3950X Who's waiting for it?

D

Despotes

Gawd
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
821
I was considering the 3900X or 3700X, but if the alleged performance is accurate, I may get this instead since the base boost is slightly higher than the 3900X--which may not mean anything since the 3900X rarely oc's to 4.6 if at all.
Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
IMO unless you need those 4 extra cores. I don't think you will see that much more performance over a 3900x when it comes to single thread tasks and clock speed...maybe 2-4%?
 
Last edited:
Photo editing is my primary concern. I'm hoping those 4 cores and small speed bump are worth it. Gaming at 1440p, I'm not too concerned about.
 
Dan_D said:
If all you want to do is play games, I wouldn't bother with the 3900X or 3950X. If you want or need more, then that's going to depend on whether or not you think the extra $250 and the wait is worth it.
Click to expand...



I sold my 3700x for full price, sold the cooler off separate. Made about $370 off the CPU and cooler. Bought a 3600 and called it a day. Best move ever since I had $50 in statement credit on my card. Cheap powerful CPU. 1800x multithreaded performance and Zen 2 single threaded performance.
 
Dan_D said:
If all you want to do is play games, I wouldn't bother with the 3900X or 3950X. If you want or need more, then that's going to depend on whether or not you think the extra $250 and the wait is worth it.
Click to expand...

Post #3
 
I got the 3900x but I will consider a quick upgrade to a 3950x depending on reviews both from reviewers and end users on how well it boosts. I’m a bit disappointed with my 3900x ability to boost so if the 3950 does better plus an extra 4 cores, I may bite.
 
Despotes said:
Photo editing is my primary concern. I'm hoping those 4 cores and small speed bump are worth it. Gaming at 1440p, I'm not too concerned about.
Click to expand...

I do a ton of photo editing. I've been fine on a 4.5 year old 8c/16t Intel Core i7 5960X @ 4.5GHz. Going to a 12c/24t Threadripper CPU didn't help at all. You would have to be working with absolutely insane file sizes and doing very advanced work before I think the justification would be there.
 
Dan_D said:
I do a ton of photo editing. I've been fine on a 4.5 year old 8c/16t Intel Core i7 5960X @ 4.5GHz. Going to a 12c/24t Threadripper CPU didn't help at all. You would have to be working with absolutely insane file sizes and doing very advanced work before I think the justification would be there.
Click to expand...

That was the argument to try some Dell 7310 rack workstations. Project was the Harry Potter environment for Universal. Ended up to be a GPU mule for the Dementor flybys as best use case.

Some of that crew did Star Wars Land, again projection heavy rides and lots of large masks to paint the physical space. If you wanted to do rerenders on the spot and have product owners view walkthrus GPU over CPU. We can get lots of CPU, GPU density gets tricky. You can never have enough.

I can get by on 6-core gear for home use.
I can use my iPad for creative personal stuff bc it's not my daily workflow.
It's be nice to have $7k worth of cam & lenses, but the gear would go to waste.
 
I'm looking forward to seeing what the 3950x can do but on the gaming side I dont expect it to out do the 3900x in gaming performance. I'd love to be wrong though.Have to wait and see.
 
Skott said:
I'm looking forward to seeing what the 3950x can do but on the gaming side I dont expect it to out do the 3900x in gaming performance. I'd love to be wrong though.Have to wait and see.
Click to expand...

Same- looking forward to the full workup, and with mature boards and BIOS, and perhaps top-performing RAM.
 
i just hope this extra time they have given themselves they are actually producing the chips.... i ordered my 3900x on the 7th i still haven't seen it, i hope your producing emm shits right now, so when people click order in September, that shits delivered....
 
I'm undecided. Either 3900X or 3950X. Won't likely bite until late fall. Will let the early adopters pay the tax, hopefully in full. The SR2/5675 x2 render box has run well and for so long, it deserves a proper retirement in a cat video editing facility of its choosing.
 
Dan_D said:
If all you want to do is play games, I wouldn't bother with the 3900X or 3950X. If you want or need more, then that's going to depend on whether or not you think the extra $250 and the wait is worth it.
Click to expand...

Also worth factoring in that the all-core boost (and base) frequencies will be lower on the 3950X, in order to meet thermal/power limits. In single thread we may see a very minor boost over the 3900X, but in multicore it will not be a linear scaling up.

I think the 3900X is the sweet spot for price/multicore/singlecore/lightly-threaded/power requirements.

That and I don't think I'd trust my X370 board to handle a 3950X. 3900X is probably already pushing my luck a little.
 
DuronBurgerMan said:
Also worth factoring in that the all-core boost (and base) frequencies will be lower on the 3950X, in order to meet thermal/power limits. In single thread we may see a very minor boost over the 3900X, but in multicore it will not be a linear scaling up.

I think the 3900X is the sweet spot for price/multicore/singlecore/lightly-threaded/power requirements.

That and I don't think I'd trust my X370 board to handle a 3950X. 3900X is probably already pushing my luck a little.
Click to expand...

That's a fair point. At least, depending on how often it achieves a boost clock greater than the Ryzen 9 3900X does.
 
I am up in the air. I have a 1800x pc 2100 ram. I was waiting for this as a render upgrade but i think a 32 core thread ripper 2nd or 3rd is a better buy. I need to see some keyshot # from the 3950x to see how i want to roll.
 
I expect price hikes over the last generation with the new Threadripper. If it overlaps with Ryzen 3000 at all, it will probably only be in the 16c/32t parts at $750. I expect a 16c/32t model will be the next "baby" Threadripper.
 
Ive owned 16 core Threadrippers, both kind.

I am more impressed with the 3900x's performance I see ZERO need for 4 more cores when this thing is blistering fast in multithread.
 
Dan_D said:
I expect price hikes over the last generation with the new Threadripper. If it overlaps with Ryzen 3000 at all, it will probably only be in the 16c/32t parts at $750. I expect a 16c/32t model will be the next "baby" Threadripper.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm waiting for, 180W and quad channel ram should give a pretty big boost over am4 without any of the latency penalty the previous gens had.
 
bobzdar said:
That's what I'm waiting for, 180W and quad channel ram should give a pretty big boost over am4 without any of the latency penalty the previous gens had.
Click to expand...

They will also still have 64 PCIe lanes at a minimum.
 
For me the 3950X or the 7nm TR4 will be my next windows workstation. I really want the TR4 but would consider the 3950X.
 
Dan_D said:
They will also still have 64 PCIe lanes at a minimum.
Click to expand...

Yup, but I can't figure out what I'd do with them. I may add thunderbolt, but that only needs 4 lanes. With 2 nvme and a video card, I'll still be under 30 lanes used.
 
At work I could find a way to use the 64 lanes but at home probably not. Still I want the 7nm TR4. This may be the last time I could purchase such a system (after 22 years as primarily a c++ programmer retirement will likely happen in the next decade).
 
get dr with 3900x on amount of cores already in alot of games. figure future proof 5+ years of life cpu 3900x is probs great, for a gamer :D
 
I am interested in seeing the 3950x. I doubt I have a use for it. Already have good box's for what I do. Plus, I'm not looking at changing mobo's. My Asus that the 2600 is sitting in currently doesn't support a 3950x.
Have my heart set on a 3700x, but really all it's for is gaming so, may do the 3600x.

That would be the practical thing probably, but this is still Hocp. In that respect, the the correct thing is to put the biggest processor I can in. Which is a 3900x.

So many differences between wants and needs, <sigh>
 
Was originally planning to get the highest end Ryzen cpu to replace my 2700x, but since I mostly just game at 1440p, I'm probably just going to get a 3900x and put the difference in a new GPU...next spring when prices (hopefully) drop.
 
bobzdar said:
Yup, but I can't figure out what I'd do with them. I may add thunderbolt, but that only needs 4 lanes. With 2 nvme and a video card, I'll still be under 30 lanes used.
Click to expand...

I have no problem using them, but my needs are a bit more unique. I need to have a 10GbE NIC installed for testing NICs for motherboard reviews. I also have an NVMe PCIe card I use for games. I can replace it with an M.2 drive but I don't want to spend the money on that. Plus, if they ever make multi-GPU worth a shit again I'll be all over it.
 
4 reasons : all the launch problems fixed, best 16 core CPU, best AM4 CPU, Intel may be prepping new 10 core CPU by then and AMD will need to lower their prices a little bit so maybe the 3950X will be at the 3900X price then.
 
I guess what I'm most interested in is since the 3950x is in the mainstream enthusiast segment how much better at gaming is it compared to the 3900x? It seems the 3900x is about as good as this generation can be for gaming or am I wrong? This is what intrigues me. Can't wait for September.
 
Skott said:
I guess what I'm most interested in is since the 3950x is in the mainstream enthusiast segment how much better at gaming is it compared to the 3900x? It seems the 3900x is about as good as this generation can be for gaming or am I wrong? This is what intrigues me. Can't wait for September.
Click to expand...

Cores are of ever diminishing return and we are seeing better performance as you go up the AMD cpu lineup due to clock speed increases at the highest end. I don’t think the 3950x will have more MHz, but if it does, it will be minimal over the 3900x. I would suggest a 3900x would be overkill for gaming.

Price to performance in gaming is always subjective as some people are obsessed with 5fps at real gaming resolutions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skott
like this
I'll probably get it. Been impressed with both my 3700x and 3900x enough to want to give the 3950x a try. Don't know if I'm gonna keep the 3700 or 3900 though when I upgrade. Or maybe just sell my old 5960x and call it a day.
 
I'd love to get one, but a little to $ for my blood. I do compiling and some encoding, so I could possibly put some of those cores to use, but I don't feel like that price premium would really make much benefit to me, better of putting that money to something else like nvme or graphics card, ram, or something.
 
I'm waiting for the 3950x. While I'm sure 16 cores is overkill for most, with the amount of multitasking I do, I'm going for it. I remember when I jumped from 4 cores to 6 cores seeing just how noticeable it was so I can only imagine what going from 6 to 16 will be like.

The 3950x will have also have better binned dies than 3900x and full chips without one core per ccx being disabled.

For something I use 8 to 12 hours a day, I think it's worth the investment compared to what intel's offerings cost.
 
Xero717 said:
I'm waiting for the 3950x. While I'm sure 16 cores is overkill for most, with the amount of multitasking I do, I'm going for it. I remember when I jumped from 4 cores to 6 cores seeing just how noticeable it was so I can only imagine what going from 6 to 16 will be like.

The 3950x will have also have better binned dies than 3900x and full chips without one core per ccx being disabled.

For something I use 8 to 12 hours a day, I think it's worth the investment compared to what intel's offerings cost.
Click to expand...

It really depends on the type of multi-tasking you do. I have windows open everywhere when I work. Excel, Photoshop, and all kinds of things (including games) may be running at that time but I never noticed any boost in performance or responsiveness going from my 8c/16t Core i7 5960X @ 4.5GHz to a 12c/24t AMD Threadripper 2920X using PBO or a manual overclock to 4.2GHz on all cores. The only thing I've ever done on my own PC that I've noticed that much of an improvement with was multi-tasking and having multiple VM's running in the back ground. That's where I've seen the benefit of additional cores. That said, I have no desire to do that on my gaming rig.

I've been running HEDT systems for years, but mostly because I've needed the extra PCIe lanes for one reason or another. At this point, I think I've pretty much figured out how to work around that. My next upgrade will probably be a Ryzen 3000 series CPU. However, I am not sure if I want to spring for the 3900X or not. The nerd in me wants the Ryzen 9 3950X, but truthfully, I'd be better served by the 3700X or the 3800X and using the extra cash to buy another one of those 1TB Inland SSD's or something.
 
Dan_D said:
It really depends on the type of multi-tasking you do. I have windows open everywhere when I work. Excel, Photoshop, and all kinds of things (including games) may be running at that time but I never noticed any boost in performance or responsiveness going from my 8c/16t Core i7 5960X @ 4.5GHz to a 12c/24t AMD Threadripper 2920X using PBO or a manual overclock to 4.2GHz on all cores. The only thing I've ever done on my own PC that I've noticed that much of an improvement with was multi-tasking and having multiple VM's running in the back ground. That's where I've seen the benefit of additional cores. That said, I have no desire to do that on my gaming rig.

I've been running HEDT systems for years, but mostly because I've needed the extra PCIe lanes for one reason or another. At this point, I think I've pretty much figured out how to work around that. My next upgrade will probably be a Ryzen 3000 series CPU. However, I am not sure if I want to spring for the 3900X or not. The nerd in me wants the Ryzen 9 3950X, but truthfully, I'd be better served by the 3700X or the 3800X and using the extra cash to buy another one of those 1TB Inland SSD's or something.
Click to expand...

Sometimes you have to feed the inner nerd. In your case though, do you think the upgrade to a 3700X would even be worth it? You're looking at $600 minimum for a 15% increase in IPC but loss of 4 cores, which almost seems like a sidegrade at best.
 
Jandor said:
4 reasons : all the launch problems fixed, best 16 core CPU, best AM4 CPU, Intel may be prepping new 10 core CPU by then and AMD will need to lower their prices a little bit so maybe the 3950X will be at the 3900X price then.
Click to expand...
Considering that Intel's 8 core with SMT is about as much as AMD's 12 core, I don't think AMD will be needing to lower prices in two months. Especially not for the non-threat of a 10 core. Intel needs to lower prices.
 
I might consider it. On the plus side it's a drop-in and would help me get better results from DBMS scalability testing. On the con side, 16 cores isn't really where the problems start, I don't do that much scalability performance work anyway, and it would probably make more sense to talk corporate into buying a few 64c/128t Rome EPYC's and get some full time staff doing the work. As much as I'd enjoy having 64 cores under the desk, most of it would just be making excess heat the majority of the time.
 
Just want to point out the level of awesome in the last couple years in CPUs.

In the mainstream we went from 4c/8t Intel or "8c" lame AMD to 8c/16t Intel and about to hit 16c/32t AMD.

In HEDT we went from 10c/20t Intel and NO AMD presence at all to 18c/36t Intel and 32c/64t AMD.

The fact that the baby Threadripper will probably be 16 cores - and who knows how high the core count will go... damn, man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top