AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review • Hacker News Board

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#111

Post by megous » Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 5:13 PM UTC

mantap wrote: post #25

adzm wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's more of a memory bottleneck though.

Yeah indeed chromium is a more efficient 2D rendering engine than what's available natively and performance of JS is comparable to Java. Electron apps being slow is mostly a developer laziness problem, not a technology problem. Making a fast electron app is actually easier than making a fast C++ app IMO, when you take into account the libraries and tooling available.

It's not more efficient than directly using skia or cairo. Not on ARMv7 anyway.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#112

Post by jwandborg » Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 5:13 PM UTC

pmoriarty wrote: post #92

zamubafoo wrote: post #19

I find it interesting how desktop CPUs are essentially coming down to two enthusiast markets, developers/content creators/workstations and gaming. While the gaming market is (usually) seeking the highest top single core clock speed with respect to CPUs, it also relies on other expensive hardware. Meanwhile the dev/content creator/workstation market is much better served by these multi-core behemoths. Intel really has…

I'd expect there are far, far more servers than there are developer machines. There are probably many more servers than hardcore gamers as well, and maybe even more than all gamers put together. It'd be nice to see some hard stats on this, however.

The vast majority of servers run on server CPUs, not on desktop CPUs. AMDs server CPUs are called EPYC, Intel's are called Xeon.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#113

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet » Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 5:20 PM UTC

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #100

burtonator wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I LOVE that the gaming market has created a serious desire for quality desktop hardware. I now build my workstations by hand and install Ubuntu. It's really nice to work on quality hardware!

As long as you want unnecessary lighting and gaping, EMI releasing, windowed cases.

LEDs on RAM: for when you absolutely positively must have the most fabulous rig at the LAN party. I guess.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#114

Post by wtallis » Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 5:22 PM UTC

kilo_bravo_3 wrote: post #64

IanCutress wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth pointing out that the value for Intel's 10nm is on its high-density libraries, not its high-performance libraries, which are less dense.

Are there any current products one can buy, regardless of expense, using Intel's 10nm? I know there was one product, the Core i3-8121U, a very middling performance chip which saw an extremely limited release. But it was discontinued.

10nm Ice Lake laptop chips are currently shipping in systems from Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#115

Post by solotronics » Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 5:23 PM UTC

neogodless wrote: post #12

This isn't the most groundbreaking release - it's not the first 16-core chip you can buy (edited), nor the first 7nm. No new clockspeed records were set. Still, $750 for all that power! Any professionals shopping for this, or waiting for 24 or 32-core Threadripper? Anyone trying to upgrade on an older motherboard, or are you getting a matching X570 to ensure maximum boost and PCI-e bandwidth?

If you look at performance per watt AND performance per dollar it is a record breaker. Also, it is the highest base clock speeds of any of the AMD chips.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#116

Post by jmkni » Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 5:23 PM UTC

neogodless wrote: post #89

wayneftw wrote: post #87

Any problems with AMD cpus and containers or virtualization? (Really? Wow. Sorry for asking a question!)

I only have limited experience so far, but I was able to enable virtualization and run WSL on Windows 10 with a Ryzen 7 2700X with no obvious issues. I'm sure more in-depth, longer term container testing would be more useful to you, though!

Same with a 3700x. Running an Android Emulator, Docker, and WSL2 on Hyper-V simultaneously with no obvious issues.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#117

Post by wmf » Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 5:29 PM UTC

HHad3 wrote: post #55

th-miracle-257 wrote: post #33

Why did Apple not release their new MBP 16 with the 3950X? [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21523780

In addition to the points already mentioned, a good bit of Apple's software depends on Intel-proprietary features, e.g. QuickSync for video encoding. So far, no macOS system ever shipped with an AMD CPU, and porting the OS and user-mode application stack is not trivial.

There must be Macs like the iMac Pro and Mac Pro that don't have Quick Sync.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#118

Post by solotronics » Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 5:29 PM UTC

bransonf wrote: post #73

davidy123 wrote: post #44

Slight meta, and part of a larger 'rant,' but when are we going to get away from reviews that might as well have been printed on glossy pages in PC Magazine in 1986? Anandtech has been at it since the 90s and hasn't changed their format at all. This is a serious decades-long stagnation of the web. The graphs should be dynamic (able to choose what scenarios and components to compare, and able to search within them), a…

I mean, there are plenty of options to compare new cpus to old ones. 0. CPUBoss 1. CPUBenchmark 2. UserBenchmark And if you’re considering an upgrade, it’s almost always the case that you should be comparing latest generation offerings to arrive at a purchase decision. Don’t call the web stagnant because they decide not to flood the page with JS libraries.

CPUBoss sucks. It doesnt have chips from the past 4 years in it.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#119

Post by agumonkey » Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 5:35 PM UTC

mrandish wrote: post #23

I noticed yesterday's articles about Intel's upcoming unusually large release of security mitigations. Under serious competitive threat for the first time in a while, I'm curious if Intel may have slowed the release of some mitigations to land after this round of comparison benchmarks.

In a similar vein, some local supermarket catalog showed half laptops based on ryzen, the only intel I saw were ultra cheap atom x5.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#120

Post by aoeusnth1 » Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 5:37 PM UTC

zamubafoo wrote: post #80

Tepix wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're forgetting about the low budget CPUs used for desktop PCs. AMD has a pretty good standing with their Vega GPUs built into the Ryzen/Athlon APUs. Or are you only talking about enthusiasts?

If we are looking at the budget systems, then AMD wins hands down. Not only do their Athlon 200 CPUs have appallingly good cost to performance ratios (with Vega GPUs and a CPU cooler), they also share the same socket with the Ryzen lineup. At the moment, I wouldn't recommend anything but AMD for CPU since you can buy at any price point then upgrade. I think the only price point that Intel does have a slight advantage…

And even then Intel's only advantage is on single-threaded workloads. At $500, you can get a 12-core AMD (3900X) for the same price as the 8-core Intel (9900K).