Cooler Master MasterBox Q500L review
Promo: URCDKey Summer Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
Colorful iGame GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Advanced OC review
ASRock Z390 Steel Legend review
Corsair M55 RGB PRO gaming mouse review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro for $13 With Office 2016 For $33
Lexar NM600 NVMe M.2. SSD (480GB) review
Tech preview: Radeon RX 5700 and 5700 XT
Tech preview: AMD Ryzen 3000 - 7nm ZEN2
Patriot Viper VPN100 M2 NVMe 512 GB SSD Review
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X: 16 cores and 32 threads - Labeled as Gaming CPU - released in September
So if you have not watched the live stream (hey I can't blame you as in the EU that was midnight), and IF you skipped our preview articles, we do need to mention the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X in at least one dedicated news-item.
The mainstream desktop solution with 16 cores (and I do need to call it that as it isn't HEDT) is expected to be released November 2019. The base frequency for the 16 cores and 32 threads will work at 3.5 GHz, but a number of cores can accelerate to the highest clock of the new lineup, 4.7 GHz. This means, among other things, that the TDP can remain quite good at 105 watts. the price of this processor will be 749 USD. In total AMD has announced 6, 8, 12 and 16-core processors for its 7nm fabbed CPUs.
|
CPU |
Cores / Threads |
Clock speed/turbo (GHz) |
Cache (total) |
PCIe lanes |
MSRP |
|
Ryzen 9 3950X |
16/32 |
3.5 / 4.7 |
72MB |
40 |
$ 749 |
|
Ryzen 9 3900X |
12/24 |
3.8 / 4.6 |
70MB |
40 |
$ 499 |
|
Ryzen 7 3800X |
8/16 |
3.9 / 4.5 |
36MB |
40 |
$ 399 |
|
Ryzen 7 3700X |
8/16 |
3.6 / 4.4 |
36MB |
40 |
$ 329 |
|
Ryzen 5 3600X |
6/12 |
3.8 / 4.4 |
35MB |
40 |
$ 249 |
|
Ryzen 5 3600 |
6/12 |
3.6 / 4.2 |
35MB |
40 |
$ 199 |
Tech preview: AMD Ryzen 3000 - 16-core Ryzen 9 3950X - 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...
New ECS LIVA A320 Mini PC Comes With AN AMD Ryzen Processor - 05/24/2019 08:19 AM
Elitegroup Computer Systems (ECS) released their all new LIVA SF110-A320 mini PC, a small computer, that is now powered by an AMD Ryzen processor, designed for home entertainment and light gaming....
AMD Ryzen 3000: New Block diagram about PCIe 4.0 on Matisse and X570 chipset - 05/23/2019 09:51 AM
Another block diagram of a more official nature leaked, this one holds the X570 chipset breakdown alongside the specs and Ryzen 3000. It's clear already that Ryzen 3000 CPUs (Matisse) and the X570 c...
FrostNixon
Senior Member
Posts: 177
Joined: 2016-04-15
Senior Member
Posts: 177
Joined: 2016-04-15
#5679339 Posted on: 06/11/2019 02:53 PM
While a great CPU, $750 for a gaming CPU is mental, hell even $500 is too much for a gaming CPU. 3800x is clearly the gaming CPU, everything else is enthusiast, especially when we know that the 9900k will perform better in games at the same price.
While a great CPU, $750 for a gaming CPU is mental, hell even $500 is too much for a gaming CPU. 3800x is clearly the gaming CPU, everything else is enthusiast, especially when we know that the 9900k will perform better in games at the same price.
asturur
Senior Member
Posts: 281
Joined: 2010-05-12
Senior Member
Posts: 281
Joined: 2010-05-12
#5679345 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:01 PM
the 9900k is around 500 too.
The 3800x is a bit less, is around 400 right? and looks like it will perform on par with a 9900k.
I agree that 750 is an enthusiast segment.
the 9900k is around 500 too.
The 3800x is a bit less, is around 400 right? and looks like it will perform on par with a 9900k.
I agree that 750 is an enthusiast segment.
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 6899
Joined: 2011-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 6899
Joined: 2011-07-20
#5679346 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:01 PM
Hey Boss...does the 3950X come with a nice cooler like the wraith? ....
I think it's a shame that intel/any company would sell a processor without a nice cooler.
Hey Boss...does the 3950X come with a nice cooler like the wraith? ....
I think it's a shame that intel/any company would sell a processor without a nice cooler.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9098
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9098
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5679349 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:07 PM
Regular gamers should get 3700X. Rich/competitive should go for 3800X. Above that 3900X/3950X are for people who have reason to get it. And gaming itself is not that reason. Games themselves will not benefit from 12C/24T+. And even 8C/16T allows for great multitasking without need to worry on what was left running in background.
Regular gamers should get 3700X. Rich/competitive should go for 3800X. Above that 3900X/3950X are for people who have reason to get it. And gaming itself is not that reason. Games themselves will not benefit from 12C/24T+. And even 8C/16T allows for great multitasking without need to worry on what was left running in background.
Petr V
Senior Member
Posts: 193
Joined: 2018-08-04
Senior Member
Posts: 193
Joined: 2018-08-04
#5679352 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:15 PM
Sure 3700X is good enogh for most of the gamers and its for good price.
I like dat 12core 3900X for same price as 9900k.
Regular gamers should get 3700X. Rich/competitive should go for 3800X. Above that 3900X/3950X are for people who have reason to get it. And gaming itself is not that reason. Games themselves will not benefit from 12C/24T+. And even 8C/16T allows for great multitasking without need to worry on what was left running in background.
Sure 3700X is good enogh for most of the gamers and its for good price.
I like dat 12core 3900X for same price as 9900k.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 35332
Joined: 2000-02-22
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 35332
Joined: 2000-02-22
#5679353 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:17 PM
Yes the bundles for the X models are all the same.
Hey Boss...does the 3950X come with a nice cooler like the wraith? ....
Yes the bundles for the X models are all the same.
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 11073
Joined: 2008-08-28
Senior Member
Posts: 11073
Joined: 2008-08-28
#5679355 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:20 PM
Hey Boss...does the 3950X come with a nice cooler like the wraith? ....
I think it's a shame that intel/any company would sell a processor without a nice cooler.
Come on airbud, tell us again how 9900k is better.
Hey Boss...does the 3950X come with a nice cooler like the wraith? ....
I think it's a shame that intel/any company would sell a processor without a nice cooler.
Come on airbud, tell us again how 9900k is better.
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 526
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 526
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5679359 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:29 PM
I'm still holding out hope for a anniversary edition 3850x high clock speed binned chip. Probably won't happen but since they just did it for the 5700x I know they have thought about doing this for Ryzen.
I'm still holding out hope for a anniversary edition 3850x high clock speed binned chip. Probably won't happen but since they just did it for the 5700x I know they have thought about doing this for Ryzen.
las
Senior Member
Posts: 260
Joined: 2013-03-18
Senior Member
Posts: 260
Joined: 2013-03-18
#5679360 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:30 PM
Getting 12 and especially 16 cores for gaming is pretty much waste of money. It's a good option for people who game and do other demanding stuff tho.
I have no doubt in my mind that 9900K/9900KS will perform better in games than any of these when those games become CPU bound, even 8700K/8086K will.
I have tested 2700X @ 4.2 and 9900K at 5 side by side. The 9900K was faster in all games when CPU bound (all high refresh gamers will be, when chasing max fps). We're talking 20-50% depending on game. Very noticable difference. This is especially true when using a high-end GPU. I used 1080 Ti at 2.1 GHz at 1440p 165 Hz Gsync.
For GPU bound gaming at high resolutions CPU does not matter much anyway since it's all GPU. This is why 99.99% of competitive / serious gamers still go with Intel. They are CPU bound and needs as high fps as possible. I doubt Zen 2 will change this. Looking forward to see high fps / CPU bound gaming tests tho. I'm looking forward to see single thread perf and all-core overclock too.
Getting 12 and especially 16 cores for gaming is pretty much waste of money. It's a good option for people who game and do other demanding stuff tho.
I have no doubt in my mind that 9900K/9900KS will perform better in games than any of these when those games become CPU bound, even 8700K/8086K will.
I have tested 2700X @ 4.2 and 9900K at 5 side by side. The 9900K was faster in all games when CPU bound (all high refresh gamers will be, when chasing max fps). We're talking 20-50% depending on game. Very noticable difference. This is especially true when using a high-end GPU. I used 1080 Ti at 2.1 GHz at 1440p 165 Hz Gsync.
For GPU bound gaming at high resolutions CPU does not matter much anyway since it's all GPU. This is why 99.99% of competitive / serious gamers still go with Intel. They are CPU bound and needs as high fps as possible. I doubt Zen 2 will change this. Looking forward to see high fps / CPU bound gaming tests tho. I'm looking forward to see single thread perf and all-core overclock too.
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 526
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 526
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5679371 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:46 PM
Getting 12 and especially 16 cores for gaming is pretty much waste of money. It's a good option for people who game and do other demanding stuff tho.
I have no doubt in my mind that 9900K/9900KS will perform better in games than any of these when those games become CPU bound, even 8700K/8086K will.
I have tested 2700X @ 4.2 and 9900K at 5 side by side. The 9900K was faster in all games when CPU bound (all high refresh gamers will be, when chasing max fps). We're talking 20-50% depending on game. Very noticeable difference. This is especially true when using a high-end GPU. I used 1080 Ti at 2.1 GHz at 1440p 165 Hz Gsync.
For GPU bound gaming at high resolutions CPU does not matter much anyway since it's all GPU. This is why 99.99% of competitive / serious gamers still go with Intel. They are CPU bound and needs as high fps as possible. I doubt Zen 2 will change this. Looking forward to see high fps / CPU bound gaming tests tho. I'm looking forward to see single thread perf and all-core overclock too.
I agree with prior history that is what I have been seeing as well but I do not want to apply that to this generation without testing. I think the gap is going to be so close that it doesn't matter anymore. If AMD is believed they are virtually dead on with Intel's 9900K in CS:GO fps.
Getting 12 and especially 16 cores for gaming is pretty much waste of money. It's a good option for people who game and do other demanding stuff tho.
I have no doubt in my mind that 9900K/9900KS will perform better in games than any of these when those games become CPU bound, even 8700K/8086K will.
I have tested 2700X @ 4.2 and 9900K at 5 side by side. The 9900K was faster in all games when CPU bound (all high refresh gamers will be, when chasing max fps). We're talking 20-50% depending on game. Very noticeable difference. This is especially true when using a high-end GPU. I used 1080 Ti at 2.1 GHz at 1440p 165 Hz Gsync.
For GPU bound gaming at high resolutions CPU does not matter much anyway since it's all GPU. This is why 99.99% of competitive / serious gamers still go with Intel. They are CPU bound and needs as high fps as possible. I doubt Zen 2 will change this. Looking forward to see high fps / CPU bound gaming tests tho. I'm looking forward to see single thread perf and all-core overclock too.
I agree with prior history that is what I have been seeing as well but I do not want to apply that to this generation without testing. I think the gap is going to be so close that it doesn't matter anymore. If AMD is believed they are virtually dead on with Intel's 9900K in CS:GO fps.
spajdrik
Senior Member
Posts: 1766
Joined: 2006-05-07
Senior Member
Posts: 1766
Joined: 2006-05-07
#5679376 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:53 PM
Gaming CPU maybe for someone who has too much money.
Gaming CPU maybe for someone who has too much money.
FrostNixon
Senior Member
Posts: 177
Joined: 2016-04-15
Senior Member
Posts: 177
Joined: 2016-04-15
#5679380 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:55 PM
Btw boss, do you plan on doing a review of the Wraith cooler to see how well it stacks against the budget options?
Btw boss, do you plan on doing a review of the Wraith cooler to see how well it stacks against the budget options?
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 6899
Joined: 2011-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 6899
Joined: 2011-07-20
#5679383 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:58 PM
I give up....:p
This is history right here....Go AMD!
Much like Sandy Bridge in 2019!....Great times indeed.....
Come on airbud, tell us again how 9900k is better.
I give up....:p
This is history right here....Go AMD!
Much like Sandy Bridge in 2019!....Great times indeed.....
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4040
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4040
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5679385 Posted on: 06/11/2019 03:59 PM
AMD sure is pandering hard to the gaming market... Even 12c/24t is overkill.
Until 4c/8t isn't enough to play games at 60FPS, I'm not upgrading. That being said, I do expect that to change by the time next-gen consoles come out.
AMD sure is pandering hard to the gaming market... Even 12c/24t is overkill.
Until 4c/8t isn't enough to play games at 60FPS, I'm not upgrading. That being said, I do expect that to change by the time next-gen consoles come out.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 193
Joined: 2018-08-04
AMD is going better and better.