Review: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X & Ryzen 9 3900X

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jul 7, 2019.

  1. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,577
    Likes Received:
    4,302
    GPU:
    pny gtx 1060 xlr8
    I totally agree^....why would Intel not send a cooler? .....I've always thought that was totally stupid.
     
  2. kakiharaFRS

    kakiharaFRS Master Guru

    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    40
    GPU:
    MSI Gaming X 1080ti
    it seemed to be the case after watching 10 different video reviews but derbauer nailed the coffin

    Ryzen does not overclock well and doesn't even run at the advertised "boost" speed (a bit like the 5800 videocards and their fake boost "temporary" values) :/
    from what he says there's no hope for better as the scaling becomes bad fast (he has already tested ln2)

    (edit:nevermind you measured the entire system load ok)
    quick question what do you do to get those 200w+ for a 9900k ?
    aida64 stress test only shows me 190w for the cpu @5.1Ghz but the corsair HX850i says 300w input-280W output overall
    (edit: omg just for +100Hz going from 5.0 to 5.1 today my temps went from 80-85 to 95-100 no thx !)
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2019
  3. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,718
    Likes Received:
    955
    GPU:
    -
    I really question this graph, i did when i first saw it. Not even questioning the results for the ryzen CPUs, but rather the 9900k, which we all know takes massive amounts of power when it gets into its boosting modes. It almost looks like this is a 9900k, without boosting....

    If you look at others results, you get much different results. Not trying to invalidate the results here, i just don't understand them as we know the 9900k is exceptionally power hungry.


    This has already been discussed multiple times and i am relatively certain that exact post has been posted multiple times. Read the thread before you post.

    But more importantly, it appears the boosting, POSSIBLY, may be a bios issue, as reported, previously in the thread if you had bothered to read it, since a new bios released after testing has already gotten the boost of the 3900x to perform more like it should. It's not 100% at its advertised yet, but not only does it start where it should, it's also boosting higher then the review bios'.
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2019
  4. thesebastian

    thesebastian Active Member

    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    GTX1080 + H90
    Here the full load of the 3700X seems 90.20W. But maybe it's a much weaker test or just a different motherboard?
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/19

    I'm pretty much fine running my CPU at 90-100W full load. But I don't think I'll want to have it at more than that.
     

  5. alanm

    alanm Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,982
    Likes Received:
    1,328
    GPU:
    Asus 2080 Dual OC
    This chart was in the back of my mind when posting.
    [​IMG]
     
  6. nz3777

    nz3777 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,372
    Likes Received:
    175
    GPU:
    Gtx 980 Strix
    Awsome Review as usual HH thank you sir. Question for the Gurus now which cpu schould I upgrade to iam still on Fx 8 core ? Do I go for the new ones mentioned here or save a little money and go with the 2000 series? In need of a new cpu big time. Thanks guys.
     
  7. Jagman

    Jagman Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,222
    Likes Received:
    295
    GPU:
    5700XT Pulse
    Really depends on your budget. Get a B450/X470 motherboard and a Ryzen 5 1600/2600(X) and you'll see a very decent performance increase. You have lots of options :)
     
    nz3777 likes this.
  8. Ryu5uzaku

    Ryu5uzaku Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,776
    Likes Received:
    110
    GPU:
    5700 XT UV 1950~
    2600X is a good valid option. If you don't mind spending tad more for the pcie4 feature get 3600 for example.
     
    nz3777 likes this.
  9. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,718
    Likes Received:
    955
    GPU:
    -
    I don't think there's any reason reason to go for a 1000 or 2000 series CPU when you can get a 3000 series for $200 that'll completely blow your FX series away even with 6 cores instead of 8.

    But, this ofcourse depends on your budget. Best bang for the buck will likely be in the 3000 series, but if it's beyond your budget, then that's that lol

    I'd say there's a bit more of a benefit over the 2600x then just PIC-Express 4.0 which isn't even a thing unless you get an x570 motherboard, of which a 3600 will have no problems being in an b350 and up motherboard

    GN has a review of a sample of the 3600 if someone wants to see the differences, but put simply the 3600 will do much much better in games if you're CPU bound then the 2600, as well as have better or similar performance in non-gaming workloads as even the 2700x
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2019
    Jagman and nz3777 like this.
  10. Jagman

    Jagman Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,222
    Likes Received:
    295
    GPU:
    5700XT Pulse
    As Aura89 said, the 3600 if you can stretch to it would be the better or maybe the best option. Just get yourself on the AM4 platform it makes the most sense.
     

  11. Clouseau

    Clouseau Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    262
    GPU:
    ASUS STRIX GTX 1080
    3800X is now in stack at Newegg.
     
  12. DW75

    DW75 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    565
    GPU:
    ROG GTX1080 Ti OC
    I think Asrock has seen the concern from users on forums as well, and they have now added the 3900X chip to the supported list for the X470 boards. It is just as they told me a few days ago when I asked about the X470 Taichi.

    https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X470 Taichi/index.asp#CPU

    AM4 Ryzen 9 3900X(100-000000023) 105W Matisse 3.8GHz 6MB B0 P3.40

    Edit: They have now added the R9 3900X as supported for all of the X470 boards.

    https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/Fatal1ty X470 Gaming-ITXac/index.asp#CPU

    https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X470 Taichi Ultimate/index.asp#CPU

    https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X470 Master SLIac/index.asp#CPU

    https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/Fatal1ty X470 Gaming K4/index.asp#CPU
     
    Fox2232 likes this.
  13. -Tj-

    -Tj- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    16,443
    Likes Received:
    1,507
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX980Ti OC
    if OC really sucks, then 3800X would be the best bet. I would rather pay extra 80€ and have better freq. and be done with OC on it.. lol

    3700x 350€
    3800x 430€
     
  14. Robbo9999

    Robbo9999 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,351
    Likes Received:
    223
    GPU:
    GTX1070 @2050Mhz
    Turning down the game details reduces load on the GPU, generally not the CPU, the 720p benchmarks were already CPU limited (I'm guessing for most of the benchmark run), so your argument about getting 200fps with Ryzen if you turn down game details is misguided (wrong). Yep, I'm aware Ryzen got 160fps in BFV, but 9900K got 180+ fps, which would only grow with Intel overclocking - we were talking about high refresh rate gaming so up to 240Hz - even 160fps average framerate when using 144Hz monitor is probably gonna mean some drops below 144fps, so even for 144Hz monitors there would be value in having a 9900K that was capable of 180+ fps average framerate, and besides there's 180Hz screens / 165Hz screens / 240Hz screens. Ryzen still does not cut the mustard for high refresh rate gaming, not if that's your main criterion for using your PC - it's as simple as that.
     
  15. Dazz

    Dazz Master Guru

    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    82
    GPU:
    ASUS STRIX RTX 2080
    Gamers Nexus has done this already but they only showed the 6 and 12 core, 6 core SMT was best left on and the 3900X disabling SMT netted a overclock from 4.3GHz to 4.4GHz on all cores and games performance increased around 7% with the only exception being Assassins creed origins which liked SMT enabled. Games don't seem to know what to do with 24 threads but also without SMT it's not saturating 2 threads on a single core. I already ordered my 3900X but it seems they won't be in the UK till friday, kinda pissed off really as Lisa said you CAN BUY them on launch day not preorder and wait a fking week after launch day.
     
    thesebastian and Fox2232 like this.

  16. Mesab67

    Mesab67 Member Guru

    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    48
    GPU:
    GTX 1080
    ...a couple of things added and highlighted.
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2019
  17. DW75

    DW75 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    565
    GPU:
    ROG GTX1080 Ti OC
    Hey Hilbert, are you considering doing an updated review after all the motherboards get the AGESA 1.0.0.3AB update ?
     
  18. kakiharaFRS

    kakiharaFRS Master Guru

    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    40
    GPU:
    MSI Gaming X 1080ti
    hey guys I did a few tests just now after realizing how much going from 5.0 to 5.1Ghz cost me in term of heat and power (way too much)

    - i9 9900k @5.1Ghz all cores, 1.36v : aida cpu package power 190watts cpu temp 95°C corsair HX850i output 290watts
    - i9 9900k @4.4Ghz all cores, 1.17v (auto) : aida cpu package power 100watts cpu temp 60°C, corsair HX850i output 200watts (yes it's lower than default I wanted to compare how games behaved with a ryzen-like clockspeed)

    saying that Ryzen use less power is slightly misleading...it's true but, I believed it meant Ryzen was purely more efficient but the fact that it's slower clocked does matter
    it's something I never really tought about it before today since I ran max OC builds for like 15 years (and corsair icue is keeping me out of cpu flex-ratio anyway with it's constant 8% cpu usage)
    I'm not writing this to diminish the 3900x, it's in my webshop cart as I write this ;) I'm waiting for motherboards reviews

    edit : btw for those who are wondering why we need 180fps in BF5 or an other game, because when you are a hardcore gamer/geek/tweaker/modder you don't play in basic 1080p you play at 150% or even 200% scaling (you do gain details when rendering in 4K and downscaling to HD fyi it's very obvious in things like rivets on vehicles in battlefield games)
    in pretty much all the games I play I have tweaked settings, external or internal post-processing filters+higher res scaling and those 160 or 180 become 60-90fps and then you're back to needing more "oomph" from your CPU and GPU ;)
    "vanilla" games benchmark numbers aren't realistic for us
    to give you an idea my modded skyrim uses 95-98% of a 1080Ti @1950Mhz I'm basically running furmark for 2,3,4hours straight when I play, I had to change the pc case because the GPU was heating everything else
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2019
    thesebastian likes this.
  19. bballfreak6

    bballfreak6 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,611
    Likes Received:
    110
    GPU:
    MSI 1070Ti Titanium
    That was a head scratcher comment for me too. Like genuine question from someone who's still using an old reliable Dell 60hz screen; I understand going to 100fps+ there is a real difference vs 60fps but beyond that is there any actual noticeable differences in game play or smoothness? As it is how many of us actually has the graphical power to run new games at those crazy frame rates? I like my games to look pretty so I turn my settings up where I can afford to and while I understand there are pro/competitive players requiring high refresh/frame rates is there really that noticeable of an advantage going to say 200fps vs 100fps? There is a difference between "not as good" and "not good enough".
     
  20. Dazz

    Dazz Master Guru

    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    82
    GPU:
    ASUS STRIX RTX 2080
    Yeah once coffee lake hits the 5GHz mark power leakage kinda gets out of controller gamers nexus tests indicated from the EPS lines that the 9900K consumed 3x more than stock or 2x more than a 3900X at stock or overclocked. Nearly 300w for a consumer CPU is getting a bit crazy and is close to the 384w MAX power that a 8pin EPS can provide. AMD's FX 8350 move over Intel coffee lake is the new space heater. Still Intel have done really well to push their architecture and 14nm to this level.
     
    kakiharaFRS likes this.

Share This Page