AMD Ryzen 3000 and Radeon RX 5700 - Review Thread

vestan

Member
Dec 28, 2017
10,142


Note: AMD has only sent out the Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700X to reviewers right now.

Overclock3D: Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700X
As you could see from the Geekbench and particularly the Cinebench scores the 3rd Generation Ryzen is now more than a match for the Intel equivalent and this also brings impressive performance in our gaming benchmarks. It's a product that requires no caveats. It just works. Excellent. One thing we like in particular is how easy the Ryzen 9 3900X is to use. With the Threadripper CPUs there was always the need to turn off some cores to get the best gaming performance and it was an annoying juggling act. The Ryzen 9 3900X just delivers sledgehammer rendering abilities and high frames per second without requiring you tinkering with anything.
The AMD Ryzen CPUs were launched with much fanfare and delivered a lot for the first revision. AMD have refined it greatly with the 2nd Generation and now with the 3rd Generation there are no holes in its armour. It's fast with single-threaded performance and multi-threaded. The memory performance is excellent. It's not too power hungry. It doesn't get too hot. With the addition of PCI Express 4.0 it actually steals a march on the currently available Intel products and is a fantastic setup at a good price point. If you've already got a good AM4 X470 motherboard then you can instantly upgrade and reap the benefits too.
PC World: Ryzen 9 3900X
With its ground-breaking 7nm process, AMD's Ryzen 9 3900X leave very little room for Intel's best CPUs. AMD's 12-core Ryzen 9 3900X is so fast, there are very few reasons to buy an Intel CPU now.
Techradar: Ryzen 9 3900X
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is the best mainstream processor on the market right now. With multi-threaded performance that destroys everything in its path and the inclusion of PCIe 4.0, you can’t find a better processor without stepping up to the HEDT market.
LinusTechTips: Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700X
I had given up on AMD… until today


Tom's Hardware: Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700X
The Ryzen 9 3900X redefines our expectations for the mainstream desktop with a beastly 12-cores and 24-threads and represents a great value if you're seeking a well-rounded performer. The extra cores and threads will pay big dividends in productivity applications, and the solid performance in more common lightly-threaded applications is more than enough for most users.
The Ryzen 7 3700X slots in as the more accessible counterpart that will appease the vast majority of customers, and it also comes with the many of the same attractions of the previous-gen model, except it is faster and consumes less power than its predecessor.
Anandtech: Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700X
Overall, we’ve been eagerly awaiting today’s launch for months, and all the while AMD has certainly given us some high expectations for their 3rd generation Ryzen CPUs. At the end of the day I think that AMD was able to deliver on all of their promises, and hitting all of the performance targets that they needed to. Furthermore, where AMD kills it is in terms of value, as both the 3700X and the 3900X really deliver in terms of offering outstanding alternatives to the competition.
What really does make the Ryzen 3700X and 3900X winners in my eyes is their overall packages and performance. They’re outstanding all-rounders, and AMD has managed to vastly improve some of the aspects it was lagging behind the most. While AMD still needs to further push total single-threaded performance in the future and continue working on improving memory performance, they’re on Intel’s tail.
The 3900X essentially has no real competition when it comes to the multi-threaded performance that it’s able to deliver. Here the chip not only bests Intel’s mainstream desktop designs, but it's able to go toe-to-toe with the lowest rung of Intel's more specialized HEDT platforms. Even AMD’s own Threadripper line-up is made irrelevant below 16 cores.
Hardware Unboxed: Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700X


PCGamesN: Ryzen 9 3900X
At $499, it’s the affordable price tag and accompanying X570 platform that separates this chip from Intel’s offering more so than raw performance advantage in games. It’s by all means an enthusiast chip – a gamer will almost certainly find better value in a Ryzen 5 or Ryzen 7. Yet enthusiasts, content creators, and professionals hoping to put PCIe 4.0 to good use will find a fantastic blend of single-threaded chops and multicore performance in the Ryzen 9 3900X of a calibre historically limited to HEDT platforms.
AMD is continuing to ramp up the pace of change with Zen 2. It wasn’t all that long ago that the CPU market was stale, stagnant, and resolutely four-core. Yet the company has been catching up with Intel across the past two years at remarkable speed and changing the face of the market.
The Ryzen 9 3900X acts as fantastic proof of that transition: an uncompromising high-end processor dragging the market kicking and screaming into the affordable, and placing enormous pricing pressure on its opponent’s lineup beyond even the mainstream desktop segment.
Techreport: Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700X
Of the two, the eight-core Ryzen 7 3700X makes a better case for itself as a gaming CPU. It comes awfully close to the Core i7-8700K in overall gaming performance, and tops it in two titles. It's also capable of streaming using x264's medium preset, where the Core i7 just can't hack it. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 9 3900X offers slightly better gaming chops and stunning performance-per-dollar in productivity apps. Anyone who plays games and produces content on the same computer will be well-served by a Ryzen 9 CPU.
Having said all that, there's also the matter that these are the most efficient CPUs we've ever had on the bench. Plus, the X570 platform offers more and faster high-speed I/O than anything Intel offers on the desktop right now. Finally, like every Ryzen CPU, these chips are fully unlocked for overclocking. I didn't have time to explore that avenue in this review, but given how efficient these processors are, a modest clock speed bump could be virtually guaranteed to those who go looking for it.
Gamers Nexus: Ryzen 5 3600
Strong recommendation!




Tom's Hardware: Radeon RX 5700 XT and Radeon RX 5700
Assuming AMD’s lower prices stick, and assuming Nvidia doesn’t clap back, the Navi-based Radeon RX 5700-series cards storm onto the scene with strength that many enthusiasts weren’t expecting. Matching the competition’s fourth- and fifth-fastest gaming cards doesn’t sound particularly impressive. But remember that the Vega generation never caught up to Nvidia’s Pascal-based line-up. And although the Turing GPUs were derided for their high prices, they did bump performance up at least one tier. To AMD’s credit, Navi delivers its speed-up with more grace than past launches. Both 5700s use less power than their predecessors. They generate appreciably less noise. And the Radeon RX 5700s serve up almost universally better performance than competing GeForce RTX 2060s at the same prices.
Digital Foundry: Radeon RX 5700
Two Navi cards arrive at launch - after the price drop drama, is the Radeon RX 5700 fast enough take on RTX 2060 and even RTX 2060 Super?


Guru3D: Radeon RX 5700 XT and Radeon RX 5700
It is good to see AMD back on track with some mainstream to high-end positioned Radeons. 7nm, a new architecture, GDDR6 the specs all tick the right boxes. Seen from Polaris AMD made a HUGE step forward in performance. In fact, NAVI sits at the Vega performance level. So the improved architecture is sound, and works. My fear, for now, is that the products might be priced a notch too high even after the pre-launch price drop. Team green just outed their super products, and the RTX 2060, 2070 Super will be fighting off NAVI10. The realm AMD is sitting in performance wise with the RX 5700 series is the non-Super models 2060 and 2070 with exceptions here and there. Then there is, of course, the discussion on how relevant you find hardware accelerated Raytracing and Tensor support. Most of you don't care at this time, but much like anything in the tech industry, everything will evolve, and AMD positioned itself to be smack down in the middle of that next step in the gaming evolution. By not offering at least RT support, their trump card really needs to be pricing and proper shader based gaming performance.
TechPowerUp: Radeon RX 5700 XT
Averaged over our whole test suite, we see the Radeon RX 5700 XT 2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070. This makes the card a whopping 20% faster than Vega 64, just 8% behind Radeon VII, which is really impressive. Just last week, NVIDIA countered AMD's Navi plans by preemptively releasing the RTX 2060 Super, which is nearly as fast as RTX 2070 — 5700 XT is 5% faster. Also new is NVIDIA's RTX 2070 Super, which is actually based on the RTX 2080 GPU — that card is 12% faster than RX 5700 XT. RTX 2080 Ti is still the king of the hill, delivering 50% more FPS than RX 5700 XT — at more than twice the price. With those performance results, we can definitely recommend RX 5700 XT for maximum details gaming at 1440p resolution, or high-refresh-rate gaming at 1080p.
AMD's new architecture brings in significant improvements over GCN that we highlighted in the architecture section of this review. One important cornerstone is long overdue reduction in power draw, to make up lost ground against NVIDIA. In our testing, RX 5700 XT is much more power efficient than anything we've ever seen from AMD, improving efficiency by 30-40% over the Vega generation of GPUs. With 220 W in gaming, the card uses slightly less power than RX Vega 56, while delivering 30% higher performance at the same time.
 
Last edited:

cyenz

Member
Oct 27, 2017
477
Has said in the other thread, people should read the conclusions from the reviewers before jumping on the "9900K" still is 10% faster at 1080p.

Anyway, the 3700X is the best value on the Ryzen 3000 series in my opinion.
 

Kayant

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
560
Videocardz has a review roundup if you're looki g for sources - https://videocardz.com/81349/amd-ryzen-3000-zen2-review-roundup.

Going to read more now but the snippets I have seen the promised single threaded improvements are legit, SMT scaling is ever more impressive. Gaming performance may not be top in everything but it's less than 10% or so it a lot of cases plus more cores/threads in most price points against the competition seems like a no brainer unless you're the kind of person that wants max single threaded performance and don't care for price.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,291
Fantastic to see AMD bringing some real competition back into the CPU space. Intel dominant for so many years has really damaged the market from a consumer perspective.
 

TaySan

Member
Dec 10, 2018
4,404
Zen 2 delivered what Zen and Zen + was supposed to do. Can't wait till my my 3900x arrives
 

chadskin

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,525
Very impressive products. AMD is back!

I hope AMD will have an 8-core chip in the $200 range ready by 2020/2021, I'd happily jump ship.
 

Durante

Dark Souls Man
Member
Oct 24, 2017
5,070
Clock potential is a bit disappointing, since it means you still can't really get a single CPU that's best at everything (especially if you take OC into account).
 

rsfour

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,895
Probably gonna buy the 3700x in the new few weeks. Just gonna wait how mobos shake out with x470/x570.
 

TheOne

Member
May 25, 2019
212
Looks like my next purchase is a 3900x coupled with some DDR4 and an X570 mobo. Dear 3770k, it's time to let it go. You've been great for all these years, but now it's time to move forward. You can rest easy, knowing you were one hell of a bargain / bang for bucks for 7 years.
 

napata

Member
Nov 2, 2017
484
For everything that isn't gaming Ryzen wins easily but for pure gaming it seems like the 9700k is still the best high end value CPU and a better buy over the 3700x.
 

J_ToSaveTheDay

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,028
USA
Impressed enough to consider a new desktop build...

Glad that AMD is really shifting expectations in the PC space with this release.
 

GReeeeN

Member
Mar 6, 2018
148
Any reason to not go with the 3700x over the 3900x if used for purely gaming?, or should I just get a 9900k which is cheaper than 3900x and only $80-$100 more than 3700x and appears to perform better
 

Lo-Volt

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,467
New Yawk City!
I was impressed by some of the gen-over-gen performance improvements from
GamersNexus’ R5 3600 review. The R5 2600 was often the recommended bang-for-buck processor in AMD’s second-generation Ryzen line and here we are with a new cheap thrill.
 

Serious Sam

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,404
Has said in the other thread, people should read the conclusions from the reviewers before jumping on the "9900K" still is 10% faster at 1080p.

Anyway, the 3700X is the best value on the Ryzen 3000 series in my opinion.
People are too fixated on comparisons against 9900K, where as important takeaway is how Ryzen 3xxx compares against 9600K and 9700K, especially in gaming (since that's what most of us are here for). I mean how often do you archive zip files or render videos with Handbrake? I do that once or twice a year, but I spend gaming 5-15 hours every week, so I need every bit of juice I can get for best framerates. That's my reasoning here, but others have different opinions on this subject and that's fine.
 

WillJoe

Banned
Nov 14, 2018
789
UK
bought myself a 3900X + X570 board.

kinda panicking because the 3900X is only showing as preorder and my order hasn't appeared in my account despite getting an email. money has been taken out my bank. maybe it'll sort out tomorrow.

can't wait to ditch Intel.
 

low-G

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,033
As expected, the 9900K maintains a substantial lead for gaming. Those 3900X temps and power usage are some mega-woof, too. Doesn't seem like a great gaming-only choice. Also, it doesn't seem like there's a real way around the CPU power / performance curve (on x64) at this point... The 3700X and 9900K are pretty close in terms of power use / heat generation.

But the 3700X looks like a fantastic value and a great choice for mid range.
 

WillJoe

Banned
Nov 14, 2018
789
UK
As expected, the 9900K maintains a substantial lead for gaming. Those 3900X temps and power usage are some mega-woof, too. Doesn't seem like a great gaming-only choice. Also, it doesn't seem like there's a real way around the CPU power / performance curve at this point...

But the 3700X looks like a fantastic value and a great choice for mid range.
at 1080p yeah but i don't think people are buying a 3900X to play at 1080p lol.

also the 9900K uses way more power and runs hotter than a 3900X.
 

low-G

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,033
at 1080p yeah but i don't think people are buying a 3900X to play at 1080p lol.

also the 9900K uses way more power and runs hotter than a 3900X.
I mean I have a 9900K and I play at 1080p (raytracing)...

Looks to me like the 3900X is running at least 10C higher and many more watts, but of course it has 4 more cores!
 

Shifty Capone

Member
Oct 27, 2017
88
Los Angeles
bought myself a 3900X + X570 board.

kinda panicking because the 3900X is only showing as preorder and my order hasn't appeared in my account despite getting an email. money has been taken out my bank. maybe it'll sort out tomorrow.

can't wait to ditch Intel.
Where did you end buying it from? I can't seem to find anywhere to buy a 3900x! Really waiting on Amazon US, but that seems like it could be awhile.
 

Duxxy3

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,758
USA
So, the situation is that the 3600 wasn't being sent out to review, but GamesNexus got a hold of an engineering sample, and wisely posted that review first.
*puts on tinfoil hat*

I think there's a reason why the 3600 isn't in the spotlight. It performs exceptionally well for gaming for its price, and might take the spotlight away from the higher end CPU's for its value to gamers. Can't even get the CPU on Newegg.

*takes off tinfoil hat*
 
OP
OP
vestan

vestan

Member
Dec 28, 2017
10,142
Might aswell turn this into the RX 5700 series review thread too, added a few reviews to the OP
 

HamSandwich

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,264
Ugh, as much as id like to return my new 8700k for the 3700x, the price of the x570 boards are a bit outrageous. I have an Aorus Ultra and its AMD counterpart is $300 bucks.
 

djplaeskool

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,929
Yep.
Goes tow to toe with Intel on gaming performance, but absolutely boat races then in productivity.
Now I gotta shop for an X570 mobo, definitely all in on the 3700X
 

Arex

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,565
Singapore
hmm tempted to get 3900x.. but I feel like my asrock x370 itx may not cut it lol, maybe I'll give my 1700 to my brother haha