AMD XT Round Up

erek

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
5,883

Attachments

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,490
Marginal performance numbers for a marginalized CPU. 3600 series still seems like the best option
Saw the Newegg announcement and briefly considered requesting access to the AMD forum... and welp, there's no point it seems. The needle hasn't appreciably moved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: erek
like this
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
3,572
I look forward to seeing some overclocking results after a week or two... Right now I kind of wonder why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: erek
like this

DooKey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
8,920
Kinda seems like they wasted their time on this "new" lineup. Not impressed.
 

sabrewolf732

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
4,387
Why test 4k for a cpu review lol

and the performance is near identical. Not one of the XT poster over a 1% performance improvement at games in 1080p, which is the only place this CPU launch would make sense.

Pointless release is pointless.
 

sirmonkey1985

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
22,061
Those results are unsurprising and in line with what AMD has touted for the XTs. There's surely a reason why AMD sought to release these chips, but I'm not exactly clear what that is.
it's not any different then why intel released the 9900KS when almost all 9900K's could do 5Ghz minimum but at least AMD isn't price gouging people.. at the end of the day the only people that overhyped XT was reddit, youtube and forums, AMD themselves barely had to do anything to advertise XT and even when they did it wasn't claiming some insane performance increase over the original zen 2 chips.

I know the 3300X is a great CPU, et all....

But how is it scoring higher than a 3900X?

View attachment 259606
different CCX layout so less latency.. all 4 cores are on one CCX vs being split over 2 CCX's like the 3100 or 4 CCX's like the 3900x.
 

Rvenger

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Messages
2,088
I am starting to get curious if AMD is going to price every 8 core CPU at $329-399 starting price every launch for the next 5-6 years like intel did with us on quad cores.
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
2,624
I do not see the point of AMD releasing these "XT" CPU's especially if these CPU's are going to be succeeded by Zen 3 in like 3 months or so. Just another pointless cash grab and has very little improvement compared to the original releases.
 

kirbyrj

Fully [H]
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
26,269
The "fine print" so to speak is the fact that the XT's clock slightly better and are slightly better in power efficiency. Techpowerup noted a 4.3Ghz all core OC on 3900xt compared to a 4Ghz all core OC on the 3900x. Whether or not it's worth $70 is another story...

If what was being said is true, you can get a non-binned 3900x, with a cooler, and AC: Valhalla for $430 which is likely to have the same silicon.
 

Mylex

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 30, 2018
Messages
239
Definitely not a fan of releases like this, just seems they wanted to be able to see more chips near msrp vs the discounts on the 3000 series. I just hope it was worth it for them to erode some mindshare.
 

sirmonkey1985

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
22,061
Definitely not a fan of releases like this, just seems they wanted to be able to see more chips near msrp vs the discounts on the 3000 series. I just hope it was worth it for them to erode some mindshare.
you'd be correct, also check GN's video, steve talks about it a bit in the beginning.. also AMD's not discontinuing the non XT chips.
 

kirbyrj

Fully [H]
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
26,269
Definitely not a fan of releases like this, just seems they wanted to be able to see more chips near msrp vs the discounts on the 3000 series. I just hope it was worth it for them to erode some mindshare.
Why wouldn't they? First, they have a product with slightly better silicon than release silicon. Second, it's binned to support the level of boost they are looking for. Third, they get the benefit of a release in between their last gen and next gen arcitectures. No one is saying you have to buy these instead of the non "XT" parts at a cheaper price. Newegg reviews seem to indicate that the newest batches of the "old" chips clock better than the release chips, so you're essentially getting the benefit of the new release without paying the "XT" tax.
 

illli

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
1,318
Those results are unsurprising and in line with what AMD has touted for the XTs. There's surely a reason why AMD sought to release these chips, but I'm not exactly clear what that is.
I feel like this is just a bunch of leftover parts, which will be limited supply. No proof of this, but say these were able to pass their "binning" with higher than average results. So maybe they had enough of these to make an XT line.
 

HockeyJon

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 14, 2014
Messages
1,237
Those results are unsurprising and in line with what AMD has touted for the XTs. There's surely a reason why AMD sought to release these chips, but I'm not exactly clear what that is.
Increase profit. These perform more or less the same as the previous launch, at the prices of the previous launch, only now you don’t get a snazzy cooler in the box, aside from the 3600XT, which gets the Wraith Spire, which is barely adequate.

The take-home here is buy a clearance Ryzen 3 while you have a chance. Ryzen 3700X is going for less than Ryzen 3600XT, and you get two more cores plus a Wraith Prism cooler, which is perfectly adequate for that processor.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,691
This launch is a good way to release something without burning the Zen 3 launch at a time when computer part stock is iffy... allot of computer stores are still closed or in partial shut down, and MFG partners are not in a great position to bring in tons of mobo stock. No one is releasing anything big right now.

What this will probably be good for is clearing out what little stock of the previous Zen 2s are in the supply chain. If you are in need of a new machine right now... its a decent time to grab a 570 or 550 board and slap a good deal x or non x 3000 chip in there for now. Then your golden for when the Zen 3 does launch. Wives and kids love upgrades, when Zen 3 hits grab them an inexpensive b450 board and give them your handy me down.... if you have neither, sell it off in a year and buy a couple pizzas or something.
 

Ready4Dis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
1,741
This launch is a good way to release something without burning the Zen 3 launch at a time when computer part stock is iffy... allot of computer stores are still closed or in partial shut down, and MFG partners are not in a great position to bring in tons of mobo stock. No one is releasing anything big right now.

What this will probably be good for is clearing out what little stock of the previous Zen 2s are in the supply chain. If you are in need of a new machine right now... its a decent time to grab a 570 or 550 board and slap a good deal x or non x 3000 chip in there for now. Then your golden for when the Zen 3 does launch. Wives and kids love upgrades, when Zen 3 hits grab them an inexpensive b450 board and give them your handy me down.... if you have neither, sell it off in a year and buy a couple pizzas or something.
Yup, I just picked up a 3700x and a B550 for my son and put it together last night! Seems it was a good call, it's less than 3% off the 3900xt @ 720p. I didn't imagine we'd see much with these released and the price going back to MSRP just doesn't make sense.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,490
This is at 4K where the GPU is the bottleneck. TPU includes charts that summarize their CPU benchmarks and gaming benchmark at 1280x720, which give a better idea of relative CPU performance.
To add, testing at 720p exposes the potential of the system for GPU upgrades. That is, if a system is faster at 720p, it'll be faster at 1440p+ with a faster GPU. Since GPU upgrades usually happen more often than CPU upgrades, this is an important metric. It seems that current Intel CPUs are likely to continue to scale better going forward.

And given the general dominance of Intel CPUs in desktop tasks, barring straight video transcoding or 3D rendering but including most other and more common content creation tasks, I find these results to really put pause on any exploration of a personal upgrade. Because there's simply no justifying the cost of swapping out a 9900K, or 8700K for that matter.

Really, the two main reasons to go for AMD are cost... and cost. Cost per core and cost for the whole platform for that fractional step toward HEDT that X570 makes.

But bottom line? Given the pain that memory compatibility remains on AMD, it's a bit of a coin toss overall. One would need to really be specific about their needs to identify either as objectively perferable over the other.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,061
To add, testing at 720p exposes the potential of the system for GPU upgrades. That is, if a system is faster at 720p, it'll be faster at 1440p+ with a faster GPU. Since GPU upgrades usually happen more often than CPU upgrades, this is an important metric. It seems that current Intel CPUs are likely to continue to scale better going forward.

And given the general dominance of Intel CPUs in desktop tasks, barring straight video transcoding or 3D rendering but including most other and more common content creation tasks, I find these results to really put pause on any exploration of a personal upgrade. Because there's simply no justifying the cost of swapping out a 9900K, or 8700K for that matter.

Really, the two main reasons to go for AMD are cost... and cost. Cost per core and cost for the whole platform for that fractional step toward HEDT that X570 makes.

But bottom line? Given the pain that memory compatibility remains on AMD, it's a bit of a coin toss overall. One would need to really be specific about their needs to identify either as objectively perferable over the other.
Memory compatibility doesn't seem to be any more of an issue on Zen3 AMD systems than it is on Intel. All motherboards and platforms right now have some issues with memory. This is why you adhere to the QVL list that everyone provides.

Edit: As far as the differences go. They really only apply in specific situations. If you're playing at 4K then it makes zero sense to buy the much more expensive Intel chips as there is no difference. If you are playing at 60hz at any resolution there is no point buying Intel. If you are trying to get above 100fps at 3440x1440 (or higher) you're severely GPU limited so either mainstream platform's top end chips are fine. If you are looking for 120+ at 1080p or 1440p then there might be a reason to buy Intel, if you really want to gun for that extra 5-ish% (on average).
 

sfsuphysics

I don't get it
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
14,093
Was going to say AMD learned from Intel, when you have practically no competition why put out anything significantly better...

except they didn't learn, because they didn't raise the prices on barely any increase! For shame AMD!!!
 

SmokeRngs

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - April 2008
Joined
Aug 9, 2001
Messages
16,233
Was going to say AMD learned from Intel, when you have practically no competition why put out anything significantly better...

except they didn't learn, because they didn't raise the prices on barely any increase! For shame AMD!!!
AMD didn't learn at all. You're forgetting that these are still 3000 series CPUs. If they had learned from Intel they would be the new 4000 series CPUs and they would cost more than the previous generation and they would need a new socket and chipset.
 

kirbyrj

Fully [H]
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
26,269
Memory compatibility doesn't seem to be any more of an issue on Zen3 AMD systems than it is on Intel. All motherboards and platforms right now have some issues with memory. This is why you adhere to the QVL list that everyone provides.

Edit: As far as the differences go. They really only apply in specific situations. If you're playing at 4K then it makes zero sense to buy the much more expensive Intel chips as there is no difference. If you are playing at 60hz at any resolution there is no point buying Intel. If you are trying to get above 100fps at 3440x1440 (or higher) you're severely GPU limited so either mainstream platform's top end chips are fine. If you are looking for 120+ at 1080p or 1440p then there might be a reason to buy Intel, if you really want to gun for that extra 5-ish% (on average).
The QVL is overrated. At best it's a small sampling of what works. Realistically with Zen2, anything works up to rated timings/speeds with a 500 series chipset up to the 1:1 limit of the FCLK (3733 or so). Some older (x370) boards have motherboard design issues limiting them to lower speeds (~3400) even with Zen2. I seriously doubt that anyone looks up the QVL for power supplies, SSDs, wireless cards, etc. so why bother with the memory unless there is some underlying issue (Zen1/300 series). Realistically, you're going to get some form of Samsung, Hynix, or Micron memory, and all of them have been demonstrated to work at 3600+ speeds on Zen2.

If we were talking about a smoking deal on a 1st or 2nd gen Ryzen, maybe it would be worth discussing, but with 3rd gen, it's not.
 

Ready4Dis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
1,741
I looked up QVL for the ram i wanted. It wasn't on the list, so in bought it anyway. XMP no problem. Same chips as other memory modules on QVL, just different RGB design. A lot of times things not on the QVL list are exactly the same as things that are on it. You are correct, I have not looked up QVL for PSU or any pcie/sata parts.
 

/dev/null

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 31, 2001
Messages
14,706
This launch is a good way to release something without burning the Zen 3 launch at a time when computer part stock is iffy... allot of computer stores are still closed or in partial shut down, and MFG partners are not in a great position to bring in tons of mobo stock. No one is releasing anything big right now.

What this will probably be good for is clearing out what little stock of the previous Zen 2s are in the supply chain. If you are in need of a new machine right now... its a decent time to grab a 570 or 550 board and slap a good deal x or non x 3000 chip in there for now. Then your golden for when the Zen 3 does launch. Wives and kids love upgrades, when Zen 3 hits grab them an inexpensive b450 board and give them your handy me down.... if you have neither, sell it off in a year and buy a couple pizzas or something.
I literally just did this last weekend.

i5-8400 + Z270....sold my I5-8400 & picked up a 3600 for $160 & an X570 for $190. Use gift card for $50 off and -$20 for MC mobo combo. Instead of a dead-end platform I get: PCIE-4.0, usb-c port,6 additional threads & should be ready for whenever zen3 comes. First Far Cry 5 benchmarks I ran are about 4-5% slower on my 3600 vs the i5-8400 I had before, but I think all the extra features & future proofing I gained are worth it.

Just need to sell that MSI Z270 SLI PLUS board now :)
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,691
I literally just did this last weekend.

i5-8400 + Z270....sold my I5-8400 & picked up a 3600 for $160 & an X570 for $190. Use gift card for $50 off and -$20 for MC mobo combo. Instead of a dead-end platform I get: PCIE-4.0, usb-c port,6 additional threads & should be ready for whenever zen3 comes. First Far Cry 5 benchmarks I ran are about 4-5% slower on my 3600 vs the i5-8400 I had before, but I think all the extra features & future proofing I gained are worth it.

Just need to sell that MSI Z270 SLI PLUS board now :)
I built a 3600x system at zen 2 launch last year. Have not regretted going AMD at all. Perhaps I would have got a couple FPS more out a Intel option... but frankly with Freesync + the fact that 9 times out of 10 I have Radeon Chill holding my FPS at pretty much exactly 74 FPS anyway who cares. (Radeon chill is a fantastic feature... for a lot of less demanding games I play a lot my 5700 XT fans don't even spin up holding 74 FPS).

I was expecting I would go 4700/4800 or even 4900 when zen 3 launched this year... really though if I am forced (oh the humanity) to squeeze another year out of my 3600x its really no big thing. It will find a home in my wives machine when I do.
 

Azrak

Gawd
Joined
Oct 4, 2015
Messages
948
Investors appeased. Job done.

For everyone else, skip these and buy the regular CPUs.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
18,001
no point to these XT chips...hopefully this means price drops on the 3600 and 3700X...Zen 3 where are you?
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,688
I don't get the hate. I'd rather they give more options for extreme builders who want to OC - rather have the option of an XT than not.
It's just two 6 core upper bin chiplets instead of one good, one shit like the rest of the dual chiplet lineup was. Close as you'll get to TR sillicon on AM4.. Also it chips that last few percent out of the Intel SC lead in some apps/games.. it's more competition, I don't see the problem.
Intel also has some new cpus coming out and AMD wants to rain on the parade before flooding it with Zen3.

different CCX layout so less latency.. all 4 cores are on one CCX vs being split over 2 CCX's like the 3100 or 4 CCX's like the 3900x.
This, it's a good example of the boost zen3 can approach by removing the CCX partitioning.
 

Axman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
4,970
I don't get the hate.
Me neither. If you were an early adopter maybe it feels like a bad deal, but if you're buying now these are all fine tweaks. And more OC headroom means longer lifespan on the chips for non- or light-overclockers. That may not seem like a big deal back in the day when CPU changes were required every year, every other year, but now people are getting 5+ years out of a CPU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,688
Me neither. If you were an early adopter maybe it feels like a bad deal, but if you're buying now these are all fine tweaks. And more OC headroom means longer lifespan on the chips for non- or light-overclockers. That may not seem like a big deal back in the day when CPU changes were required every year, every other year, but now people are getting 5+ years out of a CPU.
You got it in one, I would go XT if I had to do a non-TR build for long term. It's just a process ramp, same reason my late production V64 can do what a full power one does (and more) at 160-190W, simply better bins later in the manufacturing run.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,490
but now people are getting 5+ years out of a CPU
The only reason I've actually retired systems lately has been due to not having a role for them, or due to something like the motherboard degrading stability.

Not for being too old; I have an old Sandy laptop that will still do everything that a desktop user needs, so long as the grinding fan doesn't drive them away first :D
 

Aegir

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Messages
202
I'm with N4CR here.

The XT launch is clearly meant for people buying a NEW system. You'd be insane to "upgrade" to a 3600XT if you already have a 3600 or 3600X.

This launch coincides with the B550 launch, so people buying B550 are going to ponder this deal. Not X570 owners. But of course the old ones are still available, and available for a great price too, for anyone who wants value.

If anything, AMD is helping their other CPUs go down in price by basically competing with themselves. It's a great deal and a really exciting time for CPUs. But again, upgrading from an older version of a 3000 series chip to an XT is ludicrous. You'd have to be rich AND stupid to think this is an upgrade a 3000 CPU owner should actually buy. This is for NEW systems for long-term usage.

This is what you buy when you're replacing a PC that's already more than five years old and you want a refined Ryzen experience.
 
Top