News Watch AMD's Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 'Where Gaming Begins' Livestream Here October 8 at 9am PT

Sep 17, 2020
6
2
15
0
All that's left is for AMD to finally take the gaming performance lead from Intel to assume complete dominance of the desktop PC market.

Wouldn't some of you agree, that AMD already has an actually meaningfull performance lead? And by lead I personally understand that you get better multithread, multitasking performance in relation to cash spent for CPU/mobo altogether, and referenced to actual power draw. Intel's lead by 5-10% of fps when one considers already high fps (~150) is not really usable.
On the other hand, it's hard to say that such runner up as AMD - smaller, poorer, definitly lower market share in all areas can become a leader. It won't, what it can do is to provide GOOD (I don't use BETTER on purpose) product at reasonable price.
 

1foxracing

Distinguished
Feb 14, 2011
119
6
18,695
4
I have a feeling this is going to me similar to Nvidia's recent launch where they will announce a load of good stuff but you won't actually be able to purchase any of it for 6 months or so.
Today you still can't find a R3 3300X for sale.
 
Reactions: Shadowclash10

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Wouldn't some of you agree, that AMD already has an actually meaningfull performance lead?
As far as gaming is concerned, which is specificially what you quoted was about, Intel is still leading by 10-20% in high refresh rate gaming. This is why it got called the last frontier of AMD's dominance. AMD has the lead in nearly everything else, Zen 3 will give it the last ~20% it needs to beat Intel at nearly everything at least until Rocket Lake comes out next year.
 
Sep 13, 2020
57
8
35
0
I have a feeling this is going to me similar to Nvidia's recent launch where they will announce a load of good stuff but you won't actually be able to purchase any of it for 6 months or so.
Today you still can't find a R3 3300X for sale.
Shush AMD would never ever, evvvvaaaaa do such a thing they are the good guys according to a boatload of forum fanboys.
 

egda23

Prominent
Jun 14, 2020
667
119
640
20
Disappointing speech. They were essentially touting a ....... toy.
Practically nothing about scientific (my field) and professional usage for such an amazing piece of hardware
 

Evaldino

Honorable
May 26, 2014
11
3
10,515
0
Ok, AMD went expensive, but CPUs are not bad at all... just need to wait for Intel reaction and AMD’s response in lowering the price, and I’m in for 5800x (instead of my current 3600)
 

TJ Hooker

Glorious
Ambassador
$549 for a 5900X. Youch.

Wasn't the 3900X $449 at launch? And now commonly available for <$400?
3900X was $500. All the Zen 3 chips announced have a $50 higher MSRP compared to Zen 2 chips.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ryzen-9-3900x-7-3700x-review,6214.html

Although the fact that there's apparently no 5700X means that the MSRP for an 8 core Zen 3 is arguably $120 higher than it was for Zen 2. Same goes for the lack of a 5600, meaning a 6 core Zen 3 is effectively $100 higher for Zen 2.

Maybe they'll release a 5700(X) and/or 5600 non-X at a later point, once they've spent some time selling their higher margin chips to people willing to pay a premium.
 
Last edited:

egda23

Prominent
Jun 14, 2020
667
119
640
20
Well, that's because this was a Ryzen launch. That's why they said "gaming CPU".

You need to wait for the Threadripper debut.
I do not agree of course. A CPU is a CPU. You can do anything with it (well, according to Mr Turing).
In my field nobody is using a Threadripper category of CPU. There is something called a "budget" in scientific research and analysis
 
~40% higher price for 20% better overall performance.
Well, 20% higher if we compare launch pricing with the 3600X. I do think the pricing would have been softened a bit if they announced something like a $230-$250 non-X chip though, along with higher core-count counterparts. I imagine those will be coming not long thereafter though.

Disappointing speech. They were essentially touting a ....... toy.
Practically nothing about scientific (my field) and professional usage for such an amazing piece of hardware
Well, they did tout a 19% average performance uplift in applications compared to Zen 2. Whether that applies to mold-spore predictive analysis or whatever field you are involved in is anyone's guess, but it probably wouldn't have been all that practical for them to cover every piece of software in existence for what is essentially a quick announcement and preview of what their new hardware has to offer. And the event was called "Where Gaming Begins", so you probably should have expected that. There should be reviews out in a few weeks or so with more detailed performance numbers covering more software, and it's not like you can fully trust manufacturer-provided numbers to be representative of typical performance anyway.

I was talking about vs the 5950x which is $800 where as a 10900k is ~$650 usd
You're comparing a 16-core processor against a 10-core processor. For anything but heavily-multithreaded applications that fully utilize all cores, it makes more sense to compare it with the 8 and 12-core parts.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS