Behold the Ryzen 3000 CPUs

[fangxp]

 

[TheLostSwede]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1141442142277132289

Some more potential 3600 stuff http://tieba.baidu.com/p/6173322333

 

[dirtyferret]

impressive single core marks for the 3600

 

[HD64G]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1141442142277132289

Some more potential 3600 stuff http://tieba.baidu.com/p/6173322333

A post later on in the last link you posted someone show 200 points in CB15's 1-thread test for the 3600 that surpasses 8700K's stock for stock and ties with 9600K. And we are talking about the less powerful of the Ryzen 3X00! If that is proved to be true, Zen2 will be better than what most expected in all aspects.

 

[trparky]

Whoa.

OK so if I'm reading the screenshots right, a Ryzen 5 3600 clocked at 4.2 GHz has a CPUz single-core benchmark of 502 and a multicore benchmark of 3989. My 8700K clocked at 4.3 GHz has a single-core score of 477 and a multicore score of 3526. This Ryzen 3600 chip has a 100 MHz clock deficit when compared to my 8700K and yet it's still beating it.

 

[dirtyferret]

Whoa.

OK so if I'm reading the screenshots right, a Ryzen 5 3600 clocked at 4.2 GHz has a CPUz single-core benchmark of 502 and a multicore benchmark of 3989. My 8700K clocked at 4.3 GHz has a single-core score of 477 and a multicore score of 3526. This Ryzen 3600 chip has a 100 MHz clock deficit when compared to my 8700K and yet it's still beating it.

Assuming the scores are legit both CPUs should perform basically the same at stock speeds.

 

[trparky]

Now, of course, this may not translate into any real world differences but it's still nice to see that AMD has finally been able to catch up to Intel or at least be within an inch of Intel-like performance.

 

[advanced3]

So kinda like it was pointless to go from 1600-2600 the same seems true for 2600-3600. I'm not gonna lie, I was hoping for better.

 

[trparky]

I'm not gonna lie, I was hoping for better.

Yeah, I was hoping for a thorough ass-kicking for Intel. Ryzen 3000 simply brings them far close to Intel-like performance than they've ever been before.

 

[xkm1948]

This is getting me even more excited for TR3. All the cores for heavy load and the IPC for gaming. As long as the scheduler fix is good for TR platform as well.

 

[dirtyferret]

Yeah, I was hoping for a thorough ass-kicking for Intel. Ryzen 3000 simply brings them far close to Intel-like performance than they've ever been before.

It's solid improvement. The 2600 was behind the i5-8400 in many gaming tests. AMD gives you Intel $350 performance for just $200. I doubt the 3600 OC as well as the 8700k but you should be able to get a few more mhz out of it.

 

[GoldenX]

Looks nice, but those are best case scenarios.

 

[HD64G]

So kinda like it was pointless to go from 1600-2600 the same seems true for 2600-3600. I'm not gonna lie, I was hoping for better.

You are kidding right? The less powerful Ryzen 3000 matches the 8700K and is less than 10% behind the best of Intel's offerings in single-thread performance! Think of the beasts above 3600 that clock close to 5GHz and reply again...

Looks nice, but those are best case scenarios.

Maybe you mean "worst case scenarios" for 3600? Early BIOS, not the best memory that it can work with. It has more and it is the least powerful.

 

[GoldenX]

Maybe you mean "worst case scenarios" for 3600? Early BIOS, not the best memory that it can work with. It has more and it is the least powerful.

I mean both CPU-Z and Cinebench are best case scenarios. Real tests are what we really need.

 

[xorbe]

I need to be beholding a 3950X in my rig though.

 

[Hotobu]

Normally I wouldn't root for or against a company, but I'm glad that Intel has blundered with their 10nm process. It seems to me that since AMD is just now maybe possibly surpassing them on IPC if Intel were ready with 10nm chips they'd be blowing AMD out of the water. From now until the near future they'll be on fairly level footing part for part with AMD being the far better value proposition.

 

[Crackong]

2 more weeeeeeeks

 

[HTC]

Not sure if posted elsewhere already (translated):

Review: AMD Ryzen 5 3600 (X470) (Exclusiva Mundial)

Como viene siendo costumbre con las novedades de AMD, nos adelantamos a su lanzamiento oficial para traeros una jugosa review del nuevo AMD Ryzen 5 3600.

translate.google.com

Original link, for those that wish it: https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2019/06/amd-ryzen-5-3600-x470-review/

They used Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 WiFi motherboard with latest Ryzen 3000 supported BIOS and latest version of Windows 10 with all the mitigations for Intel and AMD. Apparently, the problems of the first generation of Ryzen processors with the memories seem to reproduce in latencies and copies. We shall see if this is true for X570 boards and / or other older gen boards.

This dude was also among the 1st worldwide to release benches for both Zen and Zen + CPUs.

 

[mstenholm]

Not sure if posted elsewhere already (translated):

Review: AMD Ryzen 5 3600 (X470) (Exclusiva Mundial)

Como viene siendo costumbre con las novedades de AMD, nos adelantamos a su lanzamiento oficial para traeros una jugosa review del nuevo AMD Ryzen 5 3600.

translate.google.com

Original link, for those that wish it: https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2019/06/amd-ryzen-5-3600-x470-review/

They used Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 WiFi motherboard with latest Ryzen 3000 supported BIOS and latest version of Windows 10 with all the mitigations for Intel and AMD. Apparently, the problems of the first generation of Ryzen processors with the memories seem to reproduce in latencies and copies. We shall see if this is true for X570 boards and / or other older gen boards.

This dude was also among the 1st worldwide to release benches for both Zen and Zen + CPUs.

Nice find.

I'm not surprised that it wouldn't OC in a x470 board.

 

[shmuck]

I'm not surprised that it wouldn't OC in a x470 board.

You what? Why wouldn't it?

 

[londiste]

I'm not surprised that it wouldn't OC in a x470 board.

You what? Why wouldn't it?

Yeah, I second that. Why wouldn't it?
X470 is high-end chipset, it is not ancient, it is AM4 that AMD has said they'd support at least until next year.
That particular board should be good in terms or VRM as well as BIOS.

 

[Metroid]

Basically what I saw his overlock was to push all cores to 4.2 from 3.6. If he didn't post overclocked beyond 4.2 then must have had a reason which he haven't said.

 

[mstenholm]

Yeah, I second that. Why wouldn't it?
X470 is high-end chipset, it is not ancient, it is AM4 that AMD has said they'd support at least until next year.
That particular board should be good in terms or VRM as well as BIOS.

1: They want to sell X570. Nobody ever promised more than Ryzen 3000 would work with existing boards, not that you will get all the goodies.
2: Not all old boards have beefy VRMs and the new CPUs might pull more then they were original designed for.
If you are disappointed then take it out on AMD.

 

[shmuck]

1: They want to sell X570. Nobody ever promised more than Ryzen 3000 would work with existing boards, not that you will get all the goodies.
2: Not all old boards have beefy VRMs and the new CPUs might pull more then they were original designed for.
If you are disappointed then take it out on AMD.

1. Yes, they did. Have you seen the compatibility matrix? Hell, they even went as far as saying if you do not need PCIe 4, then you should go with an older gen board because the performance is the same.
2. Can you explain to me how a decent B450 (let alone X470) board being able to handle an overclocked 2700X won't be able to power a 3700X, another 8-core processor, built on a MORE EFFICIENT node?

I'm not disappointed at AMD, only the nonsense you came up with.

 

[Vayra86]

So kinda like it was pointless to go from 1600-2600 the same seems true for 2600-3600. I'm not gonna lie, I was hoping for better.

Yeah, I was hoping for a thorough ass-kicking for Intel. Ryzen 3000 simply brings them far close to Intel-like performance than they've ever been before.

It just depends how you look at it.

My view on these small steps forward towards Intel ST performance are a constantly repeating confirmation that Intel really wasn't all that lazy all these years, they just made a substantial jump forward and perhaps even too much of it with Sandy Bridge. At some point there just isn't any low hanging fruit left and I think the last decade up until today and the near future confirms that for both AMD and Intel. AMD's Zen is however much better equipped to deal with that reality, being much more scalable and cost effective.