MSI MEG Z490 UNIFY review
Sabrent Rocket NVMe 4.0 1TB NVMe SSD review
Gigabyte Z490 VISION G review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - May 2020
Lamptron HM101 review
Lexar SL100 Pro Portable SSD 500 GB review
ASUS ROG Maximus XII Hero review
Intel Core i9-10900K processor review
Intel Core i5-10600K processor review
ASRock Z490 Taichi review
AMD delayed Ryzen 9 3950X launch due to unsatisfactory clock speeds?
A few days ago we've reported that the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X 16-core part has been delayed and pushed back towards November. The news was made official by AMD. To date, however, there has been no word given as to what the reason is behind the delay. We did ask, but there was no answer to that question.
Logic assumes that AMD is facing the boost issues it had with the previous Ryzen processors. Something that is fixed with the new AGESA 1.0.0.3 ABBA Firmware btw. Is the same issue affecting the Ryzen 9 3950X 16-core processor? As it turns out, production at TSMC is not an issue as Digitimes found out. However, they have a source that claims that AMD has problems 'reaching unsatisfactory clock speeds' with the sixteen core part. That source would be an employee active in the motherboard maker industry.
The Ryzen 9 3950X 16-core processor has been advertised with the fastest single-core bin boost at 4.7 GHz, its base frequency is an admirable 3.5 GHz. For them to be able to reach advertised clock frequencies on their many-core part (16c/32t) AMD likely made it a bit complicated for themselves, as it is the fastest boosting product, it has the most cores and it has two 8-core processor dies. To reach the advertised boost frequency of that impressive 4.7 GHz on a single core AMD has to bin all dies, gauntlet sort them for the best units if you will.
We have no doubt that AMD will be able to out the product at advertised performance, but what volume will be available in November remains an open question.
nizzen
Senior Member
Posts: 1027
Joined: 2005-08-05
Senior Member
Posts: 1027
Joined: 2005-08-05
#5714296 Posted on: 09/25/2019 09:48 AM
My 3900x is reaching max boost in "idle", but if it's under load of any kind, the max singlecoreboost is way lower. Max boost is like 2ms
Using ABBA 2.1 bios with Asrock x570.
My 3900x is reaching max boost in "idle", but if it's under load of any kind, the max singlecoreboost is way lower. Max boost is like 2ms
Using ABBA 2.1 bios with Asrock x570.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 37951
Joined: 2000-02-22
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 37951
Joined: 2000-02-22
#5714302 Posted on: 09/25/2019 10:10 AM
I did some testing the other day on 3700X but it was fine really. ASrock v1.7 ABBA BIOS.
Can you try a 1 thread Cinebench run and monitor with HWinfo?
Btw you need to cover your bases when testing, nothing running in the background and remove your LAN cable so that Windows isn't dong stuff in the background that can invoke threading.
My 3900x is reaching max boost in "idle", but if it's under load of any kind, the max singlecoreboost is way lower. Max boost is like 2ms
I did some testing the other day on 3700X but it was fine really. ASrock v1.7 ABBA BIOS.
Can you try a 1 thread Cinebench run and monitor with HWinfo?
Btw you need to cover your bases when testing, nothing running in the background and remove your LAN cable so that Windows isn't dong stuff in the background that can invoke threading.
yeeeeman
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: 2010-06-21
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: 2010-06-21
#5714308 Posted on: 09/25/2019 10:54 AM
3900X is already reaching 4.7Ghz for some users on ABBA bios, so no problem for them to get 4.7Ghz for 3950x. Hence this news is not relevant...
We know from multiple sources and official announcements that TSMC has troubles keeping up with demand so 3950X not launching now is just common sense. It would have been a paper launch.
3900X is already reaching 4.7Ghz for some users on ABBA bios, so no problem for them to get 4.7Ghz for 3950x. Hence this news is not relevant...
We know from multiple sources and official announcements that TSMC has troubles keeping up with demand so 3950X not launching now is just common sense. It would have been a paper launch.
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 1885
Joined: 2013-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1885
Joined: 2013-03-10
#5714310 Posted on: 09/25/2019 11:06 AM
As it turns out, production at TSMC is not an issue as Digitimes found out.
I wonder what this refers to. I just recall a Digitimes sourced news from a week ago, saying: "The lead time for production of 7nm chips at Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) has extended to nearly six months from the previous two months because of strong demand, according to industry sources." In other words, the production lines are so full that TSMC will tell you to come back in six months if you need something made. So, if AMD wanted more stuff than previous agreed (for example because they aren't getting as large a portion of high clocking units as they expected), it's possible TSMC simply can't help them at all without a considerable delay.
As it turns out, production at TSMC is not an issue as Digitimes found out.
I wonder what this refers to. I just recall a Digitimes sourced news from a week ago, saying: "The lead time for production of 7nm chips at Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) has extended to nearly six months from the previous two months because of strong demand, according to industry sources." In other words, the production lines are so full that TSMC will tell you to come back in six months if you need something made. So, if AMD wanted more stuff than previous agreed (for example because they aren't getting as large a portion of high clocking units as they expected), it's possible TSMC simply can't help them at all without a considerable delay.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Unregistered
I would really like to have one of these....I'd take 4.4