, but that is to be expected, and Der8auer says he went through every single result over three days to make sure BIOS version, AGESA version, and everything else was consistent and labeled. He also discarded some results: outliers, systems using unusual setups like chillers, and users who reported that they used PBO.

He does admit that users who weren't getting the rated boost clocks would be more likely to submit their result than users who had no issues, something which could skew results, and that he could not ensure whether or not users applied the Windows 10 update that ensures the Windows scheduler would be using the fastest core for single-threaded workloads.

On the other hand, though, the data more or less demonstrates that most users are not getting the experience promised by AMD and De8auer says if a specific Windows version or something is required to achieve the rated boost, AMD should make that clear to its users.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Rossi~ said:
If developers focus a lot more on DX12, then I think we're in for a treat.



Whilst the design of the Jaguar octa core differs drastically to the like of Ryzen, It's also not the same as bulldozer which is the design that AMD was sued for. The Jaguar octa core is essentially 2x quad core Jaguar's stuck together with each quad core part having a shared L2 cache.
Click to expand...

Jaguar was still massively underpowered though and being clocked lower on consoles made it even worse. a true intel cpu on pc (before ryzen launch ) was so much more powerful even if games did use all 6 or 7 cores they could a pc chip was still leagues ahead but that will all change in next line up of consoles.

And I think dx12 will get used a lot more going forward but I do worrie though that if ps5 is more popular then Xbox again (I know There are a lot of reason why PS4 outsold Xbox) that OpenGL or Vulcan etc might become more popular then it is today which if I’m honest I would like to see vulkan used more if I’m honest.
 
vapor matt said:
So as the Ryzen 3900X has been released with new chipsets and with faster DDR4 support are all the up takers pleased with the performance or not quite as good as expected?

Long time since I ran an AMD cpu and board, would be interested to know what people think of the performance against intel, not just in gaming but other work loads as well.


So come on spill the beans on your purchase's
Click to expand...

The 3900X is awesome, they did a superb job.

The 9900k is ok, it just runs too hot. all these peeps running 5.0-5.1 with them are running cherry picked chips and radiators the size of a car.

The sweet spot for me is the 8086k special edition chip.
 
If you don't expect it to hit the frequencies advertised on most chips at stock then its fine....... Oh and you dont expect any OC headroom at all...... In principle its ok though....
 
I have not noticed a difference between my 1800X & 3900X for general usage and games. I am currently testing some software I did for work that uses a lot of threads(90+ but not that CPU heavy) and this gets a nice boost which is why I upgraded. I also run a few VM's when testing so the extra cores and memory speed help to reduce how long each test takes.
 
You don't see me complaining!! :p

i think I was quite lucky. Got it at £479, two days after launch. Slapped it into my x370 worked straight away - and stable!! Since that enabled PBO and pushed memory up to 3400Mhz stable as a table, scores of 7350+ in CB20. It eats rendering and encoding tasks for breakfast.

Compared to my 2700x, it is more responsive when all the cores are loaded. I can notice very little lag when i'm encoding and rendering, thus really is for multitasking. For those peed off because they expected advertised boost clocks I can understand your pain, for other products I would be upset too, but for this it's given me what I was hoping for.
 
doesnt do what it says it does. lawsuits will follow. amd will pay out fines. they will profit over what they pay out so they wont care. pretty low move if we honest. said it was this but wasnt that. marketing hype that many got hooked on.i said so from the beginning .
 
~>Dg<~ said:
doesnt do what it says it does. lawsuits will follow. amd will pay out fines. they will profit over what they pay out so they wont care. pretty low move if we honest. said it was this but wasnt that. marketing hype that many got hooked on.i said so from the beginning .
Click to expand...

Blah blah blah.

AMD said they found a bug with AGESA and going to fix it on Sep 10th.

Some users have thermal issues because like noobs still placing a blob at the center of the CPU, while the cores are at the sides and instead of the cores the empty gap at the center is cooled down.

Quite a few coolers are convex designed for Intel CPUs, not making full contact with AM4 at the center also. There are whole articles about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom