I'd have gone 3950X in this situation. In fact, I went 3900X despite having a number of multicore workloads, with zero regrets (it's awesome).
But then my whole modus operandi is trying to squeak out HEDT-like performance on consumer-grade hardware because I'm a cheap ass. So maybe it's good...
I think it's at least possible AMD could release an APU that's very different than the mobile chips. I.e. One CPU chiplet and one GPU chiplet, as opposed to the monolithic mobile die.
Wild-ass guesses are fine if non-specific claims.
For instance, "Nvidia may not have enough bleeding-edge fab capacity either. They run the same risks as AMD." <--- perfectly fine. Probably true, even.
Versus: "I am sure TSMC has sold most production to other companies and Nvidia is a bit...
AMD can still screw this up. However, IIRC they've invested time/effort assuring that designs can be migrated between fabs/similar processes quickly enough. Being fabless is calculated risk. It pays off if you're smaller - as AMD obviously is. They don't have to rely on internal fab teams to...
I tend to prefer Native Instruments for most of my equipment. But this is as much due to the software side of the equation as the hardware side. I use Komplete (still on 11, not 12, because $) and Traktor.
Correct. Playback quality has more or less reached parity with production quality in most cases.
The real reason to justify a discrete sound card purchase is routing configuration not supported by onboard audio. Need XLRs for mic/instrument input? Need phantom power? Need SPDIF or optical...
I don't even bother with PBO. Just leave it stock and decently cooled, and it's fine. Overclocking these just isn't worth it. Kinda takes some of the fun out of it, TBH.
The 3900X is held back by the "shitlet". One good chiplet for high boost clocks, and one shitlet that's probably no better than a 3600 or 3600X to get that core count up. The shitlet holds back all core OC.
From what Gamers Nexus was achieving on their 3950X (4.4 stable and they said 4.5 looked...
Not sure about that. When it comes to sipping power, Icelake is probably king. But Zen 2 is highly efficient at low clock speeds, and Icelake is stuck on 4 cores. So Zen 2 may be better than the 14nm Intel mobile chips in efficiency, and better in raw multithreaded performance than Icelake. I...
Zen 2's IPC is superior, except in extremely latency-sensitive tasks (gaming being one), where it is still slightly behind. Slightly.
Intel has superior clocks. So at same core/thread count, Intel can sometimes pull wins even in tasks where AMD's IPC is superior.
However, AMD offers more...
This is one of the things AMD really hit a home run on. Absolutely fantastic job. They mitigated the worst of the penalties of moving to the chiplet + I/O die model, and made core scaling as easy as bolting on moar chiplets (at least up to 64 cores), and still preserved vastly better...
Happy with my 3900X. Really don't need anything more.
Suppose I could go e-peen my way into a 3950X, but I'm getting too old (and cheap) for that shit.
Mostly agree. I think the 3950X is kinda-sorta HEDT, and kinda-sorta not. For that matter, even the 3900X is in that segment. But certainly it straddles the same market, at least, as will (probably) the Comet Lake 10 core when it releases. And I think that's the difference between our relative...
I'm the one dude who kept telling people the other way around. If/when AMD establishes market dominance, they will charge accordingly. I think AMD was down for so long, people forget the days when Athlon X2 was super expensive, because AMD had the first (decent) dual core.
It's fine, though. I...
Can also say that, as impressive as the 3950X is, I'm not really all that pumped about it personally (I think it's awesome tech, though). I think that the 3900X is actually the sweet spot on price/performance for mixed use. the 3950X has a place in the market for the prosumer. No doubt! They'll...
Yup. Top binning. Although I suspect (can't confirm yet, obviously) that this will carryover to the retail CPUs. My thinking all along is that they had to ensure they had enough of this top-binned silicon around (and process maturity) to sustain demand - especially given the problems they had...
HEDT is for the Prosumer market, or very small business Professional. The big time professionals will use Epyc or Xeon, yes. However, where I disagree somewhat is the notion that HEDT will remain a small market. I think there's a lot of potential here. Everybody with a GoPro who needs to edit...
Okay. Don't even quite recall how it got off on that tangent anyway.
Anyway, is the review NDA on TR and 3950X lifted tomorrow? I seem to recall reading that somewhere, but can't find it.
A monopoly has a specific definition. It is possible to illegally influence a market without being a monopoly. Bulldozer was a poor design, and there are no excuses to be made for it. AMD competed just fine - in fact DAMNED WELL - even against earlier shady Intel behavior from 1999 to 2006 or...
If you have less than half the market, you are not a monopoly in that market. AMD's position is improving because they are releasing good products again. Most customers have no idea about the FTC case. As for going fabless... that has pluses and minuses. Not sure how that really looks for them...
I used to do insane overclocking stunts with cheap first-gen Durons way back in the day. I'd fry one and joke "eh, that was roundabout the cost of a decent hamburger, so no big deal."
The name stuck.
Intel is not a monopoly, though for a time it was edging toward becoming one in the x86 space (during AMD's Bulldozer days). AMD's market position is improving at Intel's expense, and so if that ever was the case, it isn't anymore. And it's questionable if a lock on x86 is a full monopoly...
They are both businesses designed to make money.
Intel can pull more shenanigans at the present moment because it is larger, and has a stronger brand.
Doesn't mean AMD is a charity, or that they would be any different were the positions reversed.
Side note: I get tired of the notion of AMD as somehow more charitable/less evil than Intel or something. They are both businesses. With Intel's superior brand strength, they can get away with more than AMD can, generally speaking, but where and when AMD can get away with charging a premium for...
Is it? Because with 18 cores, why not buy a 16 core 3950X instead? With Zen's superior SMT yield, your multicore performance between the two is probably broadly similar, and for $250 cheaper. Single core - stock vs. stock - is similar.
AMD's product stack makes sense. They are taking the lower...
Very curious to see the results, but no desire to purchase. I think I'm very well topped out at 12 cores. Even with my mixed use case, I don't see much value in more cores at this point. The 3900X is MORE than enough.
Holy hell, a few years ago I was considering whether to buy a slower 8 core...
Yeah, I expect price symmetry here.
6 fast cores for $250
8 fast cores for $330 - $400
12 fast cores for $500
16 fast cores for $750
24 fast cores for $1000
And so on and so forth.
Makes sense. And since the chiplets are driving the cost, probably, it makes sense from that perspective too.
I must say, I did not see this coming. Disagree with the decision. Bulldozer had 8 cores - 8 crappy cores, yes, that shared an FPU... but still 8 cores.
Oh well, gotta be wrong some of the time, I suppose.
Agree. In the enthusiast space and workstation/creator space, desktop is king for obvious reasons. But in terms of volume sales, laptops are where it's at. Furthermore, Zen's strengths play into a corporate machine pretty well. Zen is excellent at raw number crunching and multitasking. So if you...
"Substantial" is a loaded word. In 1080p the gap is ~6%. In 1440, it is much less, due to GPU loading.
I don't regard this as "substantial" but do regard it as worth mentioning/factoring into a purchase decision.
Sadly, I think AMD is perfectly capable of competing here, and it's confusing that they haven't bothered. A low power chip with one 8 core CCD and a Navi GPU chiplet would be awesome for mobile. Still not quite as efficient as Icelake, but it would make up for that by offering high core counts...
It's relevant. AMD has the most efficient x86 uarch on desktop and *probably* server (generally speaking, there are specific workload exceptions). But mobile... Icelake is king. Despite low clocks, Icelake performs very well, the IPC increase compensating for the clockspeed loss, and probably...
Yeah, I have a feeling the 3950X will have the same "problem" as the 3900X, where you get one golden chiplet, and one shitlet.
But perhaps a Threadripper equivalent will use two golden chiplets, albeit at a higher price point. Just speculating, of course.
BIOS, yes. Microcode... maybe not. Some reviewers have done tests with the exact same CPU on multiple motherboards. Even with the same AGESA revision, some motherboards hit the boost clocks - a few even exceed them by 25-50MHz - and some aren't even close. So it may be something the motherboard...