[GamersNexus] Ryzen 3000 release date - Page 3 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[GamersNexus] Ryzen 3000 release date

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #21 of 679 (permalink) Old 05-26-2019, 04:13 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
zealord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 6,625
Rep: 400 (Unique: 206)
Quote: Originally Posted by SoloCamo View Post
I'm going to watch it just to see.

The 'high power draw' one is the most laughable.

I just don't see why they would talk more about the CPU at E3. GPU, maybe, but E3 is mostly about gaming and 4k / VR performance is what most people care about being shown.
I see the it very same way. High power draw makes no sense because AMD showed a Ryzen 3000 beating the 9900K at lower power draw.
E3 makes more sense for navi graphics cards I agree with that too.

Like I said this is just rumors from multiple sources and nothing is even remotely verified.

Only thing that has me worried (in those rumors and whispers floating around) is that AMD stays with the same core configuration for the 3600/3700 as they have with 2600/2700 CPUs and the "not-as-high-as-hoped" clockspeeds.

But I hope it is all just rubbish



zealord is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 679 (permalink) Old 05-26-2019, 04:18 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 976
Rep: 42 (Unique: 34)
Quote: Originally Posted by SoloCamo View Post
I'm going to watch it just to see.

The 'high power draw' one is the most laughable.

I just don't see why they would talk more about the CPU at E3. GPU, maybe, but E3 is mostly about gaming and 4k / VR performance is what most people care about being shown.
Yeah, sorry but if he didn’t want to be quoted he shouldn’t have said something so ridiculous.

If core counts and clockspeeds are the same, and it’s 7nm, it would be at roughly 1/2 power consumption compared to last gen...

Never mind the fact that we’ve already seen 12c and 16c parts running on X570 boards or anything. All just a myth.

It’s possible they might only show limited information at computed, but the launch is still going to be 7/7 as we’ve all kind of assumed.

Buris is offline  
post #23 of 679 (permalink) Old 05-26-2019, 04:22 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 976
Rep: 42 (Unique: 34)
Quote: Originally Posted by zealord View Post
I see the it very same way. High power draw makes no sense because AMD showed a Ryzen 3000 beating the 9900K at lower power draw.
E3 makes more sense for navi graphics cards I agree with that too.

Like I said this is just rumors from multiple sources and nothing is even remotely verified.

Only thing that has me worried (in those rumors and whispers floating around) is that AMD stays with the same core configuration for the 3600/3700 as they have with 2600/2700 CPUs and the "not-as-high-as-hoped" clockspeeds.

But I hope it is all just rubbish
If there’s no TR this year, they could use different naming schemes

3600 6 core
3700 8 core
3800 12 core
3900 16 core

That’s just an example, they could also do

3500 6 core
3600 8 core
3700 12 core
3800 16 core

Or literally any number they want-

What matters is the product and pricing, I could care less if they decided to call this generation of Ryzen 69X420 as long as it’s competitive in single core performance and offers many cores

Buris is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #24 of 679 (permalink) Old 05-26-2019, 04:34 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
zealord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 6,625
Rep: 400 (Unique: 206)
Quote: Originally Posted by Buris View Post
If there’s no TR this year, they could use different naming schemes

3600 6 core
3700 8 core
3800 12 core
3900 16 core

That’s just an example, they could also do

3500 6 core
3600 8 core
3700 12 core
3800 16 core

Or literally any number they want-

What matters is the product and pricing, I could care less if they decided to call this generation of Ryzen 69X420 as long as it’s competitive in single core performance and offers many cores
Good post and I agree very much with what you are saying.

In the end it comes down to price and what you get for it and not the naming.

Personally I am just hoping for a nice 8c/16t CPU with good clockspeeds that has a reasonable IPC gain from Ryzen2000 and isn't too expensive.

Perfect for me would be a $300 AMD CPU that rivals the $480 Intel i9 9900K, but how realistic that is I can't say right now. Will see soon (I hope)



zealord is offline  
post #25 of 679 (permalink) Old 05-26-2019, 04:47 PM
Jedi Knight
 
Nick the Slick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Kentucky, USA
Posts: 580
Rep: 39 (Unique: 39)
Quote: Originally Posted by Serious_Don View Post
The 300 watt chip? At the 3 minute mark he says roughly it's confirmed there will be a 16 core CPU, which are at present pushing at towards 300W on air (under water).

I don't believe any 9900k would come remotely close to 300W to run 5ghz

would be hilarious if the 95W @ 4.7Ghz chip went up to 300W for 5ghz. Intel would be meme of the century.
Wut?

Quote:
But power becomes more of an issue in some productivity applications because a constant load on all cores at high clock rates is almost too much. And to be clear, the Core i9-9900K gets super hot faced with Prime95 and AVX instructions (205W stock, 250W overclocked), exceeding the specified TDP.

We measured 137W (232W) during the Cinebench test, and we topped 145W (241W overclocked) under the larger Blender workload. We even pushed past 120W (198W overclocked) with various CAD plug-ins for Creo and SolidWorks. The limits of normal all-in-one compact water cooling solutions are in sight during standard operation at 4.7 GHz on all cores, but you can easily overwhelm cheaper AIOs during overclocking.


Sauce

And yes that's cpu only, not total system. Granted the 250w is prime avx, but still, 232w for Cinebench and 241 for Blender. I would qualify that as remotely close.

Given that Steve specifically said "we have some new information on overclocking" before saying 300w was the upward bound it was pulling under water, I would guess that means the 16 core was pulling 300w overclocked. I'd say that's pretty good (depending on what the clocks were of course).

Vibranium
(16 items)
CPU
Intel Core i7 7700k
Motherboard
ASUS Z170-PRO
GPU
MSI GeForce GTX 1070 Sea Hawk EK X
RAM
G. Skill Trident Z
Hard Drive
MyDigitalSSD BPX
Hard Drive
Crucial MX300
Hard Drive
ADATA SU800
Power Supply
Seasonic SS-750KM3
Cooling
Custom Liquid Cooling
Case
Phanteks “Enthoo Pro Series"
Operating System
Windows 10
Monitor
VIOTEK GN32DB
Keyboard
Logitech K800
Mouse
Logitech G603
Audio
JBL LIVE 650BTNC
Audio
Fiio E10K DAC/AMP
▲ hide details ▲


Nick the Slick is online now  
post #26 of 679 (permalink) Old 05-26-2019, 04:49 PM
486DX2 66
 
Serious_Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: AX Register
Posts: 2,890
Rep: 211 (Unique: 126)
Quote: Originally Posted by zealord View Post
Good post and I agree very much with what you are saying.

In the end it comes down to price and what you get for it and not the naming.

Personally I am just hoping for a nice 8c/16t CPU with good clockspeeds that has a reasonable IPC gain from Ryzen2000 and isn't too expensive.

Perfect for me would be a $300 AMD CPU that rivals the $480 Intel i9 9900K, but how realistic that is I can't say right now. Will see soon (I hope)
Right there with you buddy, still sitting on my 4790k and thinking the exact same thing, 9900k performance in the $349 or less range. I would have been a 9700k buyer until they yanked HT. If ryzen 3000 is really equal or better to a 9900k though, we'll probably be seeing $450+ for a while, but we'll get the low prices sooner than later.

-----------------
My thoughts (no facts here)
If a TR2 16 core can OC to 4.2ghz and gulp up to 300 watts (OC), I think it would be reasonable to assume that a supposed 300 watt behemoth on 7nm would very conservatively be pushing 4.6ghz or better (unless there's some massive architectural change dropping clocks but raising IPC massively). I'd just buy a 2950x and be done with it if a new chip with a default TDP almost twice the 2950x didn't absolutely annihilate the 2950x.

That said, I'm feeling pretty confident we'll be getting the IPC and Frequency bump we've been waiting for from Ryzen. I can't wait to see what comes in the 6, 8, and 12 core SKUs

Can't hear my delta fans over my Death Metal crew
The sound of fallingWhen the pictures are movingBetween the memories
I Just Found Out My PCs Have A Power Button. Meh, Still Not Shutting Down Club Member #00001
Ban Thread Bot
(19 items)
HAF Baked
(16 items)
M-M-Monster Kill
(13 items)
CPU
4790k
Motherboard
Asus z97 Pro WIFI AC
GPU
Vega 64
RAM
16GB 'Team Pook' Xtreem DDR3
Hard Drive
250GB Samsung Evo 840
Hard Drive
2 x 3 TB Western Digital Black Sata 6gb/s
Hard Drive
2 TB WD Green
Power Supply
Corsair HX850
Cooling
Corsair H100i
Case
Corsair 900D
Operating System
Windows 7
Operating System
Ubuntu
Monitor
LG 27UD58P-B
Monitor
AOC g2770pqu
Monitor
Sony Bravia 40"
Keyboard
Corsair Strafe RGB
Mouse
Corsair Vengeance M65
Mouse
Gigabyte Ghost Extreme Accuracy
Audio
Sound Blaster X-Fi
CPU
FX 8320
Motherboard
Asus
GPU
Sapphire Tri-X 290
RAM
Corsair Vengeance 1600
Hard Drive
Corsair Forse LS SSD
Hard Drive
Samsung Spinpoint F3
Hard Drive
Western Digital Black
Optical Drive
Asus 24x DVD-RW
Power Supply
EVGA
Cooling
CM Hyper 212 Evo
Case
Cooler Master HAF 922
Operating System
Debian 9 & Win7
Monitor
Asus VH236H
Keyboard
Ancient Dell Mechanical
Mouse
Corsair MX65
Mouse
Gigabyte Ghost Extreme Accuracy
CPU
Pentium III
Motherboard
Intel SE440BX-2
GPU
GeForce MX 440 AGP 8X
RAM
Viking PC133 SDRAM
RAM
Viking PC133 SDRAM
Hard Drive
Western Digital Caviar
Hard Drive
Western Digital Caviar 39000
Optical Drive
LG DVD/RW
Cooling
Stock
Operating System
Windoze 98
Audio
Sound Blaster Pro2
Audio
Sound Blaster 16
Audio
Sound Blaster Live!
▲ hide details ▲



Last edited by Serious_Don; 05-26-2019 at 05:04 PM.
Serious_Don is offline  
post #27 of 679 (permalink) Old 05-26-2019, 05:00 PM
486DX2 66
 
Serious_Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: AX Register
Posts: 2,890
Rep: 211 (Unique: 126)
Quote: Originally Posted by Nick the Slick View Post
Wut?



And yes that's cpu only, not total system. Granted the 250w is prime avx, but still, 232w for Cinebench and 241 for Blender. I would qualify that as remotely close.

Given that Steve specifically said "we have some new information on overclocking" before saying 300w was the upward bound it was pulling under water, I would guess that means the 16 core was pulling 300w overclocked. I'd say that's pretty good (depending on what the clocks were of course).
I think we're going from confused to more confused here, sorry. My original post was 300 watts talking about what was said in the gamer's nexus video. Ozlay asked if he was talking about the 9900ks (that's how I understood it at least). I also assumed nexus was talking about ryzen 16 core.

Impressive amount of power going through the 9900k though, thanks for that post. It's still significantly less than 300 watts, but I redact the remote comment

Can't hear my delta fans over my Death Metal crew
The sound of fallingWhen the pictures are movingBetween the memories
I Just Found Out My PCs Have A Power Button. Meh, Still Not Shutting Down Club Member #00001
Ban Thread Bot
(19 items)
HAF Baked
(16 items)
M-M-Monster Kill
(13 items)
CPU
4790k
Motherboard
Asus z97 Pro WIFI AC
GPU
Vega 64
RAM
16GB 'Team Pook' Xtreem DDR3
Hard Drive
250GB Samsung Evo 840
Hard Drive
2 x 3 TB Western Digital Black Sata 6gb/s
Hard Drive
2 TB WD Green
Power Supply
Corsair HX850
Cooling
Corsair H100i
Case
Corsair 900D
Operating System
Windows 7
Operating System
Ubuntu
Monitor
LG 27UD58P-B
Monitor
AOC g2770pqu
Monitor
Sony Bravia 40"
Keyboard
Corsair Strafe RGB
Mouse
Corsair Vengeance M65
Mouse
Gigabyte Ghost Extreme Accuracy
Audio
Sound Blaster X-Fi
CPU
FX 8320
Motherboard
Asus
GPU
Sapphire Tri-X 290
RAM
Corsair Vengeance 1600
Hard Drive
Corsair Forse LS SSD
Hard Drive
Samsung Spinpoint F3
Hard Drive
Western Digital Black
Optical Drive
Asus 24x DVD-RW
Power Supply
EVGA
Cooling
CM Hyper 212 Evo
Case
Cooler Master HAF 922
Operating System
Debian 9 & Win7
Monitor
Asus VH236H
Keyboard
Ancient Dell Mechanical
Mouse
Corsair MX65
Mouse
Gigabyte Ghost Extreme Accuracy
CPU
Pentium III
Motherboard
Intel SE440BX-2
GPU
GeForce MX 440 AGP 8X
RAM
Viking PC133 SDRAM
RAM
Viking PC133 SDRAM
Hard Drive
Western Digital Caviar
Hard Drive
Western Digital Caviar 39000
Optical Drive
LG DVD/RW
Cooling
Stock
Operating System
Windoze 98
Audio
Sound Blaster Pro2
Audio
Sound Blaster 16
Audio
Sound Blaster Live!
▲ hide details ▲


Serious_Don is offline  
post #28 of 679 (permalink) Old 05-26-2019, 05:05 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
zealord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 6,625
Rep: 400 (Unique: 206)
Quote: Originally Posted by Serious_Don View Post
Right there with you buddy, still sitting on my 4790k and thinking the exact same thing, 9900k performance in the $349 or less range. I would have been a 9700k buyer until they yanked HT. If ryzen 3000 is really equal or better to a 9900k though, we'll probably be seeing $450+ for a while, but we'll get the low prices sooner than later.

-----------------
My thoughts (no facts here)
If a TR2 16 core can OC to 4.2ghz and gulp 230-240 watts (OC), I think it would be reasonable to assume that a supposed 300 watt behemoth on 7nm would very conservatively be pushing 4.6ghz or better (unless there's some massive architectural change dropping clocks but raising IPC massively). I'd just buy a 2950x and be done with it if a new chip with a default TDP almost twice the 2950x didn't absolutely annihilate the 2950x.

That said, I'm feeling pretty confident we'll be getting the IPC and Frequency bump we've been waiting for from Ryzen. I can't wait to see what comes in the 6, 8, and 12 core SKUs
I mean whatever it will end up as it will make a gigantic leap from my i5 2500K

I would also be ready to pay a bit more if it means I get something really juicy and the only thing that matters for me is gaming performance. So lets say a rumored 16c/32t 4.2GHZ CPU is not as interesting as a CPU with fewer cores but higher clockspeed.

Not too big a fan of the I9 9900K because it is extremely hot, expensive and power hungry. Living in europe also means I pay nearly 3x the electricity prices compared to US



zealord is offline  
post #29 of 679 (permalink) Old 05-26-2019, 05:37 PM
Waiting for 7nm EUV
 
tpi2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,059
Rep: 879 (Unique: 498)
In order to be successful AMD needs to fine tune their release. Aim too high and it might be bad for profits and / or their image, aim too low and they don't make enough of an impact. That's the dilemma right now. How high can they clock Zen 2 on the current 7nm process? That's the big question, because that will to an extent dictate what they have to release right now to make an impact.

Intel doesn't have anything to counter a 16 core mainstream-ish part, only a 10 core at most on the ring bus, more than that and it will be akin to Skylake-X and not as good for gaming. Besides, does mainstream really need a 16 core CPU right now? In my opinion it's too soon and the performance and power efficiency for a mainstream part is probably not there yet.

A 12 core will thus do for now at the high-end if the performance is there, at say $499. That also keeps their profits reasonable.

The 9900K competitor can come in at $329 for the low power, non X version, and $399 for the X one.

If I were AMD I would wait for 7nm EUV to release the 16 core part, it will improve performance by 10% or bring a 15% efficiency improvement according to this article, and they can thus wait for Intel's Ice Lake and respond at a more leisurely pace and fine tune things with time.

Is your CPU bottlenecking your GPU ? Find out: CPU and GPU usage along with FPS in-game
Read my reviews here.
Clubs (founder): The rare / unusual CPU club
Clubs (member): Corsair Professional HX / AX Series PSU Owners Club || The Official Cooler Master HAF X/932/922/912(+) Club
CPU
Core i7-3820
Motherboard
Asus Sabertooth X79
GPU
MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X
RAM
16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator
Hard Drive
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 2TB
Optical Drive
Sony Optiarc DVD-RW
Power Supply
Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold
Cooling
Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P
Case
Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus
Operating System
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Monitor
BenQ RL2455HM
Keyboard
Cooler Master Octane
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane
▲ hide details ▲



Last edited by tpi2007; 05-26-2019 at 05:47 PM.
tpi2007 is offline  
post #30 of 679 (permalink) Old 05-26-2019, 05:38 PM
It Just Works
 
TFL Replica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 14,934
So is 5GHz (out of the box boost) not happening on any of the parts? Not even with 6C?


TFL Replica is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 7 (2 members and 5 guests)
Chrono Detector , NightAntilli
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off