It’s the review we’ve all been waiting for. Since December last year – and particularly since CES – AMD has been teasing us about the new Zen 2 microarchitecture and AMD’s newest Ryzen 3000 series of CPUs. Incorporating a significantly upgraded CPU architecture and built using TSMC's latest generation manufacturing process, AMD has continued to run at full speed at a time when rival Intel has struggled to move at all. The end result is that while the first and second generation of Ryzen CPUs were all about AMD returning to competition and eating into Intel's substantial performance lead, the Ryzen 3000 series is nothing less than AMD's first shot in nearly 13 years at meeting (or beating) Intel at their own game in the desktop CPU market. It's a big moment for AMD, and an exciting one in the CPU industry as a whole.
A bit disappointed with the gaming performance so far (seems like 1/2 games are that much better than a 2700x [FC5]) and they don't seem to clock too well (TPU had the 3900x at 4GHz, granted they had issues with cooling; G3D hit ~4.4GHz on the 3700x, which doesn't bode well for the rest of the line up).
A stock 1800x seems to be about 11% worse than a stock 3700x at 1080p, which really doesn't seem much of a step up considering the clock-speed differences. I'd assume the boost-clock-bins are similar that if the 3700x hits 4.2 @ ~16 threads used, the 1800x would hit ~3.8 [based on what the 3900x does].
On the other hand, 12 cores for $500 and 16 cores for $750(?) seem like a great value especially if upgrading from a 1xxx or 2xxx series CPU.
That too.
4.0ghz on all 12 cores. Seems like again if you're into productivity space or needs to upgrade its the way to go with the newer Zen Chips but the 3600 seems like that's where the value is.
Even the 3700X looks like a substantial upgrade from the 2700X for gaming. Aside from a couple of odd titles at 720p, I honestly couldn't see the 9900K as the clear winner, unlike what Intel had us believing.
My biggest issue with that (gaming) is that in a lot of games where the 3700x has a good lead on the 2700x, the 8700k/9600k has a good lead on the 3700x (Sekiro at 1080p, 1800x -> 2700x: 15ish%; 2700x -> 3700x: 11%; 3700x -> 9600k: 17% | there are other games that are similar/there are some that show the 3700x as being better).
The gouging, the gouging, as of now newegg.ca, only has the 3900x as a combo with mobos and the cheapest ones go for over $1100. There is no more shame.
well the gaming performance wasn't where i'd hoped it would be, and showing that there really is a 15% single core IPC uplift everywhere else especially makes the gaming performance disappointing but the 3700X is a colossal jump over my 1600 and overall I don't think i'll regret pressing the order button just now.
I mean I certainly wasn't ever going to go out and spend twice as much to get the 9900k and a motherboard when I already have a motherboard that supports Ryzen 3000.
I guess all we can hope is that there are optimizations still to be done for gaming. I mean in basically every other way the 3700X is matching the 9900K despite its clock deficit so it's still extremely impressive, i just wish it applied to gaming.
PCCG, Mwave and Scorptec all have these up for sale right now for the Australians btw and prices are surprisingly good. Only $519 for the 3700X(About $360USD) so there's no ridiculous Australia tax, just the extra distribution cost.
I think it has something to do with the changes for memory write processes. AFAIK write bandwidth was cut in half on the 3000 series in order to boost performance in areas that are more beneficial to the mainstream platform consumer; Steve on HWUB mentions the bit width for write processes was cut from 32-bit to 16-bit
Not bad. Certainly not as great as everyone was hoping (misplaced hype as always), but personally I'm not disappointed with the results so far. OC3D has a small comparison of X570 vs X470 too and they don't seem to be that different (wished they included X370 too). A lot of people seem to have problems with boost clocks right now, which is producing some weird results in certain things.
The inconsistent results do see a bit odd. But overall there is a solid performance improvement over previous gen which I'd expect to improve as BIOS updates are released.
Now we have a new performance option for buyers. Sounds like a winning update to me.
Increased raw main memory latency is one of those unavoidable trade-offs of moving the memory controller off-die. Fortunately the larger caches seem to mask the effects in most scenarios.
For pure gaming, old CPUs can still hold their own for the most part.
There are very few games that higher core or higher clocks really take into effect once GPU bottlenecks takes into effect.
I wouldn't call the 0.1% irrelevant, depending on the length of the test. No doubt that the rare hicupp or unavoidable loading pause shouldn't detract from the overall experience, but I'd still pay attention to those 0.1% lows more than I would max frame rate.
The issue is that if I buy the most expensive gaming GPU that exists, and I play at the settings I want to play at, I am still going to be almost completely GPU limited in almost every scenario.
In your particular scenario, I would not be recommending a Ryzen 3000 part, but I also consider the 144 minimum fps target to be a fairly extreme niche.
I may buy the 3600 , but every time you see a benchmark from the 3700x , remember it's using 65watt 1600 power in the ass kicking it has displayed on Nvidia hardware to Intel's GOD of gaming cpu's .
I would have liked to have seen a Ryzen 7 3800X review (maybe they are still coming later today), especially to see the gaming results. With its 105w TDP, those higher sustained clocks could probably get it much closer to the 9900K, while still costing $100 less. Overall though, this is pretty much what I was expecting. AMD is back to the top of the CPU game in about every sense.
Gaming still needs work by third parties, because either Windows 10's thread scheduler still isn't working properly, despite the claims that it is now topology aware, or some games need to be updated, because in some games there's a lot of fuel in the tank:
They should mature in the coming weeks with all the new bios updates that didn't make it into these reviews. They look good so far. But i want to see 3800x and 3400G reviews.
Computer Base actually has it within 3% of the 9900K. I think they used AGESA 1003. Their gaming performance is very strong with Ryzen beating the 9900K in some games.
I was considering a 3700X but once I saw the benchmarks where AMD admitted the 9700K was faster than the 3700X in their own best case scenario benchmarks I knew AMD wasn't going to take the crown, but they're darn close!
With that being said I'm really excited to see AMD doing well this generation to hopefully bring out some real competition from Intel in the next few years after lazy Intel gets off of 14nm. I'm glad I stuck with my 6700K as the 3700X and 7700K in these benches are very similar in terms of gaming.
Don't get me wrong, if I were in the market for a new build I would go with AMD without even thinking as the gaming performance is similar enough for me not to care and their productivity scores are insane for the price.
If DDR5 is close next year (prob won't see it until 2021 a the earliest) I'll wait otherwise I'll probably pick up a Zen 3 CPU as I have a feeling this 6700K is going to bottleneck hard whenever I decide to upgrade my GTX 1080.
What happened to the 3800X?...I can't find any info on it anywhere.
Pretty impressive results, but I'm pretty dissapointed with the overclocking, AMD's marketing team made it out like PBO+ was going to push another 200mhz on top of the rated speeds on the box, but that seems like it was poorly communicated, and not the case at all.
I think I will just wait it out, and see how the 3950X performs, I have a feeling with a bit of tweaking and SMT turned off, it could pull some serious performance figures.
Steve from GN got a 3600 from Gigabyte, AMD only sent 3700X and a 3900X to be reviewed so far along with the 5700 and 5700XT.
Seems like you're gonna have to wait till later on this week or even next to see a review of the rest of the Ryzen 3000 series line up.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ask a question
Ask a question
Overclock.net
27.8M posts
541.2K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to overclocking enthusiasts and testing the limits of computing. Come join the discussion about computing, builds, collections, displays, models, styles, scales, specifications, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!