Intel Could Take YEARS to Catch Up… - Ryzen 9 3950X Review

[Emily Young]

AMD is bringing 16 cores to the masses with the Ryzen 9 3950X – Does it live up to its Threadripper predecessors? In a word… Yes.

 

https://youtu.be/stM2CPF9YAY

 

Buy a Ryzen 9 3950X:
On Amazon: TBD
On Newegg: TBD

 

Buy a Ryzen 9 3900X:
On Amazon: https://geni.us/VhZIc7
On Newegg: https://lmg.gg/8KVj9

 

Buy an Intel Core i9 9900K:
On Amazon: https://geni.us/r5YG
On Newegg: https://lmg.gg/8KVj6

 

*Purchases made through some store links may provide some compensation to Linus Media Group.*

[kelvinhall05]

Just now, GabenJr said:

AMD is bringing 16 cores to the masses with the Ryzen 9 3950X

"Intel is bringing DDR4 to the mainstream with their new Core i5 6600k and Core i7 6700k processors. Learn more at the link below."

[minibois]

3 minutes ago, GabenJr said:

*Purchases made through some store links may provide some compensation to Linus Media Group.*

Wait.. Since when did you guys add this disclaimer? 

I thought everyone knew the LinusMediaGroup affiliate code was always added to all Amazon links posted on this site too  

[Flying Sausages]

GO GO GO AMD RANGERS!

[Flying Sausages]

Under $800 for 16 core and 32 thread

 

Intel could charge you over $1k for 16 core and 32 thread

[GoldenLag]

cant wait for relativly low stocks and high demand. 

[GoldenLag]

Just now, OlympicAssEater said:

Intel could charge you over $1k for 16 core and 32 thread

they dont tho, not with cascade lake. 

[Flying Sausages]

Just now, GoldenLag said:

they dont tho, not with cascade lake. 

They can because they know people will pay more for premium.

[GoldenLag]

Just now, OlympicAssEater said:

They can because they know people will pay more for premium.

yeah? AMD can aswell. 

 

so can VIA. certain people will allways pay unreasonable ammounts for certain hardware. 

[Flying Sausages]

Just now, GoldenLag said:

yeah? AMD can aswell. 

 

so can VIA. certain people will allways pay unreasonable ammounts for certain hardware. 

But you get more core and thread on AMD $1k cpu than Intel.

[GoldenLag]

3 minutes ago, OlympicAssEater said:

But you get more core and thread on AMD $1k cpu than Intel.

And that is redeemed by more clockspeed on the intel parts (comparing hedt).

 

Yes, AMD usually has a better valueoffering, and im not violating rule 2, but there are those that will pay for a name, regardless of who it is

[Flying Sausages]

2 minutes ago, yaboistar said:

you do get more +'s on intel tho so who's the real innovator here

amd: creates new architecture

 

shintel: puts skylake back into the microwave AGAIN to re-heat another + into it

Those "++++++++" better justify me the price Intel slap on like 3700x vs 9900k on gaming where $330 cpu can stand on two legs against $480 cpu.

[GoldenLag]

3 minutes ago, OlympicAssEater said:

Those "++++++++" better justify me the price Intel slap on like 3700x vs 9900k on gaming where $330 cpu can stand on two legs against $480 cpu.

Its better value, but its also generally speaking, slower. 

 

Sometimes people just want the best. Or play a game that refuses to play nicely with anything that isnt sandybridge derivative

[Firewrath9]

16 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

they dont tho, not with cascade lake. 

They charged 2000$ for a 10 core 3 years ago

[Flying Sausages]

1 minute ago, GoldenLag said:

Its better value, but its also generally speaking, slower. 

 

Sometimes people just want the best. Or play a game that refuses to play nicely with anything that isnt sandybridge derivative

It is slower on single core but not a lot on multi core. Imagine 3700x can oc to 5GHz at $330 the same as i9 9900k oc all core to 5ghz at $480.

[germgoatz]

41 minutes ago, kelvinhall05 said:

"Intel is bringing DDR4 to the mainstream with their new Core i5 6600k and Core i7 6700k processors. Learn more at the link below."

fuck whos signature is that i forgot

[GoldenLag]

3 minutes ago, Firewrath9 said:

They charged 2000$ for a 10 core 3 years ago

Was there anything on offer at the time of MSRP from someone else?

 

I mean its "eh" at best, but they did what they could.

 

4 minutes ago, OlympicAssEater said:

It is slower on single core but not a lot on multi core. Imagine 3700x can oc to 5GHz at $330 the same as i9 9900k oc all core to 5ghz at $480.

Im guessing you are talking effective instructions per cycle i guess. 

 

And people dont really care if its faster on multicore if its not faster in the games or workloads they do.

[Flying Sausages]

4 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Im guessing you are talking effective instructions per cycle i guess. 

 

And people dont really care if its faster on multicore if its not faster in the games or workloads they do.

You say

16 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Its better value, but its also generally speaking, slower.

So I guess you are talking about single core and multi core performance?

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, OlympicAssEater said:

So I guess you are talking about single core and multi core performance?

im talking in general, when it comes to succesful SMT implementation i would expect the 3700x to be very similar or faster than the 9900k. 

[Flying Sausages]

26 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

im talking in general, when it comes to succesful SMT implementation i would expect the 3700x to be very similar or faster than the 9900k. 

[Firewrath9]

36 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Was there anything on offer at the time of MSRP from someone else?

 

I mean its "eh" at best, but they did what they could.

Exactly, Intel was forced by AMD to lower prices.

 

55 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Its better value, but its also generally speaking, slower. 

Also, max turbo (1t) of intel Cascade-X is 4.8ghz

max turbo of 3950X is 4.7ghz, and 3960X is 4.5ghz.

Clock speed difference is ~100-300mhz

 

on a 9900k vs 3700X, the 9900k can reach 5ghz. the 3700X is 4.4ghz.

600mhz clock speed difference, and ~6% 1t perf, the 9900k is 13% faster on clocks, and 6% faster on 1t perf.

Let's assume 3700X gets 1000 pts, or 227.27 pts per gigahertz, the 9900k would get 1060 pts, or 212 points per gigahertz.

 

We can extrapolate this to Cascade Lake-X getting 1018 pts, and a 3950X getting 1068 pts, and a 3960X getting 1023 pts. (Rounded to the nearest point, correct me if my math is wrong)

 

The 3950X/3960X will beat intel's HEDT on single and multi-threaded performance.

You might say "3950X will never reach those clocks", but who knows if Cascade-X will reach 4.8ghz on "Turbo Boost 3.0." Also even if the 3950X only goes to 4.5ghz (3900x can reach this iirc), its still going to be faster

 

[GoldenLag]

3 minutes ago, Firewrath9 said:

Also, max turbo (1t) of intel Cascade-X is 4.8ghz

max turbo of 3950X is 4.7ghz, and 3960X is 4.5ghz.

Clock speed difference is ~100-300mhz

thank you for misrepresenting what i said as i was specifically refering to HEDT. that being current threadripper and cascadelake. (and yes cascadelake isnt out yet, but we know its performance)

 

which is what my statement was based upon. im in no way infringing on rule 2. 

[Firewrath9]

3 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

thank you for misrepresenting what i said as i was specifically refering to HEDT. that being current threadripper and cascadelake. (and yes cascadelake isnt out yet, but we know its performance)

 

which is what my statement was based upon. im in no way infringing on rule 2. 

I don't understand. You say I can't compare the Zen 2 3950x/3960x/3970x as they haven't been released yet, but you compare Cascade-X (Which also is not out) with current Zen procs?

Shouldn't Skylake-X referesh be compared to current threadrippers, in which case its 1600$ for a 16 core?

 

If you are talking about future products that are coming soon (1-2 months), why can't I compare future products to future ones?

[GoldenLag]

2 minutes ago, Firewrath9 said:

I don't understand. You say I can't compare the Zen 2 3950x/3960x/3970x as they haven't been released yet, but you compare Cascade-X (Which also is not out) with current Zen procs?

we know the prformance of the upcomming casdade parts as they are another Skylake X derivative. 

 

and prices of Skylake X has allready dropped, tho to my suprise, not on the 16 core parts. 

3 minutes ago, Firewrath9 said:

Shouldn't Skylake-X referesh be compared to current threadrippers, in which case its 1600$ for a 16 core?

yes, but its also 1400$ for Skylake X 18 core. 

 

i understand my thought process wants straight forward, but at least there was an argument to be made between skylake X and threadripper, even tho the argument is bad in my opinion. hence Rule 2 being a thing. 

 

5 minutes ago, Firewrath9 said:

If you are talking about future products that are coming soon (1-2 months), why can't I compare future products to future ones?

we have performance for some of the parts, not all of them, so i guess thats a reason why.

[Lathlaer]

Apart from the CPU discussion, I really like the production of this video, starting from music, to the lighting, the LTT logo, ending with a classy "must...mustn't it?" sentence which I did not expect:

 

(and immediately ruined by a "closelier" mere seconds later :D)