Is Ryzen 3000 for You? One-stop FAQ

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

Thought I would put together a catch all thread to help those in the a similar position to me.

 

Ryzen 3000 series factsheet:

• 15% increase from Ryzen 2000 series. It is now on par or greater than Intel.
• Double the cache at 32MB, then 64MB at 3900X
• In short faster all round
• 16 Core CPU will push 300W after overclock.  Even entry/mid X570 boards may struggle to hit it. (Confirmed via Gamer Nexus)

 

X570 Factsheet:

• PCIe 4.0 x16 x4 x4
• More USB 3.1 Gen 2 (8 instead of 2)
• Requires active cooling with Raid 0 M.2. 
• Fans are rated for 40-50k Hours. 4hours a day for 30years
• Official base 3200Mhz RAM supported without overclock, 4400Mhz RAM oc on Air (Confirm via Dimitry HardwareCanucks - MSI video)
• Fantastic board partner support 50+ at launch

 

Interesting Tidbits:

• PCIe 4.0 x16 for X470/B450 is available via a BIOS update, only x4(PCIe, M.2) is missing
• B550 will not be available next year and won't focus as heavy on PCIe 4.0 (Gamer Nexus Confirm)
• Unless you are 4K gaming with dual GPU to never saturated PCIe 3.0

 

Marketing BS by AMD

• It was PCIe 4.0 vs PCIe3.0 in the bandwidth demo. What would happen if Intel+NVIDIA was PCIe 4.0

Building New:

• 2600 is better value than 3600, the cost of the build is half the price after discount and promotions.  15% IPC does not translate to 15% increase in framerates in games.
• 2700 is better value than 3600, cheaper build, wait for a $/£160 price to occur.  2 extra core vs 15% increase in IPC.
• 2700X < 3600, depending on price. Gamers wont need the extra cores.

 

Genuine Concerns

• Buildzoid has evaluated the VRM of MSI on par in ATX and better in MATX and ITX. Yet MSI doesn't recommend using X470/B450 for 3000 series CPU.   Something is up!   Seems the concern came from VRM, essentially all high enm to deal with 6-8 cores, the 12 core is suspect due to heat output.

 

Now for You - CPU

I am Gamer and I want the ability to game on a baller system, money isn't a limitation - BUY

I am Gamer and I want the best bang for buck or I am casual gamer and I want performance

1. AMD 1700X or older - BUY
2. AMD 2600X, 2700 or Newer - Debatable
   • if your budget is 3900(X) and high end level X570 - BUY
   • if your budget is 3700(X) and high end level X570 - BUY if you want dual M.2 PCIe 4.0 and really need the performance bump otherwise DON'T BUY  
   • If you budget is 3600(X) and high end level X570 - DON'T BUY - It is $200-300 after selling and you won't gain anything other than single core performance
3. Intel 4700K to 6700k - Debatable
   • Debatable, if your budget is 3700(X)or greater and high end level x570 - BUY 
   • If you budget is 3600(X) and high end level X570 - BUY if you want dual M.2, really need the performance bump, want a system refresh or are going multi-threaded performance, USB 3.1 Gen 2 otherwise DON'T BUY
4. Intel 7700K to 9700k - DON'T BUY

I am a video editor or photographer(professional) or game design/3d Modelling

1. AMD 1700X or older - BUY
2. AMD 2600X, 2700 or Newer - Debatable
   • if your budget is 3900(X) and high end level X570 - BUY
   • if your budget is 3700(X) and high end level X570 - DON'T BUY 
   • If you budget is 3600(X) and high end level X570 - DON'T BUY - It is $200-300 after selling and you won't gain anything other than single core performance
3. Intel 4700K to 6700k - Debatable
   • Debatable, if your budget is 3700(X)or greater and high end level x570 - BUY 
   • If you budget is 3600(X) and high end level X570 - BUY if you want dual M.2, really need the performance bump, want a system refresh or are going multi-threaded performance, USB 3.1 Gen 2 otherwise DON'T BUY
4. Intel 7700K to 9700k - DON'T BUY

I will update this as information is revealed and real-world tests are delivered.

 

Let me know what you think.

[dizmo]

This doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. According to this, the casual gamer doesn't have an option at all.

CPUs also have more cache than you've listed.

[ch3w2oy]

I need to know more about the Bandwidth thing.. Will my 3900X on X570 with my Radeon VII be faster than a 9900K on a Z390 with a 2080? How much faster? 

 

I'd like to know now but I'm going to be running a shit load of tests before and after I upgrade and report my findings online.. I'm not waiting for reviews or benchmarks.. 

 

I also think the motherboards look way better than Z390 does, so far.. At least MSI and Asus's line up.. Motherboard manufacturers are finally taking AMD serious.. 

 

Can't. Fucking. Wait. 

[PopsicleHustler]

Its not really the time to debate whether or not you should build your system on AMD or upgrade current AMD chip. As with alot of hyped hardware, stock could go puff in an instant. We could end up with extremely high prices or lack of stock.

 

And as with everything - we must see the performance in real time, in real rig with no tricks. Its nice to know the % increase compared to previous gen, but we have to see real world comparison and results.

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

1 minute ago, dizmo said:

This doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. According to this, the casual gamer doesn't have an option at all.

CPUs also have more cache than you've listed.

My thoughts were that casual gamer either seldomly played AAA or were generally affected by slowdowns in browsing and streaming which would make up an significant portion of their PC use.

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

19 minutes ago, ch3w2oy said:

I need to know more about the Bandwidth thing.. Will my 3900X on X570 with my Radeon VII be faster than a 9900K on a Z390 with a 2080? How much faster? 

 

I'd like to know now but I'm going to be running a shit load of tests before and after I upgrade and report my findings online.. I'm not waiting for reviews or benchmarks.. 

 

I also think the motherboard look way better than Z390 does.. Motherboard manufacturers are finally taking AMD serious.. 

 

Can't. Fucking. Wait. 

 

The answer is it depends on your use case, will it be saturating the PCie 3.0 bandwidth. No - wait for performance and reviews. Yes - PCie 4.0 wins

 

This is really interesting times.

[dizmo]

10 minutes ago, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

My thoughts were that casual gamer either seldomly played AAA or were generally affected by slowdowns in browsing and streaming which would make up an significant portion of their PC use.

Haha, not true at all. I'm a casual gamer and I play pretty much exclusively AAA titles. Just because I have a life and other commitments doesn't mean I don't enjoy the quality AAA titles provide I also don't think casual gamers would be streaming at all.

[Firewrath9]

I'm a gamer but like to flex my PC

- YES

 

 

walks over to company sever cabinet

rips out some xeons

[Princess Luna]

13 minutes ago, ch3w2oy said:

Will my 3900X on X570 with my Radeon VII be faster than a 9900K on a Z390 with a 2080? How much faster?

For gaming? considering as long as the CPU is no bottleneck either the 9900K or 3900X, hells even the upcoming 3700X or 9700K/8700K are enough CPU and doesn't matter at all.

 

The RTX 2080/GTX 1080 Ti is faster than the Radeon 7 at the end of the day for gaming, has been proven over and over and you can use the CPU you want it won't magically make the R7 faster than the RXT 2080/GTX 1080 Ti

 

Spoiler

 

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

Just now, dizmo said:

Haha, not true at all. I'm a casual gamer and I play pretty much exclusively AAA titles. Just because I have a life and other commitments doesn't mean I don't enjoy the quality AAA titles provide I also don't think casual gamers would be streaming at all.

Fine I will expand on that section.

[ch3w2oy]

13 minutes ago, Princess Luna said:

For gaming? considering as long as the CPU is no bottleneck either the 9900K or 3900X, hells even the upcoming 3700X or 9700K/8700K are enough CPU and doesn't matter at all.

 

The RTX 2080/GTX 1080 Ti is faster than the Radeon 7 at the end of the day for gaming, has been proven over and over and you can use the CPU you want it won't magically make the R7 faster than the RXT 2080/GTX 1080 Ti

 

  Hide contents

 

I strictly mean due to the bandwidth increase.. The example of 3dMark they ran during computex showed like a 10fps difference between the two generations of PCIe, but I don't know much about it or how it works with gaming.. I know we're not even maxing out 3.0 yet.. And they were using the Navi RX 5700.. I know the 2080 is a little faster than the R7.. 

[Mister Woof]

IMO:

Gamer/Streamer:

 

Ryzen 5 3600 is worth upgrading to if you have Haswell or older i3/i5/i7 or Ryzen 3 2200g or lower AMD chips. Sub in Ryzen 7 3700x if you are a streamer.

 

Content Creator:

Ryzen 7 3700x is worth upgrading to if you have Kabylake or older i3/i5/i7 or Ryzen 5 1600 or lower AMD chips. Sub in Ryzen 9 3900x if your time = money.

 

That's pretty much it. IMO if you are just a gamer and you already have a Ryzen 5 1600 or better, there's no point at all to upgrading unless you're chasing super high refresh. If you already have an 8700k or better, no point at all. Better to spend your money on GPUs instead.

 

 

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

5 minutes ago, ch3w2oy said:

I strictly mean due to the bandwidth increase.. The example of 3dMark they ran during computex showed like a 10fps difference between the two generations of PCIe, but I don't know much about it or how it works with gaming.. I know we're not even maxing out 3.0 yet.. And they were using the Navi RX 5700.. I know the 2080 is a little faster than the R7.. 

The answer is that there is no game currently maxing out out PCIe 3.0

[Gohardgrandpa]

We gotta wait til people have these in hand and do testing. I’d love to upgrade from my 1800x but I think I’ll be sitting on this cpu for quite a while.   

 

All I do is play games, and I can’t go off the game slide Amd showed. Sure I’d love to get a 32% improvement like they said, but I gotta see reliable people doing the benchmarks not amd 

 

Honestly who knows how skewed those results are in the video, they have to look better then intel and if that means dirtbagging it then so be it. Hell the cinebench r20 score was less then 1,000 points better then my 1800x so we’ll see what happens 

[ch3w2oy]

37 minutes ago, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

The answer is that there is no game currently maxing out out PCIe 3.0

Didn't think so.. There's also no games maxing out 8 cores but the 9900k gets higher FPS than the 9700k..

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

2 minutes ago, Gohardgrandpa said:

We gotta wait til people have these in hand and do testing. I’d love to upgrade from my 1800x but I think I’ll be sitting on this for quite a while. 

Why?  IPC and clock speed has a significant impact on performance.  Your case is pretty straight forward, it won't be a clear upgrade until the 3700.  No point upgrading unless you actually need the performance, gen 3.1 gen 2 ports, one of the other features.

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

2 minutes ago, ch3w2oy said:

Didn't think so.. There's also no games maxing out 8 cores but the 9900k gets higher FPS than the 9700k..

Games are not optimized for multi-threaded work loads.   Coding true multiple thread games is extremely complicated, most developers rely on optimisation already built into the game engine.

[ch3w2oy]

 

 

14 minutes ago, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

Games are not optimized for multi-threaded work loads.   Coding true multiple thread games is extremely complicated, most developers rely on optimisation already built into the game engine.

I know.. I guess I'll just wait and see.. Just like extra memory (32gb) can help some games when it's not even utilizing 16gb in the first place..

[Gohardgrandpa]

20 minutes ago, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

Why?  IPC and clock speed has a significant impact on performance.  Your case is pretty straight forward, it won't be a clear upgrade until the 3700.  No point upgrading unless you actually need the performance, gen 3.1 gen 2 ports, one of the other features.

I just don’t believe it til I actually see people doing benchmarks on it. Sure I’d love to get a 3700x but I want to see how it overclocks and what the actual gaming numbers look like before I drop $329 on a cpu for a system that I’m still happy with. 

I’ve had cpu money burning a hole in my pocket for a while now, trust me I want to buy but it’s gotta be worth it 

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

40 minutes ago, ch3w2oy said:

 

 

I know.. I guess I'll just wait and see.. Just like extra memory (32gb) can help some games when it's not even utilizing 16gb in the first place..

Not the same thing, when your system searches for things in RAM it looks for somewhere to place the data, more places is great for write, however not beneficial for read as it has more places to search.

[Wolrajh]

For potentially heavy content creation, I was going for a 2990wx, but at some point I started wondering if the improved frequency ( albeit less cores ) of the 2950x wouldn't be a better fit. With computex around, I decided to hold on for a while - and there wasn't any 16/32 announcement sadly.

 

Sooo... Stick to the 2990wx plans ( any chance they also see a price drop ? ) or wait and see if the rumours of a 16/32 ryzen being unveiled on June 10th are true ?

[Princess Luna]

3 minutes ago, Wolrajh said:

2990wx

This is actually a terrible choice of CPU unless you have an extremely specific use for it, "content creation" is a really vague term but all in all you're probably a lot better off with this upcoming Ryzen 9 3900X for the balance of single thread performance with multi-threading capacity.

 

Per core latency, IMC, software optimization... a load of things should be taken into account not simply a simplistic mindset of "more cores the better".

[Wolrajh]

Ah, yes, it would be for heavy FX simulation using Houdini, as well as rendering. However it's true my renderer of choice is the GPU-based redshift, mostly because Mantra and Arnold are slow as heck when you don't have a lot of cores. This probably differs a lot from simpler 3D task like modeling or animating or even video editing.

 

But yeah that's exactly why I'm wondering. The numerous threads of a 2990wx would actually matter a lot, but I guess I could fall for an upgraded 2950x - whatever that mysterious ryzen 3000 16-32 could turn out to be.

12-24 on the other may not be enough, regardless of the improvements over the previous gen.

[Xplo1t]

3 hours ago, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

Not the same thing, when your system searches for things in RAM it looks for somewhere to place the data, more places is great for write, however not beneficial for read as it has more places to search.

That's not how RAM works.  There is no searching for a piece of data.  It's mapped directly in the CPU memory controller to a specific location.

[JayzSub]

I'm more worried about the heating issues, I pray AMD isn't going back the heater generation again like the FX generation.