The motherboard one actually just annoys me because I can see how that could lead to unnecessary confusion for people who are not in the know. The "benefit" of doing this is maybe a slight chuckle so I wish they'd just not.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Rumor: Ryzen 3000 Leaks
- Thread starter Earvin Infinity
- Start date
The motherboard one actually just annoys me because I can see how that could lead to unnecessary confusion for people who are not in the know. The "benefit" of doing this is maybe a slight chuckle so I wish they'd just not.
Hmm yeh, in either case it should be a rather massive upgrade. If the actual specs and prices remain close to these leaks then we'd finally get this bang/bucks king that hasn't really been there for many years now.
Will the APU line still be limited on how fast you can set the memory to? I remember that was an issue with the last APU line. You couldn't set the memory to 3000 or anything over.
Well, since you bought an 8700k, the 9000 series has come out, so... Things are moving fast.
Lol i still got mine. It's been doing its job well for 6-7 years now.
Looking to upgrade from my 6600k, probably looking at the 3850x just to get more longevity out of it. Not too sure on an AMD GPU though as 1440p/144hz will be my preferred target going forward.
Intel has been stalled for years trying to get a die shrink. AMD is tied to TSMC for manufacturing and it's been paying off these last couple years.
EDIT: Yes, they also had GloFo, but GloFo has exited the cutting edge business and AMD is exclusively TSMC now (for cutting edge). Just so people don't point this out:)
The fact that AMD just comes out of nowhere while intel has been struggling for years on it just makes me laugh so much. Honestly at this point I don't know if it's more so "struggling" or just being "lazy" though when they had no competition.
Nonetheless, AMD coming out with Ryzen has been a godsend. Really hope the GPU side pushes the same way but I guess we'll see if these are real.
This leak comes at the worst time for me, as I just build my new PC (Ryzen 5 2600X, B450 and RX 580)... XD (My actual PC is an old Phenom II 1090T and an ancient HD 4670, the upgrade was really necessary).
Regardless of that, hoping to be true. AMD needs to be competitive on both sides, so customers will win in the end with fair prices.
Regardless of that, hoping to be true. AMD needs to be competitive on both sides, so customers will win in the end with fair prices.
Last edited:
If these rumors are true I'll start saving for a 3700/3850x, depending on game performances with the frequency boost.
It's a good lessonsfor intel, they stagnated for years, and now they are in a ridiculous situation. Next, nvidia. If only I wasn't locked to g-sync...
It's a good lessonsfor intel, they stagnated for years, and now they are in a ridiculous situation. Next, nvidia. If only I wasn't locked to g-sync...
I have a Ryzen 1700 non-X and aside from the slower clock cores, it is a fantastic CPU with a lot of multi-threading. I was debating jumping to the 2700, but now... I think I will just wait and see what comes of this rumor, I mean... that 16 core 32 thread Ryzen 9... holy hell. AMD's going for Intel's Jugular now. Even the Ryzen 3's at 6 core is pretty impressive.
Any one got an idea if how the 3700x would compare to like the 9700k ? I've been slowly amassing stuff for a new build and at the moment I'm down to just motherboard and processor so should I wait ? Like I dont really need to buy the CPU and motherboard now but if these leaks are real it seems I would be blowing a ton of money on an Intel chip after pissing away 800 on the rtx 2080 cause I'm an idiot and I wanted ray tracing......
Kyle Bennett from HardOCP told many truth inside the video. Some details are false too but not many. And he is a big critics of AMD.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/rumor-ryzen-3000-leaks.85115/post-15671157
The 9700k is a 8 core with no hyper-threading. In games I doubt there will be a massive difference, maybe 10-15% in favour of 3700x if I were to guess. In other tasks it should be beating it by a good margin. With no references it is hard to say for sure though.
Personally I think AMD is the best option going forward. You can wait, or get a cheap Ryzen now, and a good AM4 motherboard. Then replace the CPU when Zen 2 arrives. The AM4 socket will be viable until 2020.
I upgraded from my 2500k @4Ghz to Ryzen 5 1600 @3.6Ghz , never look back anymore it's a legit performance increase and snappiness . Would probably snag the 3600x if the rumors is indeed true and there isn't a need to change motherboard .
+1 for the price. The guy doing the leak said maybe two entries with base clock at 5Ghz were probably added to the table.
I would caution some of the CPU SKU clock speeds seem off, especially base clocks in some SKUs are too high.
But Holy Mackerel that R9 3850X or 3850 Black Edition top model is like a HEDT wet dream on mainstream! The one I would be interested in though is the 12-core 3700X with 5Ghz boost. Even this would wipe the floor with Intel's hot and power hungry relic 9900K if the +15 ipc rumour is true or close to it.
But Holy Mackerel that R9 3850X or 3850 Black Edition top model is like a HEDT wet dream on mainstream! The one I would be interested in though is the 12-core 3700X with 5Ghz boost. Even this would wipe the floor with Intel's hot and power hungry relic 9900K if the +15 ipc rumour is true or close to it.
I do recall now that you mention it that the 9700k had no hyper threading which was a pretty subpar idea from Intel considering their 8700k did. That being said I'll probably pick up a nice am4 motherboard and wait it out or as you said pick up one of the dirt cheap ryzen just to itch to tinker with the build. Thanks for the answer and now to deep dive into am4 motherboards whilst I sit in the office
I would wait when they release new motherboards. I can see the 3000x series be compatible but not fully exploitable with the actual AM4 mobos.
Well damn now I'm gonna have to like .... Work or something today but thanks for the info
What I find incredible is the fact that the only CPUs Intel can counter these with will be yet another 14nm+++++ refresh, that old, long in the tooth arch, hot and power hungry by comparison, to compete with TSMC's 7nm! It's crazy. What's more where do they go after the 9900K? That thing is pushed to the limit and Skylake architecture, which is essentially what that is, is not meant to run 4.7-5ghz with that many cores. It's pushed way past optimum frequency curve for the arch.
With these leaks what stands out to me most is the frequency actually, not the huge core counts.
If 7nm allows them to hit 5Ghz boost out of box as it suggests here, Intel loses on every single front/
With these leaks what stands out to me most is the frequency actually, not the huge core counts.
If 7nm allows them to hit 5Ghz boost out of box as it suggests here, Intel loses on every single front/
If these Ryzen 2 (they won't be calling them that if their product numbers are 3xxx will they?) numbers are correct and they really will be backwards compatible with Ryzen 1 boards... I'll be ecstatic.
It's not that I don't trust AMD on this, AM2/+/3 boards were supported forever... it's just I bought a system last year with a 1400 because I was expecting to buy a much higher ryzen 2 down the line as my next big upgrade after I did the ram this year. The thought of going from a 4T8 to a 12T24 or 16T32 on the same board is mind boggling. Hell, even if older boards are limited to 8T16, the price of those and the higher clocks versus the 1400 will still be a crazy upgrade.
It's not that I don't trust AMD on this, AM2/+/3 boards were supported forever... it's just I bought a system last year with a 1400 because I was expecting to buy a much higher ryzen 2 down the line as my next big upgrade after I did the ram this year. The thought of going from a 4T8 to a 12T24 or 16T32 on the same board is mind boggling. Hell, even if older boards are limited to 8T16, the price of those and the higher clocks versus the 1400 will still be a crazy upgrade.
Yeah, I would bet that none of these SKUs beat a 9900k in 99.9% of games.
I would worry that even if these numbers are completely legit, Intel won't be shaken. Quake had a large part in Cyrix's failings...
$500 8/16 CPU would be 8-10% better than the rumored $229 8/16 CPU... You're right Intel wouldn't be scared or worried about that at all.
Ryzen 1000 series was Zen "1"
Ryzen 2000 series is zen+
Ryzen 3000 series is zen 2 indeed
AMD also confirmed that AM4 will be supported till 2020. It was all over tech sites this summer.
Quick Google search
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2018/04/19/amd-socket-am4-motherboards-support-until-2020/
People could end up with zen2+ (ryzen 4000) running on their x370 boards
The management decided to maximize profits a few years ago by reducing the work force, management got bonuses and happy shareholders. Innovation stalled, and maybe now there will be a real cost to be paid
Sorry dude that's idiotic. 5ghz boost and 10-15% IPC increase and you think 9900K will be faster in 99.9% games still? Even at 360p that won't be true.
Also, the 9900K is hot and power hungry relic compared to these, who cares about that last throw of the dice from Intel.
User Warned: Inflammatory accusations
LOL. Troll fucking post.
AMD isn't Cryix in 1996. Hopefully intel paid you well for this post.
8700k easily beat a 2700x in games despite having 2 less cores. Adding in cores beyond 8 won't benefit any current games. So it'll be 9900k's better-at-gaming 8 cores vs the best case AMD's 8 cores. If they do have 5Ghz boost and 10-15% IPC, that'll be very impressive, but 9900k will still hold a performance advantage.
At same clock 8700k still handily beats a 2700x, showing the per-core per-clock performance advantage Intel has. Remember this is with 2 less cores in games that are certainly designed around 6-8 physical cores (because of consoles).
Why would going to 360p matter? GPU throttling doesn't shift performance advantage one way or another, it just decreases advantage.
Furthermore, historically Intel has gotten away with absurdly higher prices for no reason other than brand name.
Last edited:
Still sounds too good to be true. ComputerBase called it mostly BS too, especially the release date.
Oh no, I've better spend an extra $300 for an added 30fps at 300fps.
The use case where someone would need more than 144fps is niche, the 9900K is a halo product that will lose its luster.
Historically intel has been shady as all fuck. They'll go that way again in a heartbeat.
I'm not telling you to buy either chip. Now you're dismissing performance advantage. Not every game achieves such high framerates even when not GPU limited.
I'm sorry, *I* got inflammatory accusations here? What? Meanwhile another user is accusing me of working for Intel and gets off with nothing.
Just fucking perma me if the moderation is going to be this shit.
Exactly, the lower the framerate the smaller the difference.
You want me to get modded then report me btw.
I did. Mods have decided you can call me an astroturfer and idiot all you want.
You compare AMD's current performance in gaming with a cytrix CPU and quake and infer that because intel's latest CPUs are marginally faster in games that its lack of super hardcore gaming performance could sink the company.
AMD doesn't just make cpus just for 240hz CS:GO gaming.
BTW, I didn't report you at all, not for any of your posts, including the first one I responded to.