Ryzen 3000 listed online early on russian site.

[moproblems99]

Intel's turbo is telling you what AMD's boost will be... how does that work?

Just simply looking at the increases between generations for each company. +300MHz has been normal. Interesting to see if they can get anything above that.

 

[Vario]

Seen some news pop up... I'm still holding out for TPU's review, feel free to throw me one too so I can review it!!

https://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-ryzen-3000-series-matisse-specs,news-59660.html

Taken from Toms site, the link above -

View attachment 114083

Hopefully the cheaper and lower core count ones will overclock as high as the more expensive ones. The only thing I care about, as long as it has at least 6 cores, is the gaming performance and that is dependent on high single thread speed / high frequency. If the 6 or 8 core goes as high as 5.1 that would be pretty nice.

 

[Super XP]

The Ryzen 7 3700X currently looks like the beast that's going to further turn the tides for AMD. If AMD sticks to the specs and price, PURE WIN WIN in my opinion.

The question is will a X570 chipset be released? I think YES.

Quote:
AMD X570 PCH For AM4 Platform and Next-Gen Ryzen 3000 Series CPUs Allegedly Leak Out – The First Consumer Platform To Support PCIe Gen 4.0

 

[EarthDog]

If the 3700x is their big seller, I've lost faith in the tech buying masses. Why not save $100 and still have more cores and threads that will ever be useful during its lifespan.

 

[Vya Domus]

I've lost faith in the tech buying masses.

It's the same sentiment as to when someone goes out and pays 500$ for a 9900K to get 300fps in Fortnite instead of 250 with a 2700X. Same thing really, if one is OK why wouldn't this be ? You gotta also look at this through the scope of all those people that would like to upgrade from their existing AM4 CPU. Buying anything below 12c would be a waste.

 

[EarthDog]

The sentiment is the uneducated consumer sees more cores and thinks it's better for them. While that statement as a whole is true, there are few who can UTILIZE the cores and actually warrant spending more. Adding more cores isnt an upgrade if they arent utilized.

An 8c/16t cpu bought today will last through it's useful lifespan. Unless users NEED the cores and UTILIZE them, spending more isnt worth it.

 

[Deleted member 50521]

 

[Vya Domus]

The sentiment is the uneducated consumer sees more cores and thinks it's better for them. While that statement as a whole is true, there are few who can UTILIZE the cores and actually warrant spending more. Adding more cores isnt an upgrade if they arent utilized.

You have a particular fetish for this "no more cores we don't need them" thing. No matter how much you'll moan, that's where everyone is heading. Even the grand standing champion of single thread performance, Intel.

 

[EarthDog]

Fetish? Lol... cute!

Yeah, clearly I dont like it going in that direction. I'm not trying to stop it...I obviously cant. But I'll speak my mind on it regardless.

"Everyone" is heading there because people are feeble when it comes to tech and doesn't know a 4c/8t cpu is fine with 6c/12t being plenty for their useful lifespan. If you can use more cores/threads, more is helpful. Like RAM....if you cant use it and arent close to maxing it out, more wont help! And most users even here cant max out a hex.

 

[Deleted member 50521]

Fetish? Lol... cute!

Yeah, clearly I dont like it going in that direction. I'm not trying to stop it...I obviously cant. But I'll speak my mind on it regardless.

"Everyone" is heading there because people are feeble when it comes to tech and doesn't know a 4c/8t cpu is fine with 6c/12t being plenty for their useful lifespan. If you can use more cores/threads, more is helpful. Like RAM....if you cant use it and arent close to maxing it out, more wont help! And most users even here cant max out a hex.

Yep exactly this.

 

[Vya Domus]

I've reiterated this many times with you. You just don't want to accept the fact that as of now this is the only way to get extra performance to consumers. Let's just say it would be very tough for Intel and AMD to keep selling 4c/8t CPUs that are barley any faster generation to generation to people, forever.

People are stupid but not stupid enough to not realize that it is better to get something that is significantly faster at least in one area as opposed to sticking with the same thing.

 

[Super XP]

If the 3700x is their big seller, I've lost faith in the tech buying masses. Why not save $100 and still have more cores and threads that will ever be useful during its lifespan.

I have to disagree.
But of course, you are entitled to your opinion. lol

 

[EarthDog]

I've reiterated this many times with you. You just don't want to accept the fact that as of now this is the only way to get extra performance to consumers. Let's just say it would be very though for Intel and AMD to keep selling 4c/8t CPU that are barley any faster generation to generation to people, forever.

People are stupid but not stupid enough to not realize that it is better to get something that is significantly faster at least in one area as opposed to sticking with the same thing.

I accept that fact... it doesnt mean I have to like,support the direction, or pipe down because you may be tired of hearing it. There is an ignore button.

People are that stupid. Look what amd had to back in the day to their naming convention for Pete's sake. They had to label their processors with a number that was an approximate performance value compared to Intel's clockspeeds because consumers cant figure it out... Athlon 64 x2 "4200+"

Nothing has changed here....the general buying public are not informed consumers and think more cores is better....and they are, but ONLY IF THEY CAN BE UTILZED.

