Friday, May 3rd 2019

Possible Listings of AMD Ryzen 9 3800X, Ryzen 7 3700X, Ryzen 5 3600X Surface in Online Stores

Remember to bring your osmosis process to the table here, as a good deal of salt is detected present in this story's environment. Some online webstores from Vietnam and Turkey have started listing AMD's 3000 series CPUs based on the Zen 2 architecture. The present company stands at a Ryzen 9 3800X, Ryzen 7 3700X, and Ryzen 5 3600X, and the specs on these are... Incredible, to say the least.

The Ryzen 9 3800X is being listed with 32 threads, meaning a base 16-core processor. Clock speeds are being reported as 3.9 GHz base with up to 4.7 GHz Turbo on both a Turkish and Vietnamese etailer's webpages. The Turkish Store then stands alone in listing AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X CPU, which is reported as having 12 cores, 24 threads, and operating at an extremely impressive 4.2 GHz base and 5.0 GHz Boost clocks. Another listing by the same website, in the form of the Ryzen 5 3600X, details the processor as having 8 physical cores and running at 4.0 GHz base and 4.8 Boost clocks.
Sources: TPU Forums @Thread starter R0H1T, nguyencongpc.vn, ebrarbilgisayar.com
Add your own comment

242 Comments on Possible Listings of AMD Ryzen 9 3800X, Ryzen 7 3700X, Ryzen 5 3600X Surface in Online Stores

#51
Vayra86
krykry, post: 4040994, member: 180882"
I'm curious about one thing. The prices and availability of high-performance high-core count CPUs will definitely improve...in which case, how will game developers react to it? How will they utilize the additional power they will be given?
They will optimize around the mainstream. We're already seeing much better use of higher core count CPUs, they pay off already up to 8 cores. That coincides with the slow adoption of new APIs that are also better at threading.
Posted on Reply
#52
0x6A7232
krykry, post: 4040994, member: 180882"
I'm curious about one thing. The prices and availability of high-performance high-core count CPUs will definitely improve...in which case, how will game developers react to it? How will they utilize the additional power they will be given?
Consoles have been 8 core since OG PS4 and XB1, so they should optimize for that at least. And there's tech hardware and software based that can split single threaded or poorly optimized workloads between threads for benefits up to I think 32 threads? Check at about the 8 minute mark heee:
Posted on Reply
#53
M2B
Caring1, post: 4040979, member: 153156"
The numbers don't add up to me, 3700X has a 50% increase in core count OVER THE 2700x for less than 20% increase in TDP.
If anything, AMD should retain current core count and increase clocks using increased efficiency to retain the TDP as it is now.
Adding more cores is a less expensive way of improving performance and is way better in terms of marketing.
They can significantly improve the clocks and add more cores at the same time, why not?
Posted on Reply
#54
Vya Domus
M2B, post: 4041001, member: 172252"
Adding more cores is a less expensive way of improving performance
Nope, it's the only way. You will likely never see again any major increase in single thread performance on silicon.
Posted on Reply
#55
M2B
Vya Domus, post: 4041003, member: 169281"
Nope, it's the only way
Nope, it's not the only way, it however might be the only worthwhile way.
Posted on Reply
#56
0x6A7232
If it's not worthwhile then it is the only way unless you're selling to the US government something they want (F-35, anyone?).
Posted on Reply
#57
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
Tsukiyomi91, post: 4040886, member: 129086"
the R5 3600X looks like a damn fine upgrade. IF all the specs are true, then Intel are gonna either start lowering their processor prices (which is unlikely, I know) OR we'll see them rushing on more variations of the Core Series SKUs down the line while getting more flak from everyone else.
Intel has lowered their prices in the past with Core2Duo when AMD was on top. It just wouldn't be profitable to premature lower their price until they have too. Trust me if AMD could sale at a higher price then they would as well. AMD dual core processors were very high when Intel announced the C2D. I'm excited to see the price war for processor supremacy. hehe I need a new system yesterday so cheaper the better or more bang for the buck. :toast:
Posted on Reply
#58
notb
Vayra86, post: 4040989, member: 152404"
IF AMD can push out boost with these clocks, Intel is done for a good while in the consumer desktop segment. From top to bottom. They won't have anything in the entire stack that is better. And they can't surpass it either because they've already capped out on clocks too.
The situation is very similar to what we had in 2017. AMD leaps ahead in core count. Nothing more.
Mainstream Intel's 8C were announced 2 years after Ryzen (but not available yet).
"Intel is done"?
"End of Intel"?
"No reason to buy Intel anymore"?

There's no reason why Intel wouldn't make a 16C competitor until 2021.
Because rumors could be true.
They could have been true back then as well. I don't understand the excitement.

Also, people are drooling over a leak of 12 and 16C Ryzen like if this wasn't expected literally since AMD showed the chiplet idea.

Nothing here is shocking. Even if the specs are true, pricing will decide how these CPUs line up against Intel's.
Posted on Reply
#59
efikkan
These specs are purely speculative, no vendor knows the final details yet.

And they are on the optimistic end of the scale…

Shatun_Bear, post: 4040942, member: 166032"
These numbers were made up in this 'leak' extravaganza video he made in December in an attempt to increase his Patreon subscribers. And it worked, it was one of his most popular videos ever. But he fabricated that whole chart. Come on lads; he claimed his 'source' gave him the prices of every single Ryzen 3000 CPU...in DECEMBER 2018. Laughable.
The final clocks and pricing is always the last step of the qualification process. People should know this by now. Since these facts didn't even exist back in December 2018, anyone who claimed to know them is either actually psychic, lying or delusional, and I don't know which one is worse…

There is nothing wrong in speculation, but what is wrong is calling your own speculation a "leak" of facts, facts that nobody can even know yet. And it doesn't matter if it turns out to be 70% accurate or 80% accurate, it's still fake news to attract traffic to their Youtube channels, blogs, webpages, or whatever.
Posted on Reply
#60
Berfs1
Mussels, post: 4040876, member: 1746"
If those specs are real, ryzens going to destroy intel
Just now realized that? Lmao intel won’t win for the next three years... I have attached an single thread comparison on CB, and I also attached a future prediction for how they will fare, and it seems that AMD has room for improvement.
Posted on Reply
#61
ZoneDymo
Again all, pls dont just believe this, I feel these are put out deliberately just to make people disappointed with the actual products no matter how good they are.
Posted on Reply
#63
ZhangirDuyseke
Total bullcrap! AMD will never achieve this clock speeds, lmao.
Posted on Reply
#64
HwGeek
Why not? Remember that now the CPU core is stand alone and separated from anything else :-).
Posted on Reply
#65
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
ZhangirDuyseke, post: 4041046, member: 181676"
Total bullcrap! AMD will never achieve this clock speeds, lmao.
I did in 2014 with my system specs.

0x6A7232, post: 4041007, member: 187371"
If it's not worthwhile then it is the only way unless you're selling to the US government something they want (F-35, anyone?).
F-35 is fine.
Posted on Reply
#66
HD64G
High binned models will have sustainable all-core turbo close to 4.5GHz and single-threaded one close to 5GHz. And imho 7nm can provide those clocks. If IPC is +10% better than the one in Zen+ we are talking about matching Intel's gaming perofrmance and surpassing them in heavily-threaded apps. And imho 7nm can provide those clocks. Simple as that. Pricing and availability is the big questions.
Posted on Reply
#67
Manu_PT
HD64G, post: 4041065, member: 95052"
High binned models will have sustainable all-core turbo close to 4.5GHz and single-threaded one close to 5GHz. And imho 7nm can provide those clocks. If IPC is +10% better than the one in Zen+ we are talking about matching Intel's gaming perofrmance and surpassing them in heavily-threaded apps. And imho 7nm can provide those clocks. Simple as that. Pricing and availability is the big questions.
Nop, imc and ccx latencies are the big questions. Ryzen performance metrics arent all about IPC and clocks like Intel.
Posted on Reply
#68
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Manu_PT, post: 4041080, member: 168799"
Nop, imc and ccx latencies are the big questions. Ryzen performance metrics arent all about IPC and clocks like Intel.
Each revision it improves, it's not staying stagnant.
Posted on Reply
#69
TheLostSwede
Now, now, children, no need to fight over this, We should all have a much better idea of what AMD has in store for us in a few weeks time.
I don't understand the aggressiveness between people here over this. Do all of you live so boring lives that the only place you can make a point of some kind is here?
Posted on Reply
#70
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
I look forward to what is being brought out. I just know if Asus were serious with TUF like they were in 2012 I would pick up a Sabertooth X570 with a 3700X.
Posted on Reply
#71
Turmania
I did make a purchase from the mentioned online shop in Turkey.but it was couple years ago. They are reliable as far as I know.ryzen5 3600X will seem to be a top seller if it is correct. But I will not raise me expectations just wait couple of weeks we probably know more in June.
Posted on Reply
#72
Manu_PT
eidairaman1, post: 4041081, member: 40556"
Each revision it improves, it's not staying stagnant.
Unless they improved it by 100%, wich won´t happen, a 4,8ghz Zen 2 chip with 15% increase IPC won´t be enough to beat Intel on a lot of tasks, like gaming, for example.

Honestly, the bigger you dream, the harder it will be to face the truth. Let´s not get too excited because that only harms AMD itself.
Posted on Reply
#73
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Manu_PT, post: 4041122, member: 168799"
Unless they improved it by 100%, wich won´t happen, a 4,8ghz Zen 2 chip with 15% increase IPC won´t be enough to beat Intel on a lot of tasks, like gaming, for example.

Honestly, the bigger you dream, the harder it will be to face the truth. Let´s not get too excited because that only harms AMD itself.
Not dreaming fyi. Improvement is good.
Posted on Reply
#75
r9
I just hope they didn't sacrifice IPC to achieve those high clocks.
Actually I'm hoping for those 5-15% promised IPC improvement.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment