DeepCool LS720 (LCS) review
Fractal Design Pop Air RGB Black TG review
Palit GeForce GTX 1630 4GB Dual review
FSP Dagger Pro (850W PSU) review
Razer Leviathan V2 gaming soundbar review
Guru3D NVMe Thermal Test - the heatsink vs. performance
EnGenius ECW220S 2x2 Cloud Access Point review
Alphacool Eisbaer Aurora HPE 360 LCS cooler review
Noctua NH-D12L CPU Cooler Review
Silicon Power XPOWER XS70 1TB NVMe SSD Review
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X surfaces in Geekbench, performs roughly similar to Core i9 9900K
It won't be more than a week or two before AMD will unleash its new Ryzen 3000 processors and the X570 platform. We're bound to see some accidental leaks beforehand I guess. The first one starts today as a Ryzen 7 3800X has been spotted.
The eight core Ryzen 7 3800X CPU shows a base clock of 3.8 GHz and a boost of up to 4.5 GHz. From the looks of things, memory was not configured right, at only 2133 MHz - nonetheless, the results are impressive. The test platform had an 3800X paired with a X470 motherboard and achieved a single-core score of 5406, the generic score was 34059 points. If you give the Core i9 9900K with DDR4 set at the same speed all equal then it scores about 1% better in single-threaded performance (has a higher boost of 5.0 GHz), however, in multiple threads, there is a win with close to 5% in favor of AMD. Digging a little further shows a 9900K with ddr4-2666 memory to performs more than 14% better on a single thread and half a percent better in the multi-core test.
These tests, of course, and Geekbench in general, say very little, but do show an indication of what we can expect.
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X: Overclocked to 5 GHz Allcore faster than Intel Core i9 - 06/13/2019 09:01 AM
You've been able to read up on a lot of news and article about the pending Ryzon Series 3000 processors. The one proc that made a lot of news is, of course, the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X, however at the eve...
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X: 16 cores and 32 threads - Labeled as Gaming CPU - released in September - 06/11/2019 03:30 PM
So if you have not watched the live stream (hey I can't blame you as in the EUu that was midnight), and IF you skipped our preview articles, we do need to mention the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X in at least o...
Tech preview: AMD Ryzen 3000 - Incl Ryzen 9 3950X (16-core) - 06/11/2019 01:20 AM
Gen 3 aka Ryzen 3000 has received new announcements. You might have watched the live-stream, well that or you were asleep as that was nighttime in the EU, but in this preview article a deeper overview...
Windows 10 May 2019 Update Causing Issues For Some AMD Ryzen PCs, Fix In This item - 05/31/2019 10:25 AM
A new Microsoft Windows update, a new series of problems, the QA levels of Microsoft are just astonishing. The May 2019 update has problems for users with AMD processor, as well as showing problems w...
AMD Ryzen 9 16-cores CB15 Benchmark (4346 points)? - 05/28/2019 09:34 AM
I'm pretty sure you've followed the Livestream or read our articles on yesterday's Ryzen 3000 announcements. You will have noticed that the Ryzen 9 3900X is the proc with the most cores, 12 of the...
Hyderz
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2017-10-20
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2017-10-20
#5682882 Posted on: 06/21/2019 12:40 PM
ryzen 7 3800x stronk processor
ryzen 7 3800x stronk processor
Cooe
Member
Posts: 39
Joined: 2017-03-03
Member
Posts: 39
Joined: 2017-03-03
#5682905 Posted on: 06/21/2019 01:43 PM
Not impressed by this new 3800X at the same price level as my 9900k wich can score much higher both single and multi (on air cooling with D15s):
Uhhhh..... the R7 3800X is ≈ $100 less than an i9-9900K AND includes a quality, ≈$30 value Cooler Master cooler....
And did you just simply not read the entire section about the memory only being set to the base 2133MHz speed for this 3800X bench (and how much single-threaded performance is gained with faster memory on Intel ), while you're running at 3200MHz here, or are you just too stupid to be able to comprehend what that all means?
I guess I'll have to make it stupid simple for you then.... An i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 3800X, both at stock with 2133MHz memory post essentially identical single-threaded scores in Geekbench.
Not impressed by this new 3800X at the same price level as my 9900k wich can score much higher both single and multi (on air cooling with D15s):
Uhhhh..... the R7 3800X is ≈ $100 less than an i9-9900K AND includes a quality, ≈$30 value Cooler Master cooler....
And did you just simply not read the entire section about the memory only being set to the base 2133MHz speed for this 3800X bench (and how much single-threaded performance is gained with faster memory on Intel ), while you're running at 3200MHz here, or are you just too stupid to be able to comprehend what that all means?
I guess I'll have to make it stupid simple for you then.... An i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 3800X, both at stock with 2133MHz memory post essentially identical single-threaded scores in Geekbench.
oxidized
Senior Member
Posts: 234
Joined: 2017-08-22
Senior Member
Posts: 234
Joined: 2017-08-22
#5682916 Posted on: 06/21/2019 02:00 PM
In reality even if you put in as much money as you want, you even can't buy an equivalent mobo for the Intel CPU because it simply can't support PCIe 4.0. So, the equivalent on AMD's side would be one generation older mobo with PCIe 3.0. I don't think they are any more expensive than on the blue side?
Intel might end up being still overall faster due to software having so much legacy Intel optimisation. Nothing AMD can do about it. It's just something that needs to fix itself over time, assuming AMD can stay in the competition this time. And Intel doesn't resort to its usual ugly under the table methods.
Well they said their mobos would be more expensive this time, not sure how much, but even before they weren't that far off from intel mobos, it's safe to assume that comparable mobos will cost at the very least the same, yes they'll have pcie 4, which is ok, but totally useless at this time, and for at least another couple of years. Intel might end up faster because they make better silicon and they've been improving it for too many years now, software optimization is only a little part of it. Intel "usual under the table methods" have ceased to exist years ago, but you AMD fans just can't deal with it.
3700X is of better value. But people buy depending on their budget. That's why notion of paying extra $50~100 makes little sense for comparable products.
If one can save that on one component, it can be investment towards something that yields higher value per $. (Like GPU, M.2, or memory in case of productivity system.)
i'd happily pay even 150€ more for a CPU that gives me even "only" 5% more performance in both single and threaded loads
Please stop lying. 100 $/EUR difference in CPU price, and you don't need to buy an expensive X570 motherboard. In this test, there was an X470. But you can use B450 or even B350-X370 if you want.... Plus written above, the 3700X will be much better value, as it will probably be able to be OCd to 3800X levels.
Ryzen are shi**y overclockers, it was so the first gen, it was so the second, it'll be so the third. It's not me lying, it's you people lying to yourself.
Why do you say that with a GTX 1060 in your rig?
And what has this to do with the fact i have a 1060? Mirror climbing much?
1% faster in single thread while being 4-5% slower in multi thread while having much higher power consumption. Why do you lie?
Check better your numbers...A tip, look at the second image, not the first. Again you're lying to yourself, i'm just using numbers showed.
Why would you? So you don't even know what extra does the X570 adds but you say you need it. LOL
I'd buy the best available my money can buy, and i wouldn't surely buy an old mobo for a flaming new CPU
In reality even if you put in as much money as you want, you even can't buy an equivalent mobo for the Intel CPU because it simply can't support PCIe 4.0. So, the equivalent on AMD's side would be one generation older mobo with PCIe 3.0. I don't think they are any more expensive than on the blue side?
Intel might end up being still overall faster due to software having so much legacy Intel optimisation. Nothing AMD can do about it. It's just something that needs to fix itself over time, assuming AMD can stay in the competition this time. And Intel doesn't resort to its usual ugly under the table methods.
Well they said their mobos would be more expensive this time, not sure how much, but even before they weren't that far off from intel mobos, it's safe to assume that comparable mobos will cost at the very least the same, yes they'll have pcie 4, which is ok, but totally useless at this time, and for at least another couple of years. Intel might end up faster because they make better silicon and they've been improving it for too many years now, software optimization is only a little part of it. Intel "usual under the table methods" have ceased to exist years ago, but you AMD fans just can't deal with it.
3700X is of better value. But people buy depending on their budget. That's why notion of paying extra $50~100 makes little sense for comparable products.
If one can save that on one component, it can be investment towards something that yields higher value per $. (Like GPU, M.2, or memory in case of productivity system.)
i'd happily pay even 150€ more for a CPU that gives me even "only" 5% more performance in both single and threaded loads
Please stop lying. 100 $/EUR difference in CPU price, and you don't need to buy an expensive X570 motherboard. In this test, there was an X470. But you can use B450 or even B350-X370 if you want.... Plus written above, the 3700X will be much better value, as it will probably be able to be OCd to 3800X levels.
Ryzen are shi**y overclockers, it was so the first gen, it was so the second, it'll be so the third. It's not me lying, it's you people lying to yourself.
Why do you say that with a GTX 1060 in your rig?
And what has this to do with the fact i have a 1060? Mirror climbing much?
1% faster in single thread while being 4-5% slower in multi thread while having much higher power consumption. Why do you lie?
Check better your numbers...A tip, look at the second image, not the first. Again you're lying to yourself, i'm just using numbers showed.
Why would you? So you don't even know what extra does the X570 adds but you say you need it. LOL
I'd buy the best available my money can buy, and i wouldn't surely buy an old mobo for a flaming new CPU
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 11809
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 11809
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5682917 Posted on: 06/21/2019 02:10 PM
i'd happily pay even 150€ more for a CPU that gives me even "only" 5% more performance in both single and threaded loads
Would not it be smarter to save $150 or more (since you wrote Euro) and upgrade that HW in your SIG long time ago?
i'd happily pay even 150€ more for a CPU that gives me even "only" 5% more performance in both single and threaded loads
Would not it be smarter to save $150 or more (since you wrote Euro) and upgrade that HW in your SIG long time ago?
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 11809
Joined: 2012-07-20
Not impressed by this new 3800X at the same price level as my 9900k wich can score much higher both single and multi (on air cooling with D15s):
Send one i9-9900k for $400 my way