AMD Ryzen 5000 launch: "Fastest gaming CPU," higher clocks, higher prices

[Mithan]

Tables sure have turned.

I figured Zen3 would best Intel at pretty much every task. Seems like it will be true.

Honestly why even go Intel at this point.

Next year Zen 4 will be here with a new socket and will be even faster. While Intel is still struggling to get 10nm desktop chips on the market.

5800X is going to make for one fast gaming Chip.

Sadly for Intel they are pushed so hard out the box there isn't much overclock headroom. Rocket Lake isn't going to get Intel back on top.

I wouldn't talk about "next year". Zen 4 will struggle to make 2021 IMO, and once Intel finally gets its foundries in order, they are going to come out very hard. Rocket Lake will come out and I can virtually guarantee you it will be faster than Zen 3, even at 14nm, of course, it wont be pushing as many cores, so we will be exactly where we are today... Intel for better single threaded performance and AMD for more Cores overall, and better power efficiency.

These two companies are finally moving again, and the future will be very interesting offering consumers CHOICE, which has been lacking since the Core2Duo came out and until Zen 1 came out in 2017.

It looks like we are going to see competition in the GPU side of things too.

 

[Mithan]

I look forward to the gaming benchmarks and then this sucker going against Rocket Lake in 4-5 months. It will be VERY interesting.

However, the best part here might actually be those 4k Benchmarks for the new Radeon Graphics Card because if you go look at those benchmarks and compare it to a 3080RTX, they are basically the same.

I REALLY REALLY hope AMD can come out swinging in the graphics department and give nvidia a hard kick in the balls for the crazyness they have caused with video card prices. The 2080 series was absolutely *****ically priced. 3080 is still high, but more inline with the last 10-12 years of high end GPU prices.

 

[defaultname365]

Intel will challenge Zen 3 with Rocket Lake in 2021 (Intel's supposedly last 'new' 14nm Desktop CPU).

As for Radeon 6000 series, 88fps = CoD Modern Warfare puts it faster than a 2080 Ti and around 3070 performance, but not 3080 performance.

So, it may look like AMD is "winning", but there's still competition to be had.

 

[Arbie]

I imagine I will be buying one of these juicy looking new CPUs

LMAO: Badmouth, badmouth, badmouth, badmouth... BUY...

You're just lucky that these "juicy new CPUs" are available to you, since you've done everything possible to bury AMD in the forums. If people listened to you, the company would be out of business.

Fortunately for all of us, not many do listen.

 

[Nobina]

I will still wait for reviews to see actual performance, are there any bugs, issues in the first few weeks etc... I think it's better to wait until non-X versions come out, they might be marginally weaker in performance but cheaper and maybe less power hungry.

 

[Puiu]

Yeah I have a different definition since 3900x is slower than 8700k.

You keep moving the goal post, eventually you will find something you can argue for. I was talking about matching 9900k which didn't happen because 3900x is slower than 8700k. But keep moving the goal post, keep using different words than me so you can pretend we are talking about the same thing and you are right.

https://imgur.com/I55EMuM

Also, I would suggest you to check Gamer nexus to actually see how "fast" 3900x is because he actually knows how to do a proper review. The difference is even higher than 10% and 3900x is often slower than 9600k or 3700x.

I prefer more reputable reviews that use updated results and more games in their tests. According to the 3900x review on Techspot, it is 6% slower than the 9900k at 1080p which is really good (5% when both are OCed). It supports the claims made by AMD. (it really wins in cs:go)

https://www.techspot.com/review/1877-core-i9-9900k-vs-ryzen-9-3900x/

The real winner though is the 3700x which is between 0 or 2 FPS slower than the 3900x.

 

[Endymio]

Intel advanced so slowly, holding the entire industry back...

I'm guessing you're quite young, to make such a statement. Over the last 45 years, Intel cpus have gone from 0.0007ghz to 5+ghz, from an IPC of 15 clocks to about 0.2, from 4 bits to 64, and from one core to 4-16. They're a billion times faster, and you can now buy more computing power than all the worlds supercomputers combined then for the price of a good meal out -- without ordering wine. How much faster and cheaper have cars got in that same time period? Or any other product, for that matter?

If Intel hadn't used every means, fair and often foul, to monopolize the market and hamstring AMD, I could have twice the performance!

Perhaps you can name some specific examples of those "foul" anticompetitive behaviors in which Intel engaged?

 

[Irata]

I'm guessing you're quite young, to make such a statement. Over the last 45 years, Intel cpus have gone from 0.0007ghz to 5+ghz, from an IPC of 15 clocks to about 0.2, from 4 bits to 64, and from one core to 4-16. They're a billion times faster, and you can now buy more computing power than all the worlds supercomputers combined then for the price of a good meal out -- without ordering wine. How much faster and cheaper have cars got in that same time period? Or any other product, for that matter?

Perhaps you can name some specific examples of those "foul" anticompetitive behaviors in which Intel engaged?

Are you seriously asking that question? Under which Rock have you been living ?

 

[Irata]

I will still wait for reviews to see actual performance, are there any bugs, issues in the first few weeks etc... I think it's better to wait until non-X versions come out, they might be marginally weaker in performance but cheaper and maybe less power hungry.

Nothing wrong with waiting - a great way to avoid potential launch issues and the early adopter tax.

But: „less power hungry“ ??? Looks like TDP stays the same (even went down for the 5600X vs. the 3600X).

 

[Yad]

A big Up for AMD.
They BTFO Intel with ZEN.

I hope they keep up with Nvidia and we see some competition with RX6000 series.

 

[Endymio]

Are you seriously asking that question? Under which Rock have you been living ?

Well it's a rather large and comfortable one, and quite dry underneath -- but your response didn't answer the question. The leader in every market is invariably accused of anticompetitive behavior, and in a political-dominated process, sometimes even found guilty of it. That doesn't make it true. I assume you're referring about Intel's OEM exclusivity rebates, but without a hard referent, it's difficult to meaningfully discuss.

 

[Nobina]

Nothing wrong with waiting - a great way to avoid potential launch issues and the early adopter tax.

But: „less power hungry“ ??? Looks like TDP stays the same (even went down for the 5600X vs. the 3600X).

I meant non X will probably consume less power than X version.

 

[DZillaXx]

I wouldn't talk about "next year". Zen 4 will struggle to make 2021 IMO, and once Intel finally gets its foundries in order, they are going to come out very hard. Rocket Lake will come out and I can virtually guarantee you it will be faster than Zen 3, even at 14nm, of course, it wont be pushing as many cores, so we will be exactly where we are today... Intel for better single threaded performance and AMD for more Cores overall, and better power efficiency.

These two companies are finally moving again, and the future will be very interesting offering consumers CHOICE, which has been lacking since the Core2Duo came out and until Zen 1 came out in 2017.

It looks like we are going to see competition in the GPU side of things too.

Rocket Lake won't be faster. We already have Willow Cove with Tiger Lake with 4.8ghz single core, and its not even close to Zen3.... This is at 10nm too.

Rocket lake is a 14nm version of this arch, and they will be big chips with high TDPs. These chips with high core counts will be hot & power hungry. Supply will be low, overclock headroom will be minimal.

And Zen 4 will have no problem making 2021, This is the gift of their chiplet design. It makes revisions much easier. This is why the IO die has not changed. While Rocket lake is going to be a 1h 2021 chip and still be behind.

I haven't rocked AMD in my gaming desktop since Athlon 64. As much as I would like Intel to catch back up, they lost their crown when Zen 2 launched. I already moved my server to Zen, as I run a lot of VMs and Intel just doesn't compete. If you are looking at only gaming, you are better off sticking to 6 core chips.

I just wish AMD had better ITX options, as I'm done with large towers. And their ITX selection is a joke compared to Intel.

 

[Irata]

Well it's a rather large and comfortable one, and quite dry underneath -- but your response didn't answer the question. The leader in every market is invariably accused of anticompetitive behavior, and in a political-dominated process, sometimes even found guilty of it. That doesn't make it true. I assume you're referring about Intel's OEM exclusivity rebates, but without a hard referent, it's difficult to meaningfully discuss.

Ah...“in a politically dominated process“....I see where you are going, so no point in answering further really if you see Intel as the victim of nefarious politically motivated actions of several countries‘ authorities.

 

[christiangeli]

RTX 3080 gets about 66 fps in Borderlands 3 with the same settings as the teaser there showing a big navi chip at 61fps. That's about 8% slower for the AMD card and of course says nothing for ray tracing. The interesting thing here is that the RX 5700 XT gets about 30 fps in Borderlands 3 at Ultra settings. That suggests that big navi is 80 CU, basically doubling the RX 5700 XT to achieve 4K @ 60fps. Perhaps with a slightly faster clock speed to make up the difference between the Ultra and BA settings. My guess is that the card AMD is referencing here with have between 21 to 23 TFlps of performance and will slightly outperform the RTX 3070 in most games. I think the difference between the RTX 3080 and big navi 80 CU will be larger than 8% in most games. This is in line with some of the rumors floating around. If that is AMDs top tier card, which is probably is, then AMD is still going to be competitive in the mainstream market, while Nvidia will still keep the enthusiast level advantage.

As I do plan on getting a $400-$500 range graphics card, the big question might end up being which of these cards is more power efficient. My PC has a 650 Watt PSU and even if big navi were slightly more powerful than the RTX 3070 and priced equivalently, if it takes 300+ watts to power, I'll probably end up with the RTX 3070.

Who care about ray tracing....I supposed Ray tracing is a sequel to Rayman ??

 

[GameZenChill]

Hey guys, I have a question.

With the comparison chart AMD showed, with the 5900X beating the 10900K in 1080p gaming, is it safe to assume that was done comparing a stock 10900K to a stock 5900X ?

And hence, is it likely that AMD 5900X (at max stock boost of 4.9GHz ?) beats Intel 10900K (at max stock boost of 5.3GHz ?) ?

 

[Endymio]

Who care about ray tracing....I supposed Ray tracing is a sequel to Rayman ??

Who cares about that new-fangled 3-D graphics? All real games use sprites.

 

[Privery]

I'd been looking forward to this announcement for a while but came away feeling a bit underwhelmed. We seem to be (almost) getting Intel gaming performance for (almost) Intel prices. I (almost) feel I should just buy Intel.

The prices will go down AMD always lowers the price of their cpus after a few months and there will be sales

 

[EdmondRC]

Who care about ray tracing....I supposed Ray tracing is a sequel to Rayman ??

Well, like it or not, AMD Big Navi and RTX support ray-tracing and its possible that they will be about equal, but its just as likely that one will be more efficient than the other. I think of ray tracing the same as other graphics settings. Ten year ago it was soft-shadows and AA that cause huge performance hits. Of course even mid-range cards today are capable of high AA settings and soft-shadows while still maintaining high frame rates. These new graphics cards should be able to maintain 60+ fps at 1440p resolutions with ray-tracing on (hopefully). So it could be a trade off between 4K and ray-tracing in many titles and to be honest, that's a matter of preference. Or if your monitor is only 1440p, ray-tracing might be a nice feature that makes these cards a little more attractive than say a mid-range card. So I think ray-tracing performance is at least something to weigh into a decision on which card to buy, even if its lower on the list.

 

[pit1209]

Hey guys, I have a question.

With the comparison chart AMD showed, with the 5900X beating the 10900K in 1080p gaming, is it safe to assume that was done comparing a stock 10900K to a stock 5900X ?

And hence, is it likely that AMD 5900X (at max stock boost of 4.9GHz ?) beats Intel 10900K (at max stock boost of 5.3GHz ?) ?

Yes, every test was at stock clocks. ZEN 2 arch already has better IPC than Intel offerings, the weakness in gaming was lower clocks and higher memory latency due to the CCX divisions but ZEN 3 has alleviated the latter by a lot and clockspeeds are almost on par with Intel now.

4GHz CPU Battle: Ryzen 3900X vs. 3700X vs. Core i9-9900K

Expanding upon all the testing we performed in our day-one 3rd-gen Ryzen coverage, today we'll be running a clock-for-clock comparison benchmark. IPC can be a good indicator...

www.techspot.com

 

[Arbie]

I'm guessing you're quite young, to make such a statement. Over the last 45 years, Intel cpus have gone from 0.0007ghz to 5+ghz, from an IPC of 15 clocks to about 0.2, from 4 bits to 64, and from one core to 4-16.

