Reviews AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

That's similar to my plans too - for most of what I do with my PC the gains over a 2700X aren't worth £500 for the 3900X or £750 for the 3950X. For certain things it would have a fairly large impact but still not worth that amount of money.

7nm vs whatevernm the 2700X is?

 

Not quite anything. The X570 boards can't take Gen 1 Ryzen's for example, A320 does not support Gen 3 CPUs at all, and the other Gen 1 chipsets (X370 & B350) that actually made it to production are at motherboard manufacturer discretion. Expect this to continue for the life of the socket, with older boards not supporting newer CPUs and newer boards not supporting older CPUs.

TSMC's 12nm is a minor tweaking to TSMC's 16nm with mostly the same design rules, which itself is very similar to TSMC's 20nm (same BEOL, most design rules the same). Intel like to stick '+'s on the end to denote refined processes, TSMC, Samsung & GloFo like to drop the Arbitrary Nanometer Number instead.

 

Officially no, but a good bunch of them actually do. Now putting a 105W SKU in them is not a good idea, but something like a R5 3600 might be a good fit.

Plenty of other examples of 3000-series working on A320 on Youtube.

True but, Ryzen 2000 was built on GloFo 12nm, not TSMC.

 

Same thing there, GloFo 12nm is a slight tweak of their 14nm process (that's their Samsung-derived 14nm, not their IBM-derived 14nm, because GloFo just have to be awkward...).

 

Already have. It's just a BIOS update away.

 

AM4 is the future!!

 

I am basking in AMD's hold of the most desirable CPUs on the market after the persistent lack of innovation from Intel, while also cynically cost cutting by using non soldered heat spreaders.

We can only hope AMD do the same to Nvidia.

 

Newflash: If AMD had years in a position of strength, like Intel did, they would ABSOLUTELY be doing the same damned thing.

We all like an underdog, but bestowing some saintly status upon AMD is laughably naive.

 

Yep, exactly. They are both businesses who exist to make money. Neither is your pal.

 

In the tiny DIY market? Sure.
But in the far larger market of pre builts AMD was a complete non entity back then just like they are now.

 

You're offering that as comparable to Intel's position?

 

How, in the kingdom of blue moses, was I giving AMD saintly status for saying I am happy they are holding the performance crown.

I am happy that Intel have been put in their place. I don't see AMD or any corporation as being saints. To think I do is laughably uninformed, David. Competition that forces Intel to lower their prices or innovate is a win for us, which is why I want AMD to do the same to Nvidia or, indeed, Intel to do the same to Nvidia.

 

I'm really liking the look of this CPU (in fact a 38/900x would be pretty sweet also) and after a bit of research I reckon I could make an x570 ws ace work for me due to it 8/8/8 lane setup along with an NVMe raid card, it will be a little limiting on bandwidth on x8 PCie but will allow me to keep all my NVMe drives.

Roll on end of the month see how the numbers look on x299x and tr40x as that board and card will be ~700 but can be matched with a nice cheap cpu.

 

I didn't say you were, dizzi, it was a generalised comment. I would've quoted you directly if that were not the case.

 

intel can be less on the performance crown and they don't care much as they have silly amount of money this wont really affect them as some people's mind sets are still set on intel and don't really recognise amd or what they are

it taken zen+ and more so now Zen 2 to get them to notice that there currant refresh of a refresh with some 200-400Mhz jump per generation and intel cant do it any more, as they are at 5ghz so they are going to need to make another 2nd gen core again witch might be years away as they didn't really think ryzen be much a threat to them but with Zen 2 they are now Very close to intel now (very much so beating them on thermal performance) and only latency and higher clock speed that intel are winning on now

i stuck in between 9900ks (maybe 10th gen soon) or 3800x as some games i play need the single threaded performance under any core load (as ryzen single core score/performance is when the CPU is only doing 1 thread and drops off once more then 2 cores are been used, where the 9900k or KS can more or less keep single threaded score the same )

i can just put a 3800x, mobo and ram right into my case and not have to mess with my AIO and straight up 30-40% faster for the below games and higher FPS for games

intel CPU (9900ks) will be 20-30% faster then the 3800x (compared to the 1800x i have over 60% faster) for games like KSP, factorio and oxygen not included and for other games wanting high frame rate monitor but i may need to possibly replace my water cooler or buy the bits so it works on a intel cpu

 

I'm with Gareth. AMD kicked Intel's arse on every front. The only way Intel could grasp onto something that made them elite tier was to rebadge one of of their Xeons as a P4 EE.

For the price AMD were amazing. I bought a XP 2000+ and IIRC it was around the $100 mark.

AMD have also been handing out freebies and Easter eggs for years. CPUs with cores you can unlock, GPUs with cores you can unlock and so on. I don't expect that, but they did it any way.

Right now AMD are competing with... Well, themselves. And they are doing it with aplomb. This time next year this CPU will be less than £300. They seem to be doing something every year now. I mean, Ryzen has been around two years right? look how cheap the 1700 is now. And the original TR. £250 for a 12 core TR. If the board prices weren't so insane I would have gotten one.

This, highly likely, will be my next CPU. Mostly because I won't have to sacrifice a newborn for the board to put it in.