AMD Announces Ryzen 7 3700X, 3800X and Ryzen 9 3900X

I find that ironic, since I'm notoriously bad at winning the silicon lottery. I guess I got super lucky with my memory, eh?

Like I said, a particular memory not working well with Ryzen doesn't indicate much (especially since the RAM you linked to is 3600 - Zen+ has difficulty scaling beyond 3200). All four sticks of my G.SKILL Trident-Z 3200 RAM work perfectly fine @ 3200 and my Corsair Vengeance 3000 sticks also run without issue at @ 3200 (no advanced configuration required). Zen 2 should also come with official support for 3200 MHz memory so there should be little to worry about.

If you're really worried, then ask reddit about Ryzen compatibility with your particular RAM.

 

Sorry for this question. Is it possible to even speculate on the performance differences between the 3700x and say the i7 9700k? I would like to build a amd system (MB, cpu and ram), but will it be economically worth it?

 

well intel claimed they are about even, I think, but that doesn't tell us much since it was them claiming it and only based on cinebench scores. I bet it would be close enough, though, although obviously each would be better in different programs, since the 9700k doesn't even have multithreading. Maybe someone else will have more detailed thought than me, though.

As for being worth it, seems to me it may only be worth it if using something below a x570 mobo, but depends if you would care about the pcie 4.

 

Ironically, the VRM tier lists listed the b450 I got well above the x470 I sold. But also it's an itx one, which some may not like the idea of. I am still on the fence on atx vs. itx. The only case I have found that can do an itx build and be a quiet case seems to be the fractal design mini c. well, it's almost the same size case as the define c which can do an atx build, so not sure yet what I will do there.

 

I myself (really not up to speed on the tech today) dpn't see why I would need pcie 4. Some of that stuff mentioned in those yt and articals about those mb's really scares me. When things have to many moving parts its usually a recipe for failure some how.

 

I'm by no means an expert, but that is my opinion of the situation, as well. In far more than 99% of real life situations a pcie 4 ssd will not be noticeably different than a pcie 3 one and I don't like the idea of fans on the mobos. I think sme gpus are going to be pcie 4, but I don't really care about that or know how much it will affect anything.

So if the older mobos will handle the RAM as well, I might as well stick with an older mobo.

So if you get one of those other motherboards, you'd come out a lot cheaper with amd. it's up in the air how close the 3700x may be to the 9700k for gaming, though. I don't game on a pc myself.

 

latency is the key of ssd improvements over hdd's

throughput would only matter if you're entirely loading a universe into memory and keeping it there.

 

I'm still annoyed I bought a 970 pro, honestly. people wen ton and on about how much better MLC is, so I mostly did it for that reason instead of speed claims. But most people would never touch the write limits on any ssd, anyway...

And, in general, the better ssds are double the price per GB compared to the ones that are still very good.

 

Just read where AMD themselves confirmed the new cpus will perform the same on x570, x470, and b450 if you don't need pcie 4.

Like I said, the ONLY reason I was considering an x570 was where the extra bandwidth would allow me to use multiple ssds at 3.0x4 AND a gpu at x16.

But since 1 ssd at 3.0x2 or a gpu at x8 will make little to no difference I may just save myself well over $100 by not getting an x570.

I've just got to decide whether to keep the one I have now, which means I'd have to get a "loaner kit" from amd, or return it and buy a mobo again when these cpus release.... which likely won't be as good mobo prices at that time.

 

wayyyyyy off topic, but if you have a file from a dual layer BR, which I believe those hold 40 or 50 GB, why don't you need that much RAM if opening the file on the pc?

Someone told me at one point that when you open it, it doesn't put the whole file in memory as it plays the file, but I just read somewhere else that seems to be saying opening a video does put it all in memory. Obviously, if it does, more people would be needing 64GB RAM.

 

Gaming wise about equal, total system performance ~30% higher on 3700X. With your GPU practically equal for gaming even if you had weaker CPU.
If you are going to upgrade to shown Navi which competes with RTX-2070, then you have still about equal performance in games as GPU will be limiting factor in most cases.
Do you have 144Hz screen? If you sit on 60Hz, then you do not really need CPU upgrade just yet for gaming. Within a year 4C/8T may show deficit more often, but now on 60Hz it is OK.

As for economy part. Yes, AMD is still more economy oriented side.

 

I don't see how Ryzen 3000 is going to make memory prices go crazy. I think 3866-4000 will be a bit high but I guess it depends on the timings we are talking. I doubt it will be the sweet spot. 3600 CAS 14 will probably be pretty ideal. It will be interesting to see how these new neo GSkill kits turn out.

 

You'd be paying big time prices for it, compared with what most RAM costs now. That's if it even exists... On newegg they don't even have any 14 latency 3600 and filtering to 15 latency only gives 1 kit showing up. And that 15 latency 16gb kit costs more than a 32gb kit of the same speed and 2 or 3 times as much as another kit they have on sale with 18 latency.

It's hard to get half way decent prices on 14 latency 3000 speed, let alone 3600 speed.

Too bad all of their good deals are on 16gb kits, too, or I'd be tempted to buy a kit of 3600.

 

I have 4x 8GB 3600MHz CL16. I bought it at time when memory prices were high. Its price is now mere 10% lower than back then.
But cheap low-end memories now cost half of what they did at peak of prices. Sometimes even less and one can get for half price better low-end memory than before.
2x 8GB 3600MHz CL16 costs 2.2 times as much as 2x 8GB 3200MHz CL16.

If you want faster, memories have CL19 or worse. 2x 8GB 4266MHz CL19 costs 30% more than that 2x 8GB 3600MHz CL16. (And it is same model which I have and they have exactly same frequency/CL potential.)
Then there is 2x 8GB 4600MHz CL19 (19-23-23-43) which is another 30% more expensive than 2x 8GB 4266MHz CL19.
And those last 2 mentioned are quite more expensive than my 8GB 3600MHz CL16 sticks were at peak.

So, if someone wants 2x 8GB 4600MHz CL19 (19-23-23-43 which is not great) over 2x 8GB 3200MHz CL16, it does cost 3.67 times more. At high end segment priced did not really go down in any significant way.
+ those kits with clock above 3600MHz require 1.4V or 1.5V. People who want good memory should stick either to 3200MHz CL14 or 3600MHz CL16. But later can run in former configuration if desired.
= = = =
Would I want to spend $150 more on very fast memory and get 8C/16T or would I want to spend $150 more on 12C/24T CPU while using just good enough memory?
I would likely go for more cores and slower memory as I know that most of my heavy workloads can utilize all those cores even with much slower memories.

But someone can really go for best priced 2x 8GB 3200MHz CL16 + 3700X and be happy as it will not hinder system performance in most of cases by more than 3~5%. And that's wort it. If better memory increased total system price by mere 5% and enabled CPU to deliver same performance bump, it would be good investment. But that's not the case. In cases like Cinebench (small kernel which is not memory intensive) one can get 2% higher performance by moving from 2833MHz CL16 to 3200MHz CL14 or 3466MHz CL16.

 

Optical media uses an block/address file system with an index in the initial track so you don't have to read the entire content of a file to get to the part you want.

 

But he said CL14 3600. I haven't even seen that any exists. If it does newegg's filtering doesn't even have it listed. CL16 3600 would be equal to about 3200 CL14 as far as latency, so would be understandable. CL14 3600 would be like CL12 34200, which doesn't exist in DDR4, at least.

 

thanks.

 

So any other opinions on what I should do about RAM? To recap, I have g.skill 32gb 3200 CL15. That's not a common combination of specs there, so I am unsure what I could even sell it for.

Some think I should sell and buy something from QVL. Some think I should open and try it, but problem there is it would lose value by being opened.

Mine is Samsung b die. So that's a plus. But g.skill only lists pretty ancient chipsets as compatible officially.

I would "like" to probably get 3600 CL16 or CL17 or maybe even CL18 would be good enough? But they typically only have good prices on 16gb kits and then I'd probably lose a lot in selling my current one.

 

Thanks. As far as those speeds, I am just nervous OCing above the listed speed, just as I don't plan to OC the cpu, either, because I feel like for my particular use the gains aren't enough to be worth risking lowering component lifetime.

The actual listed specs on mine are indeed 15-15-15-35 and 1.35v, but what's weird is even though I have read that timings being the same like that on the actual specs is what means it will be Samsung b die, some kits have been shown as Samsung b die where the timings weren't the same... such as 16-18-18.

I know you're talking about manual settings, but it just reminded me of that situation with listed specs.

 

Reason I was considering it was more that I was already worried the kit won't be stable because not all kits are the same even if Samsung b die, so just has me nervous.