AMD Ryzen 9 3950X beats Intel i9-10980XE in 3DMark Firestrike by almost 25%
Click here to post a comment for AMD Ryzen 9 3950X beats Intel i9-10980XE in 3DMark Firestrike by almost 25% on our message forum
moo100times
If this is true, then this is massive news. Hopefully similar in other benchmarks. All we need now is the chip...
cryohellinc
Really impressive.
Karel Dvořák
It seems another type of GPU was used... 2080 ti vs. 2070??? No surprise Ryzen is faster then...
Undying
No wonder Intel dropped prices by half, they knew.
Crazy Joe
I'll wait for some independent reviews by sources I trust before jumping to conclusions. These sorts of leaks always seem fishy to me.
fantaskarsef
You know, I agree but... any company that can cut a products price by half and still make a profit is raising questions about their practices.
Typhoon2097
Wait... Intel with GTX 2070 and slower RAM vs AMD with 2080Ti and faster RAM in GPU heavy test... And how is this comparison relevant ??
wavetrex
How about this (my 3700X vs 3950X):
https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/20721349/fs/19987389
32% higher Physics score ... I'm not impressed.
What I am impressed though is the Maximum turbo core clock on 3950X, which is 4.7 Ghz !!! This will be a beast in gaming and most likely beat 9900K, KF or whatever anything else and become the top dog gaming GPU (of all CPUs in existence, not even 5.1 Ghz will be enough on Intel side to beat that)
p.s.
Intel Result has already been taken down, I expect the AMD one to disappear quickly as well.
Saved details from it:
3DMark Score
29663
Graphics Score
33698
Physics Score
32082
Combined Score
14750
Graphics Test 1
164.71 fps
Graphics Test 2
131.94 fps
Physics Test
101.85 fps
Combined Test
68.61 fps
Processor
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X 16-Core Processor
Reported stock core clock
3,500 MHz
Maximum turbo core clock
4,715 MHz
Physical / logical processors
1 / 32
# of cores
16
Memory
16,384 MB
Module 1
8,192 MB Kingston DDR4 @ 3,194 MHz
Module 2
8,192 MB Kingston DDR4 @ 3,194 MHz
... and that's quite low speed RAM.
I'm guessing it can be quite faster with tuned 3733 MT/s !
kanenas
ergo compared is the CPU tied Physics score.
nizzen
My old 7980xe overclocked is getting 38k in 3dmark physics. Memory does impact the score bigtime.
10980xe will go over 40k easy when overclocking cpu and memory. Looks like they nerfed 10980xe to get 25k points LOL
asturur
Not all benchmarks are about overclocking. Most of the people do not overclock.
I think the reason of 2666Mhz ddr and 3200 for AMD is because those are the highest officially supported as today?
Everything above i think is still considered overclock.
Kaarme
The Intel score seems pretty low. It ought to be at least 30k in a reasonable system, I imagine. If compared to the ridiculously overprised 7980xe (the price of that CPU alone would allow building the entire 16 core Ryzen PC with good components), it should get in the same neighbourhood, surely. Talking about non-OC.
Silva
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.
Typhoon2097
Edit: Sorry, I was looking at the screenshots, not the text in the article 🙂 That is impressive...
omagic
So basicaly 3950X scored 7% more than my undervolted 3900X...
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/20394280
nizzen
It's 2933 "official"
10 series cpu's with the new motherboards support 4266 xmp 🙂
Works with X299 apex too.
https://www.asus.com/no/Motherboards/ROG-RAMPAGE-VI-EXTREME-OMEGA/
geogan
Physics score is only 9.4% higher than my 3900X ... that's not great.. I presume they have not optimized that in any way. It's a pity the results don't give any details about memory settings which are kind of important to compare you would think...
https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/20721349/fs/20441742
wavetrex
Fire Strike tops out at 16 threads. It's an old bench by now from when quad cores were still king...
That 9.4% is only from clock speeds/better binning of the CCDs, 3950X able to sustain clocks better than 3900X, and probably the fact that the 16 threads get allocated to 16 real cores instead of 12 and leftovers...
Let's see Time Spy Extreme... the CPU bench in that one goes up to 256 threads, so it will be a while until it's maxed out.
Undying
Considering we would see 128threads TR cpu so soon it would not be surprise if that tops out in 2 years time.
nevcairiel
Just look up 9980XE numbers if you want something to compare to. The new CPU should if anything be slightly better (slightly better clock, hardware security mitigations), but probably not much. Obviously its impossible to judge an entire system from the benchmark page, since it has no details on cooling used, but you can extrapolate from the clock, I guess. A random 9980XE result with a 4.6GHz boost clock had around 32k Physics as well.
The Physics numbers shown in that "leak" are far too low for any real-world setup that a 10980XE will ever run it, because who buys such a thing and then doesn't give it proper cooling to stretch its legs?
TL;DR:
Benchmarks without controlled circumstances are meaningless.
