AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

[moproblems99]

Overall, they did a great job. In gaming tests that matter, there is basic parity. In productivity, they are doing well. Pricing is cheaper. What's not to like?

EDIT:

As a side note, is it confirmed that PBO and XFR are all fully supported on x470?

EDIT 2:

Just saw the other article and seems it is a mixed bag.

 

[kings]

It's not a revolution and AMD has never said it would be either. People have to stop believing in everything that comes out of youtubers' mouths!

Overall they are good CPUs, they don´t beat Intel across the board, but they are extremely competitive and that's the most important thing!

 

[jinxjx]

Nice review but i wonder why the new Radeon RX 5700 XT wasnt used for shittzz and giggles ?

 

[ps000000]

what about leaked memory oc.

5000+ ,1T on ddr4 on gotlike x570

 

[catulitechup]

Nice review however lacks of some games included in other tests case: anno 1800, ace combat 7, darksiders III, devil may cry 5, divinity original sin II, shadow of war, monster hunter world, rainbow six siege, dragon quest XI and others

 

[Raendor]

You know it was SARCASM from him, right? And you give him an upvote... Nobody said Zen2 was going to be the new gaming king. This was your silly thoughts. Their graphs only showed they came very, VERY close to the best Intels. That's what they did, while having more cores for work for less money. And you can use cheaper mobos compared to Intel for OC (B450 vs. Z370) for non X models.

I can’t upvote a sarcastic post now? Lol. No, zen2 was hyped as intel destroyer, which didn’t happen at all. You can try downplay it, but the only silly thing was fanboyish hype you’re trying to diminish now.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Nice review however lacks of some games included in other tests case: anno 1800, ace combat 7, darksiders III, devil may cry 5, divinity original sin II, shadow of war, monster hunter world, rainbow six siege, dragon quest XI and others

Maybe you should ask @W1zzard if you could become his intern and help him test?

 

[Tartaros]

I got a question @W1zzard, are the intel benchmarks from before the latest patches against vulnerabilities? If not, is there any plan to update them?

 

[bug]

Great value, but comes with two rather big weak spots. The first was already known, IF gobbles up power making these ineficient at idle or light loads and really hard to adapt for mobile. The second, they are still bested by the humble 8600k in gaming. And while the margin is pretty much negligible today, it gives Intel an easy way out if they improve their IPC even slightly in their next generation (yup, I'm one of those still hoping I'll live to see Intel's next architecture ).
And while the 3700X is priced above what I'm willing to pay, I may be tempted by a 3600(X), but I need to see some reviews first. Both for CPU and mobos.

Edit: Again, this throws me back in Athlon days. The original two iterations were ok, but once AMD reached Palomino, that's when the legends (XP1600+, XP2500+ and later 64bits and dual core CPUs) were born.

 

[birdie]

I got a question @W1zzard, are the intel benchmarks from before the latest patches against vulnerabilities? If not, is there any plan to update them?

From the review:

Software: Windows 10 Professional 64-bit
Version 1903 (May 2019 Update)

which means all the security patches for Intel CPUs are applied. There has been a microcode update quite recently but I'm not sure it will change the performance by more than a few percent.

 

[FYFI13]

I got a question @W1zzard, are the intel benchmarks from before the latest patches against vulnerabilities? If not, is there any plan to update them?

I believe he said that he re-ran all of the tests for this review, so OS and systems should be up to date and patched.

 

[dirtyferret]

We need that Ryzen 5 3600 review! That's where it gets really interesting. Likely to get close/match the R7/i5 9600k in gaming, at a lower price point.

Gamers Nexus has a review for the 3600 up right now, nothing unexpected from the review.

The i5-9600K outperforms the 3600 in most of our game benchmarks as games have been slow to adapt to CPUs with more than 8 threads, and the 5GHz+ overclocking potential of the 9600K makes it an even clearer winner for exclusively gaming, but the R5 3600 is the more versatile and potentially cheaper option at $200 MSRP.

 

[Tartaros]

From the review:

Software: Windows 10 Professional 64-bit
Version 1903 (May 2019 Update)

which means all the security patches for Intel CPUs are applied. There has been a microcode update quite recently but I'm not sure it will change the performance by more than a few percent.

I believe he said that he re-ran all of the tests for this review, so OS and systems should be up to date and patched.

Thank you.

 

[TheLostSwede]

what about leaked memory oc.

5000+ ,1T on ddr4 on gotlike x570

What about it?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1147871085150363651

 

[Bluescreendeath]

Underwhelming. Still can’t catch up with stock intel in gaming. And then add oc capabilities that 8700/9700/9900 have. This won’t send intel into panic and price reductions as we hoped.

Neither Intel nor AMD really cares about gaming that much. Gaming is for a tiny segment of the market. These companies make most of their money selling to businesses and general consumers that don't care about gaming, and iirc most of the profits are in the server cpu market. And even among gamers, many if not most gaming consumers probably buy based on which company has better marketing rather than performance charts anyways.

 

[bug]

Neither Intel nor AMD really cares about gaming that much. Gaming is for a tiny segment of the market. These companies make most of their money selling to businesses and consumers that don't care about gaming, and iirc most of the profits are in the server cpu market. And even among gamers, they probably mostly buy bases on which company has better marketing rather than performance charts anyways.

Yeah, don't make that mistake. Whoever doesn't care about gaming is either using a laptop or their smartphone. Businesses are another story, but those are probably still mesmerized by Intel's ME. A similar cancer to MS's AD, imho.

 

[rawadinozor]

Guys am i missing something, when will the 3800x be released?
i game on 1440p so i am going AMD for sure, 1-2 % doesn't really make a difference, i think i will skip pcie4 for now.

 

[yotano211]

Yeah, don't make that mistake. Whoever doesn't care about gaming is either using a laptop or their smartphone. Businesses are another story, but those are probably still mesmerized by Intel's ME. A similar cancer to MS's AD, imho.

Dont say that people who game on laptops dont care because some of us do care. I've only gamed on laptops for the past 10 years and I'll continue with my laptop for the future. But I am not a normal laptop gamer, I usually get higher spec-ed out laptops.

 

[bug]

Dont say that people who game on laptops dont care because some of us do care. I've only gamed on laptops for the past 10 years and I'll continue with my laptop for the future. But I am not a normal laptop gamer, I usually get higher spec-ed out laptops.

I only said who doesn't care about gaming probably isn't using a desktop in 2019. The logical implication is not a commutative operation

Guys am i missing something, when will the 3800x be released?
i game on 1440p so i am going AMD for sure, 1-2 % doesn't really make a difference, i think i will skip pcie4 for now.

Everything but the 3950X is released today. But both here and on Anand it would seem AMD only sampled the 3700X and 3900X. Looking around for the 3600 and 3600X myself. 3600X looks neat, but the 3600 looks like it would be pretty close for 25% less $$$.

 

[B-Real]

And looking at the chart, you could have the 9400F for months around €160. Not bad cpus forvwork by any means, and they can be used easily gor games. But it’s in no way a breakthrough it was advertised as for all that time.

You know you say by that that a 9400F makes 9900K obsolete too, right?

 

[FeelinFroggy]

You know you say by that that a 9400F makes 9900K obsolete too, right?

For gaming there is little reason to get a 9900k.

 

[bug]

For gaming there is little reason to get a 9900k.

If you look at Anand, for many things this CPU is better suited than the 3900X. As has been the norm for a while, going core crazy is not the smart route if your usual workflow isn't that multithreaded.

 

[Xzibit]

I find it crazy how little power the 3700X uses.

 

[Shatun_Bear]

I can’t upvote a sarcastic post now? Lol. No, zen2 was hyped as intel destroyer, which didn’t happen at all. You can try downplay it, but the only silly thing was fanboyish hype you’re trying to diminish now.

AMD has taken the IPC lead over Intel for the first time in FIFTEEN YEARS. They've delivered a CPU (3900X) that is significantly faster than Intel's $1200 7920X in rendering and productivity tasks for less than half the price. At the same time, said CPU is within margin of error (2%) of Intel's very fastest 'gaming king' 9900K in 1440p gaming...

So try to downplay this release all you want, nobody in the market for a new CPU today is going to buy it if they know about CPUs...

 

[bug]

I find it crazy how little power the 3700X uses.

Something doesn't add up there. The 3900X has 50% more cores and 50% more power draw? I mean, it should use lower than that, the IF being in a chiplet on its own. And then there's the 3600X with fewer cores and slightly higher frequencies, yet deemed a 95W part? I expect we'll have some follow-up articles, because there may be more to this than meets the eye.

But yes, if it wasn't for the price, I'd like to run 8 cores within that power budget