• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

AMD's Ryzen 3000 Review Thread: More Cores, More Threads.

jonnyp

Member
Jan 12, 2008
3,243
2,586
1,290
He does have a particular American accent I thought though? Very emo sounding.

I do not see what is 'emo' about the way he speaks at all. As a non-native English speaker myself also, I don't even think he speaks particularly fast either.
 

DJ Shalad

Member
Dec 10, 2018
2,992
7,486
700
Which CPU would you choose if you wanted to build the ultimate emulation PC?

If you plan on making a Hackintosh, Emustation and Windows 10 PC :
Intel CPU like i7 8700K5Ghz, 2070/5700XT+

Workstation/prosumer/w10 gaming :
AMD3900x (32gb ram) with a 5700XT and a GTX1050ti (cuda), no hackintosh, at least not without add. fiddling around in the system ktexts and so far everyone uses intel for emulation.

havent seen any rpcs3 emulation on the newest amd ryzen 3k serie.
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
7,553
9,092
775
I really don't like this guy. Hate the way and the speed he speaks.

I think the main issue i got with the guy is that he keeps japping all day long but should move faster towards the points and throw data faster on the screen. It just feels like a drag watching his video's unless you are really interested in the material that gets feeded slow paced.

Which CPU would you choose if you wanted to build the ultimate emulation PC?

Intel 5ghz 9900k and Nvidia 2080 ti.

Opengl drivers which a lot of emulators are based won't run for shit on AMD gpu's. Make sure you got that right. ALso emulation in general favors higher clocked cores far more then more cores. So it's a no brainer.
 
Last edited:
Dec 14, 2008
33,854
2,380
1,360
Trying to buy a good set of DDR4 RAM is like pulling teeth. I've had to learn an entire new vocabulary the past few days. I am now obsessed with "Samsung B-die" and will probably see a room full of it in my dreams and reach out to grab some and wake up in a cold sweat when I realize it doesn't actually exist except from shady 3rd party sellers on Newegg charging 2x the price of ordinary RAM with Hynix and Micron chips. I'm reading that AMD has improved the memory controller of Ryzen 3000 series dramatically from Ryzen 1000 and 2000, but I should be able to buy any cheap-ass kit from Newegg and expect it to run properly at the specced timings like it does on Intel. This is a whole new world of WTF for me.

The BIOS issues are getting out of hand too. Constantly idling at max Vcore when running Steam and being unable to launch Destiny 2 because AMD cannot into rdrand are certainly fun things AMD specially prepared for early adopters. I'm used to AMD graphics card launches being disasters but this is their first CPU launch I'm going to be involved in for 15 years and I'm not liking the sound of corrupting my Windows installation to my SSD because of WHEA errors and BSoDs. What the fuck is a WHEA and why does it even error?

I did end up picking my motherboard at least. I ordered the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Ultra because so far Gigabyte seems to have the fewest BIOS issues and they are even actually on AGESA 1.0.03ab. Right now I'm reading that AGESA 1.0.0.3aba (note the extra a, lol) which was to contain the fix for Destiny 2 has now been pulled because of a PCIe issue and there is no longer any ETA on being able to launch Destiny 2 on a Ryzen 3000 CPU. I don't even play Destiny 2 and this is worrying, I wonder what else is bugged in AMD BIOS?
 
Last edited:
  • Triggered
Reactions: CrustyBritches

thelastword

Banned
Apr 7, 2006
11,732
11,938
2,000
I hope AMD investigates this....Leadbetter's and some other reviews look sillier by the minute....

SMT On vs OFF on a Ryzen 3600




Seems like Ryzen gets a serious uplift in most titles with SMT off....Some titles benefit from SMT on, but those seem to be titles that are more multicore...….GTA, CSGO, World Warz, AC Origins, Fortnite all benefit from SMT off it would seem...…..I wonder if this is because of a recent windows patch that deals with SMT/hyperthreading differently because of Spectre...
 
Jul 29, 2013
3,297
6,267
985
US
I did end up picking my motherboard at least. I ordered the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Ultra because so far Gigabyte seems to have the fewest BIOS issues and they are even actually on AGESA 1.0.03ab.
Nice board, congrats. Sorry to hear about the issues. Being an early adopter is fun, but it can be like being a beta tester unfortunately. I'm having to wait to upgrade in a couple months when I have more money after my kids birthdays have passed. Maybe it's for the best. Let us know how it goes I'm hoping to build something like you went with, so I'll be interested to see your progress.
 

psn

Member
Jun 23, 2013
1,477
53
495
Germany
Trying to buy a good set of DDR4 RAM is like pulling teeth. I've had to learn an entire new vocabulary the past few days. I am now obsessed with "Samsung B-die" and will probably see a room full of it in my dreams and reach out to grab some and wake up in a cold sweat when I realize it doesn't actually exist except from shady 3rd party sellers on Newegg charging 2x the price of ordinary RAM with Hynix and Micron chips. I'm reading that AMD has improved the memory controller of Ryzen 3000 series dramatically from Ryzen 1000 and 2000, but I should be able to buy any cheap-ass kit from Newegg and expect it to run properly at the specced timings like it does on Intel. This is a whole new world of WTF for me.

The BIOS issues are getting out of hand too. Constantly idling at max Vcore when running Steam and being unable to launch Destiny 2 because AMD cannot into rdrand are certainly fun things AMD specially prepared for early adopters. I'm used to AMD graphics card launches being disasters but this is their first CPU launch I'm going to be involved in for 15 years and I'm not liking the sound of corrupting my Windows installation to my SSD because of WHEA errors and BSoDs. What the fuck is a WHEA and why does it even error?

I did end up picking my motherboard at least. I ordered the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Ultra because so far Gigabyte seems to have the fewest BIOS issues and they are even actually on AGESA 1.0.03ab. Right now I'm reading that AGESA 1.0.0.3aba (note the extra a, lol) which was to contain the fix for Destiny 2 has now been pulled because of a PCIe issue and there is no longer any ETA on being able to launch Destiny 2 on a Ryzen 3000 CPU. I don't even play Destiny 2 and this is worrying, I wonder what else is bugged in AMD BIOS?
I bought G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200 CL14 more than a year ago, has Samsung b-die. Not that expensive IMO.
 

Dane

Member
Jul 16, 2019
1,355
1,347
500
I hope AMD investigates this....Leadbetter's and some other reviews look sillier by the minute....

SMT On vs OFF on a Ryzen 3600




Seems like Ryzen gets a serious uplift in most titles with SMT off....Some titles benefit from SMT on, but those seem to be titles that are more multicore...….GTA, CSGO, World Warz, AC Origins, Fortnite all benefit from SMT off it would seem...…..I wonder if this is because of a recent windows patch that deals with SMT/hyperthreading differently because of Spectre...

To my memory, I tought that SMT off was only making a fps increase only in 3900x, good to know its also on the other ones
 
  • Like
Reactions: thelastword

PhoenixTank

Member
Jul 13, 2017
1,399
1,552
705
Trying to buy a good set of DDR4 RAM is like pulling teeth. I've had to learn an entire new vocabulary the past few days. I am now obsessed with "Samsung B-die" and will probably see a room full of it in my dreams and reach out to grab some and wake up in a cold sweat when I realize it doesn't actually exist except from shady 3rd party sellers on Newegg charging 2x the price of ordinary RAM with Hynix and Micron chips. I'm reading that AMD has improved the memory controller of Ryzen 3000 series dramatically from Ryzen 1000 and 2000, but I should be able to buy any cheap-ass kit from Newegg and expect it to run properly at the specced timings like it does on Intel. This is a whole new world of WTF for me.
Yeah, I wouldn't worry about extra special ram for these chips. Decent frequency (3200 to 3733) and latency will do the job unless you're looking to populate with 4 sticks rather than two. No hands-on personally, but this is what I've read.

The BIOS issues are getting out of hand too. Constantly idling at max Vcore when running Steam and being unable to launch Destiny 2 because AMD cannot into rdrand are certainly fun things AMD specially prepared for early adopters. I'm used to AMD graphics card launches being disasters but this is their first CPU launch I'm going to be involved in for 15 years and I'm not liking the sound of corrupting my Windows installation to my SSD because of WHEA errors and BSoDs. What the fuck is a WHEA and why does it even error?
Sounds rough. Been following the rdrand issue on the linux side... AMD not conforming to their own documentation is a bit poor. WHEA is "Windows Hardware Error Architecture", which seems to be the error handling system for when something goes wrong with a bit of your kit.
Unclear exactly what the cause is surrounding this. Ryzen 3000, Nvidia drivers and potentially Windows itself are all implicated. AMD_Robert has said quite strongly that the WHEA errors aren't causing data loss.
 

V2Tommy

Member
Oct 19, 2017
1,404
2,006
510
Canada
Why is everyone here so behind on RAM speeds? I had 4266-19-19-39 in October 2017 and people are still excited about 3200 stuff? I run my other B-Die kit at 4000-17-17-37.

Is the new Ryzen stuff not able to do that? Or is 3200 dirt cheap or something?
 
Dec 14, 2008
33,854
2,380
1,360
I found a kit with B-die but the price premium over a kit with ordinary Hynix is around $100. It is not easy to find it as most of the good kits are discontinued these days. Samsung themselves are discontinuing manufacture of most low-density DDR4 as they transition to DDR5 and B-die is apparently getting the axe so it will soon be gone forever.

For example:

32 GB (2x16) DDR4 3600 kit with Hynix is $140

32GB (2x16) DDR4 3200 kit with Samsung B-die is $240

Note that I got the in-stock notification on the B-die kit this morning and ordered it right away. It's now out of stock again. Most likely soon they will go out of stock forever as Samsung announced the transition from DDR4 to DDR5 back in May.
 

PhoenixTank

Member
Jul 13, 2017
1,399
1,552
705
Why is everyone here so behind on RAM speeds? I had 4266-19-19-39 in October 2017 and people are still excited about 3200 stuff? I run my other B-Die kit at 4000-17-17-37.

Is the new Ryzen stuff not able to do that? Or is 3200 dirt cheap or something?
If that was on a previous Ryzen system you're in the minority, sadly.
Infinity Fabric 2 uses a divider above 3733Mhz apparently negating some performance benefits.



I'm not sure that 4233CL19 setup is actually better than the the 3200CL14 kit Unknown Soldier just picked up, tbh.
 

psn

Member
Jun 23, 2013
1,477
53
495
Germany
If that was on a previous Ryzen system you're in the minority, sadly.
Infinity Fabric 2 uses a divider above 3733Mhz apparently negating some performance benefits.



I'm not sure that 4233CL19 setup is actually better than the the 3200CL14 kit Unknown Soldier just picked up, tbh.
Anything past 3200 CL14 is just a waste of money imo, might be even slower if the latency is higher.
Afaik latency was also much more important than bandwith in the previous generation .
 

billyxci

13 year old console warrior. Put me on ignore.
Aug 3, 2014
13,814
8,718
970
Why is everyone here so behind on RAM speeds? I had 4266-19-19-39 in October 2017 and people are still excited about 3200 stuff? I run my other B-Die kit at 4000-17-17-37.

Is the new Ryzen stuff not able to do that? Or is 3200 dirt cheap or something?
it's a waste of money to go that high plus for a lot of people getting a fast kit is too expensive. 3200 is most affordable it seems. the price difference between a 3200 kit and even a good 3600 kit would be better spent towards a better GPU. after 3733 you will see no performance improvement. in fact you'd see worse performance. getting a more powerful GPU will add significantly more performance.

with your 4266 kit you will only be slightly better than if you were running at 2666. 3200-3600 is the sweetspot and running at those speeds would out perform your 4266 ram easily. i would recommend lowering it to that frequency :)
 
Last edited:

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,906
1,820
3800x review posted from GN.

Glad I didn't fall for the hype train. If I did, I'd be disappointed right now.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: Insane Metal

thelastword

Banned
Apr 7, 2006
11,732
11,938
2,000
Ryzen 3600 SMT ON vs SMT OFF

Pretty much all games enjoy higher FPS with SMT OFF on Ryzen, except games that are properly multithreaded…...Your Single Core Junkie games like Farcry, GTA and Ubisoft games, gets a nice boost on RYZEN with SMT off....I hope we hear more about this from AMD soon...

 

thelastword

Banned
Apr 7, 2006
11,732
11,938
2,000
So I was going to write that 12 core 3900X and 13 core 3950X should be absolute beasts for gaming with 12 and 16 cores....Even 3700x and 3800x at 8 cores over the 9700k...…..With productivity, you can keep SMT on, but for gaming SMT off proves that Ryzen are the beasts and more that AMD was claiming......It was already impressive, but even moreso now.....

So I can only imagine 3900X/3950x with SMT OFF, and an all core OC........


 

TaySan

Banned
Dec 16, 2018
2,592
4,238
560
Why is everyone here so behind on RAM speeds? I had 4266-19-19-39 in October 2017 and people are still excited about 3200 stuff? I run my other B-Die kit at 4000-17-17-37.

Is the new Ryzen stuff not able to do that? Or is 3200 dirt cheap or something?
For gaming that's a huge waste of money and is even worse than 3200-3600Ram with lower timings.
3600 seems like the sweet spot for Ryzen in performance.
 
Dec 14, 2008
33,854
2,380
1,360

TL;DW: Disabling SMT to make games go faster is absolutely not something you should do. Performance difference across many games is essentially zero. Don't do it, that's stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Insane Metal

TaySan

Banned
Dec 16, 2018
2,592
4,238
560

TL;DW: Disabling SMT to make games go faster is absolutely not something you should do. Performance difference across many games is essentially zero. Don't do it, that's stupid.
With these CPUs, it's best to just leave everything on Auto and let it do its own thing. These chips are already maxed out.
 

thelastword

Banned
Apr 7, 2006
11,732
11,938
2,000
Spyhood is able to overclock his Ryzen 3900 X to 4.7 GHz...….I don't think it's all cores, but if you disable SMT on Ryzen, you're able to OC better on Ryzen on CCX 1, which seems to be faster and has higher OC overhead over CCX2......

The test below was done against a 9900k pegged at 5.0Ghz on all cores...…..If SMT is disabled on the 9900k, it becomes a 9700K, so performance does not improve with HT off on the 9900k...As a matter of fact, performance may actually degrade with HT off on the 9900k...…..

As for results...….The Ryzen 3900X beats the 9900k on average framerates in the majority of the gaming benchmarks seen here....


 

grfunkulus

Member
Dec 23, 2016
743
328
350
Spyhood is able to overclock his Ryzen 3900 X to 4.7 GHz...….I don't think it's all cores, but if you disable SMT on Ryzen, you're able to OC better on Ryzen on CCX 1, which seems to be faster and has higher OC overhead over CCX2......

The test below was done against a 9900k pegged at 5.0Ghz on all cores...…..If SMT is disabled on the 9900k, it becomes a 9700K, so performance does not improve with HT off on the 9900k...As a matter of fact, performance may actually degrade with HT off on the 9900k...…..

As for results...….The Ryzen 3900X beats the 9900k on average framerates in the majority of the gaming benchmarks seen here....



How can we be sure a lot of those tests aren't gpu bound? Most of these comparisons are done with a 2080ti for that reason. Even at 1080p, if you're using ultra settings, a lot of these titles will be gpu bound with a 2080 at the top end of the cpu market. Or do you think it's a coincidence that all of a sudden two cpus where there was formerly a 10+ fps gap (Far Cry being a huge example) are suddenly even? If smt off suddenly pushed the ryzen ahead, we're going to need more definitive proof than these 1-2fps difference which are clearly within margin of error and like I said, mostly likely just that in a gpu bound scenario
 
Last edited:

thelastword

Banned
Apr 7, 2006
11,732
11,938
2,000
How can we be sure a lot of those tests aren't gpu bound? Most of these comparisons are done with a 2080ti for that reason. Even at 1080p, if you're using ultra settings, a lot of these titles will be gpu bound with a 2080 at the top end of the cpu market. Or do you think it's a coincidence that all of a sudden two cpus where there was formerly a 10+ fps gap (Far Cry being a huge example) are suddenly even? If smt off suddenly pushed the ryzen ahead, we're going to need more definitive proof than these 1-2fps difference which are clearly within margin of error and like I said, mostly likely just that in a gpu bound scenario
What are you talking about? So with SMT ON when we saw Intel slightly beating Ryzen, there were no issues, but now we have issues because Ryzen gets more performance with SMT off? And seriously, what do you mean GPU bound? You're speaking like all these tests were done at 4K......These tests were done at 1080p and 1440p only....And for your information, lots of these games are still CPU bound at 1440p.......Ryzen is winning with much lower clocks than Intel because it has higher IPC....

There is no pussyfooting here, Ryzen is winning clearly here and there's still lots of patches to come for it
to improve things further......

As for those saying Intel will probably get better performance too with SMT off......How? Even Steve mentioned that in his video without any tests to show...... The 9700k is indeed a 9900K with HT off, and here it is against the 3700X with SMT off......Ryzen still wins......



I think when the 3950X debuts, it will even surpass 3900X and 3700X as the best gaming chips......3950X seems to be the best binned chip out of the lot since it's boosting to 4.7Ghz out the box....So having 16 physical cores available at such a high clock, perhaps even being able to be OC'd to 4.9-5.0Ghz will be the best chip for current heavy multithreaded games (even with SMT off, cause 16 threads right), it will also have the best average FPS and best 1% lows overall with SMT off.....because 16 threads.......It must also be known that Ryzen boosts and OC's better with SMT off.....Yet in the last video I posted, there was no OC involved...….Food for thought....
 

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,906
1,820
SMT disabled in many games benchmarked from a trusted source.


TLDW: Still slower than Intel, and worse than SMT enabled half the time. Not even the upcoming $750 Ryzen 3950x can change that. Better luck next year AMD :lollipop_smiling_face_eyes:
 
Last edited:

grfunkulus

Member
Dec 23, 2016
743
328
350
What are you talking about? So with SMT ON when we saw Intel slightly beating Ryzen, there were no issues, but now we have issues because Ryzen gets more performance with SMT off? And seriously, what do you mean GPU bound? You're speaking like all these tests were done at 4K......These tests were done at 1080p and 1440p only....And for your information, lots of these games are still CPU bound at 1440p.......Ryzen is winning with much lower clocks than Intel because it has higher IPC....

There is no pussyfooting here, Ryzen is winning clearly here and there's still lots of patches to come for it
to improve things further......

As for those saying Intel will probably get better performance too with SMT off......How? Even Steve mentioned that in his video without any tests to show...... The 9700k is indeed a 9900K with HT off, and here it is against the 3700X with SMT off......Ryzen still wins......



I think when the 3950X debuts, it will even surpass 3900X and 3700X as the best gaming chips......3950X seems to be the best binned chip out of the lot since it's boosting to 4.7Ghz out the box....So having 16 physical cores available at such a high clock, perhaps even being able to be OC'd to 4.9-5.0Ghz will be the best chip for current heavy multithreaded games (even with SMT off, cause 16 threads right), it will also have the best average FPS and best 1% lows overall with SMT off.....because 16 threads.......It must also be known that Ryzen boosts and OC's better with SMT off.....Yet in the last video I posted, there was no OC involved...….Food for thought....

9700k at stock lol. 3700x wins? OK... Overclocking 3700x yields 1-4%, MAYBE.

Try that benchmark on 3900x vs 9900k with a 2080ti and tell me the result isn't different. Go ahead, I'll wait.

I wanted the 3700x to be the best pure gaming chip under $350. Believe me, I did. I bought and returned one because it wasn't.

No horse in this race, I just noticed that for the games I play, a 9700k at 5.0ghz is still noticeably better for not that much more money. Let's not even mention the 3800x which is a joke
 

llien

Member
Feb 1, 2017
10,323
8,286
945

reddit link doesn't seem to work.
Microcenter sells 5700 for $299, or even $249 if you buy it together with Zen2.
 
Last edited:

thelastword

Banned
Apr 7, 2006
11,732
11,938
2,000
A beast of a CPU these Ryzens……...Better performance in many titles which favored higher IPC with SMT off......

Higher performance, lower power draw over Intel CPU's......I just wish AMD would fix this so better performance would be dialed in automatically...If a game is programmed for more threads let it access it, if it thrives on higher IPC and no SMT, let it prioritize whatever gives best performance.....


 

Shai-Tan

Member
Mar 16, 2009
6,350
909
1,145
I'm glad I play in 4k because none of the extra fiddling, faster memory, etc really matter much when you're gpu bottlenecked like 97% of the time.
 

thelastword

Banned
Apr 7, 2006
11,732
11,938
2,000
I'm glad I play in 4k because none of the extra fiddling, faster memory, etc really matter much when you're gpu bottlenecked like 97% of the time.
Yeah, all those people are paying $300-500 for intel CPU's to play at glorious 720p with their 2080ti's.....They don't care about 1440p or 4K gaming...….They don't care about massively better productivity performance......They just want to game in 720p man.....
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
7,553
9,092
775
9700k at stock lol. 3700x wins? OK... Overclocking 3700x yields 1-4%, MAYBE.

Try that benchmark on 3900x vs 9900k with a 2080ti and tell me the result isn't different. Go ahead, I'll wait.

I wanted the 3700x to be the best pure gaming chip under $350. Believe me, I did. I bought and returned one because it wasn't.

No horse in this race, I just noticed that for the games I play, a 9700k at 5.0ghz is still noticeably better for not that much more money. Let's not even mention the 3800x which is a joke

The guy is full of shit, literally 90% of his posts are face palm worthy.

He will pick whatever nonsense he can get to drive his AMD fanboy agenda. And comes up with the dumbest websites/benchmarks the moment he gets confronted with it.

I would not be shocked if he already claimed 5700xt to be better then a 2080 ti performance wise. Because this pacman in 30k benchmark that shows 2 fps on average shows the same numbers. God dam AMD is great. That's the logic this clown uses.
 
Last edited:

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
7,553
9,092
775
SMT disabled in many games benchmarked from a trusted source.


TLDW: Still slower than Intel, and worse than SMT enabled half the time. Not even the upcoming $750 Ryzen 3950x can change that. Better luck next year AMD :lollipop_smiling_face_eyes:

The worst part is the only gain you get is in oddyssey in any noticable manner and origin and u will sit then in stutter haven with loads of microstutters because the game isn't going to function on a 6 or 8 core solution. it needs 4/8 at a minimum to run smoothish, 6/12 preferable and 8/16 for ac odyssey to run smooth. Even devs ask you to get a 8/16 core solution to make it run at higher settings smoothly and after doing some tests myself they are right on this.

Yea AC games are something else:



But disabling SMT and Hyperthreading is a bad idea in general in this day of age. Unless you play really old games which at that point it doesn't matter anyway as performance is high enough. Because it will massively interfear is smooth gameplay and if you use extra programs behind it yea good luck with that.

I did some extensive testing on hyperthreading and smt a while back and frankly, anything but 4/8 is going to result in problems in newer games. Disabling SMT will only work in new games without much problems on a 3900x because it has 12 cores which can simulate 4/8 solution (yea it will simulate 8 threads on 8 cores ) but the moment it requires more threads or cores its to less.

The perfect CPU for disabling smt/hyperthreading would be a 16/32 solution for todays age if it isn't going to take single core total performance away.
 
Last edited:

Shai-Tan

Member
Mar 16, 2009
6,350
909
1,145
You mean 100% of the time.

depends on the game. e.g in forza horizon 4 it's like 99.9 (the benchmark says game and render logic are both running well over 130fps) but witcher 3 i was getting some annoying stutters that turned out to be the cpu's fault (though not all). same with total warhammer - gpu largely responsible for tanking perf but moving from 2700x to 3700x made the game more smooth. it might look like near convergence in 4k benchmarks but 1% lows can be misleading in my experience
 
Feb 15, 2013
8,962
7,702
855
London
I wanted the 3700x to be the best pure gaming chip under $350. Believe me, I did. I bought and returned one because it wasn't.

No horse in this race, I just noticed that for the games I play, a 9700k at 5.0ghz is still noticeably better for not that much more money. Let's not even mention the 3800x which is a joke

You're doing the same thing you claim he is, as that quote is total bullshit. There is NO NOTICEABLE difference between these chips at all. That's called hyperbole and getting anxious that better CPUs than your 9700 have come out so you get defensive.

On paper even (let alone 'noticeably') with latest chipset drivers the 3900X IS virtually neck-and-neck with the 9900K averaged across many titles (no cherry-picking BS), the difference is 3.8% and that's when using a suite of games that favour frequency/Intel (and @ 1080p with 2080 Ti):


This is the current picture. Going forward I can only agree with TheLastWord that this miniscule difference will decrease further as it can only go one way as new games and old games get optimized for Ryzen 3000 or to scale across more cores/threads, which favours AMD. This is common sense.
 
Last edited:

Shai-Tan

Member
Mar 16, 2009
6,350
909
1,145
1440p and up there isnt a huge difference but even clock for clock there is an advantage and i've seen no evidence optimization will make it go away. actual 9900k have a frequency advantage too. the question is really is it worth the extra money and there isnt one answer to that.
 

llien

Member
Feb 1, 2017
10,323
8,286
945
1440p and up there isnt a huge difference but even clock for clock there is an advantage... have a frequency advantage too...
???

These results include said "frequency advantage", and we get 2.5% difference with 2080Ti.
It is also notable how AMD has progressed 1700x (93.9%) => 2700x (97.6%) => 3700x (100%):



I'm glad I play in 4k because none of the extra fiddling, faster memory, etc really matter much when you're gpu bottlenecked like 97% of the time.
It is more of a "how to squeeze maximum" exercise, not really something one has to do (I plan all AMD 3700x/5700 build and I know I won't bother fiddling for 2-3% win).
 
Last edited:

thelastword

Banned
Apr 7, 2006
11,732
11,938
2,000
9700k at stock lol. 3700x wins? OK... Overclocking 3700x yields 1-4%, MAYBE.

Try that benchmark on 3900x vs 9900k with a 2080ti and tell me the result isn't different. Go ahead, I'll wait.

I wanted the 3700x to be the best pure gaming chip under $350. Believe me, I did. I bought and returned one because it wasn't.

No horse in this race, I just noticed that for the games I play, a 9700k at 5.0ghz is still noticeably better for not that much more money. Let's not even mention the 3800x which is a joke
All what you're asking for has already been provided in this thread, I've linked them...….3900x vs 9900k (SMT and OFF), I've done that...

3600/X SMT OFF/ON vs 9400/9700
3700X SMT OFF/ON vs 9700k/9900k
3800X SMT OFF/ON vs 9700k/9900k
3900X SMT OFF/ON vs 9700k/9900k

I have linked several of these combos and comparisons...….Some games benefit from the extra threads like Battlefield and SOTTR but the majority of the games favor higher IPC, with SMT off, that probably means lesser latency across the CCX's on Ryzen....Pretty much all the other games benefit with SMT off, like Fortnite, Origins, Project Cars, CSGO, World War Z, GTAV......On Ryzen, the average framerate is typically higher with better 1% lows in the majority of titles...…..The videos are right there, all you have to do is watch them...….

Without SMT, the overall advantage the intel CPU's had were minimal at best, with SMT off Ryzen takes the lead with lesser clock frequency and higher IPC.....When more games like Battlefield and Crysis 3 and SOTTR start emerging, or perhaps titles using multi threads even better, then intel will lose by a much bigger margin on average......And what about, when you want to game and stream, what about when you want the best results for your productivity suite? Funny that no one is talking about power consumption right now......Intel's new Xeons has a TDP of 400W, that new 9900k Super they are coming up with at 5+ Ghz on all cores will be good enough to light up the whole of Arizona.....but no one mentions it.....

One thing you should keep in mind, an OC of Intel CPU's does not give them any lead over Ryzen if Ryzen is OC'd too. Then there's even more performance from Ryzen if you do manual timings of your memory......There isn't one scenario where intel is sitting pretty, not in perf to cost, not in power consumption, not in productivity, not in gaming.......Ryzen does not need 5Ghz to beat intel, just turn SMT off on all these Ubisoft and high frequency favored games, then you will see how superior Ryzens IPC is.....at lower clocks vs 5ghz on all cores on intel....

But disabling SMT and Hyperthreading is a bad idea in general in this day of age. Unless you play really old games which at that point it doesn't matter anyway as performance is high enough. Because it will massively interfear is smooth gameplay and if you use extra programs behind it yea good luck with that.
Well if you have an intel CPU, that's a very good idea, since many of it's vulnerabilities comes through HT....


Yet, AMD is fine with SMT ON or OFF, with whatever setting you're getting more performance in your application, there's no need to worry.....Yet the funny thing is how you are now a proponent of more cores......Why turn SMT OFF and get more performance on games, where the majority of games even now favor (Higher IPC + Frequency)? You don't say!.........And here you are talking about stuttering in games as if a higher core count benefits, Far Cry series, Origins, GTA, World War Z, Resident Evil 2, Devil May Cry, Witcher, Fortnite and the list goes on and on, in many highly played and modern titles....

You are a proponent of more cores now, only (because gamers are able to get more perf in many games with SMT off on Ryzen 3000)...How oddly concerned you are, all of a sudden.......Yet, were you as concerned when all intel gave us was 4 physical cores on an I7 all these years.......Hell, we would still be on 4 cores had it not been for Ryzen.......So no need to preach about stuttering, Ryzen owners have been enjoying stutter free gaming + gaming with streaming for more than a minute now......We know... Today, Ryzen 1 vs an i5 is not a pretty picture.......If Ryzen 3000 is doing so well now vs 9900k, when the games actually use the cores and the higher IPC of Ryzen, it will be the same scenario as Ryzen 1 vs i5's stutter city mix....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coulomb_Barrier
Feb 15, 2013
8,962
7,702
855
London
It will take Intel literally years to match EPYC ROME. For now they need to and should (but won't) cut most of their Xeon prices in half, they're that far behind.

Anandtech said:
For those with little time: at the high end with socketed x86 CPUs, AMD offers you up to 50 to 100% higher performance while offering a 40% lower price. Unless you go for the low end server CPUs, there is no contest: AMD offers much better performance for a much lower price than Intel, with more memory channels and over 2x the number of PCIe lanes. These are also PCIe 4.0 lanes. What if you want more than 2 TB of RAM in your dual socket server? The discount in favor of AMD just became 50%.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: MightySquirrel

grfunkulus

Member
Dec 23, 2016
743
328
350
thelastword thelastword


"One thing you should keep in mind, an OC of Intel CPU's does not give them any lead over Ryzen if Ryzen is OC'd too"

Well this is just factually inaccurate. No other comparisons find the 3700x, or even the 3900x to meet the 9700k/9900k overclocked. The youtube comparisons you're linking to are all from one user and all other publications and reputable channels have found the Intels to still be ahead. Yes, even when both are overclocked as much as possible
 

grfunkulus

Member
Dec 23, 2016
743
328
350
All what you're asking for has already been provided in this thread, I've linked them...….3900x vs 9900k (SMT and OFF), I've done that...

3600/X SMT OFF/ON vs 9400/9700
3700X SMT OFF/ON vs 9700k/9900k
3800X SMT OFF/ON vs 9700k/9900k
3900X SMT OFF/ON vs 9700k/9900k

I have linked several of these combos and comparisons...….Some games benefit from the extra threads like Battlefield and SOTTR but the majority of the games favor higher IPC, with SMT off, that probably means lesser latency across the CCX's on Ryzen....Pretty much all the other games benefit with SMT off, like Fortnite, Origins, Project Cars, CSGO, World War Z, GTAV......On Ryzen, the average framerate is typically higher with better 1% lows in the majority of titles...…..The videos are right there, all you have to do is watch them...….

Without SMT, the overall advantage the intel CPU's had were minimal at best, with SMT off Ryzen takes the lead with lesser clock frequency and higher IPC.....When more games like Battlefield and Crysis 3 and SOTTR start emerging, or perhaps titles using multi threads even better, then intel will lose by a much bigger margin on average......And what about, when you want to game and stream, what about when you want the best results for your productivity suite? Funny that no one is talking about power consumption right now......Intel's new Xeons has a TDP of 400W, that new 9900k Super they are coming up with at 5+ Ghz on all cores will be good enough to light up the whole of Arizona.....but no one mentions it.....

One thing you should keep in mind, an OC of Intel CPU's does not give them any lead over Ryzen if Ryzen is OC'd too. Then there's even more performance from Ryzen if you do manual timings of your memory......There isn't one scenario where intel is sitting pretty, not in perf to cost, not in power consumption, not in productivity, not in gaming.......Ryzen does not need 5Ghz to beat intel, just turn SMT off on all these Ubisoft and high frequency favored games, then you will see how superior Ryzens IPC is.....at lower clocks vs 5ghz on all cores on intel....


Well if you have an intel CPU, that's a very good idea, since many of it's vulnerabilities comes through HT....


Yet, AMD is fine with SMT ON or OFF, with whatever setting you're getting more performance in your application, there's no need to worry.....Yet the funny thing is how you are now a proponent of more cores......Why turn SMT OFF and get more performance on games, where the majority of games even now favor (Higher IPC + Frequency)? You don't say!.........And here you are talking about stuttering in games as if a higher core count benefits, Far Cry series, Origins, GTA, World War Z, Resident Evil 2, Devil May Cry, Witcher, Fortnite and the list goes on and on, in many highly played and modern titles....

You are a proponent of more cores now, only (because gamers are able to get more perf in many games with SMT off on Ryzen 3000)...How oddly concerned you are, all of a sudden.......Yet, were you as concerned when all intel gave us was 4 physical cores on an I7 all these years.......Hell, we would still be on 4 cores had it not been for Ryzen.......So no need to preach about stuttering, Ryzen owners have been enjoying stutter free gaming + gaming with streaming for more than a minute now......We know... Today, Ryzen 1 vs an i5 is not a pretty picture.......If Ryzen 3000 is doing so well now vs 9900k, when the games actually use the cores and the higher IPC of Ryzen, it will be the same scenario as Ryzen 1 vs i5's stutter city mix....

Yeah except the industry had been on 4 cores for 10 years when the i5 7600k came out. Suddenly all game devs are going to magically make full use of 8 cores and 16 threads?

Hardware Unboxed showed smt off to be a net 1% gain tops.
Also, Intel still wins on 1% and. 1% lows in the vast majority of titles (again, stop using one source) so stuttering is not an issue for 8700k and up
 
Last edited:

wtftad

Member
Jun 6, 2014
575
349
605
Just finished building a 3900x.
Rog crosshair hero viii is giving me a crap ton of issues getting my RAM to run anywhere above 2100mhz.

Anyone having any similar issues with their builds?
 
Dec 14, 2008
33,854
2,380
1,360
Depends on the RAM, and also Asus has been a mess on Ryzen in general.
If you're sure the RAM is good, you might have better luck returning the C8H and buying something from MSI, Gigabyte, or Asrock.
 
Dec 14, 2008
33,854
2,380
1,360
So for those who aren't aware, there is an ongoing issue with the Ryzen 3000 CPU's consistently not boosting to AMD's advertised boost clock speeds, especially the high-end models with higher claimed boost such as 3900X and 3800X.


AMD has been extremely secretive about what clock speed actually is with Ryzen 3000 since launch. I can say that my 3900X doesn't ever reach anything resembling the 4.6 ghz boost clock printed on the box. Mine tops out around 4250 or something like that running Cinebench R20 single-thread, and 4050-4100 running multi-thread. This has been confirmed by other 3900X owners. I paid $500 for a CPU which is claimed to reach a boost clock that I am something like 350 mhz short of and it's becoming more obvious that something is wrong here. If AMD really plans on not having their CPU's boost to claimed clock speeds printed on boxes, that is blatantly false advertising and they are begging for a class-action lawsuit.

Also, every new BIOS revision of an AMD-supplied core firmware logic called AGESA (AMD General Encapsulated Software Architecture) on every motherboard manufacturer's BIOS release has been exhibiting lower and lower boost clock speeds. In fact, AMD supplied AGESA version 1.0.0.2 BIOS's to reviewers which actually could boost very close (but still not right to) the promised 4.6 ghz clock speed, but after launch, AMD has supplied AGESA version 1.0.0.3 for distribution in customer BIOS releases which do not boost anywhere near promised speeds. This feels like a very blatant bait-and-switch which again would be grounds for a class-action lawsuit.

AMD can either do something about this, or they can enjoy their lawsuits. Many owners of Ryzen 3000, myself included, are not happy. I came from 15 years using Intel where the promised boost clock means every single core on the CPU can hit that boost clock, guaranteed, and most of the time you can even overclock past claimed boost clock on all cores if you don't hit PROCHOT or just crash first. Intel understands the legal meaning of promised clock speed, AMD apparently does not.
 
Last edited:

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
45,252
17,724
1,770
Best Coast
That's too bad. The advertising gives the customer a false expectation, even if the performance numbers themselves are relatively good.
 
Last edited: