VideoCardz: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X to become world’s first 16-core gaming CPU

Status
Not open for further replies.

TurboGLH

Gawd
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
663
You got it backwards. Intel TDP figures are real and represent real dissipation [1]. AMD is the one using meaningless marketing values. E.g. that 105W 2700X has a real 140W TDP.

[1] Don't link to some review measuring auto-overclocked chip.

Come on, don't you have an unsourced graph, preferably from some European site nobody has ever heard of? One that runs counter to almost every other bit of info available.

Next you'll be making one post where it's imperative that we include AVX in the calculations for IPC differences, and then post later that only games matter since you're predominantly a gamer.
 

erek

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
6,999
where's the announcement? seems like all the rumors were fake!
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14527/the-amd-next-horizon-gaming-keynote-live-blog

IMG_20190610_161625.jpg
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
7,718
very good pricing if you ask me, specially a 16c/32t CPU. I am more interesting what you can get on all cores.

Though I think the 12c/24t is the one to get IMO
 

cjcox

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
1,796
What I don't get is why Intel and AMD won't offer CPU models with lower core counts and high clocks. As a gamer, I would very much prefer a cheaper 4-core CPU that reaches 5.5 GHz on at least two cores over a 16-core CPU that only reaches 4.7 GHz. Even a dual-core i3 @ 5.5 GHz would be better for playing single-threaded simulation flight simulators and games like Cities Skylines, Oxygen Not Included, or Factorio.

Like a higher clocking Pentium Gold G5600. But you know, for the price, that one still puts up excellent single thread numbers. If you have more money, i5-9600KF. That gets you close to the very top, for not too much dollar.
 
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
976
too rich for me... though i dont really need to build a new system till cyberpunk next year, so who knows. maybe itll be a little closer to my budget in april next year.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,249
To give you guys an idea of why this chip exists:

Just this weekend I set up a render in Blender to utilise 28 of my 32 threads, then I was able to play games online smoothly with my friend while the image rendered in the background.

This is on a first gen 1950X, and the image rendered faster than any 8 core could muster, AND I was playing games online.
 

RanceJustice

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
5,980
Its a pity to wait until September, but I anticipate that by then there will be some new high end motherboards to coincide with this launch ; if nothing else, some BIOS updates and revisions. Now what I need to see between now and its release is an honest release window for Threadripper's next entry, so I can decide if I'm going to pull the trigger on this or wait...
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,926
Its a pity to wait until September, but I anticipate that by then there will be some new high end motherboards to coincide with this launch ; if nothing else, some BIOS updates and revisions. Now what I need to see between now and its release is an honest release window for Threadripper's next entry, so I can decide if I'm going to pull the trigger on this or wait...

It sounds like there are tons of 570 boards ready to launch in a few weeks. You can always tell if a CPU is good by how many different mobo models companies like Asus release. Asus already lists 11 570 boards... Gigabyte and MSI also have a ton of boards listed already. Looks like AMD is getting some good day one support.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,712
To be fair, a $750 CPU isn't really a gaming CPU for the vast majority of gamers.

I see it more of a, you can do compute and game very well in the same package, and you don't have to spend up for an HEDT platform that would game worse (lower clocks). Quite reasonable for what it is.
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
49
It sounds like there are tons of 570 boards ready to launch in a few weeks. You can always tell if a CPU is good by how many different mobo models companies like Asus release. Asus already lists 11 570 boards... Gigabyte and MSI also have a ton of boards listed already. Looks like AMD is getting some good day one support.

ASUS is supposed to end up having 30 boards for x570.
 

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
2,876
very good pricing if you ask me, specially a 16c/32t CPU. I am more interesting what you can get on all cores.

Though I think the 12c/24t is the one to get IMO

Agreed on both fronts. $750 is less than double the 8 core part which is simply unheard of.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,249
You got it backwards. Intel TDP figures are real and represent real dissipation [1]. AMD is the one using meaningless marketing values. E.g. that 105W 2700X has a real 140W TDP.

[1] Don't link to some review measuring auto-overclocked chip.

Hahaha, wow, Asking for a link to a non-Auto-Overclocked chip, how the tables have turned on Intel. You do realize the 9700 and 9900 series pulls WAY more power than their TDP indicates? Wait, silly question, I'm sure you know.

Intel's marketing and astroturfing department is in overdrive, using arguments they previously cited as irrelevant like "when you disable Auto-Overclocking..." and "Look at the REAL power draw...!"
 

Chimpee

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2015
Messages
1,644
Really.. i remember people paying over $1000+Intel's extreme cpu's..... For gaming, with their non extreme running $800+ and people where grabbing them lime crazy.
But I don't recalled vast majority pay over 1k for it. Likewise, I doubt a vast majority will pay $750 CPU for gaming.
 

Chimpee

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2015
Messages
1,644
I see it more of a, you can do compute and game very well in the same package, and you don't have to spend up for an HEDT platform that would game worse (lower clocks). Quite reasonable for what it is.
Indeed, for the clock and amount of cores you get, a person can multitask and game at the same time. I am glad AMD at least moving the bar for CPU,
 

Chimpee

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2015
Messages
1,644
They do and have in the past...I mean Intel held the crown for a very long time. Some of their best CPU's were $1000.
I am not disagreeing that, I am just saying the vast majority of users don't buy expensive CPUs to game. Same when Intel had $1000 CPU, still the same when AMD have a $750 CPU, at least AMD gives you a great core boost with a great core counts.
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
7,718
I am not disagreeing that, I am just saying the vast majority of users don't buy expensive CPUs to game. Same when Intel had $1000 CPU, still the same when AMD have a $750 CPU, at least AMD gives you a great core boost with a great core counts.

I honestly have to disagree. Some people think that buying the most expensive CPU will be the best for gaming. I mean just look at Dell, Alienware etc etc. People are suckers for marketing, now a majority of hardware enthusiasts know better, but a lot of average joes are blind.

Need I bring up the $1000 monitor stand? LOL
 

Chimpee

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2015
Messages
1,644
I honestly have to disagree. Some people think that buying the most expensive CPU will be the best for gaming. I mean just look at Dell, Alienware etc etc. People are suckers for marketing, now a majority of hardware enthusiasts know better, but a lot of average joes are blind.

Need I bring up the $1000 monitor stand? LOL

To be fair, people spending that kind of dough generally isn't concern about price per performance. You make it sound like no enthusiast ever bought a 1k CPU and your average joes are much more price sensitive.
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
7,718
'Best' needs a qualifier; after a point, Intel's best CPUs are no longer the best CPUs for gaming. Same for AMD with Ryzen 2, and we should probably expect the twelve-core Ryzen 3 to out-game the sixteen-core.

just depends on clock speed. The IPC will be the same with all the CPU's, it is going to come down to cache, latency and clock speed. I expect the 16c to maybe hit 4.7ghz on 1-2 cores. I except to maybe get 4.4-4.5ghz on all cores on water if you are lucky.

The 12core I expect to be the best CPU for gaming just because I think it will have a better chance to hit 5ghz on all cores. https://siliconlottery.com/ is going to make A LOT of money if they sell high clocked Ryzen 3k chips.
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
7,718
To be fair, people spending that kind of dough generally isn't concern about price per performance. You make it sound like no enthusiast ever bought a 1k CPU and your average joes are much more price sensitive.

I guess i just lost a lot of faith in humanity nowadays....seems like the human race is going backwards in evolution laugh.

That 1k monitor stand sealed that deal for me.
 

primetime

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
6,647
'Best' needs a qualifier; after a point, Intel's best CPUs are no longer the best CPUs for gaming. Same for AMD with Ryzen 2, and we should probably expect the twelve-core Ryzen 3 to out-game the sixteen-core.
For those with High End water Cooling sure
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top