Thursday, May 9th 2019

AMD Ryzen 9 3000 is a 16-core Socket AM4 Beast

AMD is giving finishing touches to its 3rd generation Ryzen socket AM4 processor family which is slated for a Computex 2019 unveiling, followed by a possible E3 market availability. Based on the "Matisse" multi-chip module that combines up to two 8-core "Zen 2" chiplets with a 14 nm I/O controller die, these processors see a 50-100 percent increase in core-counts over the current generation. The Ryzen 5 series now includes 8-core/16-thread parts, the Ryzen 7 series chips are 12-core/24-thread, while the newly created Ryzen 9 series (designed to rival Intel Core i9 LGA115x), will include 16-core/32-thread chips.

Thai PC enthusiast TUM_APISAK confirmed the existence of the Ryzen 9 series having landed himself with an engineering sample of the 16-core/32-thread chip that ticks at 3.30 GHz with 4.30 GHz Precision Boost frequency. The infamous Adored TV leaks that drew the skeleton of AMD's 3rd generation Ryzen roadmap, referenced two desktop Ryzen 9 parts, the Ryzen 9 3800X and Ryzen 9 3850X. The 3800X is supposed to be clocked at 3.90 GHz with 4.70 GHz boost, with a TDP rating of 125W, while the 3850X tops the charts at 4.30 GHz base and a staggering 5.10 GHz boost. The rated TDP has shot up to 135W. We can now imagine why some motherboard vendors are selective with BIOS updates on some of their lower-end boards. AMD is probably maximizing the clock-speed headroom of these chips out of the box, to preempt Intel's "Comet Lake" 10-core/20-thread processor.
Sources: TUM_Apisak, Tom's Hardware
Add your own comment

197 Comments on AMD Ryzen 9 3000 is a 16-core Socket AM4 Beast

#1
TheLaughingMan
Is this a confirmation that these rumors are true or simply that they exist?
Posted on Reply
#2
DeathtoGnomes
Wonder if this still drop in existing motherboards without much hassle other than a BIOS update.
Posted on Reply
#3
Ebo
Seems like weer going a very fun time ahead for us all:peace:.
Posted on Reply
#4
R0H1T
TheLaughingMan said:

Is this a confirmation that these rumors are true or simply that they exist?
We can neither confirm nor deny these allegations this information :toast:
Posted on Reply
#5
EarthDog
TheLaughingMan said:

Is this a confirmation that these rumors are true or simply that they exist?
If you look at the Twitter post, well, it could be correct, but I would still classify it as a rumor.

If you read this article, it appears it is confirmed...:(

If you read the Tom's article, this is still a rumor (and worded properly for the evidence we have - maybe bt knows something we don't... but I wouldn't have wrote it in such a factual manner).
Posted on Reply
#6
dyonoctis
F-five Ghz ? on a 16 core from Amd ??? please do not let this be an hype scheme. I'm taking this with a truck of salt, but I'm still hoping just a bit.
Posted on Reply
#7
kapone32
I think it is entirely possible that we could see 5 GHZ. The 9590 was a 5 GHZ CPU from AMD. With the node shrink I don't think a 600 MHZ increase is unreasonable. After all you were lucky if you could get a 1st gen Ryzen chip to go over 4 GHZ and then the 2400G gets released and easily OCs to 4 GHZ. The 2nd Gen also saw in increase of 400MHZ for the 2700X vs the 1700X. Even though there are more cores the 2950X OCs just as high as the 2700X even though it has another CPU on the die.
Posted on Reply
#8
GorbazTheDragon
The context of the original AdoredTV leak is very much different than that of the ES leak. The original leak was very early in 7nm manufacturing, they were very likely target clocks more than anything definitive. This leak was already put in doubt several times, particularly the lower core count clock speeds and whether a 16c chip would actually come out early on in the release.

Secondly we do not know anything about the ES, no details as far as whether the clocks are final and which model they are associated with.

Lastly we don't actually know what the capabilities of 7nm silicon is in CPUs. Based on the difference between 14nm and 7nm Vega, I personally think it is reasonable to expect the maximum capable clocks to be higher, but again we don't know what the power will be like so we can't really know what kind of clocks to expect in the "out of box" TDP range.
Posted on Reply
#10
HD64G
DeathtoGnomes said:

Wonder if this still drop in existing motherboards without much hassle other than a BIOS update.
Most possibly selected mobos with good enough drm will handle those cpus just with a bios update. The rest will get up to the 95W ones.
Posted on Reply
#11
Tomgang
You smell that. Its the hype train getting really hot now;). 16 cores sounds really good and if the rumored clock speeds are true as well, Ryzen 3000 chips is gonna be a pain in the ass for intel. Dont get me wrong, i am an intel man but intel needs a butt kick cause there prices are absurd these days and need some one to challence then for real now.
Posted on Reply
#12
WikiFM
AMD is probably maximizing the clock-speed headroom of these chips out of the box, to preempt Intel's "Cannon Lake" 10-core/20-thread processor.

There's a typo, should be Intel's Comet Lake, Cannon Lake would never reach 10 cores hehe.

I will wait and see the IPC, since this is what matters to games, no game uses more than 8 threads anyway, so 12 and 16 cores are useless for most gamers.
Posted on Reply
#13
Chrispy_
For the consumers among us who are just gaming/browsing - what's the highest frequency Zen2 chip leaked? Number of cores is irrelevant since 4-6 threads is just about all that any game engine effectively uses at the moment.
Posted on Reply
#14
GorbazTheDragon
Chrispy_ said:

For the consumers among us who are just gaming/browsing - what's the highest frequency Zen2 chip leaked? Number of cores is irrelevant since 4-6 threads is just about all that any game engine effectively uses at the moment.
Having dabbled with a 5675c the last few months I think you have to add quite a lot of overhead for background tasks. Even if the individual tasks are very low load, the thread switching ends up taking a huge amount of time so having a large thread count is almost always better.
Posted on Reply
#15
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
kapone32 said:

I think it is entirely possible that we could see 5 GHZ. The 9590 was a 5 GHZ CPU from AMD. With the node shrink I don't think a 600 MHZ increase is unreasonable. After all you were lucky if you could get a 1st gen Ryzen chip to go over 4 GHZ and then the 2400G gets released and easily OCs to 4 GHZ. The 2nd Gen also saw in increase of 400MHZ for the 2700X vs the 1700X. Even though there are more cores the 2950X OCs just as high as the 2700X even though it has another CPU on the die.
My FX 8350 does 5.0 on air, older node to boot...
Posted on Reply
#16
theoneandonlymrk
eidairaman1 said:

My FX 8350 does 5.0 on air, older node to boot...
Mine did too , got to 5.5 on water.

It's like the past didn't exist , if Amd processors regularly hit 100° :);) never mind Fx's high of 90 they would be roasted in forums, yet massive power and heat are ok for team blue.

Anyway Roll on R9 day, i just hope I can afford one, think of the crunching, I would be up 20 more cores ,at the same or higher speed , for 40-60 Watts more, win.
Posted on Reply
#17
EarthDog
theoneandonlymrk said:

Mine did too , got to 5.5 on water.

It's like the past didn't exist , if Amd processors regularly hit 100° :);) never mind Fx's high of 90 they would be roasted in forums, yet massive power and heat are ok for team blue.

Anyway Roll on R9 day, i just hope I can afford one, think of the crunching, I would be up 20 more cores ,at the same or higher speed , for 40-60 Watts more, win.
What does Bulldozer have to do with Ryzen? Clearly there is something in the arc which is limiting clock speeds. With refinements, we should see those limits go up! But yeah, its like night and day, Ryzen from BD...

RE: Heat, again, its the arch of BD that doesn't support high temps. What does it really matter though? If it can support the temps and live a long life, it can. It doesn't matter if it tops out at 70C or 100C. There are several other factors which influence the temperature readings. I am not saying they are unrelated, but they are not tied at the hip.

Nobody likes the increased power consumption, but, let's be clear here, heat and temperature are two different things. For example, which has the higher temperature... a lighter with a yellow flame or a bonfire with yellow flames? The answer.......they are the same temperature, but cleary a bonfire has more energy behind the temperature. I mean I have seen 5W ASICs on mining rigs burn my finger...
Posted on Reply
#18
Zareek
Chrispy_ said:

For the consumers among us who are just gaming/browsing - what's the highest frequency Zen2 chip leaked? Number of cores is irrelevant since 4-6 threads is just about all that any game engine effectively uses at the moment.
Agreed but the leaks say the R9 3850X 16c/32t @ 4.3Ghz base 5.1Ghz boost will have the highest frequency. That is followed by R7 3700X 12c/24t @ 4.2Ghz base 5Ghz boost. Personally, I'd like an 8 core with the best clocks they can pull off! The leaks on IPC are all over the place claiming anywhere from 10-29% depending on task. All of them seem to agree AMD will still lag in gaming.
Posted on Reply
#19
yakk
Competition is good!

Otherwise we'd still have 4 core CPUs at $500+ just incredible.
Posted on Reply
#20
HimymCZe
considering even Ryzen 2000 have better IPC than i9,
even "just" 4,3Ghz Ryzen 3000 will EASILY beat i9. Every task. Every game. Every price.
All hail the new king.
Posted on Reply
#21
kastriot
I predict here more than 100 comments ;)
Posted on Reply
#22
GoldenX
HimymCZe said:

considering even Ryzen 2000 have better IPC than i9,
even "just" 4,3Ghz Ryzen 3000 will EASILY beat i9. Every task. Every game. Every price.
All hail the new king.
We have to see if AMD solved the latency problems before that. Ryzen has better IPC, but it has a lot worse latency, that's why Intel is still king in games, even on the slower models.
Posted on Reply
#23
theoneandonlymrk
EarthDog said:

What does Bulldozer have to do with Ryzen? Clearly there is something in the arc which is limiting clock speeds. With refinements, we should see those limits go up! But yeah, its like night and day, Ryzen from BD...

RE: Heat, again, its the arch of BD that doesn't support high temps. What does it really matter though? If it can support the temps and live a long life, it can. It doesn't matter if it tops out at 70C or 100C. There are several other factors which influence the temperature readings. I am not saying they are unrelated, but they are not tied at the hip.

Nobody likes the increased power consumption, but, let's be clear here, heat and temperature are two different things. For example, which has the higher temperature... a lighter with a yellow flame or a bonfire with yellow flames? The answer.......they are the same temperature, but cleary a bonfire has more energy behind the temperature. I mean I have seen 5W ASICs on mining rigs burn my finger...
I think your getting the wrong end of my stick, I'm not and was never concerned.
But me and Eidairman know. We took some stick on fx for heat and power, now it's intels turn it's ok, that's what I meant:).
As for 5ghz it's becoming less relevant and wasn't really that important to me ,a 60 hz ish gamer.

Oh and don't be foolish , the Ip in Bd at least some of it went into Ryzen, i find it all ironic tbh.
Posted on Reply
#24
TheLaughingMan
GoldenX said:

We have to see if AMD solved the latency problems before that. Ryzen has better IPC, but it has a lot worse latency, that's why Intel is still king in games, even on the slower models.
No. It has been shown dozens of times that Intel is still king mainly because of clock speed and IPC. Whenever the clock for clock tests are done, Intel loses almost its entire gaming performance lead and drops to low single digit % leads. Latency is an issue, but not nearly the game performance killer you think.
Posted on Reply
#25
EarthDog
theoneandonlymrk said:

I think your getting the wrong end of my stick, I'm not and was never concerned.
But me and Eidairman know. We took some stick on fx for heat and power, now it's intels turn it's ok, that's what I meant:).
As for 5ghz it's becoming less relevant and wasn't really that important to me ,a 60 hz ish gamer.

Oh and don't be foolish , the Ip in Bd at least some of it went into Ryzen, i find it all ironic tbh.
I was just replying to words I saw. Perhaps I misunderstood what side of the stick you were dishing out. Lol......took some 'stick'? haha.. is that a typo?

While surely there was some influence there (BD to Ryzen), the point I was trying to make had everything to do with heat and temperatures as the difference there as to what each CPU can handle is quite different. Nobody is concerned with that because the arch can NOW handle higher temps. :)
kastriot said:

I predict here more than 100 comments ;)
I predict a useless post is useless. :p

GoldenX said:

Ryzen has better IPC,
HimymCZe said:

considering even Ryzen 2000 have better IPC than i9,
TheLaughingMan said:

No. It has been shown dozens of times that Intel is still king mainly because of clock speed and IPC. Whenever the clock for clock tests are done, Intel loses almost its entire gaming performance lead and drops to low single digit % leads.
Does it? Are there other reviews showing different than this one?
https://www.techspot.com/article/1616-4ghz-ryzen-2nd-gen-vs-core-8th-gen/page3.html

Compare apples to apples (6c/12t) and look at the 1600X at 4 GHz versus the 8700K at 4 GHz....

now... their SMT IS more efficient than Intel and in heavily threaded benchmarks which use smt. IPC measurements are typically single threaded, and smt/ht cant be involved, otherwise its a multi-threaded benchmark which shows the difference between HT and SMT.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment