Monday, May 27th 2019

AMD Ryzen 5 3000 Series Lineup Detailed

AMD at its 2019 Computex keynote unveiled its Ryzen 3000 series desktop processors with the more glamorous Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 9 SKUs while glossing over its more high-volume Ryzen 5 3000 series. It turns out that AMD will launch even these chips on the 7th of July. The Ryzen 5 lineup includes the 3600X and 3600. Both these chips are 6-core/12-thread, and AMD is taking the fight to Intel's 9th generation Core i5 series by not touching the core-count and instead focusing on higher IPC and clock-speeds than Intel's offerings.

The Ryzen 5 3600X ticks at 3.80 GHz, with a boost frequency of 4.40 GHz, which is among the highest in the lineup. Its TDP is rated at 95W. The Ryzen 5 3600 is the 'cooler' offering of the two, with 3.60 GHz nominal and 4.20 GHz boost clocks, and 65W TDP. You get the same 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache, as the 8-core Ryzen 7 series offerings. AMD is expected to price the two along expected lines, with the 3600X going for roughly USD $239, and the 3600 at $199.
Add your own comment

67 Comments on AMD Ryzen 5 3000 Series Lineup Detailed

#1
londiste
Is the next news snippet about Ryzen 7 and then for Ryzen 9 series?
You can consolidate information into one piece you know. Especially if it is already there in a single one.

How about a table with both current and upcoming Ryzen 5 specs:
Ryzen 5 3600X | 6 cores / 12 threads | 3.8/4.4 GHz | 95W | $249
Ryzen 5 3600 | 6 cores / 12 threads | 3.6/4.2 GHz | 65W | $199
Ryzen 5 2600X | 6 cores / 12 threads | 3.6/4.2 GHz | 95W | $229
Ryzen 5 2600 | 6 cores / 12 threads | 3.4/3.9 GHz | 65W | $199
Posted on Reply
#2
Shatun_Bear
So like me and a few other sensible posters had been saying, only to be derided, the AdoredTV hype train chart from December that everyone was whipped up into a frenzy about was total BS.

The sanity check should have been applied when this 'leaker' (did Adored make it up himself?) revealed that the 12-core had a 4.2Ghz BASE clock and the 16-core had a 4.3Ghz base clock. It turns out the purported (fanfiction) base clock of the 12-core was only 400Mhz lower than it's real BOOST clock!

- His SKUs were all wrong, core counts weren't moved down a stack
- APU info was totally wrong, prices were off massively (there is no miracle $99 6-core, there is one that is just...double that price)
- Clocks are not just slightly lower but 400Mhz off in base and boost in some cases...
- And to round it all off, his info on Navi from the same hype December video was completely wrong.

Ban Adored as a credible news source from now on please TPU, or at least, please do not make news stories on his info. Thanks
The Ryzen 9 3900X will have a suggested e-tail price of $499, and it will come with a cooler (more details in the coming weeks). AMD compared this processor in its presentations to Intel’s 12-core HEDT processor, the Core i9-9920X, which has an MSRP of $1199 and doesn’t come with a cooler.

In this comparison, AMD provided Cinebench R20 performance data comparing the two processors (it should be noted that we can’t confirm these results at this time). AMD states that in single thread performance, the 3900X beats the 9920X by +14%, and also wins in multi-threaded performance by 6%, all while having a lower TDP (165W vs 105W).
This is a monster. Totally wipes the floor with the only Intel equivalent.
Posted on Reply
#3
Mats
I made an updated AdoredTV table, in case anyone is interested. :)
Posted on Reply
#4
TheLostSwede
@Shatun_Bear FYI, AMD didn't even tell the motherboard makers what the launch lineup would be.
The leaks had a lot of correct information, but the SKU names and pricing obviously changed, as well as some clocks.
Since when are leaks every considered fact?
I knew a bunch of details since the end of last year, but not everything ended up being exactly as what I knew.
In fact, AMD seeded different CPU SKUs to the motherboard makers to test.
You can't say that the leaks were incorrect at the time the information what released.
I know for a fact that AMD has a lot more coming, as to why they only launched what they did today, I can't say.
Posted on Reply
#5
Shatun_Bear
TheLostSwede, post: 4054955, member: 3382"
@Shatun_Bear FYI, AMD didn't even tell the motherboard makers what the launch lineup would be.
The leaks had a lot of correct information, but the SKU names and pricing obviously changed, as well as some clocks.
Since when are leaks every considered fact?
I knew a bunch of details since the end of last year, but not everything ended up being exactly as what I knew.
In fact, AMD seeded different CPU SKUs to the motherboard makers to test.
You can't say that the leaks were incorrect at the time the information what released.
I know for a fact that AMD has a lot more coming, as to why they only launched what they did today, I can't say.
I'm sorry but you've lost some credibility too by trying to defend him. The only things he got right were guesses like the R9 (of course AMD would copy Intel) and core count (again, of course they would offer more than 8-cores).

The rest, both Ryzen 3000 and Navi are only about...98% wrong. So we now know that his list of every SKU, specs and prices from December was basically made up or guesses. Don't give me this cr*p 'these were targets only'. If those specs of his were targets, then AMD have had a huge failure as they missed clockspeeds by 400Mhz!! So yeah, that's totally not the case, they weren't targets, they were made up and there's no way Adored or a leaker would be privy to all that info 8 months before release. Give it up and at least distance yourself from his BS.
Posted on Reply
#6
TheLostSwede
Shatun_Bear, post: 4054967, member: 166032"
I'm sorry but you've lost some credibility too by trying to defend him. The only things he got right were guesses like the R9 (of course AMD would copy Intel) and core count (again, of course they would offer more than 8-cores).

The rest, both Ryzen 3000 and Navi are only about...98% wrong. So we now know that his list of every SKU, specs and prices from December was basically made up or guesses. Don't give me this cr*p 'these were targets only'. If those specs of his were targets, then AMD have had a huge failure as they missed clockspeeds by 400Mhz!! So yeah, that's totally not the case, they weren't targets, they were made up and there's no way Adored or a leaker would be privy to all that info 8 months before release. Give it up and at least distance yourself from his BS.
Why would I distance myself from something that was most likely correct at the time? I have known about much of what's coming since early October last year. You don't seem to care about that. The motherboard makers were given 5GHz parts just a few weeks ago. I don't know why AMD went conservative and didn't launch them, nor the 16 core parts which are also with the board makers.
I don't work for AMD, so I can't tell you why they did what they did, but I guess they feel the launch parts are good enough for now.

This is for you...

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NkGLqzXc9sBb-nS4gYjncMKGyundJMeO/view?usp=drivesdk
Posted on Reply
#7
Shatun_Bear
TheLostSwede, post: 4054972, member: 3382"
Why would I distance myself from something that was most likely correct at the time? I have known about much of what's coming since early October last year. You don't seem to care about that. The motherboard makers were given 5GHz parts just a few weeks ago. I don't know why AMD went conservative and didn't launch them, nor the 16 core parts which are also with the board makers.
I don't work for AMD, so I can't tell you why they did what they did, but I guess they feel the launch parts are good enough for now.
Just stop. There are no 5Ghz parts, why would they hide 400Mhz? I'm putting you on ignore if you persist with this BS.
Posted on Reply
#8
Flyordie
Shatun_Bear, post: 4054967, member: 166032"
I'm sorry but you've lost some credibility too by trying to defend him. The only things he got right were guesses like the R9 (of course AMD would copy Intel) and core count (again, of course they would offer more than 8-cores).

The rest, both Ryzen 3000 and Navi are only about...98% wrong. So we now know that his list of every SKU, specs and prices from December was basically made up or guesses. Don't give me this cr*p 'these were targets only'. If those specs of his were targets, then AMD have had a huge failure as they missed clockspeeds by 400Mhz!! So yeah, that's totally not the case, they weren't targets, they were made up and there's no way Adored or a leaker would be privy to all that info 8 months before release. Give it up and at least distance yourself from his BS.
My AMD source didn't really nail anything down till 3-4 months ago. Even then, he was telling me clocks weren't where they really wanted them to be due to power limits. Basically, thermal density was just too high. AMD was going for that 65W limit.

So I can see where you are coming from here but... my source also said they kept everything fluid because they didn't know what Intel had. So the final decisions on clocks etc.. were made about 2 months ago. As for pricing, my source told me nothing until about 10 hours before the event. My guess was $799 for the 12-core part. But he flat out said... $499. The thing with Adored, and I don't understand it is this.. He releases a bunch of information and I would think... over time.. his sources will be discovered and silenced. Oh well... I just hope my AMD source is right on Threadripper 3rd Gen. (He says its still on the table.. just gonna be later than expected.. )
Posted on Reply
#9
Zyll Goliath
IPC imporovments on new Ryzen 3000 looks GREAT also power consumption is significantly reduced.....tho' price could be a bit better but to be honest that is kind of expected as they have a lot of "old" stock of previous Ryzens to sell....
Posted on Reply
#10
TheLostSwede
Shatun_Bear, post: 4054976, member: 166032"
Just stop. There are no 5Ghz parts, why would they hide 400Mhz? I'm putting you on ignore if you persist with this BS.
Why wouldn't I persist about something that's true? I've seen it. But whatever...

By the by, that chipset diagram hasn't been posted anywhere until today. If you look closely, you'll see there's a x8 CPU link option too...
Did AMD mention that?

@Flyordie afaik, it's still on the table. AMD hasn't told the board makers to stop working, so something must be coming out, the question is when.
Posted on Reply
#11
Mats
I don't really care if AdoredTV lied, or if Lisa Su would step in and confirm that his specs were correct at one point in time.
And no, I don't think he lied.

It doesn't matter now, because almost nothing he said back then matches the reality today. We have no use of such leaks, even if they valid at the time.

All we can do is remember this hype train to the next time. (..yeah, as if it never happened before. :roll: )
Posted on Reply
#12
damric
I'm guessing they are sandbagging the full 16 core part for later. They are a 8 cores per cluster, so the 12 core part must have disabled cores. They probably were expecting Intel to have something better, but it turns out they can beat them with the 12 core part, so why not hold the ace in their sleeve for later. If these are indeed just TDP limited then we should have good headroom to play with overclocking. What a great year for pc builders!
Posted on Reply
#13
NdMk2o1o
Shatun_Bear, post: 4054976, member: 166032"
Just stop. There are no 5Ghz parts, why would they hide 400Mhz? I'm putting you on ignore if you persist with this BS.
Mate you're embarrassing yourself, for a start tpu have never quoted adoredtv as fact or news so stop throwing around libellous accusations stating that they have, for another thing you don't know what amd are going to release on 7th July along with the rest of us so stop attacking other members who quite frankly seem to be in the know a lot more than you are, though you can't seem to see that. Put the phone down, turn off the pc and go for a walk outside and stop throwing rants at people on the Internet
Posted on Reply
#14
Mats
NdMk2o1o, post: 4054998, member: 83825"
tpu have never quoted adoredtv as fact or news
I'm not so sure aboout that.
https://www.techpowerup.com/255386/amd-ryzen-9-3000-is-a-16-core-socket-am4-beast

"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. "
Posted on Reply
#15
Hardware Geek
I hope there is an option in the bios to enable the disabled cores. I'm sure there will be some processors that have fully functional cores disabled like they did in the days of the phenom x3. I had one that was an x3 with the 4th core disabled and was able to enable it in bios and run the full 4 cores without an issue. I'm sure they won't allow that this time, but one can dream.
Posted on Reply
#16
NdMk2o1o
Mats, post: 4055004, member: 23052"
I'm not so sure aboout that.
https://www.techpowerup.com/255386/amd-ryzen-9-3000-is-a-16-core-socket-am4-beast

"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. "
Supposed... You see that?
Posted on Reply
#18
Mats
NdMk2o1o, post: 4055015, member: 83825"
Supposed... You see that?
Yeah, but now we're splitting hairs. :D
TPU did quote specs from AdoredTV, "supposed"/"possibly"/"maybe" or not.

I'd rather they didn't at all.
Posted on Reply
#19
Darmok N Jalad
Ryzen 3000 does what it needs to do. The products match/beat the equivalent Intel chips and are more efficient in the process, sometimes largely so. To say the launch products are running at the limits of the architecture is an assumption we can’t make. We have no idea what clocking headroom there is left, but we sure do have a good idea that the 3900X could have those last two CPU cores enabled.
Posted on Reply
#21
Mats
cucker tarlson, post: 4055059, member: 173472"
4.4 boost? That's not great.
I dunno, actual performance is more important to me. Besides, we know nothing about OC headroom.
Posted on Reply
#22
NdMk2o1o
Mats, post: 4055056, member: 23052"
Yeah, but now we're splitting hairs. :D
TPU did quote specs from AdoredTV, "supposed"/"possibly"/"maybe" or not.

I'd rather they didn't at all.
No it literally said supposed, there's no ifs or buts about it, do you really need that explaining
Posted on Reply
#23
Mats
NdMk2o1o, post: 4055065, member: 83825"
No it literally said supposed, there's no ifs or buts about it, do you really need that explaining
I said the specs are there, and "supposed" doesn't change that.
Posted on Reply
#24
Darmok N Jalad
cucker tarlson, post: 4055059, member: 173472"
4.4 boost? That's not great.
...with 15% IPC lift and at 65W. They are matching Intel 5.0 GHz with 4.4GHz. And the 3900X boosts to 4.6GHz at 105W.

Also, EPYC is likely eating all the best chiplets right now anyway. Better margins there, I’m sure.
Posted on Reply
#25
NdMk2o1o
Mats, post: 4055068, member: 23052"
I said the specs are there, and "supposed" doesn't change that.
Well yes, it makes a big difference as to a statement being fact or not, which was my point that wasn't aimed at you in the first place anyway though you felt the need to make it yours
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment