Ryzen 5000 Series Discussion

Discussion in 'AMD x86 CPUs and chipsets' started by Skramit, Nov 7, 2019.

  1. SKITZ0_000

    SKITZ0_000 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Messages:
    1,397
    Location:
    Tas
    I personally generally can't stand this guy. However I'm pleased that he has used 3600C16 memory, too few reviewers do this on their mid to high end cpu comparisons.

    I wouldn't touch a 9600k, you're just putting yourself in the same position a year or two from now. They're already struggling in many AAA titles.

    The prices of 7700K's have almost gone up as much as AMDs share price. Otherwise, a 4c8t would probably get you by without the need to change platform. Sounds like the waiting is the best option.
     
  2. Ratzz

    Ratzz Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2013
    Messages:
    10,139
    Location:
    Cheltenham East 3192
    4GHZ vs 4GHz, sure, but he specifically said that his 7600K is overclocked at 5Ghz. Clock for clock, Zen 2 wins, but Zen still can't reach the clock speeds of an overclocked 7600K. Zen 2 is very close to matching his 5GHz 7600K. Zen 3 will comfortably smash it in all situations.

    As it stands however, the extra clock speed of his 7600K is just a hair faster for single threaded performance than Zen 2, purely because of the extra clock speed he can get from his overclocked 7600K.
     
  3. vid_ghost

    vid_ghost Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,148
    umm WHAT?

    no where is a 7600k overclocked anywhere near a 3700X or 3600 in single threaded performance and in gaming benchmarks an overclocked 7600k is much, much slower.

    Even a Ryzen 1600 crushes an overclocked 7600k in gaming LOL.. SEE below.
    The only intel CPU still worth buying these days is a 9900k and thats only if you want the most FPS on 1080p for pro gaming at 144/240hz with a $1000+ high end GPU





     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2020
  4. c4dderly

    c4dderly Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2001
    Messages:
    1,333
    Location:
    Melbourne
    So when do we expect the 4000 series to release end of this year or early next?

    Very interested in what FPS it can deliver due to IPC improvements with next gen gfx cards like a 3080ti vs Intel at 1440p/4K.
     
  5. RnR

    RnR Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Messages:
    16,467
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Middle of this year I believe. Roughly same window as RDNA2 gpu's.
     
  6. Phido

    Phido Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,406
    Location:
    Dark City
    Mid to End of this year. I would aim for retail enmass around sept, early adopters and pre orders might get filled a bit earlier.

    IMO FPS for gaming, basically nothing. Maybe 1-2% over Intel consistently. Gaming performance between different CPU's is pretty marginal these days at 1440k/4k. New cards won't massively change CPU dependence and impact.
    What is likely to be much better is over all system performance. By then we will have:

    • 7000Mb/s SSD's that really max out on PCIE 4. There was basically nothing when Ryzen 3000 landed. AMD systems will likely load games, boot, etc, measurably faster. It won't be heaps, but it will be seconds. I expect this to be critical in media productivity stuff. Having a game load in 5 seconds instead of 10 does make the system feel noticeably quicker, even if the FPS are similar.
    • Faster and denser ram. We are a long way from Ryzen gen 1. Even with Ryzen 3000, people often benchmarked it with ram design for Ryzen 2000 or older.
    • More optimization for AMD code. Now that Ryzen is a known entity and taking market, people are coding for it. Patching etc.
    • More mature bios's. Ryzen 3000 was plauged by multiple bios's. I think that is less likely to be an issue because they won't be a drastic changes.
    What I do expect is for AMD to completely flatten intel in productivity etc. Encoding, rendering etc. Over system snappyness should be quite high.
     
    SKITZ0_000 likes this.
  7. chook

    chook Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    3,789
    Yes, I believe that 'mid to late CY20' is the lingo that was going around. Maybe another Computex keynote? That might be a bit biased two years in a row.
     
  8. neRok

    neRok Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    3,993
    Location:
    Perth NOR
  9. vid_ghost

    vid_ghost Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,148
    REAL 4000 Series comes out second half of this year.. mobile 4000 is low power all in one die zen2 3000 series desktop chips for the mobile market..

    Zen 3 mobile will probably be Ryzen 5000 early next year. I really dont like this mix and match naming.
     
  10. RnR

    RnR Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Messages:
    16,467
    Location:
    Brisbane
    My only doubt in relation to the release date is the presence of the next gen consoles. Will the consoles get Zen 3 cpu's, or last years Zen 2 cpu's? Releasing so much hardware on 7+nm (Zen 3, RDNA 2, EPYC, Threadripper, Scarlett, PS5) seems impossible. Something will lose out. There simply is not enough silicon to go around.
     
    chook likes this.
  11. Ratzz

    Ratzz Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2013
    Messages:
    10,139
    Location:
    Cheltenham East 3192
    I'll see your reviews and raise you a couple hundred thousand real world users... I am an AMD fanboi these days, but still willing to concede the occasional small win to Intel. Next generation though, Intel gets body slammed. The few cases where Intel still hang on by their fingernails will be smashed, let them have their last breath in peace.

    Note that this statistic doesn't even mention how much each chip is overclocked, it simply says mixed speed, which of course it would need to since not all of those couple hundred thousand submissions are using the same overclocks. 5Ghz would be on the high side for a 7600K though wouldn't it? Note too that I've highlighted single core, but 2 and 4 core also get a slight win for the i5. When it gets to 8 though, Ryzen hits it out of the park.

    https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-7600K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-3700X/3885vs4043

    Untitled 1.jpg

    Untitled 2.jpg
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2020
  12. vid_ghost

    vid_ghost Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,148
    userbenchmark.com is a paid for by intel website. It was exposed by the tech press when Zen launched after they changed their total CPU weighting from 80% Single and 20% Multi threaded workloads to 90% single and 10% Multi threaded even though the industry is moving towards multi threaded workloads and away from single. (Example being how a Ryzen 1600 beats an overclocked 7600k in new modern games) intel just cant compete honestly anymore without going back to how they used to cheat, lie and bribe back in the early 2000's with P4 vs Athlon64

    Even intel's top dog the 9900k cant beat a 3700X in single threaded performance and you think a fake paid for by intel website like userbenchmark is right about a 6700k being faster in single threaded performance and every other online reviewer is wrong? consensus always wins in the end.. its a simple fact and intel cant pay them all off.

    If you want to ignore all the youtube and online reviewers who show you numbers you dont like try an unbiased industry respected user based site like passmark... Not a reviled by the industry intel paid off scam site like userbenchmark

    https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compar...l-i9-9900K-vs-Intel-i9-9900X/3485vs3334vs3376

    https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compar...el-i7-8700-vs-Intel-i7-6700K/3485vs3099vs2565
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2020
    bob05 and RnR like this.
  13. chook

    chook Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    3,789
    Hmm. Good point. Realistically if you are AMD the consoles would have to be the priority as they are just pure cashflow. I am just guessing here (because I forgot to go to the AMD board meeting this month) but don't forget that the console chips are semi-custom so they aren't "pure" Zen but are based on the same micro-architecture. My guess is that this could mean that the production becomes easier to manage.
     
  14. pH@tTm@N

    pH@tTm@N Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    2,185
    Location:
    BRISBANE
    those passmark single threaded cpu benchmark numbers are at non turbo speeds for intel - which we know they can sustain turbo speeds, often on many or all cores a lot better than AMD.
    i9-9900K @ 3.6Ghz
    i9-9900X @ 3.5Ghz

    so all this shows is AMD is at the same(ish) efficiency clock for clock to intel, but you can set up a intel to burn at 5Ghz all core all day on air to get the win for not very multi core friendly gaming.

    Don't worry I'm going to go AMD very soon myself however :)
     
  15. SnooP-WiggleS

    SnooP-WiggleS Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,168
    Location:
    Ballarat, Victoria
    AMD have doubled their wafer orders for mid year now that apple is moving to 5nm for A14 (vs current A13 which is on 7nm+) so I don't think it'll ncessarily be an issue, particularly if they also keep to their current stategy and continue production and selling of zen2 at a discount after zen3 comes out.
    https://www.kitguru.net/channel/gen...y-set-to-double-tsmc-7nm-wafer-order-in-2020/
     
    RnR likes this.
  16. Ratzz

    Ratzz Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2013
    Messages:
    10,139
    Location:
    Cheltenham East 3192
    They changed their overall CPU weighting to favour single core performance, I'm well aware of that. I read the news too. Just take the blinkers off for a sec will you? Its single core performance, specifically on overclocked CPU's, that I'm highlighting. The one small advantage Intel has at all over AMD right now. And it's pitifully small, and very temporary. And its relevant to the discussion I was having with Sarsippius .
    Dude I own AMD, my next rig will be AMD too, AMD are the best choice on the market. Save your tirades for CJ's next rebirth.
     
  17. vid_ghost

    vid_ghost Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,148
    All pass mark scores are stock CPU settings nothing more nothing less.
    No where does it state that its not boosting to turbo clocks.. its only stating intel's base clock speed as that is what intel advertises and that's it.
    in the CPU details it lists the CPU's specs that it runs a Clockspeed: 3.6 GHz and Turbo Speed: 5.0 GHz,

    https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i9-9900K+@+3.60GHz&id=3334
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2020
  18. Ratzz

    Ratzz Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2013
    Messages:
    10,139
    Location:
    Cheltenham East 3192
    And the 7600K Turbos to 4.2GHz so the Passmark score isn't applicable in the specific discussion I was having about a 7600K overclocked to 5GHz just barely winning against a 3700X, which turbos (in theory) to 4.4GHz, in single threaded performance by just a hair.
     
  19. pH@tTm@N

    pH@tTm@N Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    2,185
    Location:
    BRISBANE
  20. bob05

    bob05 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    263
    Location:
    NSW
    Most people who buy intel in 2019-2020 for gayming don't overclock either, they will buy whatever they hear is best for it. That said, the ryzen 4000 series will take that crown with the new euv tech on 7nm, this tech is so important that intcel has delayed their lineup for the last 5-6 years waiting on it to develop while milking the 5 ghz meme.
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: