ASRock Z790 Taichi review
The Callisto Protocol: PC graphics benchmarks
G.Skill TridentZ 5 RGB 6800 MHz CL34 DDR5 review
Be Quiet! Dark Power 13 - 1000W PSU Review
Palit GeForce RTX 4080 GamingPRO OC review
Core i9 13900K DDR5 7200 MHz (+memory scaling) review
Seasonic Prime Titanium TX-1300 (1300W PSU) review
F1 2022: PC graphics performance benchmark review
MSI Clutch GM31 Lightweight (+Wireless) mice review
AMD Ryzen 9 7900 processor review
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X beats Intel i9-10980XE in 3DMark Firestrike by almost 25%
As releases dates are getting closer, we'll see more and more infor leak somehow. New is a 3DMark Firestrike for the Ryzen 9 3950X, which can be compared with Cascade Lake-X. Guess who won?
We assume the obvious being that we assume these benchmarks are genuine – as provided by the ever-present CPU leaker TUM_APISAK.
The AMD Ryzen 9 3950X (16-core) result which we see here was run on a X570 motherboard and shows a Firestrike test, shows a score of 32082. The maximum turbo clock shows just over 3,700MHz and the stock clock of 3,500MHz. The AMD rig was outfitted with 16GB of Kingston DDR4 at 3,200MHz and 16 cores with 32 threads active. An Core i9-10980XE (18-core) result with 32GB of 2,666MHz Samsung DDR4 scored 25,838, is great but substantially less.
Firestrike is heavily threaded limited though, ergo compared is the CPU tied Physics score.
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X, 3970X and 3990X Launch Dates Leak - 10/18/2019 07:04 PM
news reaches the web today that AMD will release three Threadripper 3000 SKUs: 3960X, 3970X and 3990X. The first two would be unveiled on November 5th, the embargo on sales and reviews would be lifted...
AMD Ryzen 7 3750X Spotted - Has a TDP of 105 watts - 10/17/2019 09:03 AM
Recently we have seen some OEM specific Ryzen 3000 announcements, there might be one more inbound as we do not see this one end up in retail, a Ryzen 7 3750X showed up in a recent product master list...
AMD Ryzen 5 3500X Benchmarks - 10/11/2019 09:53 AM
Silently AMD expanded their Ryzen 3000 line-up this week, exclusively in Chinafor the time being. Ryzen 5 3500X has been benchmarked. The non SMT Ryzen 5 is compared with Intel's Core i5 9400F - who...
Team Group Outs Memory and PCI-E Gen4 x4 M.2 SSD for Supporting AMD Ryzen 3000 and X570 - 10/08/2019 11:52 AM
Team Group releases T-FORCE DARK Z α DDR4 Gaming Memory and CARDEA ZERO Z440 PCI-E Gen4 x4 M.2 Solid State Drive, which are specially made for AMD RYZEN 3000 processor series and the latest ...
Over 100 Improvements to be included in upcoming AMD Ryzen 3000: AGESA 1.0.0.4 - 10/04/2019 10:36 AM
While everybody is moving towards AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA to squeeze out every last drop of performance from Ryzen 3000 processors, AMD is already at work on AGESA 1.0.0.4 as unreached boost frequencies is...
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 1653
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 1653
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5722669 Posted on: 10/21/2019 05:14 PM
Agree. We can't blame Intel for trying to make money as that is the sole purpose of corporations. If you look at Intel's earnings they are still making record profits year on year so they are following there C corp mandate. I do disagree with corporations as a whole as maximizing shareholder profits really should be 3rd or 4th on the priorities list for any company that plans to be around for the long haul. Take Intel for example there short term maximizing of profits is going to cost them long term market share. If we look out 50 years I bet this myopic view costs Intel trillions. My hope is AMD doesn't let up and gets a sizable share of the server market and they very well should since there SMT is significantly better than Intel's hyperthreading. The closer to 50/50 market share the better it is for the consumer albeit the worse it is for Intel. To be fair I do hope Intel gets a decent piece of the dedicated GPU market as it really needs a third player to help stop all the proprietary nonsense Nvidia pulls off. So in short competition is good for the consumer and bad for the pseudo monopolies.
If you study economics you'll learn a company's sole objective is profit. You'll learn also that any company will try to have some kind of advantage and will use it to crush/buy any rivals in pursuit of monopoly. By that time, they can charge anything they want as long their production is sold. So, in recap, no questions raised anywhere, as AMD would/will do the same given the opportunity. Competition and choice is healthy for the market, monopoly is not.
Agree. We can't blame Intel for trying to make money as that is the sole purpose of corporations. If you look at Intel's earnings they are still making record profits year on year so they are following there C corp mandate. I do disagree with corporations as a whole as maximizing shareholder profits really should be 3rd or 4th on the priorities list for any company that plans to be around for the long haul. Take Intel for example there short term maximizing of profits is going to cost them long term market share. If we look out 50 years I bet this myopic view costs Intel trillions. My hope is AMD doesn't let up and gets a sizable share of the server market and they very well should since there SMT is significantly better than Intel's hyperthreading. The closer to 50/50 market share the better it is for the consumer albeit the worse it is for Intel. To be fair I do hope Intel gets a decent piece of the dedicated GPU market as it really needs a third player to help stop all the proprietary nonsense Nvidia pulls off. So in short competition is good for the consumer and bad for the pseudo monopolies.
mbk1969
Senior Member
Posts: 13442
Joined: 2013-01-17
Senior Member
Posts: 13442
Joined: 2013-01-17
#5722674 Posted on: 10/21/2019 05:32 PM
Ain`t that obvious - AMD optimized that CPU for that benchmark.
Ain`t that obvious - AMD optimized that CPU for that benchmark.
fry178
Senior Member
Posts: 1920
Joined: 2012-04-30
Senior Member
Posts: 1920
Joined: 2012-04-30
#5722677 Posted on: 10/21/2019 05:35 PM
@Margalus
Doesnt say WHERE it is 25% faster.
And anyone that actually cares to read the article, would know that its the phy score..
@Margalus
Doesnt say WHERE it is 25% faster.
And anyone that actually cares to read the article, would know that its the phy score..
Deleted member 213629
Unregistered
Unregistered
#5722678 Posted on: 10/21/2019 05:46 PM
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X against Intel Core i9-9980XE - AnandTech
I did; I was surprised how many times the R9-3900X beat the shit out of the i9-9980XE. That's the 3900X mind you, the 3950X isn't in their database yet.
The cost of delaying new microarchitecture
Just look up 9980XE
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X against Intel Core i9-9980XE - AnandTech
I did; I was surprised how many times the R9-3900X beat the shit out of the i9-9980XE. That's the 3900X mind you, the 3950X isn't in their database yet.
The cost of delaying new microarchitecture
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 2273
Joined: 2005-08-05
Intel was mocking with customers and enjoying the throne for far too long ... the prices were accordingly ... now things have changed and they are SO LOST but they still have the market share that will fall in the next years if they dont come with something truly magic !
How many sockets did the make ? how many times they made customers buy new motherboards ? I think there are maybe 10-15 sockets for basically the same CPUs ... they were so greedy even the chipsests had to be sold in imense amounts .... The performance increase was at least mediocre between the many "generations" they had and it was so easy and comfy to count the money coming in with absolutely nothing new.
Take an I7 970 from 15 years ago compare it to an i7 from 5 years ago ... the difference ... marginal. All those core i5 with no hyperthreading all those K and Extreme processors that costed like a small town car ... it will all go to dust and I will be dancing in that dust in 5 years with my shiny new 64 core processor made by AMD.
Noob3d.com