I have to disagree.
But of course, you are entitled to your opinion. lol

Why do you disagree? What is your reasoning?

 

[Super XP]

More Cores? Bring it on, not only does Windows 10 benefit from more cores, but so does our daily needs, in terms of multi-tasking. For AMD, at this time they have the upper hand in providing more cores, something Intel can't currently do at the moment. They need to take full advantage of this opportunity. More cores will also help push further development into utilizing multi-cores. Not only in PC Gaming, but everything else too.

 

[Vya Domus]

but ONLY IF THEY CAN BE UTILZED.

THEY ARE UTILIZED.

Seriously, stop it. Open up Task Manager and look at the number of threads in execution, fire up a game and notice how many hundreds of threads are spawned. Guess what, Windows schedules those on no matter how many cores there are (with a few exceptions). More cores bring benefits even with no explicit multi-threading. Modern software is designed like that.

Are there diminishing returns ? Sure, but don't question whether they can be utilized or not, the answer to that is clear and definitive.

 

[EarthDog]

More Cores? Bring it on, not only does Windows 10 benefit from more cores, but so does our daily needs, in terms of multi-tasking. For AMD, at this time they have the upper hand in providing more cores, something Intel can't currently do at the moment. They need to take full advantage of this opportunity. More cores will also help push further development into utilizing multi-cores. Not only in PC Gaming, but everything else too.

Benefits in w10... ok... to what end??? Sitting in desktop and doing web and light work, barely a core is tickled. Not sure what you mean here...

Multi tasking... agree.. but how many are tapping out hex cores? A few. Octos? Even less...

I hope you are right on multithreaded development because that decade since quads have been on the market and hex/octos been here for 8, surely hasnt spurned much considering 95% of PC users will be satisfied with a 6c/12t machine for the next several years. If that rate of development increases, significantly, the more cores thing has a point whenever that time arrives.

THEY ARE UTILIZED.

used and utilized mean two different things.

It's clear they can be used...utilized though...

 

[Vya Domus]

used and utilized mean two different things.

You're hilarious, love ya.

 

[Super XP]

I'm all for innovative and technological advancements in CPU Architecture. This includes many more cores per socket. This isn't the 1980's, today people utilize desktops, notebooks and laptops that can and will benefit from a lot more Cores.

My Work Laptop, an Intel based 4 core (8 thread) is a dogs breakfast. Annoyingly too slow for Excel, Word and Adobe document creation, saving, altering etc., viewing YouTube for music while I work, sure it work's but also buffers too much via 1080p. And our Internet speed is magnitudes fast. Case in Point

 

[cdawall]

I'm all for innovative and technological advancements in CPU Architecture. This includes many more cores per socket. This isn't the 1980's, today people utilize desktops, notebooks and laptops that can and will benefit from a lot more Cores.

My Work Laptop, an Intel based 4 core (8 thread) is a dogs breakfast. Annoyingly too slow for Excel, Word and Adobe document creation, saving, altering etc., viewing YouTube for music while I work, sure it work's but also buffers too much via 1080p. And our Internet speed is magnitudes fast. Case in Point

That's weird my dual core 4 thread 5th Gen i7 doesn't have a single one of those issues.

 

[EarthDog]

That's weird my dual core 4 thread 5th Gen i7 doesn't have a single one of those issues.

I was going to say the same thing... my 5th gen 2c/4t can do those things. No buffering issues with YT or twitch while I'm plugging away in excel, word, paint.net...wordpress via the web. It isnt the fastest thing, but, I wouldn't call it dog doo either.

 

[Super XP]

That's weird my dual core 4 thread 5th Gen i7 doesn't have a single one of those issues.

Is it a work computer or a personal computer. Not sure if it's because the file sizes I work with are between 15MB up to 30MB plus. There's also a lot of corporate BS Installed running in the background.

 

[Vya Domus]

There's also a lot of corporate BS Installed running in the background.

if it's encrypted that would explain it all.

 

[Super XP]

if it's encrypted that would explain it all.

Working for the government, ya I believe everything we do is encrypted. Though I've done some work on my home gaming PC and never ran into such slow down issues.

 

[Deleted member 158293]

More cores opens soooooo many possibilities to software developers which they didn't have before and had to rely on software "tricks" and whatnot.

With 16+ cores in the hands of developers for the last couple years as mainstream parts, software development looks promising indeed in addition to the enhanced multitasking of even small home servers!

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I was going to say the same thing... my 5th gen 2c/4t can do those things. No buffering issues with YT or twitch while I'm plugging away in excel, word, paint.net...wordpress via the web. It isnt the fastest thing, but, I wouldn't call it dog doo either.

It's got to be quite an individual statement ,that i mean, i consider any system running it's Os on HDD to be antiquated now but I'll admit they are not useless, but they are to me, genuinely hate working on them.
So a ok machine to you ,might not seem ok to me and vice versa.
Like at this moment some just couldn't gsme on Ryzen, those extra fps intel gives make life complete , me , not so much since im always juggling finances, what I can afford has the most sway.