AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT Geekbenched, Roughly 5% Faster than 3900X

[btarunr]

AMD recently announced its 3rd Gen Ryzen 3000XT "Matisse Refresh" processors, with July 7 availability, and it appears like samples of the processors already hit leaky taps on the web. TUM_APISAK discovered a Geekbench 5.1 submission of a Ryzen 9 3900XT 12-core/24-thread processor sample. The processor is paired with a GIGABYTE X570 AORUS Master motherboard and 16 GB of dual-channel DDR4-3600 memory. The 3900XT scores 10945 points in the multi-threaded test, and 1324 points in the single-threaded one; both of which are roughly 5% higher than those of the 3900X. The Geekbench score is indicative that AMD wants to slim the already single-digit percentage gaming performance gap with the Core i9-10900K, and extending its multi-threaded productivity performance lead on account of more cores/threads.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Verpal]

If we assume the user has an cooling system already, 3900XT exist only to make 10900K look more reasonably priced.

But hey, I guess 3900X is cheaper now, I am getting that instead of this XT mess.

 

[heinztvoert]

My new 3800X. Worth it?

 

[Divide Overflow]

A nice speed bump. I wonder what this is attributed to, process improvements, silicon quality?

 

[Space Lynx]

A nice speed bump. I wonder what this is attributed to, process improvements, silicon quality?

I believe it has been attributed to silicon improvements and overall improvements in the manufacturing of that node over time. That is what I last read a few weeks ago, as people were reporting all oc's on ryzen 3600 non-x of 4.3 all core no downclocking fairly easy

 

[cucker tarlson]

The processor is paired with a GIGABYTE X570 AORUS Master motherboard and 16 GB of dual-channel DDR4-3600 memory. The 3900XT scores 10945 points in the multi-threaded test, and 1324 points in the single-threaded one; both of which are roughly 5% higher than those of the 3900X.

3900x with 3600 ram on an aorus master I understand.

The Geekbench score is indicative that AMD wants to slim the already single-digit percentage gaming performance gap with the Core i9-10900K

how is geekbench indicative of gaming ? and since when is 15% a single digit number ?

 

[Fouquin]

how is geekbench indicative of gaming ?

It's a measured increase from an increase in clocks which will translate across the board. Clocks are all that's holding Zen 2 back, so it makes sense to extrapolate that increasing them increases performance.

Not exactly a far fetched idea.

 

[ExplodingCaps]

I'm just wondering, do people really going to buy this? I mean, the timing of this xt is pretty tight with zen 3 release date.

 

[Pumper]

What a joke. Today you can get a 3900X for $419, while the 5% faster 3900XT will launch at $499. This just seems like a disguised attempt by AMD to increase the prices on their CPUs.

 

[cucker tarlson]

What a joke. Today you can get a 3900X for $419, while the 5% faster 3900XT will launch at $499. This just seems like a disguised attempt by AMD to increase the prices on their CPUs.

seems like a good attempt to cash in on people who say a couple of percent is not worth it but then will go on to pay a 20% premium for that couple of percent as soon as amd make it available.

 

[dicktracy]

 

[The Quim Reaper]

Phew!!

Runs Geekbench 5, My 9900K still gets 50 points higher in Single Threaded score (which is all I'm bothered about) than the 3900XT.

Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI - Geekbench

Benchmark results for a Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI with an Intel Core i9-9900K processor.

browser.geekbench.com

..No need to think about upgrade until Q1 2021, with a switch to Zen 3 confirmed

 

[Flanker]

Isn't Geekbench like the most unreliable benchmark we can find for desktop CPU's? (Serious question)

 

[phanbuey]

Isn't Geekbench like the most unreliable benchmark we can find for desktop CPU's? (Serious question)

It's up there in terms of unreliable but in this case you're basically comparing the same processor, so it's pretty spot on in terms of % gained.

^ my 3 year old 8700K lmao. Unless zen 3 is 15-20% faster on ST it's gonna be a wait to DDR5.

 

[watzupken]

What a joke. Today you can get a 3900X for $419, while the 5% faster 3900XT will launch at $499. This just seems like a disguised attempt by AMD to increase the prices on their CPUs.

The 3900X previously had the same MSRP @ 499, but most of the time, we find it cheaper than the MSRP. Now 3900XT may have taken over that MSRP, I am sure you should be able to find it at a lower price after some time. But for as long as 3900X exists, there is little reason for people to buy a 3900XT.

I'm just wondering, do people really going to buy this? I mean, the timing of this xt is pretty tight with zen 3 release date.

I agree that the XT is an unnecessary refresh by AMD considering how late this came. Also its unlikely to get the upper hand in games when compared to Intel processors, and AMD already have a good lead over Intel in other applications. The slight clockspeed bump is good to have but its late and don't give a meaningful bump in performance.

 

[DemonicRyzen666]

I'm just wondering, do people really going to buy this? I mean, the timing of this xt is pretty tight with zen 3 release date.

I really wonder that my self. Does overclocking the 3900x ever actually get the 5%. Everywhere I look people can't better overclocks than what precision boots I gives them overall. Unless there more to this chip like, thermal curves changed internally, better silicon FIT. We won't know until around 7th of July for reviews. Although coming out 1 year an anniversary of 3000 lauch. I'm staring to think "Zen 3" based chips will launch on 10-10-20. Just some speculation on my part.

Edit: auto correct on tablet sucks.

 

[Dave65]

I'm happy with my 3900x and does all I need it to do. Gonna wait on Zen 3!

 

[Deleted member 190774]

Every little bit helps. Let's not forget how far AMD have come - with more on the horizon.

Here's my TR 2950X score:

Looking forward to Zen 3.

 

[$ReaPeR$]

Complaining for the "new" xt CPUs does not make any sense. They are not replacing the x versions, so, I really do not understand all the complaining.

 

[cucker tarlson]

Complaining for the "new" xt CPUs does not make any sense. They are not replacing the x versions, so, I really do not understand all the complaining.

no one is complaining.

it is what it is,a tiny mhz bump for a pretty hefty premium.it's not good - that's why it's not getting a good reception.

I'm just wondering, do people really going to buy this?

no

 

[$ReaPeR$]

no one is complaining.

it is what it is,a tiny mhz bump for a pretty hefty premium.it's not good - that's why it's not getting a good reception.


no

No one is complaining, but "it is what it is,a tiny mhz bump for a pretty hefty premium.it's not good - that's why it's not getting a good reception." ... This is complaining. As I said, it's not replacing the x series, so if you or anyone else does not like the xt series They are very welcome to buy the x series or go Intel. If you don't like having more choices... I don't know how to respond to that. It doesn't make sense. And all this with no reviews..

 

[dyonoctis]

It's up there in terms of unreliable but in this case you're basically comparing the same processor, so it's pretty spot on in terms of % gained.

View attachment 160156
^ my 3 year old 8700K lmao. Unless zen 3 is 15-20% faster on ST it's gonna be a wait to DDR5.

At Intel a 3 years old cpu is pretty much still very relevant if you look at geekbench :

Your 8700k isn't old tech at all.

 

[BoboOOZ]

No one is complaining, but "it is what it is,a tiny mhz bump for a pretty hefty premium.it's not good - that's why it's not getting a good reception." ... This is complaining. As I said, it's not replacing the x series, so if you or anyone else does not like the xt series They are very welcome to buy the x series or go Intel. If you don't like having more choices... I don't know how to respond to that. It doesn't make sense. And all this with no reviews..

People just like to whine, and that goes on all sides, AMD, Intel, GPUs, CPUs, whatever.
I'm also very curious about what the reviews will show.

 

[cucker tarlson]

No one is complaining, but "it is what it is,a tiny mhz bump for a pretty hefty premium.it's not good - that's why it's not getting a good reception." ... This is complaining. As I said, it's not replacing the x series, so if you or anyone else does not like the xt series They are very welcome to buy the x series or go Intel. If you don't like having more choices... I don't know how to respond to that. It doesn't make sense. And all this with no reviews..

Lol its a shit deal to pay 80 bucks for 200mhz what reaction do you expect from people
You defended a massive price increase from b450 to b550 now youre complaining about people not liking the value of paying a 20 percent premium for up to 5 percent performance get real AMD has very good value options for boards and cpus why dont you focus on those instead of defending ones that everyone thinks are not

 

[Caring1]

Lol its a shit deal to pay 80 bucks for 200mhz what reaction do you expect from people

You say that now, but if you had a new 100MHz Pentium back in the day, and it increased another 200MHz on top for $80 you would be throwing your money at them