What are you on about? The invention of the transistor??? I'm talking about recent history! As it happens, SemiAccurate has just summarized the current situation with some relevant observations. He's smart, and objective even when annoyed:
https://semiaccurate.com/2020/10/08/amd-somewhat-discloses-the-ryzen-5000-series/
"In just over a year, AMD’s IPC gains beat out Intel’s 2015-2020 IPC advances. They are giddy for a reason. ... Once you add process improvements in to the 19% IPC increase you get a 24% uplift when moving from an R3K chip ... As a whole, AMD is claiming a ... 2.8x lead over Intel’s i9-10900K for the 5900X. This is a devastating advantage... Intel has nothing to compete against the 5950X and won’t for a long time."

You can take that to the bank.

And BTW, Intel didn't take us from 4-16 cores on our desktops!! AMD did, in 2017-2019. Where have you been?

Perhaps you can name some specific examples of those "foul" anticompetitive behaviors in which Intel engaged?

How can you not know of this? OK, I'll Google it for you. FYI that's an internet search engine to find stuff. Try the New York Times, among a zillion other references on many years of misdeeds:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/13/...-upholds-1-06-billion-fine-against-intel.html

What this means is that Intel abused the system to beyond the point where it could be ignored any longer. Nuff said - though you can go on about verdicts being challenged; conviction doesn't mean guilt etc.

 

[JimboJoneson]

So not even a mention of next gen MB's. Apart from the price gouging (how very Intel of them) I have zero interest in the X5xx MB's. I guess I'll have to wait until well into next year for prices to come down and pray we get X6xx MB's announced.

I am still curious which features that the next gen of motherboards will have that make them worth praying for and waiting a whole year to upgrade ... must be something spectacular! I am curious if maybe we all should be waiting for these new boards. Please do let us know!

 

[Avro Arrow]

Only the 6 core AMD has a cooler.

Now, some might say that you were simply mistaken but this is such an elementary and well-known fact that I refuse to believe that someone who is a member of TechSpot would be so ignorant because we're all enthusiasts here. Enthusiasts aren't ignorant of things that everyone knows, like nVidia uses PhysX while ATi uses OpenCL and AMD bundles coolers with its CPUs while Intel doesn't.

The AMD CPUs that don't come with coolers are speical, non-mainstream CPUs like the 3950X, ThreadRippers, EPYCs and XT models (that aren't the 3600XT). Look at this list and note that the 12-core, 8-core, 6-core and 4-core CPUs ALL say "w/Cooler". Not on this list is the Athlon 3000G which is a 2-core that ALSO has a cooler. So your claim that AMD only bundles coolers with their 6-core CPUs isn't just a lie, it's a WHOPPER.

Do you really love Intel, a CORPORATION, that much to you that you would lie to actual people to defend it after it has abused us all for over a decade?

 

[Avro Arrow]

Avro Arrow
I was going to like your comment until the last paragraph - all this is great - but it's not game changing - like Apple 2 or C64 or Amiga or getting colour, floppy drives, 8bit sound etc - Nerds were literally getting high on that stuff.

I think the next big exciting thing - with be building modular semi alive systems - adding dozens of senses, different AI processing units, scalar CPUs , power gens , mobility etc

You'll have to be more specific. I post a LOT of comments. That's what "QUOTE" is for.

 

[Shadowboxer]

LMAO: Badmouth, badmouth, badmouth, badmouth... BUY...

You're just lucky that these "juicy new CPUs" are available to you, since you've done everything possible to bury AMD in the forums. If people listened to you, the company would be out of business.

Fortunately for all of us, not many do listen.

Its funny isn’t it. As soon as AMD make products that perform best in gaming I start to like them. I wonder what on earth could motivate me?

And “done everything possible”. I think I left about 4 negative comments. I understand that some people here are emotionally attached to AMD so they probably took them personally. Lol. These guys are *****s.

Whats even funnier is that you think my negative comments have actually hurt AMD “you’re lucky these new CPUs are available to you”.

You are proving the rule that you should never underestimate the stupidity of people you encounter on the internet!