Review Small Gains, Big Price Tag

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
AMD micro-binning the hell out of Zen 2.
I find it interesting yet expected. Both do this when they can. It also makes sense to remove the cooler, although Intel got hell for it, with a CPU thats designed for higher performance. Most people who build a system with top end CPUs tend to buy a third party cooler anyways and it just becomes more waste.
 
Reactions: Gurg
(sarcasm)

AMD has been listening to the Intel fanboys on the forums. Higher clocks are all that matter. Included coolers are always stupid, because nobody will use them.

So, AMD offered just such an option. Ergo, having catered to what the Intel fanboys wanted, I obviously expect to see them snapping up Ryzen XT processers en-masse

(/sarcasm)
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
It also makes sense to remove the cooler, although Intel got hell for it, with a CPU thats designed for higher performance.
Part of that "hell" is for charging more despite removing the stock HSF which is in itself already an intrinsic value loss. If I'm going to get negative value for my money from ditching the stock HSF, I'll take the stock HSF even if I have no plan to actually use it.
 
Reactions: Shadowclash10

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
Part of that "hell" is for charging more despite removing the stock HSF which is in itself already an intrinsic value loss. If I'm going to get negative value for my money from ditching the stock HSF, I'll take the stock HSF even if I have no plan to actually use it.
They did the same thing here though.

But still the mass majority would throw the HSF away creating waste. Not worth it IMO.
 

Chris Fetters

Distinguished
Dec 6, 2013
28
11
18,535
0
The lack of manual overclocking is a massive freaking fail.... -_- Other reviewers are getting >=4.5 - 4.6GHz all-core overclocks with the XT chips, which definitely wasn't possible with the vanillia silicon (which tapped out around 4.3GHz).
 

Phaaze88

Polypheme
Ambassador
Imma just copy-paste my response from youtube:
There's not much point to these XT chips; they're a stopgap to Ryzen 4000. People will probably still snag some up anyway, 'cause "Ooh, XT lettering!"
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
I was under the impression that manual all-core overclocking was counter-productive with Ryzen 3000.
Depends on how much the workload benefits from few-cores peak vs all-cores or CCX/CCD-wise overclock.

For games which generally have a large sequential blob delegating work to threads and then consolidating results, you need the cores to sprint through the parallelizable parts and then a fast core or two to do the splitting/aggregating, so games tend to favor single-threaded performance over all-cores overclocks.
 

olaf

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2011
427
0
18,790
1
Seeing that the x series was a huge meh compared to the simple ones , is 3600 3600x , I think the propped comparison would have been with the "bland" variety not the X . I wouldn't be surprised if the X goes extinct ... The very least as the vanilla chips to the benchmarks...
 

dalauder

Splendid
I find it interesting yet expected. Both do this when they can. It also makes sense to remove the cooler, although Intel got hell for it, with a CPU thats designed for higher performance. Most people who build a system with top end CPUs tend to buy a third party cooler anyways and it just becomes more waste.
My Spire cooler is just sitting in a box under my desk right now. I agree with not packaging coolers, if you can sell chips $10 cheaper at least.
 
Reactions: Gurg

dalauder

Splendid
Seeing that the x series was a huge meh compared to the simple ones , is 3600 3600x , I think the propped comparison would have been with the "bland" variety not the X . I wouldn't be surprised if the X goes extinct ... The very least as the vanilla chips to the benchmarks...
I agree that the X will go extinct. But the point of the benchmarks was to show the performance of XT against the X's they will replace. I don't thing the X's are still in production and they'll just be clearing the stock for a bit.

I haven't heard anyone disagree that the 3600 is the CPU to buy since the chip was released. (It's what I'm using.)
 

vinay2070

Distinguished
Nov 27, 2011
195
30
18,720
2
I agree that the X will go extinct. But the point of the benchmarks was to show the performance of XT against the X's they will replace. I don't thing the X's are still in production and they'll just be clearing the stock for a bit.

I haven't heard anyone disagree that the 3600 is the CPU to buy since the chip was released. (It's what I'm using.)
How will the X go extint? If the XT is a binned CPU means AMD has to keep creating the X to get the XT here and there.
 

vinay2070

Distinguished
Nov 27, 2011
195
30
18,720
2
You can flip the Prism on eBay for ~$35.
That is true, but with the covid, I dont know how many would want to goto the post office to ship it.

In my opinion its meaningless to buy the XT as the all core OC will be the same as the X with probably one of the CCX being slower. One can still OC a particular CCX higher in the Ryzen master, but I am not sure if its worth all the trouble for a 100 MHz extra OC on one of the CCX.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
One can still OC a particular CCX higher in the Ryzen master, but I am not sure if its worth all the trouble for a 100 MHz extra OC on one of the CCX.
Given how little there usually is to gain, I'd be more likely to undervolt and underclock to see how much power efficiency I can gain from minimal performance sacrifice than go the other way around.
 

dalauder

Splendid
How will the X go extint? If the XT is a binned CPU means AMD has to keep creating the X to get the XT here and there.
I'm assuming that XT is binned like X's with 7nm optimizations, kind of like an X with a new stepping. Then the "Vanillas" are probably produced on the optimized node as well, but still binned as "Vanilla". My guess is we'll see new 3600's with a new stepping that OC marginally higher than original 3600's.

Maybe it's all microbinning, but more likely is an optimized node/new stepping, at least from what I've heard. There's absolutely no upside to producing the X's simultaneously. So we can either assume the "XT" moniker is so that people know AMD made something better (as opposed to a silent new stepping like it did with Phenom II's) or that AMD is undercutting itself by producing both simultaneously, thereby reducing its own margins...merely out of stupidity.

Given the way the last four years have gone, I'm betting on AMD capitalizing on improvements, rather than just being foolish.
 

dalauder

Splendid
In my opinion its meaningless to buy the XT as the all core OC will be the same as the X with probably one of the CCX being slower...
That makes sense. I don't think these chips are intended to replace Ryzen 3rd Gen though. They're just marginally better replacements at the same price point and generating a tremendous amount of media coverage. Great move by AMD ("no publicity is bad publicity").
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
They're just marginally better replacements at the same price point and generating a tremendous amount of media coverage. Great move by AMD ("no publicity is bad publicity").
Well, most of the coverage I'm seeing says "don't buy it" which isn't exactly great either. My guess is AMD is setting the stage for price hikes all around for Zen 3 by resetting the MSRP bars to full on Zen 2 before launching Zen 3.
 
Reactions: Shadowclash10

ASK THE COMMUNITY