Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 290 posts

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#161

Post by lostlogin »

nolok wrote: post #137
velox_io wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I didn't expect that. Laptops were the only market Intel was still strong, still dominated. Having brought an rx5700 XT recently, the power usage has been just as impressive as the performance. AMD will have some very nice products when they start putting mini RX5000s in their CPUs. Decent performance without discrete GPUs is a real possibility. (Just need add some HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) to the mix and thin…

You will probably still see mostly intel in expensive (>1000€) gaming laptop but everything else the power consumption of AMD new chips alone should give them the reign until intel can react.

... Until Apple leave Intel. It’s been the eternal rumour but it doesn’t show any sign of dying.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#162

Post by NicoJuicy »

tempguy9999 wrote: post #160
NicoJuicy wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel has been cheating their single core performance against AMD for many years, thanks to predictive and insecure algorithms. Reality is just catching up, AMD is already number one for a long time. Intell's cheating just didn't make it clear. I've waited for a year to express my opinion, before I could see any evidence. The time has come that AMD is even beating Intell's fake single core performance, so slowly we w…

Well, maybe. Probably so, in part, but intel makes large dies rather than AMD's style of multiple smaller dies, which means signals have less far to go (and possibly don't have to be boosted to get between mini-dies). Perhaps someone who knows about this stuff can comment. Edit: the mini-dies are chiplets/CCDs. Couldn't remember the name.

As I understood, they had to much hick-ups going to smaller dies because of internal issues.

They plan to recover in the end of 2020, while temporarily leaving the market open for AMD. Accepting that made them willing to fix their security issues, which decrease performance.

Since they have no product line in response to AMD for now, that was not an easy call for sure.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#163

Post by qzw »

chaosbutters wrote: post #45
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?

I'm waiting for 64 core CPU. 32 is nice but still not enough.

64 cores ought to be enough for anybody...

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#165

Post by NicoJuicy »

velox_io wrote: post #127
agumonkey wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Wow, I didn't expect that. Laptops were the only market Intel was still strong, still dominated. Having brought an rx5700 XT recently, the power usage has been just as impressive as the performance. AMD will have some very nice products when they start putting mini RX5000s in their CPUs. Decent performance without discrete GPUs is a real possibility. (Just need add some HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) to the mix and thin…

I'm expecting decent AMD laptops next quarter, I'm not seeing decent ones now, yet. It's one of the few markets that "is in progress", so it seems.

Mostly because of power consumption, fyi.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#166

Post by boris »

neogodless wrote: post #60
oouiterud wrote: post #49

I read that all these new AMD CPUs support ECC, but it’s been hard finding verification. Can any one recommended a motherboard that both supports and uses ECC RAM with this new CPU?

Some useful links within: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cb8tyr/asus_pro_ws_x57... ASUS Pro WS X570-Ace seems like the top dog here. https://www.anandtech.com/show/14161/the-amd-x570-motherboar... The conclusion doesn't point out ECC-compatible boards, but the comments mention the same Asus.

Anyone hopping to have ECC with Ryzen should really read the reddit thread. Wow, what a mess.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#168

Post by davidy123 »

mmmrk wrote: post #157
davidy123 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is solve-able through user reputation.

Reputation is not an objective measure.

It's not, but it's a measure, like money, that can help sort high quality/relevant contributions. Phoronix / OpenBenchmarking.org provides an example of how many technical people can provide benchmarks for many component and software combinations, in the mainstream reputation would help for even broader views.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#169

Post by NicoJuicy »

lostlogin wrote: post #161
nolok wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You will probably still see mostly intel in expensive (>1000€) gaming laptop but everything else the power consumption of AMD new chips alone should give them the reign until intel can react.

... Until Apple leave Intel. It’s been the eternal rumour but it doesn’t show any sign of dying.

Well, Apple has never been about performance/$ though.

It's the "total package" ;)

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#170

Post by NicoJuicy »

IanCutress wrote: post #37
Someone1234 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an interesting idea I didn't consider. edit: Below is wrong, see author of article's reply below for why. Preserving for record. They have been holding back review samples of their latest i9s so reviewers wouldn't do head-to-heads with this new 3950X (but people have anyway, and the 3950X crushes the i9). See Linus Tech Tip's review of the 3950X this morning for citation.

The new 18-core i9-10980XE isn't out yet, and review embargoes haven't been lifted. We know it's a slightly clock bumped version of the i9-9980XE, which was included in the AnandTech review and not the Linus review. Linus tested the 8-core i9-9900KS, which came out a few weeks ago, and those results are also in the link which is the title to this thread.

Those results are not valid anymore.

Better phrased: won't be valid for long, if the security patches are released ;)

Post reply on HN