Its a definitive upgrade from that 6700k, I'd pull the trigger if I were you.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
AMD Ryzen 3000 and Radeon RX 5700 - Review Thread
- Thread starter vestan
- Start date
So is the Red Devil the way to go for a 5700xt? Prices seem to finally be showing in Aus, $729 for the Evoke OC and Red Devil, XFX RAW II OC is $699. There was a deal for an Evoke for $670 the other day, but I've heard it's a bit loud.
Look into objective benchmarks across a range of titles, not forum advise. You will inevitably find both Intel and AMD fanboys blowing smoke up your ass. If the 6700K is not explicitly compared, find it's differential against the 9700k and add that spread to the Ryzen benches. Of most importance is whether your current use case is CPU or GPU limited. I honestly have no idea how the 6700K compares so this is not an endorsement one way or the other.
3900x is faster in nearly every scenario compared to 6700k but it wont be a transformative improvement for gaming. Id wait till at least around the launch of next gen consoles before upgrading. Youll be able to make a much better choice then
I personally went from a 6700k to a 3700x after weeks of consideration.
In the end it really depends on what games you are playing, I was BNing in multiple titles and the 3700x has defiantly given me a big performance boost overall. No more stuttering either.
If I was you, get a 3700x now with a good x570 Mobo (because 3900x is literally 1-5fps difference in gaming and not worth paying extra for games), and if the next gen of Ryzen provides another substantial boost in performance, you can always sell the 3700x and upgrade to that and run with ease with the x570 mobo.
I upgraded to a 3900x from a 6700k. Gaming is much more stable for me.
No micro stutters at all
Any particular game or games? I'm on a 6700k and haven't noticed any stutters but I don't play super recent games. What GPU btw?
Battlefield V, Metro Exodus,Apex Legends,Shadow Warrior 2, Wolfenstein Youngblood
All games i've played recently and all have been consistent performance wise.
Looking forward to Control and Gears 5 to try out.
Paired with a Titan X Pascal
I might recall a crashing issue present in gears 4 on nvidia cards at launch. Im a bit hazy
Precisely. It's an issue that has persisted for years and that has carried over to Gears 5 so I don't anticipate it being fixed anytime soon. And Gears 4 was a game I played a ton of and I expect to play more Gears 5.
the funny thing is that it was perfect at launch, it was a few months after with a driver release that it started crashing and it was never really fixed for pascal.
i wonder how gears 5 is gonna be
Judging by the reviews I've seen the aural and thermal performance is way better than other AIB cards.
That's a sweet looking ride.
This Thicc 5700XT looks like a cadillac.
I love it.
It's been over a month and I still haven't made a final decision thankfully from the 3700x being mostly out of stock. I think I'm going to go with a 3600x instead as I tighten up my budget.
I can always pick up a better cpu when the next-gen of consoles arrive. I'll be mainly using it for gaming. Does anybody have good links for comparisons between the two chips?
Last edited:
Went from a i7-7700K to a 3700X and cant say I'm seeing a gain or loss in gaming performance as I have not gamed extensively yet. I really did not upgrade for or expect much in that way anyway, where I'm seeing the gains is in rendering and encoding. Earlier I was encoding a 10GB file on the highest priority with a bunch of tabs open in both Chrome and Firefox while watching a video on YouTube and not one hitch. I could have probably played game also. What a beast, I could not get away with that on the 7700K though it is a beast in its own right. So yeah, if thinking of jumping on a 3700X for not just gaming but also a little work then it might be worth it.
Bought a 3900x recently and the thing is idling at 55~60 degrees. Its insane. I see it spike to 75 using google chrome. Its obviously a fuckup on AMD's part because if I change the power plan to power saver it will idle at ~35. Hope this is fixed in the next week or so or I might return the chip
Are you on the latest chipset drivers that came out the other day? I deleted the old Ryzen power plans before installing it as the new driver was meant to improve them, and I feel like it's a bit better than it was. I actually saw it drop to 1.0v/1.1v sometimes when browsing via firefox, where as before it was always 1.4v-1.5v when browsing. It's still not perfect though. Clicking a link or something sometimes caused my fans to rev up a tad, and it still does rev up/rev down occasionally even when I'm not using the PC. If I'm not using headphones and am not bothered about performance I'll still swap it over to power saving as it does still get a bit annoying. It's an improvement from the constant rev up rev down my fan was doing before though, I could hear that stuff even through my headphones, was maddening.
Edit: Forgot to say I'm on a 3700x instead but I imagine it should help the other 3000 series cpu's too.
Something seems wrong with your current setup (beyond the normal Ryzen issues right now, like how they still don't seem to be boosting properly). My 3900x is idling at 33-35 degrees. Ryzen Balanced power plan, latest chipset drivers, bios and no overclocking.
Latest version of Ryzen Master shows much lower temps for me and it apparently has the more accurate numbers. Are you using that as well? I'm not sure if other apps with temp reporting have been updated to match
What chipset drivers? I have a 3700x and didn't know the chip needed its own drivers?
Well, it installs necessary drivers and some Ryzen power plans which help performance. It's possible windows may have already automatically installed some stuff for you.
You can download the latest version from here -
That link is for a x570 motherboard, replace the end of the link with x470, b450 or whatever depending on which board you got.
Thanks. I have the Aorus Elite x570. I have been getting random bluescreens after closing down a game. Thought it might ram related, but maybe its the drivers.
I'm having it stuck on 1.4-1.5 right now and I cant get it any lower without using power saver plan.
It's a common issue from what I can gather from reddit. All my chipset drivers are updated, bios is updated. I'm running on an ASUS which I think is part of the problem. I CANNOT make it go under 1.4-1.5 volts without using power saver mode, which drops it down to .9 (and 30c).
