ASUS TUF Gaming B760-PLUS WIFI D4 review
Netac NV7000 2 TB NVMe SSD Review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4080 Noctua OC Edition review
MSI Clutch GM51 Wireless mouse review
ASUS ROG STRIX B760-F Gaming WIFI review
Asus ROG Harpe Ace Aim Lab Edition mouse review
SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Headset review
Ryzen 7800X3D preview - 7950X3D One CCD Disabled
MSI VIGOR GK71 SONIC Blue keyboard review
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D processor review
AMD Confirms It Will Launch Zen 3 This Year - We Haven't Seen the Best From AMD Just yet
AMD for the what .. fifth time this year is confirming that ZEN3 will launch this year. This time the turn goes to AMD Executive Vice President of Computing and Graphics Rick Bergman, who confirmed that we will see the new Zen 3 based processors before the end of the year.
He also stated that we have not yet seen the best that AMD has:
So, what’s next for AMD in the PC space? Well, I cannot share too much, but I can say our high-performance journey continues with our first “Zen 3” Client processor on-track to launch later this year. I will wrap by saying you haven’t seen the best of us yet…
This remark was made during the announcements of the new Ryzen 4000 Desktop APUs. It is interesting to see that AMD reiterates this news so many times, and quite frankly they seem really enthusiast about it, so let's hope it is really good! According to rumors, the processors based on this new architecture would be up to 20% faster in single-core and 15% faster in multi-core, and that is once again a really significant leap.
AMD Confirms ZEN3 and RDNA2 by Late-2020 on Twitter - 04/29/2020 07:03 AM
A bit unusual from AMD, but ZEN3 and RDNA2 based technologies will be released late 2020, AMD confirmed this on twitter. Earlier on a roadmap confirmed that the design phase of Zen 3 is complete and ...
AMD Confirms AGESA 1.0.0.3 ABBA firmware with a Blog post - 09/10/2019 06:36 PM
Following our story on the AMD AGESA 1.0.0.3 ABBA firmware, AMD just announced a comprehensive update for 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen processor boost behavior, desktop idle behavior, as well as a new monitori...
AMD Confirms that Ryzen CPUs are Immune to SPOILER Exploit - 03/19/2019 08:56 AM
Two weeks ago new vulnerabilities for Intel procs surfaced. The vulnerability was given the name Spoiler and was discovered by the Worcester Polytechnic Institute and the University of Lübeck. It i...
AMD confirms Raven Ridge Vega 11 and halts production Vega Reference Cards - 12/04/2017 10:19 AM
In a recent interview with James Prior, senior product manager at AMD and the guy behind Threadripper mentioned a number of things that are interesting news. First and foremost, Prior mentions that s...
AMD confirms all RYZEN processors can be overclocked - 01/08/2017 10:12 AM
One more for the weekend. I actually already mentioned this bit of in in one of my earlier posts, but it is now confirmed. AMD will release several RYZEN model CPUs at launch. What wasn't confirmed j...
TLD LARS
Senior Member
Posts: 516
Joined: 2017-03-01
Senior Member
Posts: 516
Joined: 2017-03-01
#5811905 Posted on: 07/24/2020 04:55 PM
1440p is the new 1080p with the new gen gpu's
Beat Intel in "cpu bound" gaming?
First they have to dig hard to beat this in gaming:
Picture removed: Showing 10900k 5600Mhz Cinebench 20 7269 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure that thing is stable in Cinebench or other allcore workload?
This is the first time i have seen a 10900k above 5400Mhz without using ice cubes, dry ice in the watercooling loop or running suicide burst runs.
The score is a little above a stock 3900X (Guru3d results), so i think the 10900k is throttling in this benchmark.
On another note, a 5600Mhz 10900k would be around 500W TDP, so the cooling solution must be a custom loop and min. 1000W powersupply.
It is enough to buy a 3900x, a 570 motherboard and 16GB memory for the same price as your cooling solution alone, i am guessing.
So the discussion about who is beating who is a bit weird when the comparison is between something custom made for 2-3 times the prize, against a off the shelf setup that is 2-10% slower and uses half the power.
1440p is the new 1080p with the new gen gpu's
Beat Intel in "cpu bound" gaming?
First they have to dig hard to beat this in gaming:
Picture removed: Showing 10900k 5600Mhz Cinebench 20 7269 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure that thing is stable in Cinebench or other allcore workload?
This is the first time i have seen a 10900k above 5400Mhz without using ice cubes, dry ice in the watercooling loop or running suicide burst runs.
The score is a little above a stock 3900X (Guru3d results), so i think the 10900k is throttling in this benchmark.
On another note, a 5600Mhz 10900k would be around 500W TDP, so the cooling solution must be a custom loop and min. 1000W powersupply.
It is enough to buy a 3900x, a 570 motherboard and 16GB memory for the same price as your cooling solution alone, i am guessing.
So the discussion about who is beating who is a bit weird when the comparison is between something custom made for 2-3 times the prize, against a off the shelf setup that is 2-10% slower and uses half the power.
nizzen
Senior Member
Posts: 2321
Joined: 2005-08-05
Senior Member
Posts: 2321
Joined: 2005-08-05
#5811928 Posted on: 07/24/2020 05:47 PM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure that thing is stable in Cinebench or other allcore workload?
This is the first time i have seen a 10900k above 5400Mhz without using ice cubes, dry ice in the watercooling loop or running suicide burst runs.
The score is a little above a stock 3900X (Guru3d results), so i think the 10900k is throttling in this benchmark.
On another note, a 5600Mhz 10900k would be around 500W TDP, so the cooling solution must be a custom loop and min. 1000W powersupply.
It is enough to buy a 3900x, a 570 motherboard and 16GB memory for the same price as your cooling solution alone, i am guessing.
So the discussion about who is beating who is a bit weird when the comparison is between something custom made for 2-3 times the prize, against a off the shelf setup that is 2-10% slower and uses half the power.
It's direct die cooling, and yes it's stable in Cinebench. I just posted CB result, because many here in this forum LOVES Cienbench
This cpu is for gaming only. Nothing more for me, so if it's stable in Battlefield games, then it's stable enough for me. Looped Cinebench R 20 for 10 minutes, and it didn't crash. Will try Asus Realbench eventually.
Using 1x360 radiator. The Supercool Computer direct die block is the key here. It's crazy good!
More info about the block is here:
More 5600mhz 10900k with direct die:
My best 3900x CB 20 score is this:
It's faster in CB 20 than 10900k, but it's WAY 20-30% slower in cpubound games. Both "max" overclocked. Main difference is latency and 10900k is running 4700c17 tweaked memory
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure that thing is stable in Cinebench or other allcore workload?
This is the first time i have seen a 10900k above 5400Mhz without using ice cubes, dry ice in the watercooling loop or running suicide burst runs.
The score is a little above a stock 3900X (Guru3d results), so i think the 10900k is throttling in this benchmark.
On another note, a 5600Mhz 10900k would be around 500W TDP, so the cooling solution must be a custom loop and min. 1000W powersupply.
It is enough to buy a 3900x, a 570 motherboard and 16GB memory for the same price as your cooling solution alone, i am guessing.
So the discussion about who is beating who is a bit weird when the comparison is between something custom made for 2-3 times the prize, against a off the shelf setup that is 2-10% slower and uses half the power.
It's direct die cooling, and yes it's stable in Cinebench. I just posted CB result, because many here in this forum LOVES Cienbench
This cpu is for gaming only. Nothing more for me, so if it's stable in Battlefield games, then it's stable enough for me. Looped Cinebench R 20 for 10 minutes, and it didn't crash. Will try Asus Realbench eventually.
Using 1x360 radiator. The Supercool Computer direct die block is the key here. It's crazy good!
More info about the block is here:
More 5600mhz 10900k with direct die:
My best 3900x CB 20 score is this:
It's faster in CB 20 than 10900k, but it's WAY 20-30% slower in cpubound games. Both "max" overclocked. Main difference is latency and 10900k is running 4700c17 tweaked memory
Neo Cyrus
Senior Member
Posts: 10489
Joined: 2006-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 10489
Joined: 2006-02-14
#5811929 Posted on: 07/24/2020 05:49 PM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure that thing is stable in Cinebench or other allcore workload?
This is the first time i have seen a 10900k above 5400Mhz without using ice cubes, dry ice in the watercooling loop or running suicide burst runs.
The score is a little above a stock 3900X (Guru3d results), so i think the 10900k is throttling in this benchmark.
On another note, a 5600Mhz 10900k would be around 500W TDP, so the cooling solution must be a custom loop and min. 1000W powersupply.
It is enough to buy a 3900x, a 570 motherboard and 16GB memory for the same price as your cooling solution alone, i am guessing.
So the discussion about who is beating who is a bit weird when the comparison is between something custom made for 2-3 times the prize, against a off the shelf setup that is 2-10% slower and uses half the power.
He knows, he thinks he's being clever, he asks for something he could easily look up while ignoring 100% of the point, knowing people don't keep screenshots of everything they do, and that I'm not going to waste any time on him. Ignore and move on. And for the record my 3900X stock scores over 7200, the Guru3D result was with slower RAM/Fabric/MC.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure that thing is stable in Cinebench or other allcore workload?
This is the first time i have seen a 10900k above 5400Mhz without using ice cubes, dry ice in the watercooling loop or running suicide burst runs.
The score is a little above a stock 3900X (Guru3d results), so i think the 10900k is throttling in this benchmark.
On another note, a 5600Mhz 10900k would be around 500W TDP, so the cooling solution must be a custom loop and min. 1000W powersupply.
It is enough to buy a 3900x, a 570 motherboard and 16GB memory for the same price as your cooling solution alone, i am guessing.
So the discussion about who is beating who is a bit weird when the comparison is between something custom made for 2-3 times the prize, against a off the shelf setup that is 2-10% slower and uses half the power.
He knows, he thinks he's being clever, he asks for something he could easily look up while ignoring 100% of the point, knowing people don't keep screenshots of everything they do, and that I'm not going to waste any time on him. Ignore and move on. And for the record my 3900X stock scores over 7200, the Guru3D result was with slower RAM/Fabric/MC.
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 1665
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 1665
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5812098 Posted on: 07/25/2020 03:38 AM
This news hurts even more now that Intel has delayed 7nm.
This news hurts even more now that Intel has delayed 7nm.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1343
Joined: 2009-08-19
I'm waiting for a chipset that supports DDR5 RAM before I upgrade my CPU.