Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Origami Cactus

(16core added)AMD 3000 specs! 4.7 GHZ, R9 3950x, R7 3700x, 3800x.

Recommended Posts

I really do hope these will OC to like 5GHz. 


i5-4670K ~ RX 470 ~ Z87MX-D3H ~ MX300 525GB ~ CM Hyper 212+ ~ 12GB 1600MHz Ram ~ EarthWatts 650 ~ NZXT GAMMA ~ WD Blue 250GB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I'm gonna ask exactly where those rumors about having more cores came from... 

 

That aside, that looks like a healthy IPC bump, but the big question is how much you can overclock them by. Any closer to 5GHz and Intel really will have to start coming up with a proper response. 

 

The long standing argument is that Ryzen is better for productivity applications (especially from a value perspective) whilst Intel is more suited for gaming, but even that is slowly being undermined. 


Please tag me if you need assistance or if you want me to contribute to a topic 

 

ASUS RoG STRIX GL502VM

Intel Core i7 7700HQ | GeForce GTX 1060 6GB | 16GB DDR4-2133 | 128GB SanDisk M.2 SATA SSD + 1TB 7200RPM Hitachi HDD | 15.6" 1080p IPS monitor @ 60Hz w/ G-SYNC | Windows 10 64-bit

 

Samsung Galaxy Note8 SM-N950F

Exynos 8895 (4x Mongoose @ 2.3GHz, 4x Cortex A53 @ 1.7GHz)ARM Mali G71 MP20 | 6GB LPDDR4 | 64GB Samsung NAND flash w/ UFS 2.1 dual-lane controller + 128GB SanDisk C10 UHS-I microSD | 6.3" 1440p "Infinity Display" AMOLED | Android Nougat 7.1.1 w/ Samsung Experience 8.5

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gonna wait for the reviews first. 


Specs: Motherboard: Asus X470-PLUS TUF gaming (Yes I know it's poor but I wasn't informed) RAM: Corsair VENGEANCE® LPX DDR4 3200Mhz CL16-18-18-36 2x8GB

            CPU: Ryzen 7 2700X @ 4.2Ghz          Case: Antec P8     PSU: G.Storm GS850                        Cooler: Antec K240 with two Noctura Industrial PPC 3000 PWM

            Drives: Samsung 970 EVO plus 250GB, Micron 1100 2TB, Seagate ST4000DM000/1F2168 GPU: EVGA RTX 2080 ti Black edition @ 2Ghz

                                                                                                                             

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, melete said:

Really looking forward to Adored explaining why he wasn’t totally wrong, just mostly wrong on 12 core Ryzen 7 etc.

 

He allready did months ago when he noted that pricing and branding can be changed anytime upto a few weeks from launch. both the low end 8c and low end 12c match the specs he gaves. AMD just chose to use a different branding and pricing structure.Which given they've apparently decided to hold back the 16c actually makes perfect sense. The 16 core is no longer their flagship model, the 12c is and everything else in the product stack has shifted in naming and pricing to reflect that.

 

It even makes good business sense, (the original leaks did too, but it ultimately comes down to what AMD's objective was/is, from this i'd say AMD are pursuing a different objective from what they had when the launched Zen1/Zen+). Personally whilst it's just educated guesswork i'd say AMD went for different pricing and the branding that goes with that because of how various recent factors, (more deals signed with big suppliers and Intel's shortage getting more major tech OEM's using AMD parts), have made AMD more prominent and competitive in the CPU space. That means undercutting intel on both price and performance may now present a degree of diminishing returns in marketing terms that would be detrimental to profits. AMD has been undercutting all these years because they've needed a really compelling argument to overcome Intel's mindshare and general entrenched position.I'd say the new pricing scheme and delayed 16c represents AMD deciding they've overcome that adequetly to adopt a more short term profit focused stance. They no longer feel they need the pricing advantage to get good sales, performance alone is enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, SenioRR said:

They have lost their last advantage and that's the IPC. I bet we are going to see some rushed panic launches in the near future.

I really hope AMD is saving their 16c monster for when Intel tries to respond, only to further humiliate them.

 

AMD DESTROYS INTEL WITH CORES AND IPC

Intel still has their main advantage since 2017, clock speeds


Ex-EX build: Liquidfy C+... R.I.P.

Ex-build:

Meshify C – sold

Ryzen 5 1600x @4.0 GHz/1.4V – sold

Gigabyte X370 Aorus Gaming K7 – sold

Corsair Vengeance LPX 2x8 GB @3200 Mhz – sold

Alpenfoehn Brocken 3 Black Edition – it's somewhere

Sapphire Vega 56 Pulse – ded

Intel SSD 660p 1TB – sold

be Quiet! Straight Power 11 750w – sold

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Quadriplegic said:

Intel still has their main advantage since 2017, clock speeds

IPC is what matters here. A lower clocked Ryzen CPU is outperforming a higher clocked Intel CPU in single-threaded benchmarks.

Higher clocks don't do very much for Intel anymore as they have pretty much hit the IPC ceiling for their current process.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one hell of an IPC increase. Benchmarks are going to be interesting for sure


I spent $2500 on building my PC and all i do with it is play no games atm & watch anime at 1080p(finally)...

Builds:

The Toaster Project! Northern Bee!

 

The original LAN PC build log! (Old, dead and replaced by The Toaster Project & 5.0)

Spoiler

"Here is some advice that might have gotten lost somewhere along the way in your life. 

 

#1. Treat others as you would like to be treated.

#2. It's best to keep your mouth shut; and appear to be stupid, rather than open it and remove all doubt.

#3. There is nothing "wrong" with being wrong. Learning from a mistake can be more valuable than not making one in the first place.

 

Follow these simple rules in life, and I promise you, things magically get easier. " - MageTank 31-10-2016

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SenioRR said:

IPC is what matters here. A lower clocked Ryzen CPU is outperforming a higher clocked Intel CPU in single-threaded benchmarks.

Higher clocks don't do very much for Intel anymore as they have pretty much hit the IPC ceiling for their current process.

Which is almost irrelevant as Intel CPUs have higher ceiling of clock speeds, entirely negating difference in IPC. Zen 2 chips have to overclock well to be successful


Ex-EX build: Liquidfy C+... R.I.P.

Ex-build:

Meshify C – sold

Ryzen 5 1600x @4.0 GHz/1.4V – sold

Gigabyte X370 Aorus Gaming K7 – sold

Corsair Vengeance LPX 2x8 GB @3200 Mhz – sold

Alpenfoehn Brocken 3 Black Edition – it's somewhere

Sapphire Vega 56 Pulse – ded

Intel SSD 660p 1TB – sold

be Quiet! Straight Power 11 750w – sold

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite 5GHz, but this ain't bad I guess. 4.6GHz max turbo and 15% IPC uplift should give quite decent performance. I don't think these will be hitting 5GHz even on high end daily cooling, probably like 4.8GHz and 5GHz if really lucky if we are basing it on the existing OC capabilities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Quadriplegic said:

Which is almost irrelevant as Intel CPUs have higher ceiling of clock speeds, entirely negating difference in IPC. Zen 2 chips have to overclock well to be successful

If AMD's IPC claims hold true and can OC to their top base clock, the performance difference between Intel and AMD will be pathetically small. In the neighborhood of a 9900K @ 5GHs vs a 9900K @ 5.05-5.1GHz.


Come Bloody Angel

Break off your chains

And look what I've found in the dirt.

 

Pale battered body

Seems she was struggling

Something is wrong with this world.

 

Fierce Bloody Angel

The blood is on your hands

Why did you come to this world?

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

The blood is on your hands.

 

The blood is on your hands!

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
2 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Not quite 5GHz, but this ain't bad I guess. 4.6GHz max turbo and 15% IPC uplift should give quite decent performance. I don't think these will be hitting 5GHz even on high end daily cooling, probably like 4.8GHz and 5GHz if really lucky if we are basing it on the existing OC capabilities.

Yeah but new process and new design, so the past OC capabilities shouldn't matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, plsno said:

I really do hope these will OC to like 5GHz. 

it's most likely 4.6, look at the single core boost on zen + and the max all core oc, if it does go to 5.0 i think ppl would lose their shit, but slightly too good to be true.


9900k 1.39v 5.2 83C 185w 1.24v 4.9 60C 135w 1.05v 4.5 90w 50C (doing some testing for hot days) all-2avx cinebench/blender temps. avx voltages in prime. ll D15 ll Z390 taichi ult 1.60 bios fixed LLC voltage gaps ll gskill 2x8gb cl16 ddr4000 bdie 1.42v ll EVGA 2080 ti XC (duo fan skinny) 1995//7600 power limited 79C max, stock voltage (really bad ocer) ll 2x samsung 860 evo 500gb raid 0 ll 500gb nvme 970 evo ll Corsair graphite 780T ll EVGA G2 1300w ll Windows 10 Pro ll NEC PA272w (movie, work mon) 2k60 14bit lut ll Predator X27 4k144 hdr (rgb98)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Origami Cactus said:

Yeah but new process and new design, so the past OC capabilities shouldn't matter.

It's still Zen and the clock step up is about the same as it was between Zen and Zen+. If process and design were so much better they'd be hitting 5GHz out of the box at least on the highest end CPU. But they aren't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite frankly, anyone who has trusted AdoredTV in the last 1-2 years is either a moron or not researched enough. The guy (AdoredTV) has consistently been wrong on the stuff he says, only to then backpadel or cherry pick benchmarks to kind of get it right. 

 

Only 2 out of 20 benchmarks gets the results he wants? Let's only show those 2 benchmarks in the video! Nothing biased or misleading about that, right? 

 

Fuck that dude. 

 

 

Anyway, Ryzen 2 sounds really good. Not anywhere near as good as some of the leaks (some which even said the 6 core would be like 99 dollars) but still really good IPC improvement. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we aren't really getting any more cores per dollar, nor that much MHz increase per dollar compared to current prices. Correct? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

How you like Adored now? 

LOL, at least it is entertaining to listen to him. So even though he is bad at predictions/leaks I will keep listening to him just cause I enjoy it.  And I don't tend to get over-hyped and disappointed. So listening to somebody wade through technical stuff and speculate about GPUs and CPUs and the industry is just fun. Even though he has lost his credibility for predictions.

 

But he actually could have done some damage here to AMD because he made people expect the 3800x to be 5Ghz boost. So the people who got overhyped based on that can be blamed on him.

 

And then people blame AMD for overhype and let down... when in reality they have given us a 200Mhz clock speed boost with 15% IPC gain and better efficiency! Which is actually really good, AMD is consistently executing on their roadmap faster than Intel  and with bigger improvements per gen than Intel.

1 hour ago, SenioRR said:

Will Intel even be recommended anymore in future builds? Doesn't look like they have much of an advantage left after the 15% IPC increase for AMD.

They IPC advantage is completely gone. But they still have a few 100Mhz clockspeed advantage, and they will throw power/efficiency/price concerns out of the window and try to sell 5Ghz CPUs. However they will hold on to the laptop market for now because AMD is not bringing Zen2 to mobile parts for now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, CarlBar said:

 

He allready did months ago when he noted that pricing and branding can be changed anytime upto a few weeks from launch. both the low end 8c and low end 12c match the specs he gaves. AMD just chose to use a different branding and pricing structure.Which given they've apparently decided to hold back the 16c actually makes perfect sense. The 16 core is no longer their flagship model, the 12c is and everything else in the product stack has shifted in naming and pricing to reflect that.

 

It even makes good business sense, (the original leaks did too, but it ultimately comes down to what AMD's objective was/is, from this i'd say AMD are pursuing a different objective from what they had when the launched Zen1/Zen+). Personally whilst it's just educated guesswork i'd say AMD went for different pricing and the branding that goes with that because of how various recent factors, (more deals signed with big suppliers and Intel's shortage getting more major tech OEM's using AMD parts), have made AMD more prominent and competitive in the CPU space. That means undercutting intel on both price and performance may now present a degree of diminishing returns in marketing terms that would be detrimental to profits. AMD has been undercutting all these years because they've needed a really compelling argument to overcome Intel's mindshare and general entrenched position.I'd say the new pricing scheme and delayed 16c represents AMD deciding they've overcome that adequetly to adopt a more short term profit focused stance. They no longer feel they need the pricing advantage to get good sales, performance alone is enough.

So, where's the proof that AMD did the changes rather than him just speculating as usual?  He already admitted that he had speculated and was wrong about the CES portion of that.

 

Gets 1 thing right and 3 things wrong.  Much credible.

 

 


Bloodshed and the Fenris-Wolf:

| CPU:  Ryzen 3 2200g(buying a 3900x in August for it) | CPU Cooler:  Stock at the moment(have a dark rock pro 4 for that 3900x) | Paste:  Kryonaut | Motherboard:  ASRock x470 Taichi(replacing with a Gigabyte x570 Aorus Elite) | RAM:  G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 48 GB (2 x 16 GB + 2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 | Boot Drives:  Crucial MX500 500 GB M.2-2280+Crucial BX500 120 GB 2.5" SSD | Storage Drives:  Toshiba X300 4 TB 128 MB Cache 3.5" HDD+PNY CS900 240 GB | GPU:  Sapphire Radeon VII 16 GB HBM2 Video Card | Case:  Cooler Master MasterBox MB511 RGB | PSU:  EVGA SuperNOVA G2 750 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply w/CableMod E-Series Cable Kit (Black/Red) | Case Fans:  2 Corsair SP140 49.49 CFM 140 mm Fans | Displays:  AOC U2879VF 28.0" 3840x2160 60 Hz Monitor (Replacing with an LG 4k IPS display for game art)+AOC G2460PQU 24.0" 1920x1080 144 Hz Monitor | Mouse:  Corsair M65 Pro RGB | Keyboard:  Ducky Shine 7 Blackout - MK Exclusive First Release - RGB LED Double Shot PBT Mechanical Keyboard with Silent Red Switches | Mousepad:  Gaya Entertainment Oversized Gaming Mousepad Doom | Audio:  Massdrop x AKG K7XX Audiophile Open-back Headphones+Audio-Technica ATR2500-USB Cardioid Condenser USB Microphone+Kingston HyperX Cloud II 7.1 Channel Headset+iBasso IT01 Dynamic Driver Audiophile In-Ear Monitors/Earbuds (Black)+Pair of Mackie MR624s(came with stands+isolation pads) | OSes:  Windows 10 Pro+openSUSE Tumbleweed |



VashTheStampede(ROG Zephyrus M GU502):

| CPU:  i7-9750h | RAM:  32GB Dual Channel 2666mhz CL 19(Stock+Samsung 16GB DDR4 PC4-21300, 2666MHZ, 260 PIN SODIMM, 1.2V, CL 19 ) | Storage:  1TB SSD with Optane | GPU:  Nvidia RTX 2060 | Display:  144hz 3ms | Mouse:  Corsair M65 Pro |

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they release 16 core by holiday 2019 I guess I can forgive them for being greedy. Still though, they could definitely be selling the 16 core on launch, they arent hard pressed for working 8 core chiplets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Not quite 5GHz, but this ain't bad I guess. 4.6GHz max turbo and 15% IPC uplift should give quite decent performance. I don't think these will be hitting 5GHz even on high end daily cooling, probably like 4.8GHz and 5GHz if really lucky if we are basing it on the existing OC capabilities.

I expect 4.7Ghz to be the common max stable overclock on all cores without doing anything exotic.

 

I say this because the highest clocked part we got is 4.6Ghz and so far AMD clocks Ryzen close to the max reasonable frequency. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Humbug said:

I say this because the highest clocked part we got is 4.6Ghz and so far AMD clocks Ryzen close to the max reasonable frequency. 

on 14nm soc process at the literal max the process can handle, meant for phone chips. It's not the arch as much as it was the node.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, S w a t s o n said:

on 14nm soc process at the literal max the process can handle, meant for phone chips. It's not the arch as much as it was the node.

And this contradicts Humbug's statement....how?


Come Bloody Angel

Break off your chains

And look what I've found in the dirt.

 

Pale battered body

Seems she was struggling

Something is wrong with this world.

 

Fierce Bloody Angel

The blood is on your hands

Why did you come to this world?

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

The blood is on your hands.

 

The blood is on your hands!

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
5 minutes ago, S w a t s o n said:

If they release 16 core by holiday 2019 I guess I can forgive them for being greedy. Still though, they could definitely be selling the 16 core on launch, they arent hard pressed for working 8 core chiplets.

There is actually a big reason.

All the max binned 8 core chiplets are going to EPIC and ryzen 3800x. So the 3950x will come when they have enough chips.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IAmAndre said:

So is it game over for Intel?

Losing the battle != losing the war. Cases in point, Intel came back from Netbust and AMD came back from Faildozer. At the very minimum, I wouldn't expect Intel to have been sitting on their thumbs these past couple years since the initial Ryzen launch (one would hope anyway). I want the war to heat up and benefit the consumer, not for either to cede entirely.


The pursuit of knowledge for the sake of knowledge.

Forever in search of my reason to exist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

And this contradicts Humbug's statement....how?

AMD clocked ryzen near the max clock because that was what they were working with and needed to be competitive with intel. This node is a high performance node specifically designed for chips like this vs a phone soc at 12w. Along with this goes things such as clock speed increases. AKA the chips should be able to go much faster, and with the IPC lift, AMD doesnt have need to go into the poor scaling region of the voltage curves on stock chips. That's how you get an 8core at 65 watts to a 9700k at 95w.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Origami Cactus said:

There is actually a big reason.

All the max binned 8 core chiplets are going to EPIC and ryzen 3800x. So the 3950x will come when they have enough chips.

The epyc chips do not need the max binned chiplets that can do 5ghz. They want power efficient chips that will play nice around 2-4ghz. That is basically all working 8core chips most likely. Yield is supposed to be something like 70% for working 8 core chiplets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×