I am on ryzen master, yes.
I'm going to give it a week but after that I'll return for a 9900k. I've only got a 15 day return window for best buy.
You've probably tried this, but just to have checked it: are you by chance running something like Corsair software to run your RGB? That tends to constantly poll the cpu for the hardware monitor and is causing people to see high voltages. Other monitoring software other than ryzen Master running in the background can also give these results. Sorry if you're already running without any of this, but I wanted to at least check if it helps.
No need to be sorry, I appreciate any info anyone has. But yes, unfortunately I've tried turning off every background process, using different monitoring software, etc
I'm going to piggy back on this, just to get this out one last time.
PLEASE READ THIS IF YOU ARE A RYZEN OWNER CONCERNED WITH HIGH IDLE VOLTAGES.
Windows has a global timer that can be reprogrammed. Lowering the interval (aka increasing the frequency of) this clock increases interrupt load, which leads to clock response on the CPU (also on Intel CPUs, but Ryzen is so fast to respond that it's most noticable there). When multiple applications reprogram this timer, "fastest wins", so closing a singular application will not necessarily reveal the culprit.
An idle system should have the timer interupt set to no less than 15.6ms. Many media applications will lower it to 4ms. Steam will lower it to 1ms (which is overkill and bad for energy use, this is due to its use of chromium), and for some reason the nVidia overlay will also lower it even when it's not active on screen.
Garbage software from hardware companies like Logitech (G Hub), Corsair (iCue) and others (Telegram, most 'game clients') are also known to do this.
HWiNFO does not touch this timer AFACT, neither does GPU Tweak II (by default).
See Windows Timer Resolution: Megawatts Wasted for an intro to this issue. (<-- please read)
One can use this tool (download page) to monitor the timer, or see this post for doing it with powercfg.
TL;DNR: Run 'powercfg /energy /duration 5' as administrator and look for 'Outstanding Timer Request'
The ULTIMATE SOLUTION is to complain to people who write software that run in the background and messes with this timer, because it's bad form and as Bruce Dawson warned years ago; it will only get worse. He was right, and here we are.
Last edited:
Any way to stop those programs without uninstalling them? Was wondering why my CPU is not downclocking a lot. Seems like this is the cause for this as well.
For some applications there are specific features that you can disable (nVidia experience is fine once you disable the overlay), but there's no general solution.
Ideally we want an application that can inject itself in front of the DLL used to control the timer, and provide a blacklist. This is discussed on Bruce Dawsons blog, in the comments. AFAIK no one has stepped up to do it. Doing it system-wide looks easy, but could also break a lot of stuff.
It's a bit more complex than this, or it used to be. A certain web benchmark ran chunks of work divided with a setTimeout call with 1ms resolution. Web browsers, to score well on this, needed to increase the timer resolution to 1 ms to be able to compete on this benchmark as it was often quoted in the press as a measurement of browser performance. Then as now, I was doing web browsers and we tried to do this ramping up of resolution in a way that would lower it immediately when it wasn't needed.
Sure, but keywords "run in the background". If you need it you need it, but most software do NOT need it, and certainly do not need it 100% of the time. And do you actually need 1ms, or would you have gotten 90% of the way with 5ms?
My current Firefox instance is somehow fine leaving the timer at 15.6ms even running in the foreground, even with me writing in it, with a youtube video paused in an active tab. I run hwInfo64 with 'all' the sensors, and somehow it doesn't need to mess with this timer. OBS Studio sets it to 1ms on startup. Okay, I can see it needing that when recording or for smooth preview, but why is it 1ms when it's minimized, idle not doing any recording?
Probably MS should just take control of this away from applications unless they run with admin privs. Then developers would at least have to do some sort of cost-benefit analysis.
Last edited:
Any update on the 3950X release date? I've been looking into getting one with the MSI MEG X570 GODLIKE mobo.
Basically nothing. Its kind of frustrating how little there is about this chip. Its supposed to launch in September and we are almost there...
It's a 19.8.1 driver problem. Turning off hardware acceleration in options stopped the BSODs for me.
Do you need the extra cores for something other than gaming? If yes, go 3900X. If not, then choose between 3600 (non-X) and 3700X. By the time the extra cores become relevant you can buy next year's refresh version if you don't want to upgrade to AM5 or whatever platform.
I was heavily leaning towards 3600 but decided to get the 3700X. I have a 2080 Ti so I'm going to need all the CPU beef I can get. If I had a lower GPU model then 3600 would do just fine for several years.
The 3900 offers better performance in minimums and smoothness of gameplay. Cores are irelevant. If money allows, i wouldnt get anything below the 3900.
Based on the reviews I've seen the difference is pretty negligible at 1080p and shrinks to nothing at 1440p and above. Totally not worth the extra price unless you have other uses than gaming for the cores. Over here it's about 200 euros more expensive than the 3700X. Even 3600 vs 3700X at around 130 euro price difference is somewhat questionable as current games don't gain that much from the extra cores but the 8 cores is more future proof for a few years.
Add someone still on a 2500k and considering a Zen 2-based new build, thanks for posting this.
Next year's refresh won't be that much better than what you can buy now.
Remains to be seen. I don't expect it to be huge either but it's still going to be better. By that point if you truly need more cores then you can either buy a 3900X or 3950X cheaper or buy the new thing.
Well, yeah, but chances are that you'd have to pay less if you buy 3900X now instead of buying 3700X now and some "4900X" next year - while it's rather unlikely that this "4900X" will be so much better than 3900X that you'll regret your purchase. So basically if you can afford it and need >8C CPU now (games don't really need them at the moment mind you) then there's not a lot of reasons to not get 3900X now.