Who is looking to upgrade to Zen2

jbc029 said:

If someone who has actually talked with MSI board reps and has heard directly from them that high end R3 will *not* be supported on their b350/b370 due to the *very* high power draw ( for the design two years ago), I'll go with that.
Click to expand...

As far as I know the A320 is out of the realm of support entirely, the only place that sucks for me is that midget ASROCK system I just picked up the a300 "AMD NUC" I now dropped a 2200 into. Some B350 & X350 boards will be supported on an individual Manufacturer basis. That has been said since Ryzen 1 was first announced, tho. This is nothing new.
 
Legendary Gamer said:
As far as I know the A320 is out of the realm of support entirely, the only place that sucks for me is that midget ASROCK system I just picked up the a300 "AMD NUC" I now dropped a 2200 into. Some B350 & X350 boards will be supported on an individual Manufacturer basis. That has been said since Ryzen 1 was first announced, tho. This is nothing new.
Click to expand...

Yeah there isn't the power delivery on a320 for much to be honest.

I have an a320 in my son's PC and I'm gonna probably offer it in a buy something of mine and you get this board free solution
 
I've heard that Asus (from a Gamer's Nexus video, I think) is expecting to support the entire announced line up of Ryzen 3000's on all of their B350, X370, B450 and X470 boards. I can attest that they have been rolling the new AGESA out on all of my Asus AM4 boards...

On topic, yes. I DO plan to get a new x570 board and a Ryzen 3000. I'm building my brother-in-law a new system as a gift because he is still on a Phenom II x4 840 system with 4G of RAM. My Crosshair VI and 2700X will trickle down the line, freeing up the Prime B350-Plus board and Ryzen 7 1700 chip for him.

My plan is to build him a soft-tube liquid cooled system based around those parts, using my now-spare Koolance Exos 2 750. I picked up that $129 Geforce GTX 1060 6G (EVGA SSC GAMING ACX 3.0) from Kyle for this system, and I already have a small case that was left over from my cousin's old build. I have a spare Koolance CPU-380 block that will go on it, and plan to install an additional 240mm Koolance aluminum radiator I have sitting around into the case (I migrated to copper rads last year). I will be using my now-replaced older style Koolance QDCs with the Exos to make transport easier. I also already have a 450W power supply, but I may need to replace that. I will probably just run the CPU at stock to avoid potential problems he isn't equipped to deal with since he lives across the country from me - it'll still be a massive upgrade over what he has, even if I'm not pushing it to 3.8GHz.

Still need to get the aforementioned x570 and Ryzen 3000-series CPU (probably 3700x), a water block for that 1060, some RAM, an SSD, and a large HDD for bulk storage...
 
65w 3700x is really appealing. now they just need to add igpu for my htpc...
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
sc5mu93 said:
65w 3700x is really appealing. now they just need to add igpu for my htpc...
Click to expand...

I keep having the thought to myself that the 3700x is the binned one, because it's able to maintain those clocks at a much lower voltage than the 3800x.

Will the 3800x be able to undervolt and be stable at the same clocks? Higher clocks?

Will the 3700x have the same or possibly even better OC potential than the 3800x?

:::head spinning in circles with excitement:::
 
sc5mu93 said:
65w 3700x is really appealing. now they just need to add igpu for my htpc...
Click to expand...

I'd get excited if they dropped some form of GPU + 4GB or 8GB of HBM into the spot where that second CPU die is going. Somewhere between RX560 and RX570 plus eight cores?

That'd handle anything at decent settings at 1080p and perhaps most at 1440p60 with conservative settings.
 
I'm going to wait for the 16Core release the 8 core and 4 core chiplets isn't what I want. I want the 8 and 8 core chiplets. It will happen. Note I am running 64GB of DDR4 on a 2700X(4300mhz) ram at 3000mhz. I have not heard if the new CPU can support more or not?
 
Vader1975 said:
I'm going to wait for the 16Core release the 8 core and 4 core chiplets isn't what I want. I want the 8 and 8 core chiplets. It will happen. Note I am running 64GB of DDR4 on a 2700X(4300mhz) ram at 3000mhz. I have not heard if the new CPU can support more or not?
Click to expand...
It does ;) checkout the [H] AMD motherboard section the video is where Buildzoid explains all of the ins and outs for motherboards with the Ryzen 3000 series including compatibility and memory frequency.
 
tangoseal said:
Yeah there isn't the power delivery on a320 for much to be honest.

I have an a320 in my son's PC and I'm gonna probably offer it in a buy something of mine and you get this board free solution
Click to expand...

The a300 just came out... So, I would have kind of figured that the damn thing might be a bit more future proof for A-Series CPUs. Who knows, maybe it will be... I want to find out because, my only hope may be whatever replaces the 2500 (3500?) as a Gen 2 update to their APU/CPU combo.

I wouldn't imagine that the lower end chips would even require more than what the A320 can deliver in terms of power. I just think this is more of board vendor / AMD choice to cut out the low end boards and focus on the Mid to High end. AMD prolly dropped support of the low end chipsets because it makes more sense to slim the product stack on the MB side since the new stuff is significantly more expensive to support PCI-E 4.0 and on the Board Manufacturers end I would not expect to see many 300 Series boards supporting the 3000 series, because they want to drop support for older lineups not fight through the issues of figuring out how to deliver adequate power to the CPU on them. Gigabyte, of all vendors is supposedly enabling PCI-E 4.0 support on their older boards. So, at least one MB vendor out there is supporting the older chipsets.

After the announcements of the new AMD lineup, I don't suspect you will have too much trouble getting someone to take that A320 off your hands. It's full capable of running Gen 1 & 2 Parts which will be selling at a healthy discount. Let me know what you do, I would be happy to throw some bones your way for the board. I was looking for another one to toss a GE200 into coming up here as a bedroom pc for music and web surfing.
 
I'll upgrade one of my 2 1700X's. Love the fact that Zen 2 is backwards compatible with X370, suck it intel with your unnecessary forced mobo upgrades so your investors can get richer off our hard earned $$'s.
- Also need to upgrade my now deceased freenas i5-2500k. Will probably wait for the Ryzen 5 3400G
 
Last edited:
Pieter3dnow said:
I am going to wait until the dust settles that I know what kind of frequency the top end product has and I would like to stay on X370 as well so I can buy AM5 motherboard with DDR5 next year :) .
Click to expand...
DDR5 for desktop not until 2021 imho. Zen3 will be either DDR4 only or hybrid. My 5 cents.
 
X570 175 - 240 USD Mobo.
2x16Gb DDR4 3000-3200
Ryzen 3700X
eVGA RTX 2080 XC Ultra.
Intel 660p 2Tb nvme
Is my current planned build for August.
 
Manny Calavera said:
X570 175 - 240 USD Mobo.
2x16Gb DDR4 3000-3200
Ryzen 3700X
eVGA RTX 2080 XC Ultra.
Intel 660p 2Tb nvme
Is my current planned build for August.
Click to expand...
Feel like I'll be on the same boat but replacing the 2080 with an AMD card and a bit delayed timeline wise. It's going to replace a Xeon 1270 and a 970 that were both second hand from a friend, so anything in the new line of cpus will be a nice upgrade. This system will probably make it's way to my nephews in it's entirety if I'm feeling cheap, or they're getting a R5 3600, whatever comes in just below it, or a used R7 2xxx if I find a good deal. Depends how the budget works out in the end.

Next up is hoping to see the new TR stuff comes up and either get that or a used 2950x or 2920x to replace my dual 2650 server setup, though even a 3600x or 3700x might be a good bet there.
 
somebrains said:
It'd be cool to see how 3900x ran on your CH6 vs your next motherboard.
Click to expand...

I will likely keep my CH6 when I upgrade. However I am leaning more to the 3800X or 3700X. Alot will depend on reviews tho there is a small chance I will get the 3900X.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
I'm one of those 'concerned'; I realize that AMD would have taken steps to mitigate any issues, but so far the numbers they have shown have come from applications that wouldn't highlight potential deltas due to separating the memory controller from the cores.

Se we'll see!
Click to expand...
Count me in that group. It will be interesting to see how windows handles assigning threads across chiplets.

My chief concern is always single thread performance. The apps I care about are multithreaded to various degrees but are ultimately limited by the main thread on CPU zero. This is where I get worried about thread synchronization latency issues between different chiplets.
 
For me, it is all about the SFF choices, so ITX & DTX...

There is the absolute beast of a motherboard from ASUS, the ROG Crosshair VIII Impact DTX board...

Then there is the ASRock ITX board with Thunderbolt 3...

One of those two boards

Ryzen 9 3900X 12C/24T CPU
64 GB DDR4 (3200C14) RAM
2TB M.2 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe SSD
Navi PCIe 4.0 x16 GPU
Corsair 750W SFX PSU
NCASE M1 chassis

Full PCIe 4.0 system, baby...!
 
123Lanoix said:
yup the 3700x seems to be the best bang for the buck. The 3800x only offers .100 mhz more boost clock for $70 more ? Plus you have a much higher TDP. 8c/16thread 65w tdp pretty amazing !
Click to expand...
I agree. So it makes me think that there will be a reason. 70% higher TDP for 100MHz? Does not seem logical at all.
I would guess that it will be the chip with some OC headroom. More cores will take that advantage away. It will be the one to get to or close to 5GHz. I am guessing this is the only highly binned sku. The peak of all the single chiplet CPU's will be 3800x's.
Just a guess. We will find out soon enough.
 
funkydmunky said:
I agree. So it makes me think that there will be a reason. 70% higher TDP for 100MHz? Does not seem logical at all.
I would guess that it will be the chip with some OC headroom. More cores will take that advantage away. It will be the one to get to or close to 5GHz. I am guessing this is the only highly binned sku. The peak of all the single chiplet CPU's will be 3800x's.
Just a guess. We will find out soon enough.
Click to expand...

You can have certain aspects of binning, there are prolly more dies that will work on higher voltage given a certain frequency range and that part is suited for the higher TDP it does not have to work better for overclocking.

We will have to see how good the 7nm process is for overclocking (65W vs 105W).
 
Pieter3dnow said:
You can have certain aspects of binning, there are prolly more dies that will work on higher voltage given a certain frequency range and that part is suited for the higher TDP it does not have to work better for overclocking.

We will have to see how good the 7nm process is for overclocking (65W vs 105W).
Click to expand...
Ya okay. I am not seeing you offer a better reason for that much power increase for 100MHz?
So in your opinion why 70%+ more power for a 100MHz turbo? What's you think is happening?
 
It depends on how far ahead you can get on that process if it was obvious then AMD would have sold them at overclocked rating.
 
Thatguybil said:
Count me in that group. It will be interesting to see how windows handles assigning threads across chiplets.

My chief concern is always single thread performance. The apps I care about are multithreaded to various degrees but are ultimately limited by the main thread on CPU zero. This is where I get worried about thread synchronization latency issues between different chiplets.
Click to expand...

The chiplets are going to be transparent to windows.

Threadripper already runs chiplets i.e. 2 separate dies or more. Works fine.
 
If reviews on the 12 core look good, it will very likely replace my 5820k. Will be interesting to see how it does heat wise with a much smaller heatspreader than threadripper.
 
tangoseal said:
Threadripper already runs chiplets i.e. 2 separate dies or more. Works fine.
Click to expand...

Well, there are some issues with the chiplets that don't have memory connected on the 24- and 32-core Threadripper SKUs, but since no cores on Ryzen 3000 have direct access to the memory controller- and the access they all have is uniform- we shouldn't be seeing too many issues with the memory controller being 'non-uniform' (NUMA).

We still do need to see latency tests for the platform and for inter-CCX and inter-die communication with relevant benchmarks.
 
funkydmunky said:
Ya okay. I am not seeing you offer a better reason for that much power increase for 100MHz?
So in your opinion why 70%+ more power for a 100MHz turbo? What's you think is happening?
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if we should look at this not as power draw directly. Aside from AMD's traditionally wacky TPD numbers, the extra TDP rating may be to allow for higher sustained boost clocks.

What we don't know is if the lower part will be TDP limited, or if this SKU separation is mostly for OEMs. It may be that given the same enthusiast-grade power delivery and cooling, the parts could produce very similar results.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
I'm wondering if we should look at this not as power draw directly. Aside from AMD's traditionally wacky TPD numbers, the extra TDP rating may be to allow for higher sustained boost clocks.

What we don't know is if the lower part will be TDP limited, or if this SKU separation is mostly for OEMs. It may be that given the same enthusiast-grade power delivery and cooling, the parts could produce very similar results.
Click to expand...

AMD stays alot closer to stated TDP then Intel anymore at one time that was not true but it is now. The 9900K is one of the biggest offenders of going way past the stated TDP, as a 95 watt chip should not be drawing 165 watts or so.
 
If the 3900X hits the mark that AMD has suggested it will, I will be onboard day 1 with a X570 system and the highest end Ryzen 2 chip they sell. Been waiting a long time for a new upgrade and I think AMD's platform is a lot more compelling right now, even if Intel has a small IPC advantage.
 
I have a 6700k, 3900x and X570 will likely get me to upgrade and I will use my current set-up for the family computer.
 
Gideon said:
I will likely keep my CH6 when I upgrade. However I am leaning more to the 3800X or 3700X. Alot will depend on reviews tho there is a small chance I will get the 3900X.
Click to expand...

Buildzoid did a video on what he thinks should be compatible with 12 and 16 core Ryzen 2 based on the VRM's and the CHVI's look promising.

 
Gideon said:
AMD stays alot closer to stated TDP then Intel anymore at one time that was not true but it is now. The 9900K is one of the biggest offenders of going way past the stated TDP, as a 95 watt chip should not be drawing 165 watts or so.
Click to expand...

Don't just use the halo part to make your point, if you're saying 'AMD' and 'Intel'.
 
crazycuz20 said:
Buildzoid did a video on what he thinks should be compatible with 12 and 16 core Ryzen 2 based on the VRM's and the CHVI's look promising.

Click to expand...


Yeah I picked up the beta bios already for 3rd gen stuff and I believe the VRM is stout enough for the full lineup but you never know if it will allow full support of the cpu. ASUS has always been pretty good at support on their boards so I am hopeful.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Don't just use the halo part to make your point, if you're saying 'AMD' and 'Intel'.
Click to expand...

Fine the 8700K is 95 watts as well and it hits 145 watts or so which is way beyond TDP. It's simple to compete Intel has factory overclocked their chips in gross violation of their TDP, AMD did the same thing with Bulldozer to try to keep up. It's one thing to go a bit past the TDP but Intel right now is shattering their TDP ratings. Which is obvious when you see a 7700K is 91 watts TDP and runs at 95 watts TDP on average and the 7700K was a halo chip at one time.
 
Hoping for an upgrade, I have a 1700 that I want to pass onto my fiance and go for hopefully the 12 core. I'll likely need a new motherboard as well, as I need more SATA ports and M.2 slots so I've been wanting one for a while. I already have the case, memory, etc. that I'm gonna transfer over so if I spend about $750(?) between motherboard and CPU it'll still be a damn nice upgrade, I can hold off on a videocard upgrade for a little longer. Probably gonna get one (or two) of those fancy new PCI-E 4 NVME drives as well.

Upside is that a new motherboard/CPU should be able to actually utilize all my memory at its correct timing, so I should be able to get it up to its rated 3200mts instead of its current barely stable 2800mts. Combined with higher frequency, more cores, and 20%(ish?) better IPC it should hold me over.

I'm in a far better place financially now than I was when Ryzen launched, and with both of our systems being AM4 systems now I can easily pass off my current stuff to my fiance. Which is great, we both game but she doesn't care about all the fancy graphics or framerates as much as I do. 1080p60 should be enough for her for quite a long time. I already upgraded her to 32GB of ram, which even with her 200-300 tabs open at once finally seems like enough.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
I'm wondering if we should look at this not as power draw directly. Aside from AMD's traditionally wacky TPD numbers, the extra TDP rating may be to allow for higher sustained boost clocks.

What we don't know is if the lower part will be TDP limited, or if this SKU separation is mostly for OEMs. It may be that given the same enthusiast-grade power delivery and cooling, the parts could produce very similar results.
Click to expand...

That was kind of the situation for the 2700 vs 2700x. The boost clock algorithms reacted very differently to each processor, even though both were pretty regularly able to hit 4.1-4.2 all core OC. The 2700 natural behavior constrained it a lot more to keep it much lower on power draw, but you could force it to draw as much as a 2700x. I think that's what the TDP diff is here. The behavior in how aggressively it automatically pursues that auto-oc.
 
Gideon said:
Fine the 8700K is 95 watts as well and it hits 145 watts or so which is way beyond TDP. It's simple to compete Intel has factory overclocked their chips in gross violation of their TDP, AMD did the same thing with Bulldozer to try to keep up. It's one thing to go a bit past the TDP but Intel right now is shattering their TDP ratings. Which is obvious when you see a 7700K is 91 watts TDP and runs at 95 watts TDP on average and the 7700K was a halo chip at one time.
Click to expand...

...if you let it exceed the TDP in the BIOS, which you're going to do with the AMD parts too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top