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

I think the same, those rumors were difficult to believe, even Ryzen 2000 at current prices couldn't be competitive.

About overclock, maybe we'll see new boost technologies and not much all core potential over it.

 

... so those chips will operate beyond their supposed TDP. I can imagine there will be lots of raised eyebrows with coolers unable to cope with such supposed TDPs.

I think generally actual processing unit power consumption is becoming completely unrelated to TDP even at stock settings if it wasnt already unrelated already, it's just a well educated guess.
Probably it has to do with the fact that these chips operate with energy saving functions and all that performance engineering mumbo-jumbo even way beyond user accessiblity.
On that note, it's quite strange how the 3800x and the 3900x has the same TDP.

 

Base clock difference of 100MHz on 8 vs 12 cores. There is likely breaking point where this 7nm stops being efficient. Similarly as bit lower clock on 3700X brings it down to 65W.

Then there is this cache thing. 6C/12T Zen 2 has 35MB of L1/2/3. 12C/24T has 70MB total.
But 8C/16T has 36MB. Those may be different chiplets. One could presume that 12C/24T has disabled cores, but what if those are actually two 6C/12T chiplets as that would explain pricing.
(Or maybe cache difference is just form disabled L1/L2, but then I would expect difference to be bigger... or maybe AMD did some cache magic reassignment.)

 

In my understanding moving to the 7nm should have compensated for the higher clocks, in addition to perfecting the Ryzen architecture in general, reducing the power draw. However, since they must have made the cores more complex to raise the IPC, it must have eaten away the natural boost, making the clocks upgrade more modest.

Besides, currently Intel's CPUs are eating more power, yet they are still sporting both the gaming crown and larger market share. In the GPU field Nvidia has for years given more gaming performance with higher clocks for lower wattage (although for non-gaming compute it might not be the same). I know CPUs and GPUs aren't the same, but it still deserves some attention.

You can't just redefine an established concept like IPC for your own purposes. IPC stands for instructions per cycle. It's great if you have a higher frequency because it means the overall performance will be higher, but it's irrelevant to IPC.

 

I'll be waiting for reviews and to see the motherboards. But the 3900x looks like the one I'll go with if all ok.

 

My guess is that this is just a "starter" edition of Zen 2 chips, as Lisa said this is a preview of upcoming goodies.

I would say we shall see something like :

• Ryzen 7 3750X
• Ryzen 7 3850X
• Ryzen 9 3950X
• Ryzen 10 = 16 Cores maybe cause 9 is 12 cores now.

Each of these should be able to boost to 5GHz (1 - 2 cores)

This is my predection atleast, but i reckon we wont see them this year, or atleast at the end of the year some of them.

Cheers

 

How's that tax rate to provide free healthcare going for ya?

 

Each manufacturing process has certain efficiency range. And transistors all behave in same way once close to their voltage limits... current disaster.
AMD and nVidia while making chips in same factory had always different manufacturing tweaks. nVidia had that well done and on top of that historically used lower density. Biggest thing used to be that till Turing, they did not invest extra transistors into different forms of compute.
All those things did led to better energy efficiency. And lower power draw => lower temperature => better behaving transistors => higher achievable clock.
It was good strategy, but Turing is very close to AMD's GCN in terms of compute investment. They still have all those other things better.
(As for CPU front, intel simply had that manufacturing advantage for so long. But they did run out of luck and can't get it out of house properly.)

Now with Navi, AMD will have better front-end. Hopefully better Back-end too. And if they improved shaders as it seems that they did, Navi based GPUs will deliver higher fps per transistor investment per clock than Turing while clocking equally. This would mean AMD would no longer produce more expensive to make graphics cards at certain performance point as they did prior and post Polaris. (Higher margins or more sales from price attractive cards.)

 

On caches, every core has 0,5 MB of L2, so 3 MB for 6 cores, 4 MB for 8 cores and 6 MB for 12 cores, the rest is the same (I think L3 is a shared cache pool):

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1440...-cores-for-499-up-to-46-ghz-pcie-40-coming-77

And it looks you're right about efficiency, as in "old" Ryzen architecture, it will be impossible to reach 5 GHz, but they are getting closer, maybe with Zen 2+.

 

Decent ipc improovements , better than expected . Clocks exactly as expected , can't wait to see how much overclocking headroom have they left us . Hopefully Hilbert wil receive his testing cpu soon . I hope that the full 16 core is not too far away as I don't like to buy silicone with disabled cores , I am on 6 cores right now so I would like to upgrade in a big step .
Good times .

 

There is thing I really was excited about. That is lower clock power efficiency. I did experiment a lot on 2400G and a bit on 2700X.
45W 8C/16T notebook was impressive. This time around 45W TDP on mobile CPU will deliver Zen(+) 105~125W desktop 8C/16T.

This is 1st time when we can have ~100W next gen mobile gaming performing around 400W last gen desktops.
(I did own 3 gaming notebooks over years and multiple standard note/net/ultrabooks. Gaming even at 100W+ never lasted long enough to justify price in past.)

I think that Zen2 6C/12T will be impressive @35W (and more than sufficient for gaming), leaving good 60W for Navi which will be very close to RX-580.

 

I want an AMD Surface like with Zen 2 and Navi; my Intel's 2 cores - 4 threads is looking dated and I fear disabling HT for a safer professional computing

 

Clock speeds are lower than I had hoped, but that's not entirely surprising. After all, Intel's first-gen 10nm is also lower than their current 14nm++. What IS surprising is the 15% boost in IPC (I had cast doubts on this before), although I suspect this is only under certain workloads.

At any rate, the 3900X looks to be a fine replacement for my 1800X. Also, my Threadripper is still relevant .

Did you even read what you replied to? Clock speed has nothing to do with IPC.

 

Edumacation is important, but your IPC is importanter.

 

Intel's meeting during AMD Computex 2019 Keynote:

https://i.**********/d0Cd38qt/Intel-cancelled-final4.png

 

correct, but the power of Intel is in the scale of Intel at this point. and for the uninformed consumer Intel is still the premium brand, for the military and enterprise they are mostly still in legacy mode Intel datacenter and datacenter products.
and just like in comedy, timing is everything. AMD's sharpest dagger to the heart of Intel is Epyc indeed. the legacy datacenters are falling under "green" constraints in Europe and Japan. AMD's foresight and the pace of progress at TSMC are just the on-topic assault on Intel. FGPA's, contracting, and cloud services are a few of the others.

R7 3000 series is a beast.
i've had some inside info, but only drips and drops (now in context).
i'm very, very curious as to the fate/role of threadripper at this point. granted, 64 pcie lanes are more than 40, but it seems all of the non-WS cpus are not as viable given the spec of the 3900 and 3800.

 

Thing is that intel is safe.
"Intel's New Sales" = "Intel's old sales" - "AMD's production capacity"

And that being said, AMD does not have sufficient production capacity to make serious dent. AMD surely will make good profit, but intel is not going to lose big part of cake.

 

Slightly disappointed with pricing and clocks (AMD, you crafty buggers! You're holding out on us I think) but will still be a very strong release. Proper benchies required please HH

 

all true but imho, i'm fairly certain they'll oc to it. tdp is a major selling point, especially in countries with greener laws and higher electricity rates. it's entirely possible (tho' speculation) that the cpu's are undervolted for marketing.

 

the 3700X looks so sexy with it's only 65W of TDP, it looks perfect for a HTPC... But yes, the 3800X with his higher TDP promise better overclocking...