IF AMD rumours are true what SKU would you buy?

[paddy-stone]

1 minute ago, SolarNova said:

ooops.. yes .. now changed. . thanks.

 

People have been saying that same thing for years, and yet game dev's have been slow to optimise games more for multi thread, mainly due to APi limitations. So while it would be very nice to see game become much more multi core optimised, i doubt its happening anytime soon, and if it does then thats great , would mean i dont need to upgrade my CPU    not that i need to yet, 6c/12t 3930k at 4.6 is doing fine, and if need be i can likely hit 5ghz in the future.

 

Would be nice to make a new build though, perhaps a fully AMD one with a top perfoming AMD 3000 CPU and a top end Navi GPU ...though im less convinced AMD is going to perform at the top end with GPU's any time soon.

Yeah, I know it's been a long time those rumours have abounded... but it does seem to be getting better, so hope is there that they will come through... not sure if dev would be persuaded by chip makers to keep it as is though as that would possibly stifle their business <tinfoil hat, me? >

 

That woulld be nice if GPUs also come through, but less likely IMO.

[RollinLower]

if this is all actually happening, i would definitely go for the 3700X. i currently have a Threadripper 1920X, so i wouldn't upgrade on cores, but my current chip peaks at 4150Mhz. running 5Ghz on 12 cores would be absolutely amazing!

[minibois]

I would probably go for a 3700 (non x) telling myself I'll overclock it which I won't do in the long run probably just like this time maybe I'll go for the X version now.

I haven't actually really been missinf cores.. but I could use them. I need to get a better GPU too though!

[DrMacintosh]

The 3300 would be a massive improvement over my 4690K and realistically I don’t need more than 6C/12T since I only play games and multitask. My MacBook does any video editing that I may want to do. 

[Princess Luna]

None, would wait Intel's 10nm response [:

[FadedCrown]

Should be a Ryzen 3 4c/8t option with high clocks.

 

Also, looks like they are focusing on getting lots of cores with high clocks. I would have liked to see strides made in single threaded workloads.

[BuckGup]

3800x because I wanted threadripper but the low clock speeds and hefty price were too much of a turn off. But 16 cores at 4.7ghz or at least most cores at 4.7ghz is awesome. My CPU can barely get 4.3ghz on all cores and  a 267% core increase paired with 500mhz more and better memory support an IPC?? Sign me up

[ThePD]

4 minutes ago, BuckGup said:

3800x because I wanted threadripper but the low clock speeds and hefty price were too much of a turn off. But 16 cores at 4.7ghz or at least most cores at 4.7ghz is awesome. My CPU can barely get 4.3ghz on all cores and  a 267% core increase paired with 500mhz more and better memory support an IPC?? Sign me up

If I am not mistaken, the 3850X is rumored to hit 5.1 GHZ.

[ThatBlockishWay]

Probably 3600x cause I dont need that many cores so it'd just be adding heat. If I can OC to 5+ Ghz thats all thatd matter for my uses

[ThatBlockishWay]

1 hour ago, Princess Cadence said:

None, would wait Intel's 10nm response [:

Im an Intel biased person too but of the choices which?

[TVwazhere]

4 hours ago, TetraSky said:

Of course, benchmarks come first. 

^this^

 

Specs only tell half the story. But I've got my eye on Either the R7 3700 or the R9 3800 fully watercooled. Mostly waiting on single thread/IPC benches to make sure they're better than my 4790K (they should be, but yknow...)

[BuckGup]

3 minutes ago, ThePD said:

If I am not mistaken, the 3850X is rumored to hit 5.1 GHZ.

That sounds juicy