# AMD Ryzen 5000 "Zen 3" "Vermeer" Launch Liveblog



## btarunr (Oct 8, 2020)

AMD is announcing its next-generation Ryzen 5000 series desktop processors in the Socket AM4 package. These 7 nm processors see the implementation of the company's new "Zen 3" microarchitecture, and are expected to push the performance envelope. AMD CEO Dr Lisa Su takes centerstage in a pre-recorded launch event stream which we are live-blogging. These are facts as they appear, along with our analysis.





*Update 16:01 UTC*: Looks like this is a pre-recorded stream made to look live (a premiere). 





*Update 16:02 UTC*: AMD runs through the "Zen" journey.


 

*Update 16:04 UTC*: Dr Su takes centerstage


 

*Update 16:05 UTC*: PS5 + Xbox Series X/S design wins are big for AMD


 

*Update 16:06 UTC*: AMD significantly changed PC performance over the past 3 years.


 

 

*Update 16:08 UTC*: Zen 3


 

*Update 16:09 UTC*: "Best single-threaded performance and gaming performance:" Dr Su


 

*Update 16:09 UTC*: Shipping within Q4 2020, confirmed.

*Update 16:10 UTC*: IPC increases confirmed, new cache topology


 

*Update 16:11 UTC*: Unified 8-core complex per chiplet


 

*Update 16:11 UTC*: 19% IPC Uplift!!!


 

 

*Update 16:13 UTC*: Breakdown of the performance contributions


 

*Update 16:14 UTC*: Relentless commitment to energy efficiency, +24% vs prior generation


 

*Update 16:14 UTC*: 2.8x efficiency vs. Core i9-10900K


 

*Update 16:15 UTC*: "Zen 4" on 5 nm confirmed.

*Update 16:16 UTC*: Ryzen 9 5900X 12-core/24-thread, 19% IPC increase, higher clock speeds, 105W TDP


 

*Update 16:16 UTC*: 28% gaming performance increase vs. 3900XT. AMD has leveled up to Intel


 

*Update 16:18 UTC*: Massive gaming performance gains. Average 26% gain in CPU-limited resolutions. AMD already has parity in high-resolutions that are GPU-limited


 

*Update 16:19 UTC*: AMD beats Intel in single-threaded Cinebench. It's curtains for Intel's 1T CPU leadership


 

*Update 16:20 UTC*: The best possible PC gaming experience: Rob Hallock.

*Update 16:21 UTC*: The World's Best Gaming CPUs. Lineup:


 

*Update 16:21 UTC*: Prices:


 

*Update 16:22 UTC*: Available in November 5

*Update 16:22 UTC*: 16-core Ryzen 9 5950X, 105W


 

*Update 16:23 UTC*: Up to 27% faster than the R9 3950X


 

*Update 16:23 UTC*: 59% faster than i9-10900K in creator workloads. And Gaming. Priced $799


 

*Update 16:24 UTC*: Radeon Big Navi teaser


 

*Update 16:25 UTC*: 5900X + 6000 series flagship performance preview


 

*Update 16:26 UTC*: That was fast! No pointless celebrity demoes, just "we're the fastest, kthxbai"

*Update 16:38 UTC*: AMD will bundle Far Cry 6 with the 5950X, 5900X, 5800X in select markets.

*Update 16:39 UTC*: And this concludes our liveblog. Wow.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## phanbuey (Oct 8, 2020)

buy calls, make popcorn... I am ready.


----------



## kapone32 (Oct 8, 2020)

This is very interesting.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Oct 8, 2020)

sooo shall I finally drop my 2600k? think I might just do that

Also the Radeon bit is just epic, the background music makes it feel like im watching a Halo trailer, good stuff.
But yeah as we can see its not quite up there with the 3080 but beats the 2080(ti), now its just a matter of powerconsumption and price and we can have a winner.


----------



## KarymidoN (Oct 8, 2020)

That Cinebench ST was scary.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 8, 2020)

Hmm a new Ryzen 3 rig to start out 2021 is sounding really nice.


----------



## kapone32 (Oct 8, 2020)

This is why I bought a X570  board.


----------



## ShurikN (Oct 8, 2020)

Damn that's a $50 increase across the stack, with 8 core getting the biggest shaft as they took the 3800X for base. Well 6 core it is for me.


----------



## btarunr (Oct 8, 2020)

Hello 5900X, here I come.


----------



## kapone32 (Oct 8, 2020)

According to the benchmarks the 6000 is just as fast as the 3080 in COD Warzone?


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 8, 2020)

wow big navi matches rtx 3080 at 4k in 3 games, about 5 fps slower than 3080, but still wow. well done AMD


----------



## KainXS (Oct 8, 2020)

Intel Dethroned


----------



## Turmania (Oct 8, 2020)

I was expecting some increase is frequencies. I think it is priced a bit on the highside, but damn I want it !


----------



## Hellfire (Oct 8, 2020)

5900x/5950x gaming performance will be interesting to follow...


----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Oct 8, 2020)

kapone32 said:


> According to the benchmarks the 6000 is just as fast as the 3080 in COD Warzone?


88 fps in cod is amazing. Pretty close to 3080. Hope they price it at $500.


----------



## kapone32 (Oct 8, 2020)

ShurikN said:


> Damn that's a $50 increase across the stack, with 8 core getting the biggest shaft as they took the 3800X for base. Well 6 core it is for me.


I am willing to bet the 5600 will be a nice version of a 3300X upgrade.


----------



## Franzen4Real (Oct 8, 2020)

please just let there be availability.... 5900X incoming.

Interesting charts on Big Navi at the end. Looks to be between 3070 and 3080 (only based on two titles compared to TPU's 3080 benchmarks). Now it just comes down to the price.


----------



## birdie (Oct 8, 2020)

Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.

The pricing for the Ryzen 5000 series:

5600X: $300 - very close to the price of the 3700X which featured two more cores.
5800X: $450
5900X: $550
5950X: $800

All priced $50 higher than their Ryzen 3000 counterparts. What's more, there's no sign of 5700X which was a sweet spot for the previous gen Ryzen CPUs. Either you pay $50 more for the 3600X alternative or you have to pay whopping $120 more to get just two more cores.

Customers first, my ass. More like profits first now that Intel still cannot solve their 10nm node.


----------



## Chomiq (Oct 8, 2020)

This made me excited about Zen 4.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 8, 2020)

They're being quite unequivocal about the performance. I actually giggled when they paired it against the Intel chip on ST.

Go AMD. Just remember folks, this is the poorer company competing, it seems, toe-to-toe with the big guy.

Unfortunately, I think Big Navi might fall short of Nvidia's best.


----------



## jesdals (Oct 8, 2020)

Think I might go all in with a 5950x but didnt se any info about compability with mainboards and would have liked to see the Ifinity speeds


----------



## kapone32 (Oct 8, 2020)

mrthanhnguyen said:


> 81 fps is slower than 3080. I just saw its avg 90fps with the 3080 on youtube.


88 vs 90 is nothing.


----------



## Hyderz (Oct 8, 2020)

that single core improvement is outstanding


----------



## qcmadness (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.
> 
> The pricing for the Ryzen 5000 series:
> 
> ...



If you don't have any counter parts from Intel, then AMD could charge as high as they like. Just like how NVIDIA charges for GPUs.


----------



## milewski1015 (Oct 8, 2020)

Must...wait...for...AM5/DDR5...


----------



## Rahnak (Oct 8, 2020)

I hope they do a 5700X later on. There's a pretty big price gap between the 5600X and the 5800X.


----------



## ShurikN (Oct 8, 2020)

the54thvoid said:


> Unfortunately, I think Big Navi might fall short of Nvidia's best.


Looks like it's 10fps down on 3080 in two of the 3 games. I'll come down to pricing. Probably another 5700XT VS 2070Super situation (in terms of price/perf).


----------



## kapone32 (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.
> 
> The pricing for the Ryzen 5000 series:
> 
> ...


What is your point? Who isn't excited about these especially if you were able to compare the 3100x vs the 3300x. That is why I am happy to pay that for a 5600X.


----------



## milewski1015 (Oct 8, 2020)

Rahnak said:


> I hope they do a 5700X later on. There's a pretty big price gap between the 5600X and the 5800X.


Agreed. Hopefully there'll be some non-X SKUs too, since at MSRP the X SKUs are generally not worth spending more for


----------



## chaosmassive (Oct 8, 2020)

if AMD follow their tradition, there will be non X SKU which hopefully shave off another 50-100 unnecessary spending on X counterpart.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Oct 8, 2020)




----------



## Frick (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.
> 
> The pricing for the Ryzen 5000 series:
> 
> ...



No one assumed otherwise. At least not anyone worth listening to.


----------



## kapone32 (Oct 8, 2020)

jesdals said:


> Think I might go all in with a 5950x but didnt se any info about compability with mainboards and would have liked to see the Ifinity speeds


There should be zero issues with B550 and X570 boards with BIOS updates. Even budget B550 boards have BIOS flashback.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 8, 2020)

lynx29 said:


> wow big navi matches rtx 3080 at 4k in 3 games, about 5 fps slower than 3080, but still wow. well done AMD



Matches? 

I mean go to Wizz RTX3080 review and look at Gears 5 and BL3 4k numbers. Big Navi is like ~10fps lower in both those games. 

Basically sits exactly where I thought it would.


----------



## kapone32 (Oct 8, 2020)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Matches?
> 
> I mean go to Wizz RTX3080 review and look at Gears 5 and BL3 4k numbers. Big Navi is like ~10fps lower in both those games.
> 
> Basically sits exactly where I thought it would.


But which Navi card is it?


----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Oct 8, 2020)

Where is the 5ghz hype train?


----------



## BoboOOZ (Oct 8, 2020)

the54thvoid said:


> Unfortunately, I think Big Navi might fall short of Nvidia's best.


They said Radeon 6000, we don(t even know if what we saw was the biggest Navi.


----------



## gravel (Oct 8, 2020)

AMD The World's Best Gaming CPUs ...rip intel


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 8, 2020)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Matches?
> 
> I mean go to Wizz RTX3080 review and look at Gears 5 and BL3 4k numbers. Big Navi is like ~10fps lower in both those games.
> 
> Basically sits exactly where I thought it would.



still not bad considering how big of a leap the 3080 was.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 8, 2020)

kapone32 said:


> But which Navi card is it?





BoboOOZ said:


> They said Radeon 6000, we don(t even know if what we saw was the biggest Navi.



This is true we don't know.



lynx29 said:


> still not bad considering how big of a leap the 3080 was.



3080 wasnt that big of a leap if we are talking pure rasterization.


----------



## birdie (Oct 8, 2020)

mrthanhnguyen said:


> Where is the 5ghz hype train?



Derailed as it's been with AMD for the past 10 years?


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 8, 2020)

mrthanhnguyen said:


> Where is the 5ghz hype train?



Clock frequency is less important than IPC. It's why AMD had their crazy high power FX chips at 5GHz. It was just a number. Now they're serious. Thanks to an engineer named Su.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 8, 2020)

lynx29 said:


> still not bad considering how big of a leap the 3080 was.





the54thvoid said:


> Clock frequency is less important than IPC. It's why AMD had their crazy high power FX chips at 5GHz. It was just a number. Now they're serious. Thanks to an engineer named Su.



Su and Jim Keller


----------



## R0H1T (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.
> 
> The pricing for the Ryzen 5000 series:
> 
> ...


Let me be brutally honest, *Intel don't lower their MSRP they just EOL their processors & launch new ones with more clock speeds or HT* ~ that's their playbook for more than a decade! You want a new gen chip with an old chipset ~ sucks to be you because Intel not only locks you in with their BS OCing premium on their processors but also locks you out of performing upgrades because they just *need to mint $ like there's no tomorrow*. I have a couple of x9xx motherboards with no upgrade path because ~ *Intel *

So stop your *BS comparisons* about what AMD & Intel do


----------



## Punkenjoy (Oct 8, 2020)

mrthanhnguyen said:


> Where is the 5ghz hype train?



That hype train is just another proof than enthousiast don't know what they need. They are able to beat Intel with a CPU that have less Frequency. So do you still need more GHz? or more perf?


----------



## TheLostSwede (Oct 8, 2020)

jesdals said:


> Think I might go all in with a 5950x but didnt se any info about compability with mainboards and would have liked to see the Ifinity speeds


It's all up on their website already 


			https://www.amd.com/en/processors/ryzen


----------



## birdie (Oct 8, 2020)

the54thvoid said:


> Clock frequency is less important than IPC. It's why AMD had their crazy high power FX chips at 5GHz. It was just a number. Now they're serious. Thanks to an engineer named Su.



I'm 100% sure Lisa has had zero input/impact on any Zen uArch. She's a CEO, not a CPU engineer. She might have chimed in on their pricing though.


----------



## Zareek (Oct 8, 2020)

Someone put +$100 for 5800X, 3800X launched at $399.99 so it's $50. Not sure why but it quoted the wrong post.

I'm a little disappointed by the price increases but I suspect this is only a launch price. It gives them room to react as Intel drops it's prices while bagging as much profit from the early adopters as possible.


----------



## laszlo (Oct 8, 2020)

no comment til see the reviews of all ... cpu&gpu...


----------



## Punkenjoy (Oct 8, 2020)

R0H1T said:


> Let me be brutally honest, *Intel don't lower their MSRP they just EOL their processors & launch new ones more clockspeeds or HT* ~ that's their playbook for more than a decade! You want a new gen chip with an old shipset ~ sucks to be you because Intel not only locks you in with their BS OCing premium on their processors but also locks you out of performing upgrades because they just *need to mint $ like there's no tomorrow*. I have a couple of x9xx motherboards with no upgrade path because ~ *Intel *
> 
> So stop your *BS comparisons* about what AMD & Intel do




Yes, if you have a 5xx series motherboard or supported 4xx series motherboard, you will just be able to pay for a new CPU to upgrade where with Intel, you always have to add the cost of a new motherboard. I will certainly buy a 5900x or something like that later down the road (maybe next summer) to replace my 3600.

Drop in replacement are amazing. But hey, don't get too exited, it's pretty clear that there will be a new AMD socket for DDR5. 

Also, i am happy about what i am seeing, but AMD is a corporation. Their goal is to make money. That's it. So don't cheer to much for a company. But i am very happy that there is a fight going on between Intel and AMD. Just hope Intel will fight back hard so AMD have to reply hard and etc...

This is what is good for customer.

Like with GPU, if the rumors that Nvidia cranked up Ampere to fight AMD are true, well it's all good for us no matter what you end up buying.


----------



## v12dock (Oct 8, 2020)

Hmm... Do I go to Microcenter on the 5th...


----------



## B-Real (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.



And who said that AMD is a charitable organization? While they were building the brand, they brought CPUs with lower price and of course better price/performance ratio. But don't worry: with Zen 3, they will still own the better price/performance product title. And I bet that the 5800X for $450 will be better or very close to the 10900K for $488 (which is more like $650).

And do not forget that while with an AMD B motherboard, you get full memory frequency support and the ability to OC, while you can only get higher than 2400 MHz memory with Z Intel mobos, as well as OC capability.



mrthanhnguyen said:


> Where is the 5ghz hype train?


Don't worry, blue boy, your only point remains is to watch the frequency numbers while knowing your 10900K  will be beaten by an AMD product. LOL.


----------



## Octopuss (Oct 8, 2020)

So there won't be any new motherboards, not even new revisions or whatever? I mean, I guess I can buy one now if I run into a discount, good deal or something, right?


----------



## birdie (Oct 8, 2020)

Punkenjoy said:


> you will just be able to pay for a new CPU to upgrade where with Intel, you always have to add the cost of a new motherboard.



Firstly, Intel normally allows two generations of CPUs for the same socket/chipset, so you're basically lying.

Secondly, considering their anemic performance gains from Sandy Bridge up to Comet Lake (for almost eight years) you must have had more money than common sense to upgrade each generation.

With AMD it's indeed different because I don't remember the last time Intel offered a 20% IPC generational uplift. Probably it was Sandy Bridge back in 2011. Ice Lake is around 18% but it hasn't been released as a desktop part and won't be.



Octopuss said:


> So there won't be any new motherboards, not even new revisions or whatever? I mean, I guess I can buy one now if I run into a discount, good deal or something, right?



Why would you need a new mobo when the X570 chipset has all the bells and whistles? PCI-E 4.0, USB 3.2 gen 2, etc.


----------



## Nater (Oct 8, 2020)

Octopuss said:


> So there won't be any new motherboards, not even new revisions or whatever? I mean, I guess I can buy one now if I run into a discount, good deal or something, right?



There already are new revisions announced.  The new Asus boards are on the front page now.  I'm sure there will be more from other brands to follow in the next month.

Just no new chipsets, as of yet.  Doesn't sound like their will be until AM5.


----------



## birdie (Oct 8, 2020)

And when you thought that AMD has basically started price gouging with Ryzen 5000, only the 5600X CPU will feature a stock cooler which means it's not a $50 difference, it's even larger.

What kind of justification would AMD lovers provide? I'm just curios.


----------



## B-Real (Oct 8, 2020)

Octopuss said:


> So there won't be any new motherboards, not even new revisions or whatever? I mean, I guess I can buy one now if I run into a discount, good deal or something, right?


Even the B450-X470 mobos will be able to run these CPUs. But there will definitely be new boards later on: if you check the title here, it says "*AMD Confirms Ryzen 4000 ‘Zen 3’ Desktop CPU Compatibility With X570 & B550 Motherboards*", which 100% means there will be new models.


----------



## Dirtdog (Oct 8, 2020)

It's good for the consumer that they've finally caught up with Intel in gaming, it's been a long time coming and better late than never.  It's a shame they've hiked the prices above Intel levels.

Anyone buying a new CPU will want to consider these but nobody with a recent CPU from either company should feel any urgent imperative to upgrade.


----------



## R0H1T (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Firstly, Intel normally allows* two generations of CPUs for the same socket/chipset*, so you're basically lying.


Normally right so z270--z370-z390 & now z490, are you sure you aren't the one who's lying here?


----------



## Nater (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> And when you thought that AMD has basically started price gauging with Ryzen 5000, only the 5600X CPU will feature a stock cooler which means it's not a $50 difference, it's even larger.
> 
> What kind of justification would AMD lovers provide? I'm just curios.



Did you mean price "gouging"?  Gauging might be the better word actually, I think they priced them just right.  Honestly, they could probably get more for them.


----------



## B-Real (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> And when you thought that AMD has basically started price gauging with Ryzen 5000, only the 5600X CPU will feature a stock cooler which means it's not a $50 difference, it's even larger.
> 
> What kind of justification would AMD lovers provide? I'm just curios.


1. No need to change motherboards, even 2 (later 3 when B650 and X670 comes) generation-old ones.
2. Though the stock coolers were enough for the 3900X, custom coolers provided significantly better temperatures (and maybe dBs too).


----------



## Octopuss (Oct 8, 2020)

Nater said:


> There already are new revisions announced.  The new Asus boards are on the front page now.  I'm sure there will be more from other brands to follow in the next month.


I guess there wouldn't be any way to tell from the descriptions in eshops, so the new revisions will simply eventually replace the old stock.


----------



## B-Real (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Firstly, Intel normally allows two generations of CPUs for the same socket/chipset, so you're basically lying.
> 
> Secondly, considering their anemic performance gains from Sandy Bridge up to Comet Lake (for almost eight years) you must have had more money than common sense to upgrade each generation.


So you had money to change mobos for Intel, but it's shitty from AMD to raise CPU prices... lol.  

BTW, AMD provided 3 generation motherboard compatibility for all their Ryzen series so far (including Zen 3), while allowing to CO with B series motherboards (Intel only lets you do it with Z), plus Intel did that shitty move that their new B series motherboards do not support memories higher than 2400 MHz, which would let you gain extra performance in games or applications.


----------



## xkm1948 (Oct 8, 2020)

That big navi number on 4k is a bit underwhelming TBH


----------



## ZoneDymo (Oct 8, 2020)

xkm1948 said:


> That big navi number on 4k is a bit underwhelming TBH



How can it be? what if its priced at like 600 dollars? 200 dollars less then a 3080? that would be amazing.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Oct 8, 2020)

Octopuss said:


> So there won't be any new motherboards, not even new revisions or whatever? I mean, I guess I can buy one now if I run into a discount, good deal or something, right?


There might be a few new boards, like what Asus announced today, but yes, as we've been telling you for quite some time, just go with something currently available.
Just make sure it has a flashback button or whatever they like to call it, so you can update the UEFI without a CPU in the board.


----------



## illli (Oct 8, 2020)

I'm really curious in the difference in performance between the 5800x vs 5900x. I don't need that many cores in the 5900x, but I wonder how much of a difference that 70MB vs 36MB cache really makes


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 8, 2020)

@R-T-B @TheLostSwede 

How does clock frequency work? like lets say I buy the 5600x, I manage to find one of the 6 cores will hit 4.8ghz 24/7 and rest left at stock.  will games default use that 4.8ghz core? will benchmarks? how do they know that is the core i want to use most?


----------



## Blueberries (Oct 8, 2020)

lynx29 said:


> wow big navi matches rtx 3080 at 4k in 3 games, about 5 fps slower than 3080, but still wow. well done AMD



3070*


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 8, 2020)

illli said:


> I'm really curious in the difference in performance between the 5800x vs 5900x. I don't need that many cores in the 5900x, but I wonder how much of a difference that 70MB vs 36MB cache really makes



for only 100 bucks more it seems silly to me anyone would buy a 5800x. i think they messed up their product stack honestly.



Blueberries said:


> 3070*



mmk.


----------



## agentnathan009 (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.
> 
> The pricing for the Ryzen 5000 series:
> 
> ...



And you feel that this new pricing is somehow unfair? What if you were putting in the hard work to beat Intel, wouldn’t you want to be rewarded for your hard work with higher profit margins on premium products?


----------



## Franzen4Real (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.
> 
> The pricing for the Ryzen 5000 series:
> 
> ...


Everything you said is true. But I think another way we can look at this is that AMD's CPU division is finally in a position to where they can charge enough to not only cover their costs on this gen, but also have funding for R&D to actually keep pushing forward generation over generation. As a consumer, sure, I don't want to pay higher prices, but I also don't want the _only_ company that can put Intel in check to be stagnant or dragging behind (i.e. Bulldozer days). I want to see a true fight between them, not a "good enough" option. To me it looks like they are doing this exactly.
Secondly, as a long time ATi customer, after the buyout I watched that GPU division prop up the CPU division during the Bulldozer days to get them to ZEN, at the cost of GPU's falling behind. AMD can now take the profits from a successful ZEN2/3 and use it to boost the GPU division and hopefully become as competitive as their CPU's today (at all performance tiers).

TLDR: I don't see the prices as a negative. Actually, I think it's long overdue for AMD to stop being Generation Entitlement's best friend at their own detriment, and start charging what they _need _ to charge in order to thrive and outpace competition. We also have to remember that whether we talk about AMD, Intel, or nVidia--- the closer we get to physical limitations of silicon, the cost of development and engineering skyrockets, as they have already picked all low hanging fruit performance-wise long ago.


----------



## B-Real (Oct 8, 2020)

xkm1948 said:


> That big navi number on 4k is a bit underwhelming TBH


Do note that all 3 games run better on NV cards (Techspot review vs. individual game benchmark reviews).




Blueberries said:


> 3070*


It can't match the 3070 as we don't even have rumours about its performance (and we don't even have non-AMD benchmarks of the RX 6000). Only NV said "faster than 2080Ti", however, Galax pictures showed it's under it.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Oct 8, 2020)

lynx29 said:


> @R-T-B @TheLostSwede
> 
> How does clock frequency work? like lets say I buy the 5600x, I manage to find one of the 6 cores will hit 4.8ghz 24/7 and rest left at stock.  will games default use that 4.8ghz core? will benchmarks? how do they know that is the core i want to use most?


Unfortunately not. The core allocation works just like on any other CPU, as you can't set the fastest core to be the "default" core that kicks in.
What you want to hope for is core 1 being the fastest one, but most people aren't that lucky.
In the case of my current CPU, core 8 is the fastest one, followed by core 4 and then 2 and 7, at least according to Ryzen Master.
On the plus side of these new chips, you have eight cores in a single CCX, which should hopefully allow for a bit better utilization of the cores, whereas in the Zen 2, the first CCX seems to be utilised more than the second CCX. Right now, 3/4 cores in my second CCX are asleep, with all the cores in the first CCX being active.


----------



## B-Real (Oct 8, 2020)

agentnathan009 said:


> And you feel that this new pricing is somehow unfair? What if you were putting in the hard work to beat Intel, wouldn’t you want to be rewarded for your hard work with higher profit margins on premium products?


Still, it will be the better price/performance CPU for sure. And I would bet on it that the $450 5800X will be on par (or maybe beat) the 10900K. So regarding the same-strength CPUs, AMD will probably remain cheaper too. Not to mention you need Z motherboard for Intel CPUs to be able to use memories over 2400 MHz.


----------



## Blueberries (Oct 8, 2020)

B-Real said:


> It can't match the 3070 as we don't even have rumours about its performance (and we don't even have non-AMD performance of the RX 6000). Only NV said "faster than 2080Ti", however, Galax pictures showed it's under it.



6000 will be 15% slower than a 3080. I've been alive for enough of these launches to tell you their goal is to out price the 3070/3060.


----------



## Pumper (Oct 8, 2020)

The price of 5800X makes not sense: +$150 for 2 extra cores over 5600X, then only +$100 for 4 more cores on 5900X and the MSRP higher than the current prices of 3900X. That IPC gain looks great, but it does not seem to be all that relevant in games that aren't already running at 150+ FPS.

5800X should have been the rumored 10core CPU, with 8core 5700X in the middle.


----------



## B-Real (Oct 8, 2020)

Blueberries said:


> 6000 will be 15% slower than a 3080. I've been alive for enough of these launches to tell you their goal is to out price the 3070/3060.


Yes, and check the results of the linked Borderlands 3 benchmark: RX 5700 XT is slower than a 2070, where in reality it sits in the middle between the 2070 and 2070 Super in average.


----------



## Turmania (Oct 8, 2020)

Very disappointed with their pricing of the products.


----------



## kapone32 (Oct 8, 2020)

TheLostSwede said:


> On the plus side of these new chips, you have eight cores in a single CCX, which should hopefully allow for a bit better utilization of the cores, whereas in the Zen 2, the first CCX seems to be utilised more than the second CCX. Right now, 3/4 cores in my second CCX are asleep, with all the cores in the first CCX being active.


This why I am excited the 3300X is in every way faster than the 3100X because of this, You can feel it too.


----------



## DemonicRyzen666 (Oct 8, 2020)

Blueberries said:


> 6000 will be 15% slower than a 3080. I've been alive for enough of these launches to tell you their goal is to out price the 3070/3060.



Borderlands 3 is brought to life with Unreal Engine 4, which takes advantage of DirectX 12 and Direct X 11 with some AMD-specific features, such as FidelityFX. In our testing, we used *DirectX 11* _because the DirectX 12 renderer has extremely long loading times and some instability_. We will switch to the new renderer once these issues are ironed out.

This from the techpowerup reviews for all of those 3080.

doesn't compare vs DX12.


----------



## ObiFrost (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.
> 
> The pricing for the Ryzen 5000 series:
> 
> ...


Expect XT refresh and 3100/3300x/3500x cutdowns eventually, hence why I'm waiting patiently for AM5...


----------



## ShurikN (Oct 8, 2020)

DemonicRyzen666 said:


> Borderlands 3 is brought to life with Unreal Engine 4, which takes advantage of DirectX 12 and Direct X 11 with some AMD-specific features, such as FidelityFX. In our testing, we used *DirectX 11* _because the DirectX 12 renderer has extremely long loading times and some instability_. We will switch to the new renderer once these issues are ironed out.
> 
> This from the techpowerup reviews for all of those 3080.
> 
> doesn't compare vs DX12.


Nice observation.


----------



## Mats (Oct 8, 2020)

birdie said:


> Firstly, Intel normally allows two generations of CPUs for the same socket/chipset, so you're basically lying.


No, you should read up before posting.
8700K = new Z370 board
9900K = new Z390 board
10900K = new Z490 board
(or budget variants)

_*Normally *_*doesn't apply here, as soon as the core count started to go beyond four, a new board was needed every time. *What you're referring to happened up until the 7700K in January 2017, which could be used with the older Z170 chipset.
And stop calling people liars, you can do better than that.


----------



## sk8er (Oct 8, 2020)

Franzen4Real said:


> Everything you said is true. But I think another way we can look at this is that AMD's CPU division is finally in a position to where they can charge enough to not only cover their costs on this gen, but also have funding for R&D to actually keep pushing forward generation over generation. As a consumer, sure, I don't want to pay higher prices, but I also don't want the _only_ company that can put Intel in check to be stagnant or dragging behind (i.e. Bulldozer days). I want to see a true fight between them, not a "good enough" option. To me it looks like they are doing this exactly.
> Secondly, as a long time ATi customer, after the buyout I watched that GPU division prop up the CPU division during the Bulldozer days to get them to ZEN, at the cost of GPU's falling behind. AMD can now take the profits from a successful ZEN2/3 and use it to boost the GPU division and hopefully become as competitive as their CPU's today (at all performance tiers).
> 
> TLDR: I don't see the prices as a negative. Actually, I think it's long overdue for AMD to stop being Generation Entitlement's best friend at their own detriment, and start charging what they _need _ to charge in order to thrive and outpace competition. We also have to remember that whether we talk about AMD, Intel, or nVidia--- the closer we get to physical limitations of silicon, the cost of development and engineering skyrockets, as they have already picked all low hanging fruit performance-wise long ago.



Very relaxing, thanks. This holiday season will be awesome for both console & pc gamers, so much choices


----------



## TheLostSwede (Oct 8, 2020)

Octopuss said:


> I guess there wouldn't be any way to tell from the descriptions in eshops, so the new revisions will simply eventually replace the old stock.


----------



## birdie (Oct 8, 2020)

Mats said:


> No, you should read up before posting.
> 8700K = new Z370 board
> 9900K = new Z390 board
> 10900K = new Z490 board
> ...



Socket 1156: supports both Lynnfield and Clarkdale CPUs.
Socket 1155: supports both Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge CPUs.
Socket 1151 revision 1: supports both Sky Lake and Kaby Lake CPUs.
Socket 1200: supports Comet Lake and Rocket Lake CPUs.

Now there are outliers which you've shown but in your first blanket statement you claimed each new generation of Intel CPUs require a new socket. Sorry, you lied.


----------



## Cheeseball (Oct 8, 2020)

ShurikN said:


> Looks like it's 10fps down on 3080 in two of the 3 games. I'll come down to pricing. Probably another 5700XT VS 2070Super situation (in terms of price/perf).



And this is fine, tbh.

The RX 5700 XT is a really good chip at $400. It may be within 5% to 15% slower than the RTX 2070 Super, but it is $100 cheaper.

I'm going to throw in my guess that the RX 6900 XT will be $599 just to undercut the RTX 3080.

Also they should've aimed at just adding $50 more to all the CPUs compared to the previous generation. My 3800X is doing pretty well but the single-core performance is what I'm after. 5800XT (8-core) at $450 is quite overpriced, especially since I got the 3800X at only $320 during last year's Black Friday. I was planning to go 5900XT as a reasonable upgrade, but not at $550.


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 8, 2020)

ZoneDymo said:


> sooo shall I finally drop my 2600k? think I might just do that
> 
> Also the Radeon bit is just epic, the background music makes it feel like im watching a Halo trailer, good stuff.
> But yeah as we can see its not quite up there with the 3080 but beats the 2080(ti), now its just a matter of powerconsumption and price and we can have a winner.


We seem to be in the same boat apparently. I was thinking of buying a 5900x or 5950x since it will be mainly used for programming (my day job), and will finally get to replace this old trash (2600k). Since this will be the last platform to support the DDR4 and since it is pretty cheap nowadays, I was thinking of even going 128 GB, since I easily burn through the 32 GB when running 20 - 30 microservice docker instances when doing development.


----------



## Cheeseball (Oct 8, 2020)

DemonicRyzen666 said:


> Borderlands 3 is brought to life with Unreal Engine 4, which takes advantage of DirectX 12 and Direct X 11 with some AMD-specific features, such as FidelityFX. In our testing, we used *DirectX 11* _because the DirectX 12 renderer has extremely long loading times and some instability_. We will switch to the new renderer once these issues are ironed out.
> 
> This from the techpowerup reviews for all of those 3080.
> 
> doesn't compare vs DX12.



This is true. The RX 6000 series should have a slight advantage at DX12 in Borderlands 3, but please take note that the DX12 renderer is still incomplete even today. I know this because I actively play using a RX 5700 XT at 3880x1440p. There is stuttering when traveling through the world and the load times are longer than using the DX11 renderer. Not sure why Gearbox isn't working with Epic to fix this yet.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 8, 2020)

Cheeseball said:


> And this is fine, tbh.
> 
> The RX 5700 XT is a really good chip at $400. It may be within 5% to 15% slower than the RTX 2070 Super, but it is $100 cheaper.
> 
> ...



Black Friday isnt a normal selling situation. Seems wierd to use that for comparison on pricing.



Cheeseball said:


> This is true. The RX 6000 series should have a slight advantage at DX12 in Borderlands 3, but please take note that the DX12 renderer is still incomplete even today. I know this because I actively play using a RX 5700 XT at 3880x1440p. There is stuttering when traveling through the world and the load times are longer than using the DX11 renderer. Not sure why Gearbox isn't working with Epic to fix this yet.



Similar issue with Battlefield and Battlefront in DX12 and thats with Frostbite.


----------



## Cheeseball (Oct 8, 2020)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Black Friday isnt a normal selling situation. Seems wierd to use that for comparison on pricing.



Well, that's the thing. If I'm not mistaken the original launch price of the 3800X was $399, but even then this is still $50 over the part it was supposed to replace.

Then again (I almost forgot about this one) its technically replacing the refresh 3800XT which is $399, so I guess the $50 uplift is fine? I can always wait for a sale on the 5900X to go down to $499 or maybe even $450.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 8, 2020)

Cheeseball said:


> Well, that's the thing. If I'm not mistaken the original launch price of the 3800X was $399, but even then this is still $50 over the part it was supposed to replace.
> 
> Then again (I almost forgot about this one) its technically replacing the refresh 3800XT which is $399, so I guess the $50 uplift is fine? I can always wait for a sale on the 5900X to go down to $499 or maybe even $450.



I dont see an issue with pricing. If I was okay with Intel doing basically the same thing for years while they had the performance crown, im okay with AMD doing the same. And it sounds like AMD will quite literally have the performance crown for more than just non gaming workloads.


----------



## Zach_01 (Oct 8, 2020)

TheLostSwede said:


> Unfortunately not. The core allocation works just like on any other CPU, as you can't set the fastest core to be the "default" core that kicks in.
> What you want to hope for is core 1 being the fastest one, but most people aren't that lucky.
> In the case of my current CPU, core 8 is the fastest one, followed by core 4 and then 2 and 7, at least according to Ryzen Master.
> On the plus side of these new chips, you have eight cores in a single CCX, which should hopefully allow for a bit better utilization of the cores, whereas in the Zen 2, the first CCX seems to be utilised more than the second CCX. Right now, 3/4 cores in my second CCX are asleep, with all the cores in the first CCX being active.


ZEN2 is indeed a little mess with those high-med-low "quality" cores. The lucky users got the best ones in 1 CCX and the worst in luck got them scattered around 2 or even 4 CCXs. On top that unluck here comes the ignorant windows scheduler to load all cores almost equally to any given load, not just single/low thread work. Theoretically 1usmus's Universal power plan do some right on this, but still not much on the unlucky ones with "high quality" cores scattered on all CCXs. By giving Win scheduler the knowledge of core quality its trying to load the highest ones but also try to keep most loaded threads on the same CCX. And this applies to any given workload from 1% to 100%. But with the exact opposite benefit margin.

Red: Best cores
Yellow: CCXs
Watch closely the effective clocks and the thread loading. Actual clocking without all C-states included does not really matter and thats what eff clock is.
This is after 5+hours of light workload, eveyday simple usage of internet and videos. I can show also gaming and 100% loads.


----------



## Chomiq (Oct 8, 2020)

Blueberries said:


> 6000 will be 15% slower than a 3080. I've been alive for enough of these launches to tell you their goal is to out price the 3070/3060.


It might be in 4K, it might not be in 1440p. 3080 gains a lot in 4K due to the high number of shaders.


----------



## arbiter (Oct 8, 2020)

Pumper said:


> The price of 5800X makes not sense: +$150 for 2 extra cores over 5600X, then only +$100 for 4 more cores on 5900X and the MSRP higher than the current prices of 3900X. That IPC gain looks great, but it does not seem to be all that relevant in games that aren't already running at 150+ FPS.
> 
> 5800X should have been the rumored 10core CPU, with 8core 5700X in the middle.


150$? Um reports are that 5800x and up doesn't even come with a cooler so that 150$ is more closer to 250$


----------



## Selaya (Oct 8, 2020)

Pumper said:


> The price of 5800X makes not sense: +$150 for 2 extra cores over 5600X, then only +$100 for 4 more cores on 5900X and the MSRP higher than the current prices of 3900X. That IPC gain looks great, but it does not seem to be all that relevant in games that aren't already running at 150+ FPS.
> 
> 5800X should have been the rumored 10core CPU, with 8core 5700X in the middle.


If you look at how the CCDs are shaped and CPUs are made, this makes perfect sense. The 5600 can use defective CCDs and disable 2 cores while 5800 requires flawless ones. Same with the 5900, which is 2 5600s duct-taped together.

Honestly, either a 7-core or 2-CCD 8 core 5700 would make the most sense, from an engineering PoV.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 8, 2020)

Expensive. 

But if it beats Intel hands down in all scenarios at lower power draw then AMD are right to ask for _at least_ what Intel have been ripping people off with for the last decade.

On top of superior performance and energy efficiency, it's also not subject to continual and repeated performance degredation through Spec-ex attacks that Intel's horribly-dated architecture is _still_ subject to.

I'll wait for independent reviews of course, but they'll be out before any of us can actually buy these anyway....


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 9, 2020)

Mats said:


> No, you should read up before posting.
> 8700K = new Z370 board
> 9900K = new Z390 board
> 10900K = new Z490 board
> ...



Except that you're wrong.

This all assumes the board maker provides a BIOS update, but that would be true for AMD boards as well :

6700k and 7700k will work on a Z170 or Z270
The 8700K and 9900K will work on a Z370.  
8th and 9th gen work on Z3XX and so on. 
10th and upcoming 11th gen Rocket Lake will work on Z4XX

Intel has a sustained record across the previous 4 processor generations of motherboard chipsets working for 2 generations.  

If you really want to get technical, it's possible to make a 9900K work on a Z170 - with an overclock -  that's 4 gens (there are many such guides out there):


----------



## xman2007 (Oct 9, 2020)

arbiter said:


> 150$? Um reports are that 5800x and up doesn't even come with a cooler so that 150$ is more closer to 250$


it was a $30 cooler at best that was adequate, now you want to mitigate that with a high end air cooler or 240m AIO at $100???      add $100 to all previous Intel CPU's that shipped with no cooler then talk about how more expensive it is, fml you can't please some people


----------



## genralramius (Oct 9, 2020)

birdie said:


> Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.
> 
> The pricing for the Ryzen 5000 series:
> 
> ...



Do not forget that they increased the L3 cache to 32 MB. Also they did a redesign on the CCX.



arbiter said:


> 150$? Um reports are that 5800x and up doesn't even come with a cooler so that 150$ is more closer to 250$



If your are upgradeing from Ryzen 3000 series you already have a cooler.
If you are upgrading from Intel CPU circa 2017 or above and you are not using the stock Intel cooler, than that cooler should have a AM4 option either in the box, or for cheap.


----------



## Zach_01 (Oct 9, 2020)

genralramius said:


> Do not forget that they increased the L3 cache to 32 MB. Also they did a redesign on the CCX.


3600/3600X already has L3 cache of 32MB. The difference now is that all cache is unified available to all cores.



genralramius said:


> If your are upgradeing from Ryzen 3000 series you already have a cooler.
> If you are upgrading from Intel CPU circa 2017 or above and you are not using the stock Intel cooler, than that cooler should have a AM4 option either in the box, or for cheap.


I agree with the upgrade option but you have to consider the new builds also. Although a large number of the new does replace the stock cooler from day one.

————

Also we must consider that 5600X can replace 3700X even with 2 cores short. 25% less cores but with uplift performance per core. So mostly would be about the same with all core workloads with the 3700X but with a lot higher single thread and gaming performance from better IPC and higher clock. And it’s 30$ less msrp from 3700X.
It’s half of an upgrade to 3700X but it is better.


----------



## Argentrx (Oct 9, 2020)

you ever get the feeling its like rocky 1,2,3,4,5,6 and so on and so forth...... higher prices now until intel take the performance crown again....then theyll hit back as best they can ... it really is the rocky balboa of pc tech .... its like the old days of thoroughbred and palomino all over again....


----------



## medi01 (Oct 9, 2020)

the54thvoid said:


> Unfortunately, I think Big Navi might fall short of Nvidia's best.


From what we know so far:

1) 3080 was a desperate move to counter Big Navi
2) It is expensive to produce, power hungry, buggy piece of hardware with *no serious availability (at that price) for MONTHS TO COME *(most likely scenario is more expensive 20GB version later on)

3070 is the only real product (in terms of "will be sold") that RDNA2 will complete with and from what we see Lisa will wipe the floor with Huang's offerings.
"DLSS", "RT, "Drivers" FUD will intensify, but will have limited effect.


----------



## Super XP (Oct 9, 2020)

Redesigning the cache system was genius. AMD shows how to innovate again and again. 
Looking forward to a Ryzen 7 - 5700x to replace my Ryzen 7 - 1700x. 3 Generations later sounds like a sound upgrade.   



medi01 said:


> From what we know so far:
> 
> 1) 3080 was a desperate move to counter Big Navi
> 2) It is expensive to produce, power hungry, buggy piece of hardware with *no serious availability (at that price) for MONTHS TO COME *(most likely scenario is more expensive 20GB version later on)
> ...


Many people underestimate RDNA2, including Nvidia themselves. The RTX 3080 was in fact a desperation by Nvidia. When was the last time Nvidia launched a product that had so many issues? I can't recall at the moment. The key to RDNA2 is the rumored Infinity Cache that is suppose to play a huge role in performance by allowing AMD to utilize a smaller 256-bit memory bus (takes up less space) all while maintaining or exceeding performance if having a 512-bit memory bus - For Example!


----------



## mahoney (Oct 9, 2020)

So no 5Ghz on the AM4 platform?  
That adored leak for the 3000 series is looking  even more dumber now


----------



## Bytales (Oct 9, 2020)

birdie said:


> Let me be brutally honest. AMD is no different than Intel in terms of dictating prices when they have the performance crown.
> 
> The pricing for the Ryzen 5000 series:
> 
> ...



Hey yo gotta remember, nobody etches those CPUs for free.....
And let me tell yeah, their dirt cheap. Have you see the prices of the Zen2 Threadripper PRO ?
2050 EUR gets you a Lenovo Case, 1 TB hdd, one 1000W PSU, 1x16gb DDR4 3200MHZ ECC Ram, and one 12 core ThreadripperPRO Zen2 CPU(3945WX CPU). 
From Here prices are as follow:
700 EUR more for the 16 core, 3955WX or
2950 EUR more for the 32 core, 3975WX or
6550 EUR more for the 64 core, 3995WX

In my opinion these are the best CPU AMD has made so far.
proper ECC suport, coto-chanell memory support, and a ton of other godies the plebeic CPUs dont get, which shouldnt happen really.

The Threadripper PRO is the peak of ZEN2 technology with everything it can offer. You can call it the Full-Option ZEN2 CPU.
Either im gonna scratch my ass and get me that, or ill wait for the full Option ZEN3 CPU.

These are the cpus to get, the rest are for the dumb masses ....


----------



## Zach_01 (Oct 9, 2020)

mahoney said:


> So no 5Ghz on the AM4 platform?
> That adored leak for the 3000 series is looking  even more dumber now


And 5950X lost 1.5% more performance. Now that is not worth it... and of course I'm entertained by that commend.

Probably 5950X could hit that last 2% of speed (+100MHz) to achieve the so important 5GHz psychological barrier but I assume it would come with an uneven cost to power draw (+5~10% maybe)


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 9, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> And 5950X lost 1.5% more performance. Now that is not worth it... and of course I'm entertained by that commend.
> 
> Probably 5950X could hit that last 2% of speed (+100MHz) to achieve the so important 5GHz psychological barrier but I assume it would come with an uneven cost to power draw (+5~10% maybe)


Meaning you could probably do it yourself when you loosen up those thermal limits.


----------



## Zach_01 (Oct 9, 2020)

mahirzukic2 said:


> Meaning you could probably do it yourself when you loosen up those thermal limits.


Well if it is like ZEN2 it doesnt work exactly that way. Its something between thermals, power limit, power delivery system, silicon lottety and the clouds in the sky.

ZEN2 boosting behaviour is 90+% thermal related and the past year I saw very, very rare cases of some high end SKUs like 3800X/3900X/3950X only passing by 25~50MHz the max rated boost speed.
They needed to be really well cooled to do even that +25~50MHz and got the lucky lottery silicon. Those chips (and there is nothing to make me believe than ZEN3 wont be the same as they are on the excactly same node) are hard-coded internally (by silicon FITcontroller) and no "tricks" can by-pass the max rated single core boost. You can trick them to surpass the all-core boost algorithm, as we saw few months ago with the "Power Reporting Deviation" situation that boards report false(less) power draw back to the CPU, but thats it. Nobody can control single core boosting without leading to instability or even to damage.


----------



## BoboOOZ (Oct 9, 2020)

mahirzukic2 said:


> Meaning you could probably do it yourself when you loosen up those thermal limits.


That and there will also probably be XT SKUs next autumn getting past 5GHz.


----------



## r9 (Oct 10, 2020)

So 25% improvement and now beating intel by 5% in games. So the math is that Ryzen 2 was 20% behind Inter, that's not the impression I had for sure.
I have to see the 5600 reviews for sure but right now I think for $299 I would rather pick i7 10700 over Ryzen 5600. And that is really strange to me finding better value with Intel, especially when looking at new CPU that is not even out yet. And full credit to AMD even if you are Intel fan you can't deny that without their pressure you could get something like i7 10700 for $299 from Intel.
So competition is healthy people.
Hope AMD finally brings some competition to NVIDIA as well.
And I hope that we can get few cards to pick from and some healthy supply as well as I can't stand looking at Marketplace right now people still asking $500 for used 2070 and 1080ti.

Desperate implies that Big Navi will blow out of the water RTX 3080/3090 and that will never happen.
The very best we can hope for is for 6900xt to match RTX 3080 and even if that happens NVIDIA will play the 3080ti card and that's that.
There is nothing desperate here, what you seeing is NVIDIA finally have to think about competitively pricing a product as they didn't have competition in a very very long time.
And you can't say NVIDIA counters anything as that implies that they are responding to something that is already out and that's no true either.

Also if you read between the lines AMD haven't released much information and that's only because there is not much to brag about not to mention Lisa's quote "It bill be the most powerful GPU "*we*" every made".
NVDIA product is already out there is no reason to withhold any information, if anything AMD would benefit as it would give reason to potential NVIDIA customers to hold off on buying RTX.
So nothing I've seen so far seen screams that Big Navi will be this great success or anything NVIDIA should be concerned about.
Right now I'll settle with being competitive with 3080 and keep NVIDIA honest.

I think 6900xt will be slower than 3080, maybe match in some games that suits it better but that will be about it, offer more VRAM which will be the main selling point for AMD.
But honest to God I don't know what's the peoples fixation of amount of VRAM as the only valid metric is FPS.
Don't try to sell me that futureproof bs as never ever in history of GPUs extra vram was proven to get you more FPS down the line.

And so much unknowns like what the performance impact would be when enable Raytracing, how does the AMD Raytracing quality compares to NVDIA's, will AMD introduce something to compete with DLS 2.0, does the games will have to have separate implementation for each.

Personally I'm not too  big of a fan of the current state of Raytracing as you pay a hefty performance penalty for something that most times it just looks different but you can't tell if it looks better or not.
And I don't dispute that Raytracing is the way to go it's just I don' think was worth it before when looking at 2080ti price.
As far as DLS 2.0 that's pure awesomeness, the opposite of Raytracing getting hefty performance boost but you barely notice difference in quality.




Super XP said:


> Redesigning the cache system was genius. AMD shows how to innovate again and again.
> Looking forward to a Ryzen 7 - 5700x to replace my Ryzen 7 - 1700x. 3 Generations later sounds like a sound upgrade.
> 
> 
> Many people underestimate RDNA2, including Nvidia themselves. The RTX 3080 was in fact a desperation by Nvidia. When was the last time Nvidia launched a product that had so many issues? I can't recall at the moment. The key to RDNA2 is the rumored Infinity Cache that is suppose to play a huge role in performance by allowing AMD to utilize a smaller 256-bit memory bus (takes up less space) all while maintaining or exceeding performance if having a 512-bit memory bus - For Example!


----------



## mahoney (Oct 10, 2020)

Super XP said:


> Redesigning the cache system was genius. AMD shows how to innovate again and again.
> *Looking forward to a Ryzen 7 - 5700x to replace my Ryzen 7 - 1700x. *3 Generations later sounds like a sound upgrade.
> 
> 
> Many people underestimate RDNA2, including Nvidia themselves. The RTX 3080 was in fact a desperation by Nvidia. When was the last time Nvidia launched a product that had so many issues? I can't recall at the moment. The key to RDNA2 is the rumored Infinity Cache that is suppose to play a huge role in performance by allowing AMD to utilize a smaller 256-bit memory bus (takes up less space) all while maintaining or exceeding performance if having a 512-bit memory bus - For Example!


Will these new cpu's even work on x370/b350 boards?
Didn't they say that only x470/b450 will support them?



			https://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/HzyuYmRJC340D1di.jpg


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 11, 2020)

All I do is game, so I am leaning towards buying the 5600X now, and trying for a 4.4 all core oc, with maybe a 4.5 or 4.6 boost on my best core, lets hope that is core 0.  

I really don't see 8 core cpu's changing gaming benchmarks and I don't do streaming or multitasking of any kind so yeah I think i will save $250 and get the 5600X.  i really don't see why you wouldn't spend $100 more for an extra speed boost and 4 more cores, the 5800x makes no sense to me.


----------



## Turmania (Oct 11, 2020)

lynx29 said:


> All I do is game, so I am leaning towards buying the 5600X now, and trying for a 4.4 all core oc, with maybe a 4.5 or 4.6 boost on my best core, lets hope that is core 0.
> 
> I really don't see 8 core cpu's changing gaming benchmarks and I don't do streaming or multitasking of any kind so yeah I think i will save $250 and get the 5600X.  i really don't see why you wouldn't spend $100 more for an extra speed boost and 4 more cores, the 5800x makes no sense to me.



If you do only gaming, I really do not see why you should even go for 5600x? Go for 3300x or 5300x when it launches.  Unless you do something else on the background those are enough and you save 100 usd and more.


----------



## Zach_01 (Oct 11, 2020)

Turmania said:


> If you do only gaming, I really do not see why you should even go for 5600x? Go for 3300x or 5300x when it launches.  Unless you do something else on the background those are enough and you save 100 usd and more.


Depends... Not every one has the same plans on keeping their hardware the same amount of time. More cores and more threads are going to last you longer.
5600X its not 8/16 CPU but is a 6/12 which is better than 4/8. Plus its clocks and IPC will place it above 3900X for gaming.


----------



## dr.noob (Oct 12, 2020)

Turmania said:


> If you do only gaming, I really do not see why you should even go for 5600x? Go for 3300x or 5300x when it launches.  Unless you do something else on the background those are enough and you save 100 usd and more.



You are seeing it wrong because if you play online games at low settings a better cpu(ipc and cores) will give you a good boost. For example at the moment i use an i7 4770 playing vs 30 players +10 bots gets me around 100fps in Cuisine Royale but i'm aiming to 200-240 in 1080p for less input lag.


----------



## cueman (Oct 15, 2020)

naah, vermeer zen 3 ,feels alot  just zen 2,except price is higher..reql world.
hm,amd has 7nm cpu its pocket over year,but i cant understand...still 7nm ryzen CANT boost 5ghz?

what it is telling..hmm not good...

also,i see only amds price politics change.

i really recomended to check intel Rocket Lake performance 1st!
 intel last 14nm cpu.


and then finaly, we see really what kind cpu amd 7nm ryzen vermeer is, when intel 10nm Adler Lake is here!

its happend Q2/2021.

battle:

intel Adler Lake hydrib 10nm  VS  7nm amd vermeer zen 4 (2021)


i really recomemnded to search info intel Hybrid cpus.
Total new age and performane level start.


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 20, 2020)

cueman said:


> naah, vermeer zen 3 ,feels alot  just zen 2,except price is higher..reql world.
> hm,amd has 7nm cpu its pocket over year,but i cant understand...still 7nm ryzen CANT boost 5ghz?
> 
> what it is telling..hmm not good...
> ...


Dude, I think you are drinking too much of their kool-aid. Lay off the crack.


----------



## Zach_01 (Oct 20, 2020)

cueman said:


> ...still 7nm ryzen CANT boost 5ghz?
> 
> what it is telling..hmm not good...


The only thing that your post is telling is that you are lacking the knowledge of fundamental principals about manufacturing a silicon chip and its operational characteristics and limits of each node, on each manufacturer (like TSMC, GF, Samsung...)

So for you to know, Intel has no other way this time but to come up with a hybrid architecture to be able to compete, at least performance and core count wise. It’s the 10nm consistent failures that forced Intel into this path. This was was not their original plan nor the optimal one.

So I’m not blaming you for trying to present this as the new discovery of the wheel.
It’s simple... you are missing the big picture and you have a mindset of some meaningless numbers.


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 23, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> cueman said:
> 
> 
> > naah, vermeer zen 3 ,feels alot  just zen 2,except price is higher..reql world.
> ...


So I’m not blaming you for trying to present this as the new discovery of the wheel.
It’s simple... you are missing the big picture and you have a mindset of some meaningless numbers.


----------



## Dyatlov A (Oct 24, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> Depends... Not every one has the same plans on keeping their hardware the same amount of time. More cores and more threads are going to last you longer.
> 5600X its not 8/16 CPU but is a 6/12 which is better than 4/8. Plus its clocks and IPC will place it above 3900X for gaming.



Yes 5600X with SMT off will be the new gamer king. I just hope there will be even room for overclocking.


----------



## Zach_01 (Oct 24, 2020)

Dyatlov A said:


> Yes 5600X with SMT off will be the new gamer king. I just hope there will be even room for overclocking.


I really don expect this.
AMD probably took all the room available just like with ZEN2, and why not...
Wanted to hit Intel to everywhere they can.


----------



## iamajunky (Nov 1, 2020)

Think it might be time to upgrade from my 4790k


----------

