AMD Ryzen 7 3700X & Ryzen 9 3900X review with benchmarks leaks out

@pegasus1 Well Said.

You were not here for 4.5 billion years.
You will live for maybe 80 years.
Then you will never exist again.
Yet you are willing to spend time arguing over something so irrelevant.

 

Jesus christ, low res gaming tests are the best way to predict which processor will perform better when new generations of graphics cards show up. If you are only interested on how they perform at 1440p on actual "real hardware" please knock yourselves out with the 1440p results and ignore the additional information those tests provide, it wont bite you, thanks.

 

Real gamers? If you mean competitive online gamers, then yes I think you have a point.
Yet, for slow paced single player games I think 4k is a perfect choice if you can financially handle it. Immerion is key there .
I tried best of both worlds and went for 1440p at 144Hz G-sync but alas, this is still a TN pannel. I miss details, HDR and deeper colours in single player games.
And at 280+ games in my steam library and gaming since the '90 I'd say I'm a real gamer .

 

Another my-opinion-is-universal gamer who thinks one one set of criteria must apply to all and no ifs or buts about it . Not everyone cares about fast paced gaming. There is such a thing as slow paced games that allow one to take in all the scenery in its finer details while the player proceeds at his own leisurely pace.

Most of current 4k gamers (myself included) came off lower res, high refresh rate displays as a preferred choice. Not because its 'better' (it isnt in fast paced shooters), but because some may prefer other aspects of gaming that have nothing to do with the competitive side of things nor about rapidly panning screens that captures all motion intact.

Can still go back to my 1440p 120hz display in 2nd rig, but nope, prefer the large 4k one where an apple looks like a real apple with all its fine textures and details, instead of like a cherry on small high refresh displays. Again, we all have choices and different sets of criteria that we may appreciate more than others. Yours are not universal, neither are mine.

 

Fresh benches on x470
https://imgur.com/lNqmwkn

 

WHAT? you dont need to buy twice as much ram, you just need a 4 stick kit.
Im on 9900K now and using 4-stick kit of 3733Mhz because thats what was available,
If you want 32GB for example, its usually cheaper to get four 8GB sticks then two 16gb sticks.
Im lucky that 3733Mhz is also the best speed for Ryzen 3000, if Gurus benchmarks come out OK, ill be upgrading to asus x570 Hero and probably 12 core because it will overclock better then the 16 and will be less hot and faster in single threated, also the 12 core has the most cache per core, more then 16 core CPU

 

the memory speed on that new bench is pitiful.

 

Is this yours or did you take it from somewhere?

If this is yours, then why is the ram set to, if i'm reading that correctly, 2066?

 

Its DDR4-2133 Cas 15 by the looks of it.
If its still getting that single thread score with that memory, thats a feat in itself.

 

I guess the question is, if you need the memory, and you need the cores, why do you not need or at least want the quad-channel memory of the threadripper?

And unless i'm mistaken, i could be, you'd only need 4 slots of ram for quad-channel to work? So you could go with the link you listed above for 4x16, or go with 8x8

Something like this

https://www.amazon.com/Corsair-Vengeance-64GB-DDR4-PC4-25600/dp/B01BYMNH7A/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=DDR4+3200&qid=1562455024&refinements=p_n_feature_five_browse-bin:9559992011,p_n_feature_two_browse-bin:16955291011&rnid=16955283011&s=pc&sr=1-1

(shows only 4 on the picture, says 8 pack, and details state "Density: 64GB (8x8GB)"

Just throwing ideas out there as it seems you are wanting your system for purposes that generally like quad-channel memory.

Right, my mathing abilities have failed me, horribly. Lol.

 

Not mine, this is low end CPU for someones wife
Here is what he said

 

No they are not using more threads. They benefit sometimes, but are not designed to. They (games) are ports from consoles. And consoles use Bulldozer architecture. Some games DO benefit from more cores, like....I can't think of a single one, but there is one, or two perhaps. And intel skylake is still doing better at them. Then in productivity, you want Ryzen all the way. Then again, that is only if you are doing time sensitive work and need something done in 30 minutes instead of 45. Which imho, is not that time sensitive but whatever. We have people that like to game and record and stream to their grandma and need ryzen because it's 10% or 20% better at that, and has no vulnerabilities, like intel has.

Personally, I like my i5 9400F on z370 just fine for under 300$

 

Hi there

Just don't get Corsair Vengeance RAM or Dominator, have used both and with both I have only issues, tried like 3200mhz Dominator or Vengeance on 8700k or 8086k

Not sure if X570 will support 32GB sticks which I think I would use and please check Buildzoid YT videos regarding what is best RAM combination for motherboards, sometimes 2*16GB or 2*8GB is better option on some boards than 4*8GB or 4*16GB on other boards

Recently I have used G.SKILL Ripjaws V 3200mhz which I could easily OC to 3733MHz

Hope this helps

Thanks, Jura

 

The processor seems to be running almost constantly at 4200
the memory speed on that new bench is pitiful
Its DDR4-2133 Cas 15 by the looks of it.

Info for ryzen 3000 series
Artificial restriction is present due to NDA. To fully use Zen 2 you need 1.0.0.3AB AGESA

 

Is that the ComboPi version bundled in the x570 MBs? As for asus, everyone knows they are slow to release new AGESA, just updated today my C6H to ComboPi 1.0.0.2 band new BIOS... Zen2 official support should start with ComboPie 0.0.7.x anyway...

 

@Mesab67
didnt know that you were one of the mods in this forum. .
that would be the only time you could make an assumption about what is liked/disliked/allowed/not allowed in this forum.



@
couple ppl here know i usually dont agree (for whatever reason) with aura on lots of stuff, but so far, not on of his post were off.


fact: about 80% of the planet are using 1080p as gaming res. not 720, not 4k not 8k. but 1080p, even if i say its too high, and lower it to 60, still they majority.
fact: testing at lower than 1080 is ok to see variations in perf/to compare synthetic numbers, but are IRRELEVANT for +60% of gamers.
fact: no one will start optimizing future software (incl games) for single/dual core cous, especially since all games for the upcoming ps/xb might be converted for the other side (pc to console/the other way around),
so games/developers will expect to have more cores available, not less.
fact: intel has tried multiple times in the past 20y, that i remember, to force amd out of the business with different tactics
( btw most of them never used in similar fashion by amd against intel) and have been fined multiple times by not just one country.
fact: you don't try to take out someone, that is the last on your list (of competitors), you go for the biggest threat.
fact: intel held back on core count, because they could, and amd changed that pretty much.
what was the first real quad (core) that intel released? when was it replaced by a higher core count? lol
fact: there are differences in perf, for sure, but not everyone is intended to spend multiple times more, to get a little bit better perf.(ST/min FPS).
the same way there are ppl that have the money to buy a 100k car, some get one that costs 1M, or even more.
will they be better in performance? sure, but the gains will be nowhere close to the increase in price you see.

same with intel vs amd: how much more does it cost, to gain 10% in perf?

 

Man, I can't believe so many pages were spent discussing the resolution of the CPU gaming benchmarks! You would think such a thing would be self explanatory!

 

Dunno what you all are on about. I for one can't wait to get better than 2700x perf in a 65 watt tdp package.
My Sliger sm560 loves it. =)

 

Early Brazilian YouTube review. Looks like we don't have to worry about Zen 2's gaming performance at all. It manages to edge out the 8700K in a wide variety of titles despite the latter having a slight clock speed advantage. The 8700K was definitely crippled by the DDR4 2666 RAM though. The 8000/9000K series loves fast RAM, and will benefit from faster memory more than Zen 2 due to having less on die cache.

Zen is undoubtedly the more potent core overall though.