# AMD Ryzen 9 5900X CPU-Z Bench Score Leaks, 27% Higher 1T Performance Over 3700X



## btarunr (Oct 1, 2020)

With AMD expected to announce its 5th Generation Ryzen "Vermeer" desktop processors next week, the rumor-mill is grinding the finest spices. This time, an alleged CPU-Z Bench score of a 12-core/24-thread Ryzen 9 5900X processor surfaced. CPU-Z by CPUID has a lightweight internal benchmark that evaluates the single-threaded and multi-threaded performance of the processor, and provides reference scores from a selection of processors for comparison. The alleged 5900X sample is shown belting out a multi-threaded (nT) score of 9481.8 points, and single-threaded (1T) score of 652.8 points. 

When compared to the internal reference score by CPUID for the Ryzen 7 3700X 8-core/16-thread processor, which is shown with 511 points 1T and 5433 points nT, the alleged 5900X ends up with a staggering 27% higher 1T score, and a 74% higher nT score. While the nT score is largely attributable to the 50% higher core-count, the 1T score is interesting. We predict that besides possibly higher clock-speeds for the 5900X, the "Zen 3" microarchitecture does offer a certain amount of IPC gain over "Zen 2" to account for the 27%. AMD's IPC parity with Intel is likely to tilt in its favor with "Zen 3," until Intel can whip something up with its "Cypress Cove" CPU cores on the 14 nm "Rocket Lake-S" processor.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## wolf (Oct 1, 2020)

Interesting if true, I guess we'll know soon enough. If that is pretty much stock 5900X performance I could see one dropping in to replace my 3700X when the hype train settles down sometime next year.


----------



## ratirt (Oct 1, 2020)

That's a nice uplift. I'd rather want to see the 3700x compared to 5700x or 3900x vs 5900x but this is still promising. The single core bench number is quite amazing.


----------



## nguyen (Oct 1, 2020)

Oh boy I'm just itching to upgrade my 8700K for awhile now, seems like 5950X or 5960X would be a worthy upgrade.


----------



## DemonicRyzen666 (Oct 1, 2020)

nguyen said:


> Oh boy I'm just itching to upgrade my 8700K for awhile now, seems like 5950X or *5960X* would be a worthy upgrade.



I'm with this as long it's upgradable to DDR5 and Pcie 5.0.


----------



## umano (Oct 1, 2020)

DemonicRyzen666 said:


> I'm with this as long it's upgradable to DDR5 and Pcie 5.0.


 It won't, this is the last am4 cpu. I am really curious about x670


----------



## AnarchoPrimitiv (Oct 1, 2020)

I've been predicting for months that between the IPC increase, frequency increase/node improvement, and the doubling of cores per CCX, that the core for core performance lift could be upwards of 30%, although this isn't total confirmation, it's in the right direction.

TPUs own analysis showed that the performance difference between the 3100 and the 3300x is 12% due to the respective two vs one CCX design, and since then I've postulated that this (along with the cache redesign, 17%-20% IPC gains and 200-300mhz frequency bump), the total performance uplift could be upwards of 30%...Can't wait to upgrade my 2700x for a 5900x and my X470 for an x670


----------



## nangu (Oct 1, 2020)

ratirt said:


> That's a nice uplift. I'd rather want to see the 3700x compared to 5700x or 3900x vs 5900x but this is still promising. The single core bench number is quite amazing.



My 3900X scores 550 ST and 8400 MT, so if those numbers are true, the bump over the 3900X is really good.


----------



## robb (Oct 1, 2020)

DemonicRyzen666 said:


> I'm with this as long it's upgradable to DDR5 and Pcie 5.0.


what a stupid thing to say. how would the cpu or mobo support something that is not even released yet? and you must have been living under a rock because it has been known for years this is the end of the road for AM4.


----------



## DemonicRyzen666 (Oct 1, 2020)

umano said:


> It won't, this is the last am4 cpu. I am really curious about x670





robb said:


> what a stupid thing to say. how would the cpu or mobo support something that is not even released yet? and you must have been living under a rock because it has been known for years this is the end of the road for AM4.




Bolded part. not AM4. TRX4.


----------



## Vya Domus (Oct 1, 2020)

Until CPU-Z's benchmark tool gets nerfed again for Zen processors .


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Oct 1, 2020)

Nice but i think i will stick with my rig till Am5. then hopefully intel will have its shit together, or i will switch to Am5/AMD


----------



## PooPipeBoy (Oct 1, 2020)

I don't give a rat's arse about Ampere or Navi. Cutting-edge processor releases are where it's at, especially of this magnitude in performance gains.


----------



## Neverdie (Oct 1, 2020)

Maybe it's time to upgrade my i5 3570k   Don't know if the performance jump is worth it.


----------



## john_ (Oct 1, 2020)

That's a promising score but CPU-Z was always a bad benchmark, in my opinion, to compare different architectures. I think it really uses any extra special instruction it can find and if one architecture is significantly better than the other in just one area, it will so a score difference that will never be seen in real usage. But it is a promising score.


----------



## Outback Bronze (Oct 1, 2020)

I would like to know clock speeds. 

Very impressive results atm. I might finally go AMD : )


----------



## R0H1T (Oct 1, 2020)

This doesn't say much, if anything at all. First 5900x is a direct upgrade over 3900x, assuming they're switching to 5xxx part numbers for all next gen chips, so it has more cache likely higher bin as well. Not to mention a better comparison would've been with 3800x or indeed 3900x dodecacore.


----------



## BluesFanUK (Oct 1, 2020)

DemonicRyzen666 said:


> I'm with this as long it's upgradable to DDR5 and Pcie 5.0.



Let's be realistic - both of those are utterly pointless and likely will be for years to come even after release. You can exceed 4,000MHz on DDR4 right now, and GPU's are barely saturating PCIe 3.0 at the moment.

Yeh it's nice to have bragging rights and feel like it's future proofing your system, but i'd be willing to wager most people would upgrade their system once more before DDR4 and PCIe 4.0 become irrelevant.

I've learnt my lesson over the years, new and shiny doesn't always translate to being better.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 1, 2020)

nguyen said:


> Oh boy I'm just itching to upgrade my 8700K for awhile now, seems like 5950X or 5960X would be a worthy upgrade.


TBH the 8700K is still a really strong chip for just about everything you could want to do today; It's still close to the top of the charts for anything that isn't limited by core count and if you'd genuinely needed more cores you'd be on a 3900X already.

I'm not telling you how to spend your money, but I personally won't be buying a new CPU until something comes along that needs more. At the moment I'm mostly just bouncing off the upper refresh-rate of my monitor and TV and discarding frames.


----------



## efendi (Oct 1, 2020)

Hmm... My ten years old Sandy Bridge @5GHz scored 490 SC and 2452 MC here - we didn't get too far since then it seems, at least on single core


----------



## harm9963 (Oct 1, 2020)

Now i have a reason to upgrade.


----------



## Taraquin (Oct 1, 2020)

Hope this transaltes into significantly better gamingperformance. Wonder how far we get on ram support, since Renoir APUs can du 2200-2300 infinity fabric I`m hoping Zen 3 can do atleast that.


----------



## Bwaze (Oct 1, 2020)

WCCFTech compares it to 3900X too:

"As for performance, the chip scored 652.8 points in the single-core test which is 27% faster than the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and up to 25% faster than the Ryzen 9 3900X. 

Coming to the multi-threaded performance test, the alleged AMD Ryzen 9 5900X CPU scored a total of 9481 points which is a massive 75% improvement over the Ryzen 7 3700X & a 15% improvement over the Ryzen 9 3900X."

Why only 15% higher score than 3900X in multicore? That's lower than the alleged IPC uplift - for almost 50% higher TDP, presumably. Something's not right.


----------



## R0H1T (Oct 1, 2020)

Bwaze said:


> Why only 15% higher score than 3900X in multicore? That's lower than the alleged IPC uplift - for almost 50% higher TDP, presumably. Something's not right.


Because the "IPC" gains cannot be normalized for multithreaded workloads. Not only does every core clocks differently but also without fixed clocks, which I doubt this test was run on, you're just relying on the "TDP" & the boost algorithm to measure the performance, not to mention different motherboards make the test even more unreliable. For almost any workload you can think of, the IPC gains will not be 1:1 coming from ST to MT tasks. Though the length of the tests also matter, without fixed clocks & TDP restrictions (removed) the bigger core siblings will be at a disadvantage in short duration benches.


----------



## Bwaze (Oct 1, 2020)

Zen2 had uplift in single and in multicore compared to Zen1 or Zen+. 2700X to 3700X had 12% increase in single core CPU-Z score (457 to 509), but 13% increase in multicore (4839 to 5465). 

It's strange that 3900X to 5900X wouldn't follow the same pattern, especially with the TDP and frequency uplift. I could imagine this result if processor was thermally or power limited.


----------



## Dredi (Oct 1, 2020)

R0H1T said:


> Because the "IPC" gains cannot be normalized for multithreaded workloads. Not only does every core clocks differently but also without fixed clocks, which I doubt this test was run on, you're just relying on the "TDP" & the boost algorithm to measure the performance, not to mention different motherboards make the test even more unreliable. For almost any workload you can think of, the IPC gains will not be 1:1 coming from ST to MT tasks. Though the length of the tests also matter, without fixed clocks & TDP restrictions (removed) the bigger core siblings will be at a disadvantage in short duration benches.


IPC cannot be ’normalized’ for single threaded applications either, because it is always by definition an application specific metric.


----------



## R0H1T (Oct 1, 2020)

Right & in this case we're speculating how it affects CPU-Z Bench.


----------



## Dredi (Oct 1, 2020)

R0H1T said:


> Right & in this case we're speculating how it affects CPU-Z Bench.





Bwaze said:


> WCCFTech compares it to 3900X too:
> 
> "As for performance, the chip scored 652.8 points in the single-core test which is 27% faster than the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and up to 25% faster than the Ryzen 9 3900X.
> 
> ...





Bwaze said:


> Zen2 had uplift in single and in multicore compared to Zen1 or Zen+. 2700X to 3700X had 12% increase in single core CPU-Z score (457 to 509), but 13% increase in multicore (4839 to 5465).
> 
> It's strange that 3900X to 5900X wouldn't follow the same pattern, especially with the TDP and frequency uplift. I could imagine this result if processor was thermally or power limited.


This time the IPC gains of about 10% come from the CCX structure changes that affect single and multi threaded workloads differently. For single threaded workloads you effectively have double cache resources at your disposal, where as the MT workload has about the same as before per thread. Depending on if the worker threads share data there could be some benefit from the restructuring, but in this case I think that might not be the case and the workers in the MT workload do not share data and thus the IPC gain would be the about 10% lower than in the ST workload.


----------



## Bwaze (Oct 1, 2020)

That's an enormous difference just for the cache size.


----------



## Dredi (Oct 1, 2020)

Bwaze said:


> That's an enormous difference just for the cache size.


Yup, but 32 megs of cache for a single thread is a lot compared to 16 megs on zen2. On MT workloads the cache size is the same per thread as it was on zen2.
It might also be possible that they have figured out how to pump more juice to a single core, but have kept the TDP the same, meaning that the single core performance would be higher but MT would be proportionally more power limited.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 1, 2020)

Shit, n I wasn't going to upgrade, might have to


----------



## jesdals (Oct 1, 2020)

Would like to know the Infinity fabric speed of these 5xxx cpu’s


----------



## Xzibit (Oct 1, 2020)

So this person can get his hands on unreleased hardware but can't update to the latest CPU-Z in a year


----------



## Vayra86 (Oct 1, 2020)

If that single thread is noticeably higher than what Intel does on CFL, I'm getting rid of this setup and upgrading too, most likely.

This 8700K still isn't my favorite CPU. Still does odd things now and then, spiky voltage/temp behaviour at times, its hard to put the finger on it, but meh - and the OC potential just isn't there unless I go exotic on cooling measures, which I'm not doing.


----------



## Calmmo (Oct 1, 2020)

3900x, I'm sorry but i don't think we were meant for each other, it's not because of you, it's me..



Vayra86 said:


> If that single thread is noticeably higher than what Intel does on CFL, I'm getting rid of this setup and upgrading too, most likely.
> 
> This 8700K still isn't my favorite CPU. Still does odd things now and then, spiky voltage/temp behaviour at times, its hard to put the finger on it, but meh - and the OC potential just isn't there unless I go exotic on cooling measures, which I'm not doing.



oh boy, i hope you are prepared for the zen3 drama then, it was nuts with zen2 voltages last year for the first 2-3 months


----------



## Vayra86 (Oct 1, 2020)

Calmmo said:


> oh boy, i hope you are prepared for the zen3 drama then, it was nuts with zen2 voltages last year for the first 2-3 months



Yeah... def waiting for dust to settle. I'm also looking at Ampere... damn what a shit show.

As far as OC goes... I've let go of that idea, its not worth it anymore. They can do that for me now, apparently


----------



## Calmmo (Oct 1, 2020)

Yeah, OC is very different to what I was used to from my quad core i7 days, it's all about per ccx oc as quality per ccx varies wildly. You go from cores that can do 4.4 at 1.275 to cores that cant even do 4.3 at 1.4v.


----------



## Xaled (Oct 1, 2020)

If the 652 single-core score is true, the whole current cpu lineup is KOed..
So I'll take that with a pinch of salt


----------



## R0H1T (Oct 1, 2020)

Which lineup?


----------



## TheLostSwede (Oct 1, 2020)

AnarchoPrimitiv said:


> I've been predicting for months that between the IPC increase, frequency increase/node improvement, and the doubling of cores per CCX, that the core for core performance lift could be upwards of 30%, although this isn't total confirmation, it's in the right direction.
> 
> TPUs own analysis showed that the performance difference between the 3100 and the 3300x is 12% due to the respective two vs one CCX design, and since then I've postulated that this (along with the cache redesign, 17%-20% IPC gains and 200-300mhz frequency bump), the total performance uplift could be upwards of 30%...Can't wait to upgrade my 2700x for a 5900x and my X470 for an x670


There won't be any new motherboard chipsets for the 5000-series CPUs.


----------



## FinneousPJ (Oct 1, 2020)

About 85% over stock R7 1700. Yeah, I think I can justify the upgrade


----------



## Berfs1 (Oct 1, 2020)

Yeah when CPU-Z 1.93 is out, definitely use version 1.90 for a "leak"!


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 1, 2020)

Taraquin said:


> Hope this transaltes into significantly better gamingperformance. Wonder how far we get on ram support, since Renoir APUs can du 2200-2300 infinity fabric I`m hoping Zen 3 can do atleast that.


RAM support is still something that AMD needs to work on. I still regularly encounter RAM that simply doesn't work with an XMP setting. I _know_ XMP is intel-optimised timings but when you get a common, affordable DDR4-3200 kit and it's not happy on Ryzen, your average Joe is going to be running it at 2133 JEDEC default and horrible 1066MHz Infinity Fabric, simply because the timings for XMP aren't quite there on the AMD platform.

Given that 95% of RAM kits available to consumers rely on XMP, it kind of sucks that the XMP settings still don't work for a non-trivial number of combinations. Sure, most TPU readers know to plug in the timings from the 1usmus DRAM calculator to get their AMD systems running at or close to the advertised speeds, but I'm willing to bet that most users aren't going to be interested in a 3-step process that involves manually inputting dozens of secondary and tertiary RAM timings buried in a completely different place under advanced BIOS settings for each motherboard.

Only this week I encountered a mainstream Gigabyte B550 board that failed to run XMP settings on two different RAM kits, and earlier during lockdown, Asus and Asrock B450 boards choked on a popular Kingston 3200 kit but were happy with (supposedly terrible for AMD) Corsair LPX and budget Patriot 3600 kits respectively.

AMD really needs XMP to "just work" and their AGESA firmware should really _really _loosen timings by 25% or so on the memory training before giving up and running 3600MHz DDR4 at almost half it's rated speed.


----------



## Dredi (Oct 1, 2020)

Chrispy_ said:


> RAM support is still something that AMD needs to work on. I still regularly encounter RAM that simply doesn't work with an XMP setting. I _know_ XMP is intel-optimised timings but when you get a common, affordable DDR4-3200 kit and it's not happy on Ryzen, your average Joe is going to be running it at 2133 JEDEC default and horrible 1066MHz Infinity Fabric, simply because the timings for XMP aren't quite there on the AMD platform.
> 
> Given that 95% of RAM kits available to consumers rely on XMP, it kind of sucks that the XMP settings still don't work for a non-trivial number of combinations. Sure, most TPU readers know to plug in the timings from the 1usmus DRAM calculator to get their AMD systems running at or close to the advertised speeds, but I'm willing to bet that most users aren't going to be interested in a 3-step process that involves manually inputting dozens of secondary and tertiary RAM timings buried in a completely different place under advanced BIOS settings for each motherboard.
> 
> ...


I don’t think AMD can affect the XMP profiles memory manufacturers decide to put on their modules. Because of that the only way XMP could ”just work” on AMD is if they commit to designing their memory controller to be compatible with the same timings as the intel memory controllers, which is a silly proposition. The way forward is (sadly) QVL lists for memory, until memory manufacturers stop making their XMP settings incompatible with AMD memory controllers.


----------



## cueman (Oct 1, 2020)

nice but,true performance we see then when intel get ready even 10nm cpu....and what leaks and so on, amd ryzens not shine so bright then.

its useless  comapare 7nm cpu for 14nm cpu...and specially tell it 'fast'.


few month and we see intel 10nm side and 6 month we see equal battle


----------



## Dredi (Oct 1, 2020)

cueman said:


> nice but,true performance we see then when intel get ready even 10nm cpu....and what leaks and so on, amd ryzens not shine so bright then.
> 
> its useless  comapare 7nm cpu for 14nm cpu...and specially tell it 'fast'.
> 
> ...


Few months, according to what? There are no 10nm desktop processors in any timetable.


----------



## Steevo (Oct 1, 2020)

Bwaze said:


> WCCFTech compares it to 3900X too:
> 
> "As for performance, the chip scored 652.8 points in the single-core test which is 27% faster than the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and up to 25% faster than the Ryzen 9 3900X.
> 
> ...




It might be a lot of clock speed for the single core increase.


----------



## Sandbo (Oct 1, 2020)

I thought I didn't have to upgrade from my 3600X.


----------



## Fleurious (Oct 1, 2020)

We must be getting close to actual benchmarks, wasn’t there supposed to be something in October for Zen3 and big navi?

Hopefully, these leaks are true as it will be nice to see them compete in high refresh rate gaming.


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 1, 2020)

Fleurious said:


> We must be getting close to actual benchmarks, wasn’t there supposed to be something in October for Zen3 and big navi?
> 
> Hopefully, these leaks are true as it will be nice to see them compete in high refresh rate gaming.



october 7th/8th for cpu and 27th and 28th for gpu. you will see official benches then


----------



## Chomiq (Oct 1, 2020)

Well one thing's for sure. 5900X will cost a lot more than 3700X.


----------



## Dave65 (Oct 1, 2020)

Hope it's true.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Oct 1, 2020)

Neverdie said:


> Maybe it's time to upgrade my i5 3570k   Don't know if the performance jump is worth it.


I'm still on the i7 3770K. And since I play on 3440x1440 I see no reason to upgrade yet, since the CPU gain on that resolution is mediocre the best.


----------



## Metroid (Oct 1, 2020)

This is a hard pass if is indeed 15% ipc gain or higher, Intel days we had a 10% ipc gain and you could see people spending at least a thousand dollar on the upgrade because Intel demanded you to upgrade the motherboard too, in this case there is no motherboard upgrade, so it's easy to upgrade. I will have to say good bye to my ryzen 5 3600 and for the record, my 3600 does 500 on single-thread and 4000 on multi-thread, the new 5900 cpu does 652 on single-thread and 9481 on multi-thread. So if we cut that benchmark in half to 6 cores 12 threads, then we have single-thread still 652 and multi-thread 4740, which in turn makes 20% better multi-thread performance.


----------



## Divide Overflow (Oct 1, 2020)

I love my 3900X, but if single thread performance increases that much, I might upgrade the the 5900X.  
I'll wait for the TPU review before making any decision.


----------



## BorisDG (Oct 1, 2020)

8 core vs 12 core ... interesting comparison. Yeah it's single thread, but still.


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 1, 2020)

This is seriously a great achievement for amd. 3700X has max boost of 4.4 ghz. Rumors say 5900X will achieve 5 ghz. With 27 % improvements the 5 ghz claims seems fairly legit I think. So 15 % IPC gain + 600 mhz higher coreclock = 27 % better single thread performance. This is not to far out in my opinion.

Also another leak where 5800X beating I9 10900K in Ashes of the Singularity benchmark. Gives good vibes for zen 3.









						AMD Ryzen 7 5800X 8-core Zen3 CPU spotted on AotS benchmark site - VideoCardz.com
					

First benchmarks of AMD Vermeer Just a week after @TUM_APISAK spotted the Ryzen 7 5700U processor at Ashes of the Singularity benchmark website, he also discovered the Ryzen 7 5800X entries. The leak would seemingly confirm that AMD Is indeed skipping the Ryzen 4000 series naming for its desktop...




					videocardz.com
				




Unless Intel really brings something good to the table with 11 gen CPU's. It seems amd zen 3 is the go to choise for the coming time.

Now let's just hope scalpers dosesn't do a nvidia ampere again to Zen 3. Cleaning inventory in seconds.


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 1, 2020)

Tomgang said:


> This is seriously a great achievement for amd. 3700X has max boost of 4.4 ghz. Rumors say 5900X will achieve 5 ghz. With 27 % improvements the 5 ghz claims seems fairly legit I think. So 15 % IPC gain + 600 mhz higher coreclock = 27 % better single thread performance. This is not to far out in my opinion.
> 
> Also another leak where 5800X beating I9 10900K in Ashes of the Singularity benchmark. Gives good vibes for zen 3.
> 
> ...



all you need is my sig baby ~  Lisa Su has conquered all


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 1, 2020)

lynx29 said:


> all you need is my sig baby ~  Lisa Su has conquered all



Zen 2 whas surprisingly good and now Zen 3 looks like a Intel killer even in games. Intel need to take amd very seriously now, else they will lose a lot of sales the way they are going now.


----------



## HD64G (Oct 1, 2020)

Intel in panic mode again in a few days. Who knows what else their marketing team will think of...


----------



## Franzen4Real (Oct 1, 2020)

Neverdie said:


> Maybe it's time to upgrade my i5 3570k  Don't know if the performance jump is worth it.






Tomgang said:


> Now let's just hope scalpers dosesn't do a nvidia ampere again to Zen 3. Cleaning inventory in seconds.


Count on it. Now, botting and gouging are a trendy new topic at the forefront of tech conversations, right at the beginning of the Holiday spending extravaganza. I couldn't get a 3900X at launch or even months after for anywhere near msrp against human buyers, now we have freakin' automated 24/7 website scrapers to contend with as well. I think that there will be _more_ people involved now that they have seen the $$ that can be made, at a time in the world where lost jobs and uncertainty has everyone wanting extra money and security more than ever. The high-end of Ryzen, RDNA2, Ampere, Xbox, PS5, you name it...if they are high dollar, highly anticipated items, then they are all F'd well through Christmas.

5900X is my goal, but I am anticipating disappointment through the end of the year minimum.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 1, 2020)

Dredi said:


> I don’t think AMD can affect the XMP profiles memory manufacturers decide to put on their modules. Because of that the only way XMP could ”just work” on AMD is if they commit to designing their memory controller to be compatible with the same timings as the intel memory controllers, which is a silly proposition. The way forward is (sadly) QVL lists for memory, until memory manufacturers stop making their XMP settings incompatible with AMD memory controllers.


I'm not expecting XMP to work with Intel timings on an AMD motherboard, but AMD write AGESA firmware, and that includes speculative memory training.

At the moment, that memory training gives up on XMP timings far too easily because it doesn't loosen them enough. Even very loose 3600 timings and 1800 FCLK are _waaaay_ better than JEDEC 2133 defaults.

Say you have a 3600 kit with 18-18-18-40 XMP timings that won't run on a typical Zen2 CPU; regardless of the board, the AGESA firmware will use the XMP primary timings and take a rough stab at the secondary timings before giving up. The thing is, XMP primary timings are almost always compatible with Zen2, it's the auto-generated secondary/tertiary timings that fail to boot on AMD and those aren't even part of the XMP spec. You can likely get that 3600-18-18-18-40 kit to run at 3600-16-16-16-36 on Zen2, so the problem is _not_ the XMP data stored on the SPD.

IMO, AMD need to stick to the XMP frequency and voltage, and then use the primary timings as a reference point to calculate some safe values to attempt on the memory training runs. The best thing they could do at this point is hire 1usmus since his DRAM calculator works really well and is only a megabyte even as a compiled windows application with a GUI. If he can make a bootable timings calculator based off a handful of input variables, AMD can integrate the same kind of thing into AGESA. It doesn't even matter if AMD assumes low-quality RAM modules and runs a super-loose set of timings. Take that 3600 kit I mentioned above; Even if it was run at 20-20-20-55 timings with tRC of ~70 and tRFC of ~600 it would still be so much better than giving up and running the FCLK at 1066 instead of 1800 just because the memory training failed to find bootable values.


----------



## Tomgang (Oct 1, 2020)

Franzen4Real said:


> View attachment 170403
> 
> Count on it. Now, botting and gouging are a trendy new topic at the forefront of tech conversations, right at the beginning of the Holiday spending extravaganza. I couldn't get a 3900X at launch or even months after for anywhere near msrp against human buyers, now we have freakin' automated 24/7 website scrapers to contend with as well. I think that there will be _more_ people involved now that they have seen the $$ that can be made, at a time in the world where lost jobs and uncertainty has everyone wanting extra money and security more than ever. The high-end of Ryzen, RDNA2, Ampere, Xbox, PS5, you name it...if they are high dollar, highly anticipated items, then they are all F'd well through Christmas.
> 
> 5900X is my goal, but I am anticipating disappointment through the end of the year minimum.



Yeah that's what worries me. Scalpers ruining my own Christmas presents a new pc.

Also about job. I lost my old back in April do to lock down and found a new job in July and have been there for 3 months. This week we have gone from pretty busy to almost nothing to do. If this continues, I can kiss this job goodbye as well. So I can only say I know to well how uncertainty can make people more desperate for money. It's not funny to go with out a job. Specially in the long run, as you feel the economic worries coming with low or no income at all situation.

Let's hope the vaccine will come fast, so we can get this dam virus out of the way and we can get back to more normal times. Althrow the virus is here to stay, but with a vaccine it will hopefully not be a bigger problem than the common cold/flu.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 1, 2020)

Chrispy_ said:


> I'm not expecting XMP to work with Intel timings on an AMD motherboard, but AMD write AGESA firmware, and that includes speculative memory training.
> 
> At the moment, that memory training gives up on XMP timings far too easily because it doesn't loosen them enough. Even very loose 3600 timings and 1800 FCLK are _waaaay_ better than JEDEC 2133 defaults.
> 
> ...


How many different platforms have you used Ryzen calc on, it is not that great imho 18+ AMD builds.
AMD need their own Xmp ,intel timings are made for intel memory controller's which have different characteristics than AMD's.


----------



## ARF (Oct 1, 2020)

Why didn't AMD use 8-core CCX from the very beginning?
15% from Ryzen 9 3900X to Ryzen 9 5900X is nothing interesting, it's even disappointing given that they even jumped over one whole generation - Ryzen 4000 series.


----------



## Calmmo (Oct 1, 2020)

ARF said:


> Why didn't AMD use 8-core CCX from the very beginning?
> 15% from Ryzen 9 3900X to Ryzen 9 5900X is nothing interesting, it's even disappointing given that they even jumped over one whole generation - Ryzen 4000 series.


Zen2 was big news for being 13% over zen+, we're used to more like 1-5% from intel (look at 9k vs 10k) and you find the potential of 15+% to be lackluster? erm.. I guess maybe it would have been in the early 2000's


----------



## ARF (Oct 1, 2020)

DemonicRyzen666 said:


> I'm with this as long it's upgradable to DDR5 and Pcie 5.0.



I will skip this. Was also thinking about getting the new Big Navi but not going to happen since I have no good enough for me CPU to pair it with.

Waiting for DDR5 and PCIe 5, as well, maybe 2022, but at least it will be a strong and future-proof platform.

Hot and noisy X570 with last AM4 CPU , just no.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 1, 2020)

ARF said:


> Why didn't AMD use 8-core CCX from the very beginning?
> 15% from Ryzen 9 3900X to Ryzen 9 5900X is nothing interesting, it's even disappointing given that they even jumped over one whole generation - Ryzen 4000 series.


Wtaf , they skipped some numbers = butthurt.

They can call it Susan 43 I couldn't care less and they don't owe you two times the performance because they skipped a number.

Buy what you want obviously but spouting shite about 15% when it's looking like 27% and fifteen is above The norm anyway , go intel bro they'll give you more cores , performance and better bedroom heating, no wait only one of those is true.


----------



## ShurikN (Oct 1, 2020)

ARF said:


> 15% from Ryzen 9 3900X to Ryzen 9 5900X is nothing interesting, it's even disappointing given that they even *jumped over one whole generation - Ryzen 4000 series.*


Pure comedy gold


----------



## ARF (Oct 1, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Wtaf , they skipped some numbers = butthurt.
> 
> They can call it Susan 43 I couldn't care less and they don't owe you two times the performance because they skipped a number.
> 
> Buy what you want obviously but spouting shite about 15% when it's looking like 27% and fifteen is above The norm anyway , go intel bro they'll give you more cores , performance and better bedroom heating, no wait only one of those is true.



Intel has a 10-core. AMD has an 8-core and far over it a distant 12-core.
Whatever.

It's called 1st generation, 2 generation, not 1st generation and then jump over to 5th generation.
It's misleading the customers who will think a second generation in advance.

Intel at least doesn't skip generations.
1st generation.
2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and now 10th.


----------



## siki (Oct 1, 2020)

ARF said:


> I will skip this. Was also thinking about getting the new Big Navi but not going to happen since I have no good enough for me CPU to pair it with.
> 
> Waiting for DDR5 and PCIe 5, as well, maybe 2022, but at least it will be a strong and future-proof platform.
> 
> Hot and noisy X570 with last AM4 CPU , just no.



You two are bunch of losers because i am am waiting for PCIe 6. Yeah you heard it right.
And i also hope this CPU is compatible with  PCIe 6. Yep thats me. Dumb as a rock.


----------



## Calmmo (Oct 1, 2020)

ARF said:


> far over it a distant 12-core



so your agument is they should make the 12 core a 10core.
Sound, very.

You're really just trolling at this point with this whole skipping thing


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 1, 2020)

ARF said:


> Intel has a 10-core. AMD has an 8-core and far over it a distant 12-core.
> Whatever.
> 
> It's called 1st generation, 2 generation, not 1st generation and then jump over to 5th generation.
> ...


No they add a + reroll the dice and sell it again with 5-10% performance increases.
We got every AMD generation technically, just not an SKU for every segment.

And we're up to(intel gen) 11 next, 10900 etc are out ,the very easy to recall 11090 is next ,like who the f knows what Intel CPU is what ,they have a million different sku's a generation with some right turds hid about the place, Imho.

But back to your point they skipped a number, so what, dya really not recall Anyone else doing that.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 1, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> How many different platforms have you used Ryzen calc on, it is not that great imho 18+ AMD builds.
> AMD need their own Xmp ,intel timings are made for intel memory controller's which have different characteristics than AMD's.



Builds? I dunno; Low 3-digit figures myself, I have a couple of minions to crank out repeats and I just deal with sorting out new spec/builds/imaging when stocks dry up and force us to switch vendor/model etc. As for unique platforms, that probably spans at least a dozen B350/450/550/570 boards and three X399 models. When you have to keep ~1000 machines up to date on a 3-4 year cycle you tend to get through large quantities of builds and variants a month, but it's the personal commissions that actually give me just as much variety of build because there's no benefit in me standardising.

I reckon about 25% of the combinations, RAM doesn't work with the XMP profile, and I can_ always_ get it to work with the DRAM calc, though not necessarily with the default settings - sometimes I have to pick bad bin, or drop from B-die to OEM but it doesn't matter, I'm only concerned with getting them booting and stable at the higher FCLK and it's extremely rare (twice ever, I think) that I can't run at least the XMP's rated frequency and CL timing.

If you dig into what info the XMP 2.0 profile stores, very little of it is secondary and none of it is tertiary timings, yet these are the ones that need tweaking with bins or manual entry when the 1usmus safe defaults don't work using the presets, so it's not the XMP timings that are at fault, it's the poor attempts at memory training and ease with which motherboards/AGESA gives up and reverts back to JEDEC 2133.


----------



## ARF (Oct 1, 2020)

Calmmo said:


> Zen2 was big news for being 13% over zen+, we're used to more like 1-5% from intel (look at 9k vs 10k) and you find the potential of 15+% to be lackluster? erm.. I guess maybe it would have been in the early 2000's



Intel increased the multi-threading performance from the 8-core 9900K to the 10-core 10900K by at least 25-30%.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 1, 2020)

Chrispy_ said:


> Builds? I dunno; Low 3-digit figures myself, I have a couple of minions to crank out repeats and I just deal with sorting out new spec/builds/imaging when stocks dry up and force us to switch vendor/model etc. As for unique platforms, that probably spans at least a dozen B350/450/550/570 boards and three X399 models. When you have to keep ~1000 machines up to date on a 3-4 year cycle you tend to get through large quantities of builds and variants a month, but it's the personal commissions that actually give me just as much variety of build because there's no benefit in me standardising.
> 
> I reckon about 25% of the combinations, RAM doesn't work with the XMP profile, and I can_ always_ get it to work with the DRAM calc, though not necessarily with the default settings - sometimes I have to pick bad bin, or drop from B-die to OEM but it doesn't matter, I'm only concerned with getting them booting and stable at the higher FCLK.


So Ryzen calc works the same there then, hit n miss, I could and did get by without it often too.
Patriot And certified Ram has been faultless for me though, even beyond Xmp ,last few builds I went with them, they're not expensive comparatively either.
But I still disagree that Xmp should just work, I understand it would be nice but it's unrealistic, didn't AMD make Amp an Xmp competition, not seen anything about it in years, shits vague now.

@ARF do the maths FFS, 8 cores add 2= 20% more cores = Intel having many a brew break chilling.

clap f#£@&g clap.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 1, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> They can call it Susan 43 I couldn't care less


I'd totally buy a Susan 43 processor. It's not any worse than "Ryzen"


----------



## ARF (Oct 1, 2020)

Chrispy_ said:


> I'd totally buy a Susan 43 processor. It's not any worse than "Ryzen"



Yeah, Zen is not even the correct spelling, it must be Chán or Dhyaan, Japanese _禅_ , Sanskrit ध्यान , Chinese 禪.





						Google Translate
					

Google's service, offered free of charge, instantly translates words, phrases, and web pages between English and over 100 other languages.




					translate.google.com


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 1, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Patriot And certified Ram has been faultless for me though, even beyond Xmp ,last few builds I went with them, they're not expensive comparatively either.
> But I still disagree that Xmp should just work, I understand it would be nice but it's unrealistic, didn't AMD make Amp an Xmp competition, not seen anything about it in years, shits vague now.


Rings a bell but Asus DOCP is about the closest we can get and that's just them tweaking the XMP values before feeding it to the AGESA training boots I think.

As for Patriot, I've used a couple variants of their Viper Steel/Blackout (at 3466 and 3600, I think) and found them flawless in MSI, problematic on lower-end Gigabyte and all of the Asrock platforms. YMMV but I suspect it's more about the silicon lottery of each particular batch/bin than a particular guaranteed make/model. I've certainly heard reports of the 'gold standard' (G.Skill Trident Z Royal) failing to post at XMP profile, which is what makes me think that luck of the draw, coupled with easy-to-quit memory training that's the problem.



ARF said:


> Yeah, Zen is not even the correct spelling, it must be Chán or Dhyaan, Japanese _禅_ , Sanskrit ध्यान , Chinese 禪.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


when Ryzen launched, Lisa Su specifically explained that the name was a play on "new Ho*rizon*". I'm not sure if the codename was already Zen at that point or whether Zen was born of that phrase....


----------



## Rob94hawk (Oct 1, 2020)

Divide Overflow said:


> I love my 3900X, but if single thread performance increases that much, I might upgrade the the 5900X.
> I'll wait for the TPU review before making any decision.



Where is it saying the 5900X is faster than the 3900?


----------



## ARF (Oct 1, 2020)

Chrispy_ said:


> when Ryzen launched, Lisa Su specifically explained that the name was a play on "new Ho*rizon*". I'm not sure if the codename was already Zen at that point or whether Zen was born of that phrase....



I think their job is all days long to think how to milk the customers and how to confuse them and tell fairy tales.... 

"All similarities are in your imagination and there only":


----------



## Franzen4Real (Oct 1, 2020)

Tomgang said:


> It's not funny to go with out a job. Specially in the long run, as you feel the economic worries coming with low or no income at all situation.
> 
> Let's hope the vaccine will come fast, so we can get this dam virus out of the way and we can get back to more normal times. Althrow the virus is here to stay, but with a vaccine it will hopefully not be a bigger problem than the common cold/flu.


Very true. In the past I had gone through a sudden business closing as well, and that was incredibly stressful _without_ a pandemic causing chaos in the workforce. I wish you the best.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 1, 2020)

ARF said:


> I think their job is all days long to think how to milk the customers and how to confuse them and tell fairy tales....
> 
> "All similarities are in your imagination and there only":
> 
> ...


It's a. Name like Paco Bel, Sony, Hyundai, Dave.

They can spell it how they want , the shit in your mind twists it into mattering.


----------



## ARF (Oct 1, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> It's a. Name like Paco Bel, Sony, Hyundai, Dave.
> 
> They can spell it how they want , the shit in your mind twists it into mattering.



I see that the crap is not only in your mind but also on your naughty fingers


----------



## Makaveli (Oct 1, 2020)

harm9963 said:


> Now i have a reason to upgrade.View attachment 170356



You are going to still be waiting abit.

There won't be bios support for x400 boards at launch from what I've seen.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 1, 2020)

ARF said:


> I think their job is all days long to think how to milk the customers and how to confuse them and tell fairy tales....


Actually now you've reminded me of the Zen circle in the logo, I recall that they changed it to Ryzen by combining Zen with new horizon_ because Zen can't be trademarked._


----------



## Turmania (Oct 1, 2020)

I never forget bulldozer and hype before launch  then the total silence after launch  that was priceless.


----------



## z1n0x (Oct 1, 2020)

Turmania said:


> I never forget bulldozer and hype before launch  then the total silence after launch  that was priceless.



It seems to me, Faildozer's AMD and Zen's AMD are two different companies.
If AMD could made that 180*°* turn and with the Radeon group that would be nice.


----------



## BorisDG (Oct 1, 2020)

Rob94hawk said:


> Where is it saying the 5900X is faster than the 3900?


If it's not, than whats the point?


----------



## phill (Oct 1, 2020)

Whilst  it is only CPU-Z bench test results, looks positive and I hope this is just the tip of the iceberg.....  Can't wait to see the TPU review of the 5 series CPUs and big Navi....  October looks to be a good month!


----------



## Caring1 (Oct 1, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> @ARF do the maths FFS, 8 cores add 2= 20% more cores = Intel having many a brew break chilling.
> 
> clap f#£@&g clap.


2 is 25% of 8.
It's only 20% when calculated from 10.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 1, 2020)

Caring1 said:


> 2 is 25% of 8.
> It's only 20% when calculated from 10.


I waaas trying to be nice to ARF.


----------



## Minus Infinity (Oct 2, 2020)

Sounds impressive and finally my old i5 3570K which I only bought as a stop gap BTW in 2012 will finally get punted to the never never. I'm thinking 5900X + Big Navi to be the basis of my new PC build. I may also update my other PC with a Zen 1700X, but I may wait for a Zen 4 with DDR5 and RDNA 3 for that upgrade as it's stills works very well.



ratirt said:


> That's a nice uplift. I'd rather want to see the 3700x compared to 5700x or 3900x vs 5900x but this is still promising. The single core bench number is quite amazing.



Well surely 1T performance will be at least as good if not better as you would think 5700X could hit a bit higher clocks than the 5900X.


----------



## Nihilus (Oct 2, 2020)

Glad they are calling it the 5000 series as it should get back in line with laptop numbering.  AMD 4000 series was special in efficiency and deserved its own numbering line.


----------



## sergionography (Oct 2, 2020)

Bwaze said:


> Zen2 had uplift in single and in multicore compared to Zen1 or Zen+. 2700X to 3700X had 12% increase in single core CPU-Z score (457 to 509), but 13% increase in multicore (4839 to 5465).
> 
> It's strange that 3900X to 5900X wouldn't follow the same pattern, especially with the TDP and frequency uplift. I could imagine this result if processor was thermally or power limited.



At this rate you start to run into limits such as memory bandwidth and throttling of clocks. Ipc doesn't translate the same to multicore because the cores aren't even loaded near 100% to even benefit from the ipc. Zen 1 to zen 2 seems bigger because sustained multicore clocks increased drastically from the transition to 7nm and the new architecture. So in reality sustained clocks were probably much higher than the 12% gain you saw


----------



## ratirt (Oct 2, 2020)

Minus Infinity said:


> Well surely 1T performance will be at least as good if not better as you would think 5700X could hit a bit higher clocks than the 5900X.


Probably. I think all the new Ryzens will hit 5Ghz but maybe more in some cases than that but not necessarily.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 2, 2020)

ratirt said:


> I think all the new Ryzens will hit 5Ghz but maybe more in some cases than that but not necessarily.


I wouldn't get your hopes up; Almost every single AMD launch in the last 20 years has been preceded by leaks and hints that clocks would be higher than they turned out to be. Call it optimism for the underdog or sensationalism to generate clicks but the real products have always been considerably more tame than the hype train.

I'm not a betting man but I suspect the 5600 will run boost at ~4.5GHz and the best bins like the 5900X and 5950X will maybe run at 5GHz single-threaded.

I'd like to be wrong, but the historic evidence is absolutely overwhelming, and we're likely looking at a 200-300MHz bump over Zen2. For games at least, that translates to a 5700X running 4-8 threads at ~4.6Ghz, which isn't too shabby when added to the claimed IPC improvements.


----------



## ratirt (Oct 2, 2020)

Chrispy_ said:


> I wouldn't get your hopes up. Almost every single AMD launch in the last 20 years has been preceded by leaks and hints that clocks would be higher than they turn out to be.
> I'm not a betting man but I suspect the 5600 will run boost at ~4.5GHz and the best bins like the 5900X and 5950X will maybe run at 5GHz single-threaded.
> I'd like to be wrong, but the historic evidence is absolutely overwhelming, and we're likely looking at a 200-300MHz bump over Zen2.


I don't see anything wrong in saying it may happen and that has nothing to do with hope. Seeing how AMD advances the Ryzen it is not impossible. If AMD doesn't pull off 5Ghz the whatever these will still be great CPUs anyway. Considering how they move the CCX's packing more cores, reducing latency and making them smaller it is very plausible that 5Ghz is not a miracle but can actually happen.
There's not a long way from 4.6 to 5ghz you know. AMD done clock bump earlier with other Ryzens so maybe this time around it can be the same story.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 2, 2020)

ratirt said:


> I don't see anything wrong in saying it may happen and that has nothing to do with hope. Seeing how AMD advances the Ryzen it is not impossible. If AMD doesn't pull off 5Ghz the whatever these will still be great CPUs anyway. Considering how they move the CCX's packing more cores, reducing latency and making them smaller it is very plausible that 5Ghz is not a miracle but can actually happen.
> There's not a long way from 4.6 to 5ghz you know. AMD done clock bump earlier with other Ryzens so maybe this time around it can be the same story.


Aye, there's room for both optimism and pessimism in the same discussion.
TBH, I'm not even that fussed about high clockspeeds - all it does it drive up power consumption and drive down efficiency. I'm definitely interested in the lower latency and the 1T IPC gains.


----------



## ratirt (Oct 2, 2020)

Chrispy_ said:


> Aye, there's room for both optimism and pessimism in the same discussion.
> TBH, I'm not even that fussed about high clockspeeds - all it does it drive up power consumption and drive down efficiency. I'm definitely interested in the lower latency and the 1T IPC gains.


True, but you can always dial the clocks down if you have TDP distaste. What I mean is, I'd be OK with this CPU no matter what happens. It will definitely be better than 3000 series Ryzen that's just inevitable.


----------



## Fabio (Oct 2, 2020)

Vayra86 said:


> If that single thread is noticeably higher than what Intel does on CFL, I'm getting rid of this setup and upgrading too, most likely.
> 
> This 8700K still isn't my favorite CPU. Still does odd things now and then, spiky voltage/temp behaviour at times, its hard to put the finger on it, but meh - and the OC potential just isn't there unless I go exotic on cooling measures, which I'm not doing.


My 8700k run quite fresh at 4930 Mhz, 1,28 vcore, that run up to 1.31 when under avx workload.  I have an aio nzxt. But i think that a good air cooler will work well too.
Single td performance still quite the same as a 10700k... 580 in cpuz and 218 chinebench 20 single


----------



## Vayra86 (Oct 2, 2020)

Fabio said:


> My 8700k run quite fresh at 4930 Mhz, 1,28 vcore, that run up to 1.31 when under avx workload.  I have an aio nzxt. But i think that a good air cooler will work well too.
> Single td performance still quite the same as a 10700k... 580 in cpuz and 218 chinebench 20 single



1.28 is very good for that clock.

I wasnt that lucky...


----------



## Bubster (Oct 2, 2020)

Intel Headquarters Parking Lot is gonna be full of Ambulances and First aid Kits and defibrillators Next week during AMD upcoming processor launch...


----------



## Fabio (Oct 2, 2020)

Vayra86 said:


> 1.28 is very good for that clock.
> 
> I wasnt that lucky...


This is the very limit. After that 4920 i need to pump 1.34-1,36 to run stable at 5 ghz. Temp in full load under stress went from 76-78 max to 85-86. Really does not wort it...


----------



## Vayra86 (Oct 2, 2020)

Fabio said:


> This is the very limit. After that 4920 i need to pump 1.34-1,36 to run stable at 5 ghz. Temp in full load under stress went from 76-78 max to 85-86. Really does not wort it...



Yeah that's where I was at for 4.8. 1.34 really is the max for air, in my experience, and its not pretty at that.



Bubster said:


> Intel Headquarters Parking Lot is gonna be full of Ambulances and First aid Kits and defibrillators Next week during AMD upcoming processor launch...



Now you're assuming they care that much


----------



## bmacsys (Oct 4, 2020)

DemonicRyzen666 said:


> I'm with this as long it's upgradable to DDR5 and Pcie 5.0.



Are you stupid?


----------



## guttheslayer (Oct 4, 2020)

Bwaze said:


> Zen2 had uplift in single and in multicore compared to Zen1 or Zen+. 2700X to 3700X had 12% increase in single core CPU-Z score (457 to 509), but 13% increase in multicore (4839 to 5465).
> 
> It's strange that 3900X to 5900X wouldn't follow the same pattern, especially with the TDP and frequency uplift. I could imagine this result if processor was thermally or power limited.



Hi this video exactly explain why it actually show 5900X having only 15% increase in multi-core CPU-Z score compared to 3700X (rather than a 27% boost), go to video below at 4:00 mark.










That also mean the 15% boost is in line with nT gen-on-gen leap for Zen so far, making the leaked result extremely legit.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 4, 2020)

This has been an interesting year for PC upgrades. Is it time to give away my Asus Hero VI and reach for the new AMD MOBO's? Frankly, I'm quite excited about the new AMD CPU's.


----------



## Parkab0y (Oct 4, 2020)

multicore comparison

3700x 5433pt @ 88W
5900x 9481.8pt @ (150W) TDP value
+62.5%pt , more 33% cores, almost double the energy +16% performance per-core (same compared to 5900x)

5433/8c = 679.125
9481.8/12c = 790.15

679.125/88W=7.71
790.15/(150W)=5.26

7.71/5.26=1.4657

*3700x=46,6% more efficient *in the best case if the 5900x doesn't surpass 150w value at full load

5900x 9481.8pt @ (150W)
3900x 8189 @ 142.09W
+15,7%pt

*3900x still more efficient by 9,7% *in the best case if the 5900x doesn't surpass 150w value at full load

single core comparison

5900x 653pt (impressive but 653/522=1.25, so *+25%* not 27%)
3900x 522pt
3700x 511pt

if 5900x will be over 150w in full load (where a 9900k can reach 180W being rated 105W TDP) how they think to cool it?
with a stock cooler 1kg double 140mm fans?

a 3950x 16c at full load reaches max 144W.

at 200w my bike push me at 20kmph.


----------



## mtcn77 (Oct 4, 2020)

Parkab0y said:


> multicore comparison
> 
> 3700x 5433pt @ 88W
> 5900x 9481.8pt @ (150W) TDP value
> ...


The Ryzen 3000 ihs is dished, therefore its coldplate is uneven. The dish makes contact weak. I wouldn't suggest making a direct comparison out of 3700X'es heating characteristics for 5900X for that reason.








						Dotting For Better Ryzen 3000 Thermals? | Level One Techs
					

As a follow-up to this – why might the spread method not be desirable?  If your CPU has a concave ihs (or your cooler for that matter) it is possible to spread the Tim too thin.  On stock wraith prism coolers it is pretty thick and the bottom of the cooler isn’t super even.  On the h115i pro I...




					forum.level1techs.com


----------



## Parkab0y (Oct 4, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> The Ryzen 3000 ihs is dished, therefore its coldplate is uneven. The dish makes contact weak. I wouldn't suggest making a direct comparison out of 3700X'es heating characteristics for 5900X for that reason.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



https://www.anandtech.com/show/15043/the-amd-ryzen-9-3950x-review-16-cores-on-7nm-with-pcie-40/2
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/19

OK but power comsumption is a fact, forget temps, for a while (I don't think the 5900x will be an easy beast to tame by air anyway)


----------



## mtcn77 (Oct 4, 2020)

Parkab0y said:


> https://www.anandtech.com/show/15043/the-amd-ryzen-9-3950x-review-16-cores-on-7nm-with-pcie-40/2
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/19
> 
> OK but power comsumption is a fact, forget temps, for a while (I don't think the 5900x will be an easy beast to tame by air anyway)


Depending on the coldplate gradient, you can gain an edge. I wouldn't say these kinds of temperature gradients are normal in 3700X, so I'll hope better for 5900X.








						Why Intel CPU's run at 95°C and why AMD's should, also
					

The original study is from AMD's forum and it is a response to a hung up query. Noctua, AMD and GN's technology journalists have attended to the question of why AMD runs hot. I'm going to prove it on a third party case study. You can access individual company takes on the question in the hereby...




					www.techpowerup.com
				



This whole thread is about coldplate dynamics.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 4, 2020)

I really hope Zen3 isn't a power-hungry monster in an attempt to reach 5GHz.

One of the best things about the 3600 I used to have was that it was pretty much silent on a modest air cooler.


----------



## Parkab0y (Oct 4, 2020)

Chrispy_ said:


> I really hope Zen3 isn't a power-hungry monster in an attempt to reach 5GHz.
> 
> One of the best things about the 3600 I used to have was that it was pretty much silent on a modest air cooler.


exactly what we are seeing

a 3950x asks 144W at full load to reach 11000+ score on CPUZ multicore and can reach max 4.7GHZ to score around 560 in single-core

that 653 single core score from the supposed 5900x IMHO stands for 5.0 GHZ or even more,  who knows how many watts was needed to achieve it!


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 4, 2020)

Parkab0y said:


> exactly what we are seeing
> 
> a 3950x asks 144W at full load to reach 11000+ score on CPUZ multicore and can reach max 4.7GHZ to score around 560 in single-core
> 
> that 653 single core score from the supposed 5900x IMHO stands for 5.0 GHZ or even more,  who knows how many watts was needed to achieve it!


This is a new process node from TSMC though, there's literally zero solid data about the efficiency of 7nm EUV at the moment. Your assumptions and guesses are as good as anyone else's at this point. _Rumours and leaks_ point to it being 200-300MHz faster than TSMC's N7 at similar voltages, so in theory 5GHz on Zen3 isn't going to be much hotter than a stock 3900X.

Not long to wait now for actual, official, independently-verified answers at least.....


----------



## Icon Charlie (Oct 5, 2020)

Parkab0y said:


> multicore comparison
> 
> 3700x 5433pt @ 88W
> 5900x 9481.8pt @ (150W) TDP value
> ...



Thank you for taking the time for showing us... the masses on the importance of wattage usage on components.   In this day and age marketing is simply lying and hiding their lies by symantecs, exploitation of information and so on.

Efficiency is a important tool to create your rig but in this day and age it's bling bling and power numbers.

But again thanks for your input on this matter.


----------



## Millennium (Oct 6, 2020)

FinneousPJ said:


> About 85% over stock R7 1700. Yeah, I think I can justify the upgrade


Same, though I may go from 8 core to 6 core to save money (probably not). I wonder if there will be a 10 core part?


----------



## ratirt (Oct 6, 2020)

Chrispy_ said:


> I really hope Zen3 isn't a power-hungry monster in an attempt to reach 5GHz.
> 
> One of the best things about the 3600 I used to have was that it was pretty much silent on a modest air cooler.





Chrispy_ said:


> This is a new process node from TSMC though, there's literally zero solid data about the efficiency of 7nm EUV at the moment. Your assumptions and guesses are as good as anyone else's at this point. _Rumours and leaks_ point to it being 200-300MHz faster than TSMC's N7 at similar voltages, so in theory 5GHz on Zen3 isn't going to be much hotter than a stock 3900X.
> 
> Not long to wait now for actual, official, independently-verified answers at least.....


You guys are not serious right? Considering the iterations of of each Ryzen, it was always going with a clock boost and not more power draw so I assume it is not the matter of "how power hungry this chip is" but a matter of how many watts are needed to get it running. Which I assume isn't much though. If you look for power hungry chips you should be talking about Intel.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 6, 2020)

ratirt said:


> You guys are not serious right? Considering the iterations of of each Ryzen, it was always going with a clock boost and not more power draw so I assume it is not the matter of "how power hungry this chip is" but a matter of how many watts are needed to get it running. Which I assume isn't much though. If you look for power hungry chips you should be talking about Intel.


I was reacting to the suggestion that the 5900X would have a 150W TDP, which is quite the step up from the 105W of the current 3900X.

Given that Zen3 chips need to be compatible with the cheapest B550 board on the market, with the weediest VRMs the spec will allow, I strongly suspect that the TDP is going to stay the same 65W and 105W.


----------



## Dredi (Oct 10, 2020)

Chrispy_ said:


> I'm not expecting XMP to work with Intel timings on an AMD motherboard, but AMD write AGESA firmware, and that includes speculative memory training.
> 
> At the moment, that memory training gives up on XMP timings far too easily because it doesn't loosen them enough. Even very loose 3600 timings and 1800 FCLK are _waaaay_ better than JEDEC 2133 defaults.
> 
> ...


That’s a fair point. They might be too adamant in following jedec specs on the secondary timings and a more adaptive method would be better. Though I find it likely that there would be a shitstorm of sorts if your xmp set would use different primary timing than what is written on the package, so it would need to figure out how to get them working with secondary timings only.

Luckily there are no systemic problems with XMP as long as you are literate and check the QVL from the motherboards support page.


----------



## mtcn77 (Oct 10, 2020)

I cannot possibly believe all this catcalling was just for FUD. "150 watt" TDP! Try harder next time.


----------

