- Dec 28, 2017
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.
PC World: Ryzen 9 3900XThe 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.
Techradar: Ryzen 9 3900X
LinusTechTips: Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700X
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.
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.
Hardware Unboxed: Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700XThe 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.
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.
Techreport: Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700XThe 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.
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.
Gamers Nexus: Ryzen 5 3600Having 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.
Tom's Hardware: Radeon RX 5700 XT and Radeon RX 5700
Digital Foundry: Radeon RX 5700Assuming 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.
Guru3D: Radeon RX 5700 XT and Radeon RX 5700
TechPowerUp: Radeon RX 5700 XTIt 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.
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.