Good cpu for workstations but for gaming i keep it with intel, love my 10700k.

That SC score in CB20 and CPU-Z is mouth watering. My 3800X comes nowhere near that (just like the 3800X in Hilberts earlier test). I'm very curious how the CPU would do with a per-CCX OC and with much lower voltage than 1.4V which in my opinion is impossible for the CPU to handle, even with extreme LLC. I'd go for 1,33V or something like that. I've been able to do a 4425 MHz all-core OC which obviously wins over that 3800XT at stock by a pretty nice margin.

If you want lots of bang 4 your bucks take this: R9 3900X (~410€) MSI B450M Mortar Max (~100€) Arctic Liquid Freezer II 240 (~70€) 32GB G.Skill Trident Z (nonRGB) DDR4-3600 DIMM CL17 Dual Kit @1T (~155€) That '735 bucks' kit is 'stock' (only XMP on) faster in almost all cases! 🙂 My results: R15: 215/3182 // R20: 537/7247 // CPU-Z: 562/8514 - temps in a Silverstone PS07 Minitower 66.7 °C avg / 77.5 °C max after 8h prime95 torture with 4.133GHz/1.308V avg. on all cores. IMHO: The 3900XT is a nice thing, but definetly NOT worth the money... and if you need high framerates in gaming take a 3600XT or a maybe more expensive Intel setup depending on the CPU that is chosen. Cheers, TJ

In all honesty these XT Cpus dont really bring anything good. One can see well in the 3800xt review, that the 3800xt is bad chip and the 3800x from the old review was better. Since the Power Usage is way higher on the 3800xt MT and the OC is not rly possible. And on all three reviews you can see that MT power usage is way higher on the XT parts as compared to the X parts, whilst the Performance is basically the same... The only interesting this is the 3900XT using significantly less in idle, as compared to the 3900X. Perhaps one tip for you Hilbert, you write always for the OC, to set 1,4V and up the multiplier, to my knowledge the zen2 cpus are rather voltage sensitive (from other forums) and one should not up the voltage over the max MT voltage that the cpu uses with Precision boost, which is mostly under 1.35v, or even under 1.3v, depending on each individual cpu. Hence perhaps you determine first this Voltage and than oc at this voltage (my 3900x can do 4100mhz on all cores at 1,0V, but above it needs disproportionally more voltage for just a few MHZ gains and than its starts to massively gain temperature - on a custom Waterloop with EK Block and two 240 radiators), same goes for another 3600 that i have in a htpc, but if i run them custom oC on a lower voltage, they have higher MT scores, a bit lower ST scores and use significantly less power as compared to stock.

can't add call of duty warzone to benchmark ?

Crazy Joe:

As I feared when I saw that the base clocks haven't changed: for existing owners of the equivalent X variant these XT variants are not worth it. For new customers they may make more sense, but seeing as the cooling solution needed for running one of these has gone up a notch the original X models make more sense. I guess the real innovation will come with the Zen3 models, these XT models seem to be nothing more than a marketing exercise.

When was there ever an upgrade to a refresh that was realistically "worth" it? Hell even a single generation jump usually isn't trully worth it unless you are a numbers/super enthusiast guy.

I wonder if they if they will hit higher IF clocks, might be more worth while if they can.

Seeing this only makes me wanna say: careful AMD, don't slip up now.

I really disagree with the Recommended award. Such a pitiful increase in performance for so much more money... and heat.

A strange and useless release these XT versions, they add very little performance and are much more expensive than the non XT parts. And to make things worse, Ryzen 3 is on track for a release near the end of the year...

DG21:

and if you need high framerates in gaming take a 3600XT or a maybe more expensive Intel setup depending on the CPU that is chosen. Cheers, TJ

Doesn't need to get more expensive with Intel, a 10600K will do fine.

All at the same price as the original X series product

Actually 3900XT is not the same price like 3900X even in the ideal case of no price increase at the shops because the "X" version comes with a wraith spire cooler while the "XT" version comes empty so you have to buy a cooling solution which adds to the price. I also don't think that they merit a "recommended" award - let's be serious...they merit a "skip this" award - X marks the spot, not XT or wait for ZEN 3.

jststojc:

In all honesty these XT Cpus dont really bring anything good. One can see well in the 3800xt review, that the 3800xt is bad chip and the 3800x from the old review was better. Since the Power Usage is way higher on the 3800xt MT and the OC is not rly possible. And on all three reviews you can see that MT power usage is way higher on the XT parts as compared to the X parts, whilst the Performance is basically the same...

you know I went back to a 9900k for a gaming computer (2nd 9900k in my hands) that one is one of the latest boxed cpus sold, while my old one was a "day1 availability" tray cpu...the last one is awful, impossible to get it running at 5.0 all cores with less than 1.4v with the 90+°C and around 200watts that go with it when my early "tray" can do 5.1@1.36v (180watts) or 5.0@1.26v (140watts) no problems I had seen DerBauer video about 10900k binning but watching a video and experiencing the giant gap between two "same" cpus was eye opening, I now understand why people spit on Intel...I got lucky apparently with my 1st cpu, my view of Intel gaming lineup wouldn't have been the same if I had way higher power usage (and the heat !) as a 1st experience, AMD seems to go the same way with that XT line I would not want more watts for 100Mhz it changes nothing in most uses (I run 3960x 4.3Ghz@1.28v or 4.15Ghz@1.24v both of which are way cooler than the idiotic 1.46 I sometimes get at default settings) I'm starting to think you're better off buying early :/

So the X variant can be had for as little as £270 new and the cheapest ive seen the XT is £447..... i paid £325 for my 3800x 2 months ago and now the same seller sells the same x version for £270....if they wanted better sales on the x why not just drop the price in the beginning, also there are going to be some sweat deals on second hand 3800x from now on, with better thermals and only a handful of fps less for essentially £80 less why would anyone choose the XT now.

Mineria:

Doesn't need to get more expensive with Intel, a 10600K will do fine.

For now. I woudnt bet on 6core to last this generation. 8core is where its at.

I guess my year old 3900x with r20 531/7382 should be renamed to 3900xt Super. 😕

4700mh all core

Mineria:

Doesn't need to get more expensive with Intel, a 10600K will do fine.

Yep, that is why I said 'maybe' and 'depending' - but as you say: for Gaming a 10600K is a very(!) appetizing option. 🙂

@nizzen Whaaaat?!?!? How did you cool that?

Undying:

For now. I woudnt bet on 6core to last this generation. 8core is where its at.

Which games will get great benefits from 8/16 over 6/12 this year, next year? Both the 10600K as the 3600 will be fine for gaming only for the next 2-3 years, games won't magically utilize 8/16 over night. You can of course go with 3700X instead of the 10600K to have 8/16, but for pure gaming the i5 does perform better, if we include streaming, sure, more cores do help.