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

[realpetertdm]

Just now, Trixanity said:

No one says you have to. You won't be seeing big leaps anymore so most people can easily manage with the same CPU for five years. If 15% isn't enough you'll be waiting a few years for more.

I was planning to build a new PC and was really hyped for the new R5 3rd gen. I was expecting a bit more then small improvements for a 200 dollar price tag. Especially when the 2600 is selling in the 140s.

 

At this rate people are just going to buy the 2600 once the price drops.

[The Benjamins]

9 minutes ago, realpetertdm said:

That "IPC improvement" really gotta have some amazing improvements. I'm not going to pay 60+ more for a 10~15% increase

the 15% IPC makes the 3600 effectively a 4.8Ghz 2600, which makes it nearly 25% faster.

[Settlerteo]

4 minutes ago, realpetertdm said:

I was planning to build a new PC and was really hyped for the new R5 3rd gen. I was expecting a bit more then small improvements for a 200 dollar price tag. Especially when the 2600 is selling in the 140s.

 

At this rate people are just going to buy the 2600 once the price drops.

Then go buy the 2600. 15% improvement from previous gen might be worth it for some people and it's not only that but the whole chipset improvements. I really don't know what you were expecting. In the end why don't you go and buy the athlon 200GE which costs 50 bucks? It's a heck of a value for the price.

[Settlerteo]

5 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

the 15% IPC makes the 3600 effectively a 4.8Ghz 2600, which makes it nearly 25% faster.

I really can't understand some people. They wanted a 15 Watts AMD 9900K  for 100 $ but guess what.

[realpetertdm]

2 minutes ago, Settlerteo said:

Then go buy the 2600. 15% improvement from previous gen might be worth it for some people and it's not only that but the whole chipset improvements. I really don't know what you were expecting. In the end why don't you go and buy the athlon 200GE which costs 50 bucks? It's a heck of a value for the price.

I don't know, some more clocks, maybe an extra core or two. Lower price too.

 

I like how everyone goes "If you dont like then dont buy"

[thorhammerz]

13 minutes ago, realpetertdm said:

I don't know, some more clocks, maybe an extra core or two. Lower price too.

Then pay up - it's not free .

Quote

I like how everyone goes "If you dont like then dont buy"

But that's exactly how it's going to go: you either tolerate (you need not like it) the price you pay for the computing performance provided and make your purchase, or you hold onto your money. No amount of sugar and fluff will change the base nature of the transaction.

[realpetertdm]

"if u dont like then dont buy" is not helpful to the discussion at alll,

 

:Hey guys, I think product X is a bit too expensive"

"IF YOU DONT LIKE THEN GET OUT"

 

[illegalwater]

11 minutes ago, realpetertdm said:

"if u dont like then dont buy" is not helpful to the discussion at alll,

 

:Hey guys, I think product X is a bit too expensive"

"IF YOU DONT LIKE THEN GET OUT"

 

It's not too expensive though? The 2600 and 3600 have the same MSRP, and they're both $20 cheaper than the 1600 was at launch. You're getting more performance for a similar price which has been the standard since.. forever.

Expecting the prices to come down this gen is kinda ridiculous tbh, not only is Zen 2 on 7nm, but they've got a separate I/O chip to deal with now as well.

[realpetertdm]

1 minute ago, System32.exe said:

It's not too expensive though? The 2600 and 3600 have the same MSRP, and they're both $20 cheaper than the 1600 was at launch. You're getting more performance for a similar price which has been the standard since.. forever.

Expecting the prices to come down this gen is kinda ridiculous tbh, not only is Zen 2 on 7nm, but they've got a separate I/O chip to deal with now as well.

I'm comparing it to current 2600 price on Amazon

It's not that much of a difference for some people but when you're on a tight budget 50 dollars is huge

[ravenshrike]

40 minutes ago, realpetertdm said:

I was planning to build a new PC and was really hyped for the new R5 3rd gen. I was expecting a bit more then small improvements for a 200 dollar price tag. Especially when the 2600 is selling in the 140s.

 

At this rate people are just going to buy the 2600 once the price drops.

"Small improvements" The idea that a double digit IPC increase which puts them significantly ahead* of their competitor in IPC for the first time in over a decade
 is a small improvements is just baffling. Hell, just the 6-8% increase over Intel's current IPC is a greater IPC improvement than we've seen from intel in a single jump in the past 6-7 years. This doesn't include the clock speed increase and the extremely probable overclock potential given the VRMs that motherboard manufacturer's are slapping on their boards.

 

 

*It's possible that the general IPC increase puts them less than 5% ahead of Intel in the majority of other non-AVX workloads but I doubt it.

[illegalwater]

8 minutes ago, realpetertdm said:

I'm comparing it to current 2600 price on Amazon

It's not that much of a difference for some people but when you're on a tight budget 50 dollars is huge

You do realize that this happens literally every time new hardware comes out, right?

 

Finding discounted last gen parts isn't an argument.

[thorhammerz]

16 minutes ago, realpetertdm said:

"if u dont like then dont buy" is not helpful to the discussion at alll,

Reality is reality - prices do not magically come down just because you do not or cannot afford something at a particular price tier at a particular point in time.

[XenosTech]

1 hour ago, ch3w2oy said:

Stop wining. You sound petty. 

 

Every product that gets replaced goes on sale at some point. Do you want a brownie?

I'll take 5 and a box of cranberry juice

[PCGuy_5960]

Let's keep this discussion on topic, k?

 

-Thread cleaned-

[Humbug]

14 hours ago, realpetertdm said:

I was planning to build a new PC and was really hyped for the new R5 3rd gen. I was expecting a bit more then small improvements for a 200 dollar price tag. Especially when the 2600 is selling in the 140s.

 

At this rate people are just going to buy the 2600 once the price drops.

Thing is CPU horsepower normally doesn't improve that fast. What we have got from the R5 1600x to R5 2600x to R5 3600x is actually good by industry standards when considering the combination of IPC and clockspeed progression over just two years. GPU price/performance tends to improve faster (at least until recent RTX cards).

 

Regarding the lower price now of the second gen ryzen parts you will probably see similar price drops for the third gen parts in time before they introduce the fouth gen.

[mr moose]

16 hours ago, Trixanity said:

No one says you have to. You won't be seeing big leaps anymore so most people can easily manage with the same CPU for five years. If 15% isn't enough you'll be waiting a few years for more.

That's me, I'm still rocking a 3550 (built in 2012) in my main rig.  I still enjoy new games because at 1080P I don't need anything newer yet.   

 

 

15 hours ago, realpetertdm said:

I'm comparing it to current 2600 price on Amazon

It's not that much of a difference for some people but when you're on a tight budget 50 dollars is huge

I agree, $50 is a lot to some people, I was one of them once and I'll never forget it.  However the reality is regardless of why the 3XXX is not a wise purchase for yourself, It still falls within the normal bounds of new tech pricing and performance improvements.

 

When people are telling you not to buy it, they are not trying to dismiss your position or opinion (that's a completely accurate reflection of your position), they are trying to let you know that not buying it and going with the cheaper 2600 is still a legitimate option.  In fact if the new series wasn't priced the way they were you probably wouldn't even have that option cheaper.

 

Also on side note (just an offering of opinions) If you are seriously thinking of buying a 2600, I would think fast because once they release the 3000 and the 26000 stock runs out it will be much harder to get and you might have to settle for a 3600 anyway.

[PianoPlayer88Key]

I was kinda dreaming (before Computex that is) about seeing this for the Ryzen 9.

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

My dream would have had:

• IPC improvement having Ryzen 3000 being as far ahead of Intel Ice Lake as Bulldozer was behind Kaby Lake

• Ryzen 9 being 24 cores, 48 threads, priced at or below MicroCenter's entry-level LGA 2011 on Black Friday a few years ago.  (Also maybe squeezing a very basic iGPU onto the I/O die, so you could use it in a workstation / for virtualization without needing a dGPU.)

• Ryzen 7 being 16 cores, 32 threads, plus a Navi die, priced at/below MicroCenter's i7-4790K or 2600K on Black Friday

• Ryzen 5 being 12 cores, 24 threads, plus Navi GPU, priced like i5-4690K or i5-2500K at MC on BF

• Ryzen 3 being 8 cores, 16 threads plus 1x or 2x Navi, priced like i3-6100, 4160, 2100 .....

• Athlon being 8 cores, 8 threads (or 6 cores, 12 threads) plus 1x Navi, priced like Pentium G3258 ....

• Sempron being 4 cores, 8 threads, plus Navi, priced like Celeron G1840, etc ...  

 

I'm still hoping that whatever comes out in 2021 or 2022 will have the same price-to-performance improvement that my parents had going from a ~$270-300 286-10 in January 1989 to a 486DX4-120 in October 1995.  Yes I know we aren't getting that big of an improvement in single-core anymore, but at least there's multi-core.

 

The spoiler has a pic that I had done a while ago, from the one-die shot at CES.

 

I wasn't really expecting it of course though.  I wonder if AMD possibly could, if they wanted, bring something like this out for Ryzen 4000 series?  Like, either a 24 core CPU, or 16 core APU (with the 3rd chiplet being a Navi die)?   Or maybe even an 8-core APU with 2 Navi dice?  

Hey if with the next generation they coud shrink the I/O die to 7nm lithography, might it be possible to make the I/O die small enough to fit a 4th chiplet?  Or if those were down to 5 nm .....  

 

 

And for Threadripper 5000 / 6000 or the successor to AM4 / TR4, instead of another big TR socket, I wish AMD could do something like this .... (decided to put the GIMPed boards in a spoiler, didn't think it was right to say "photoshopped" since I didn't use that software  )

 

 

Spoiler

  

 

I wanted to try to fit triple or even quad AM4 on there, but couldn't figure out how to do it.  I'm guessing quad AM4 would fit on a dual TR4/SP3 board though.

 

 

... so they could have just one socket across the entire product stack.  If I want to buy a nice motherboard but save money by getting Ryzen 3 or Athlon now, then later upgrade to Ryzen 7 or TR, then later on upgrade to Epyc without changing my motherboard, well, I wish I could.  (I'd love to see motherboards last a LOT longer, like, outlast PSUs, PCIe physical slots, physical SATA ports, even outlast the 4-pin molex connector. ) 

 

As for where I got the idea to put CPU sockets so close... (See in spoiler.)  I'm thinking depending on how it was designed, they could maybe use TR4 coolers on the hypothetical dual AM5 setup.  

Spoiler

 

 

 

(Also I think I heard before Zen 1 launched, something about Zen being SOC, with chipset on the CPU package.  Guess I was wrong about getting the idea that people wouldn't have to do BIOS updates before upgrading to newer CPU generations.  OTOH, I guess some motherboards DO have socketed BIOS chips, although socketed chipsets might be nice at least on mid to higher end boards.)

[Loote]

For me, the expected single thread performance increase makes 3rd gen Ryzens worth it over 2nd gen discounts. We need to see tests of course, but I think until DDR5 arrives, we won't get anything that is better than 3xxx by a similar margin to Zen 2 over Zen 1+.

 

I wonder how would futureproof world look, that is,how hard is it to make 'universal CPU socket' that has additional pins for the future, which will be used for decades, but had such MB been invented 10 years ago, would that mean no USB-C or m.2? How can we guarantee compatibility with something that doesn't exist yet, unlimited PCI-E lanes and dongles? The tech is in a big part a compromise between specialisation and standardisation and you won't find the perfect spot for everyone.

[GoldenLag]

16 hours ago, realpetertdm said:

I'm comparing it to current 2600 price on Amazon

It's not that much of a difference for some people but when you're on a tight budget 50 dollars is huge

if you are on a tight budget, why go for second gen Ryzen. first gen 1600 is even cheaper and the difference between the two are non-excistant to some extent. 

 

[GoldenLag]

11 minutes ago, Loote said:

For me, the expected single thread performance increase makes 3rd gen Ryzens worth it over 2nd gen discounts. We need to see tests of course, but I think until DDR5 arrives, we won't get anything that is better than 3xxx by a similar margin to Zen 2 over Zen 1+.

why would DDR5 be the defining feature of CPU performance?

 

we still have some headroom when it comes to bandwhidt, even with 8 cores per channel. i can imagine we are cutting it close, but for most tasks its more than enough

[strajk-]

7 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

why would DDR5 be the defining feature of CPU performance?

Price and performance per watt, you have to pay a huge premium to have top tier memory, plus the power consumption ramps up as you get that premium memory.

DDR5 improves power consumption and reduces the price of jumping to faster memory.

[Loote]

I'm betting on a small increase thanks to the memory, coupled with improvements in other areas I'd expect it to be the point where the difference becomes significant. I'm not claiming DDR5 will single-handedly make CPUs that much faster
Yes, I know first pieces of memory from a new gen tend to be slower than the previous one fastest.

[GoldenLag]

Just now, strajk- said:

Price und performance per watt, you have to pay a huge premium to have top tier memory, plus the power consumption ramps up as you get that premium memory.

DDR5 will start of being expencive, and memmory barely draws any power....... and you dont need faster memmory than 3666mhz where 3000mhz is the sweetspot. 

1 minute ago, strajk- said:

DDR5 improves power consumption and reduces the price of jumping to faster memory.

DDR5 will start of expencive, such is the market of memmory, and we have no DDR5 on the market. and powerconsumption of memmory is a non-issue. if that was an issue, we would be using HBM

[mr moose]

 

I find it amusing that we are getting to a point where people are starting to debate the virtues of improvements so small that you need measurement software/test gear to see it.    The difference between a 400W system and a 500W system only becomes big enough if you calculate the savings over a year,  the extra 5-10% you get in raw processing power is only measurable between benchmarks. 

 

Some times I feel like just saying buy the second best CPU turn the damn FPS counter off and enjoy the game with some extra cash in your pocket. 

[schwellmo92]

21 minutes ago, strajk- said:

Price and performance per watt, you have to pay a huge premium to have top tier memory, plus the power consumption ramps up as you get that premium memory.

DDR5 improves power consumption and reduces the price of jumping to faster memory.

A 16GB DDR4 DIMM at JEDEC standards draws 6w~, I don’t think lower power consumption is a very good argument here. DDR5 will be cool, but I don’t think it’ll be groundbreaking.