• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT

Vya Domus said:
Yeah, a better binned refresh with slightly higher clocks is a brutal wake up call ... from what exactly ? :roll:

You've posted cringe bro.
Click to expand...

It's just bait ignore and move along.
 
My regular 3900X can do 4.4GHz all core with 1.3v

No idea how this 3900XT doing 4.2 at 1.4v ............................
 
Kinda hard to help the economy when new stuff are stuck between boring and boring-er.
 
Crackong said:
My regular 3900X can do 4.4GHz all core with 1.3v

No idea how this 3900XT doing 4.2 at 1.4v ............................
Click to expand...

And you proberly have your LLC on ultra on some stuff that shoots 1.45V ~ 1.5V into your CPU. Good job.

This is a refined silicon that offers a few percentage more performance. This could lead to lower power consumption if same clocks or more performance since you can raise the clocks while maintaining the same simular voltage.
 
@W1zzard
I wonder if it is the Motherboard or you really got unlucky with both your chips (X and XT), since i get much better results with a regular 3900X in pretty much all tests. For example my R20 score is 7258 Pts stock, with PBO disabled and the Blender render gets done in just 1.58,54 so like 119s, also stock. Not dissing your results or anything, just wondering.
 
heky said:
@W1zzard
I wonder if it is the Motherboard or you really got unlucky with both your chips (X and XT), since i get much better results with a regular 3900X in pretty much all tests. For example my R20 score is 7258 Pts stock, with PBO disabled and the Blender render gets done in just 1.58,54 so like 119s, also stock. Not dissing your results or anything, just wondering.
Click to expand...
3200CL14 ?
 
Oh, running 3800 CL16, could that be it? Hm...guess that's that then...
 
Thank you so much for yet another outstanding professional and authentic review. This CPU is trashed all over YouTube by the biggest YouTubers and none disclose the lower temperature at same clock. Thanks again, you're awesome as always.
 
heky said:
Oh, running 3800 CL16, could that be it? Hm...guess that's that then...
Click to expand...
My stock xmp result after just updating to 1.0.0.2 combo bios is 7332/525 in r20 for example. And I know from manual OC that my chip isn't particularly good (req. voltage too high to get 4.3 all core)
 
Jism said:
And you proberly have your LLC on ultra on some stuff that shoots 1.45V ~ 1.5V into your CPU. Good job.

This is a refined silicon that offers a few percentage more performance. This could lead to lower power consumption if same clocks or more performance since you can raise the clocks while maintaining the same simular voltage.
Click to expand...

I ran 4.4 @ 1.3v on games, benchmarks and some P95, voltage never goes beyond 1.306v

Maybe my HWinfo64 is lying to me.
Maybe you knew better without knowing my whole setup is.
 
It's a joke - in some cases the "new" XT is slower than the old X.
Why do they have to relaunch these things now ?
 
ARF said:
It's a joke - in some cases the "new" XT is slower than the old X.
Why do they have to relaunch these things now ?
Click to expand...

Because they're the market leader, 3000 series selling so fast they are cashing in by serving the market buying those with something 'new'. It'll help them continue to dominate Amazon, OverclockersUK, Mindfactory etc sales charts much to Intel's chagrin.
 
Aside from a occasional and rare non-very-techy builder who is just picking up a random CPU for a build and stumbles upon something like this and goes, "Okay looks good, add to cart...", this is largely directed at the brand loyalists. Ones who will buy anything with a certain brand no matter what. Ya know, the ones with more RGB fans in their Fortnite game boxes than brain cells.

As for overclocking bandwidth somebody was talking about, Ryzens, all of them, don't really overclock out of the box. These are maxed at factory. These XT's seem to be extra MAXED in fact. Every bit of fruit seems to have been picked at this point from the Zen tree (at this architectural junction) unless you are going the extreme super-duper-exotic cooling route. Mid 4GHz seems to be it for Zen right now, and that ain't enough to get that gaming crown.


(multi CPU Ryzen owner for three years now, before the "loyalists" get started.)



...
..
.
 
Crackong said:
My regular 3900X can do 4.4GHz all core with 1.3v

No idea how this 3900XT doing 4.2 at 1.4v ............................
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is a terrible result. My 3900x from August can't quite do 4.4 all-core but easily does 4.3 at about 1.325v. Other reviewers are hitting around 4.5 all-core and some over 4.6 on the first chiplet when doing per ccx overclocking with the 3900xt.
 
How it does in things I do compared to Intel product at same price
Slower in Office Apps
Slower in Photoshop
Slower in video editing
Slower in Gaming
31C Hotter

How it does in things I never do
I didn't look cause I have no reason to care

How many cores and what's the die size ?
See abave ... have no reason to care


Well that's one decision I won't have to think about.
 
Shatun_Bear said:
Because they're the market leader, 3000 series selling so fast they are cashing in by serving the market buying those with something 'new'. It'll help them continue to dominate Amazon, OverclockersUK, Mindfactory etc sales charts much to Intel's chagrin.
Click to expand...
This suddenly feels hip when the shoe is on the other foot. :)
 
EarthDog said:
This suddenly feels hip when the shoe is on the other foot. :)
Click to expand...

Well yes, I dont mind if they cash in ten-fold actually. Because if you look at AMD's financials, they make about 1/20th of the profit Intel make a year. It's much better for the consumer if AMD are doing it than Intel for competition.

Also, Intel add a meaningless 100mhz on top of boost clocks and calls it an entire new gen (Comet Lake) so I hope you voiced your displeasure there too.

But I suspect you were the type hooting and hollering over 220fps vs 210fps using a 2080 Ti @ 1080p res gaming results....
 
Hmmm did I miss the part about Infinity settings - can this one do above 1900Mhz?
 
Shatun_Bear said:
Well yes, I dont mind if they cash in ten-fold actually. Because if you look at AMD's financials, they make about 1/20th of the profit Intel make a year. It's much better for the consumer if AMD are doing it than Intel for competition.

Also, Intel add a meaningless 100mhz on top of boost clocks and calls it an entire new gen (Comet Lake) so I hope you voiced your displeasure there too.

But I suspect you were the type hooting and hollering over 220fps vs 210fps using a 2080 Ti @ 1080p res gaming results....
Click to expand...
Easy there, killer... that isn't me. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of some opinions. I didn't expect you to admit it and then try to justify it like that. Good stuff. Telling....
 
The amount of voltage it took for you to get the OC on both the 3900X and XT is pretty insane, must've gotten really unlucky on the silicon lottery. My 3900X will do 4250MHz @ 1.275v with SMT off and 1.3v with SMT on, and I've seen many other with chips able to do the same; sucks to get so unlucky twice :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top