• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

AMD Ryzen 3000 Builders Thread

Page 122 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Noid

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,167
55
91
Assassin's Creed - Valhalla has a benchmark
( game was free from AMD reward's last night )

F1 during execution shows each chiplet in action.
( very kewl to see )

1. = My game default setup
2. = Ultra

It's good to see I can play a new game in Ultra settings.
( since we are unable to get the new RTX 3090's or the 5900X's yet )
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,584
2,738
136
Assassin's Creed - Valhalla has a benchmark
( game was free from AMD reward's last night )

F1 during execution shows each chiplet in action.
( very kewl to see )
I wish all game had a nice fps stats page like that!
 

Noid

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,167
55
91
AIDA now taking over BCLK ! ( attachments )
I have already tried to up the BCLK with current DDR settings.
( not P95 stable at 101 - so whats the point )

However .... Look what AIDA is doing ..
I didnt have HWINFO running ... I think I'll let it all day now ....

To see if it's boostin BCLK at any time on it's own ...
( gaming ... encoding ... etc ... )

Has anyone seen this with their test runs ... ?
 

Attachments

Noid

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,167
55
91
Changed my mind about trying this.
Need the new Ampere or RX Radeon Cards to see results.

7C37v1D1(Beta version)
Release Date
2020-11-16

Description
- Support AMD SAM(SMART ACCESS MEMORY) function
 
Last edited:

Noid

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,167
55
91
AMD D/L page - x570

AMD Ryzen™ Chipset Driver Release Notes (2.10.13.408) Highlights
Release Highlights

  • Few drivers updated.
Fixed Issues
  • Installer may fail to launch if executed from a folder name with non-Latin character.
  • Installer may not downgrade to older version.
  • Installer may fail to install on Windows® 10 with Russian language pack installed.
  • Installer may fail to uninstall from Apps and features with Singapore Chinese language pack installed.
Known Issues
  • Manual system restart required on Non-English OS after installation is completed.
  • Windows Installer pop-up message may appear during install.
  • Uninstallation log may not be generated in silent mode.
Chipset Support
Windows 10
AMD TRX40Yes
AMD X570Yes
AMD B550Yes
AMD A520Yes
AMD X399Yes
AMD X470Yes
AMD B450Yes
AMD X370Yes
AMD B350Yes
AMD A320Yes
Processor Support
Windows 10
AMD Ryzen™ 5000 Series Desktop ProcessorsYes
1st/2nd/3rd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ ProcessorsYes
3rd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Desktop ProcessorsYes
AMD Ryzen™ Desktop Processors with Radeon™ GraphicsYes
AMD Ryzen™ Mobile Processors with Radeon™ GraphicsYes
1st/2nd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Desktop ProcessorsYes
2nd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Desktop ProcessorsYes
7th Gen AMD A-Series ProcessorsYes
Package Contents
The AMD Ryzen™ Chipset Driver installation package contains various independent drivers designed to support the following Microsoft® Windows® platforms. Operating System support may vary depending on your specific AMD product
Driver NamePrevious VersionNew VersionChange Details
AMD Ryzen Power Plan /
AMD Processor Power Management Support
6.0.0.36.0.0.7New program support added.
Support for AMD Ryzen™ 5000 Series Desktop Processors
AMD PCI Device Driver1.0.0.801.0.0.81Bug fixes
AMD I2C Driver1.2.0.1021.2.0.111Clock frequency tuning
AMD UART Driver1.2.0.112No Change
AMD GPIO2 Driver2.2.0.130No Change
PT GPIO Driver2.0.1.0No Change
AMD PSP Driver4.13.0.0No Change
AMD IOV Driver1.2.0.49No Change
AMD SMBUS Driver5.12.0.38No Change
AMD AS4 ACPI Driver1.2.0.46No Change
AMD SFH I2C Driver1.0.0.86No Change
AMD USB Filter Driver2.1.11.304No Change
AMD SFH Driver1.0.0.3081.0.0.312Bug fixes
AMD CIR Driver3.2.4.135No Change
AMD MicroPEP Driver1.0.27.01.0.28.0New program support added
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,584
2,738
136
A few updates. Upgraded to 32 GB, big price drop on two sticks of G.Skill FlareX. Upgraded to latest BIOS with AGESA 1.1.0.0 C, can finally get into my bios w/o having to clear CMOS. Updated to new AMD chipset drivers. Haven't tinkered any memory settings yet, but all four sticks are running well a 3600CL16 CR 1. I just need to set DRAM to quick startup after I'm confident the sticks are good (boots slowly now).
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,584
2,738
136
Ugh. The A7x BIOS is trash. No menu item for SVM - I'm able to use the search function and turn it on, but then it locks up.
I can't control my CPU fans, they are running at 100%. Meh. I hope I can flash back. I flashed this version because users reported better stability at faster timings - but I haven't even gotten to that point.
 

MalVeauX

Senior member
Dec 19, 2008
390
29
91
Hey all,

Well, with the 5000 series released, after waiting to see what it was in real hands and it's unavailability everywhere, I'm starting to wonder, why bother for now? So I'm back to looking at building a new workstation around the 3900X, it's $430 USD new right now. Thinking of putting it on a B550 based board with 3600mhz DDR4 memory. The use is data crunching, so I need high single core performance but also as many cores as I can get for the budget. I realize I could get more with the next step up CPU but it's cost per core isn't worth it. The 3900X seems to be the best non-flagship C/T count and performer for cost currently. I was thinking about the 5900X of course, but is it really worth the extra cost? It's 30% more expensive for the same C/T count and nearly same clocks, just newer platform, etc. My application for use is I use software to analyze large RAW video containers, massive piles of of them, 21Gb files at a time is common, 250~500Gb per session is common. I currently do this with an 8 core CPU, but its' an old Bulldozer and my $50 3000G APU performs better in my software than my 4Ghz 8 core Bulldozer does (lol, wow...).

What do you guys thing? Go 3900X now? Wait for 5900X and pay 30% more and wait.... and wait.... ?

Very best,
 

MrTeal

Platinum Member
Dec 7, 2003
2,937
592
136
Even at $430, I don't think I'd buy a new 3900X right now. Even in a lot of multithreaded loads the 5800X might pull close for the same price, and in single threaded loads it will be much faster.
Depending on your local market though, a used 3900X might be a good choice. I've seen them going for $350, so if you could get one near that it would tick a lot of boxes. You'd also be able to flip it down the road and toss in a 5900X without losing much if anything on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MalVeauX

MalVeauX

Senior member
Dec 19, 2008
390
29
91
Even at $430, I don't think I'd buy a new 3900X right now. Even in a lot of multithreaded loads the 5800X might pull close for the same price, and in single threaded loads it will be much faster.
Depending on your local market though, a used 3900X might be a good choice. I've seen them going for $350, so if you could get one near that it would tick a lot of boxes. You'd also be able to flip it down the road and toss in a 5900X without losing much if anything on it.
Good points, thanks.

Then the question again becomes... wait? Wait how long? Worth waiting really?

Or, $270 for the 3700X (8c/16t), saving nearly 50% cost. Or, jump to $350 for the 3800X (8c/16t) for a $80 increase but very similar performance in many regards. $430 for the 3900X (12c/24t), $80 gets 4 cores and 8 more threads and the increase in performance that should come with the cores, not so much single threaded performance though. Then the 3950x at $700 (16c/32t) gets 4c and 8t more for a staggering $270 increase (over 50% cost increase). Just don't see the value in that one for cost (other than just getting the most numbers you can get no matter the cost type approach). Then the 5000 series come in, and while they're more expensive and perform better, by a bit, the problem is availability, like, is it going to be real world Feb/March before they're common enough to buy without having to get lucky or camp a website?

Very best,
 
Last edited:

MalVeauX

Senior member
Dec 19, 2008
390
29
91
@MalVeauX What is your time horizon?
Heya,

Honestly I have a working system, so I don't need to upgrade. I just want to at this point. My system is old. It's AM2+/AM3 Bulldozer with a FX8350 with 16Gb DDR3. I built it for very cheap after upgrading from a Phenom II 955 with a direct swap out. Unfortunately this is all like 10+ years old or so now and the chipset/architecture was pretty lousy to begin with.

Realistically it's all about time for me. Processing my data takes minutes, but when I have lots of it, it turns into hours. I had a hard dose of reality the other day when I built a new desktop for my observatory and built it around an AM4 B450 board with an Athlon 3000G APU. Just for giggles, I tested my software on it with a large file full of data and it outperformed my FX8350 significantly, as in, several minutes of time saved with a low end $50 dual core. Laughable! The processes the software does requires good signal core performance and then heavily benefits from multi-core so need a good all around CPU to handle it. My data is getting bigger and bigger too, so sorting 250Gb a day is going to be fairly common. That's typically hours of my time to do that on my aged old FX8350. So really this is about getting time back by using a newer platform with a good architecture and some speed. Anything will be a relief since mine is so old now.

I've waited this long, so I could wait for a 5000 series CPU. I've just been staring at the 3000 series for months now.

Very best,
 

MrTeal

Platinum Member
Dec 7, 2003
2,937
592
136
Heya,

Honestly I have a working system, so I don't need to upgrade. I just want to at this point. My system is old. It's AM2+/AM3 Bulldozer with a FX8350 with 16Gb DDR3. I built it for very cheap after upgrading from a Phenom II 955 with a direct swap out. Unfortunately this is all like 10+ years old or so now and the chipset/architecture was pretty lousy to begin with.

Realistically it's all about time for me. Processing my data takes minutes, but when I have lots of it, it turns into hours. I had a hard dose of reality the other day when I built a new desktop for my observatory and built it around an AM4 B450 board with an Athlon 3000G APU. Just for giggles, I tested my software on it with a large file full of data and it outperformed my FX8350 significantly, as in, several minutes of time saved with a low end $50 dual core. Laughable! The processes the software does requires good signal core performance and then heavily benefits from multi-core so need a good all around CPU to handle it. My data is getting bigger and bigger too, so sorting 250Gb a day is going to be fairly common. That's typically hours of my time to do that on my aged old FX8350. So really this is about getting time back by using a newer platform with a good architecture and some speed. Anything will be a relief since mine is so old now.

I've waited this long, so I could wait for a 5000 series CPU. I've just been staring at the 3000 series for months now.

Very best,
Really given your workload I'd probably buy a 5800X now if you can find one, otherwise just buy a 3900X and flip it when the 5900X comes in stock. I have no idea how you're compensated, but it sounds like a better CPU would pay for itself in days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MalVeauX

MalVeauX

Senior member
Dec 19, 2008
390
29
91
Really given your workload I'd probably buy a 5800X now if you can find one, otherwise just buy a 3900X and flip it when the 5900X comes in stock. I have no idea how you're compensated, but it sounds like a better CPU would pay for itself in days.
Hrm, this is true. It's a gamble for me because no one benchmarks the software I use for the class data I process. Basically I benchmark it myself, roughly, just to get an idea of what components matter the most. Anything at this point would be a major upgrade. The 5800X and 3900X cost roughly the same. I could put either one on a B550 chipset motherboard and should be good to go. I just don't know if the improved Zen3 core will have performance yields superior to Zen2 with more cores (3900X) in my applications. I think it will be clear that the 5800X will be slightly faster in single core processing routines and that is part of my routines, so it matters, but I'm not sure how much of a difference the 16 vs 24 threads will matter, since 8 more threads is pretty significant. I just don't know how significant.

I should get both, benchmark a test file, and keep the best one. Sigh. But I can't do that.

I've tried having someone else do the benchmark with my test data, but a 20Gb file is too difficult to send on my limited internet. The last time I did it, I legit snail mailed a thumb drive to them to get the data to test out their Xeon 6C/12T CPU and it did good times (9 minutes compared to my 19 minutes processing time on the same data with same parameters). And I recently had a friend with a 1800X Ryzen do the test and it was 6 minutes, so 3 minutes faster than the Xeon 6C/12T. So this makes me think a 5800X/3900X would be even faster than the 1800X since they're newer generation, faster everything, more cores, so maybe I could see 4~5 minutes on the 20Gb clump of data. That would turn my 250Gb piles I generate nearly daily when I'm doing this to an hour total time, rather than 4 hours, just for the processing of the data.

I'm definitely leaning towards the 5800X at this point. Assuming I can just plop it into a B550 motherboard without having to have a different chip to flash the BIOS with or something. Same cost. Should perform better or at least similar. I guess it's more a matter of getting one in stock somewhere.

Very best,
 

VirtualLarry

Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
49,519
5,594
126
I'm definitely leaning towards the 5800X at this point. Assuming I can just plop it into a B550 motherboard without having to have a different chip to flash the BIOS with or something. Same cost. Should perform better or at least similar. I guess it's more a matter of getting one in stock somewhere.
I wouldn't count on NOT having to flash the BIOS to support the 5000-series Ryzen CPUs on B550 boards. Newegg was/is running a disclaimer on many of their B550 and/or X570 boards, claiming that users may need to flash the BIOS on the board to fully support the 5000-series CPUs.

From what I understand, though, they will boot with the 5000-series, and then you can flash from there. Bonus if your board included USB-based flashing, without needing a CPU or RAM.
 

MalVeauX

Senior member
Dec 19, 2008
390
29
91
I wouldn't count on NOT having to flash the BIOS to support the 5000-series Ryzen CPUs on B550 boards. Newegg was/is running a disclaimer on many of their B550 and/or X570 boards, claiming that users may need to flash the BIOS on the board to fully support the 5000-series CPUs.

From what I understand, though, they will boot with the 5000-series, and then you can flash from there. Bonus if your board included USB-based flashing, without needing a CPU or RAM.
Thanks, yea, hoping to not get into that situation where I cannot boot just to flash. I don't mind doing a USB flash if it can be done. I just don't want to have to rip out my Athlon 3000G from my observatory PC just to boot a new board and flash it. I'd rather the company do that leg work since I'm buying.

I'm looking at this board currently for a feature/budget balance: Asus TUF gaming B-550 Plus

It seems to have the USB flash option.

Here's it's CPU compatability list:


Looks like I might have to flash it based on that list assuming the board ships with a lesser BIOS version? But it seems the board has the ability to update flash via USB and a button on there, even if no CPU/Memory installed. So should be ok?

Very best,
 

VirtualLarry

Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
49,519
5,594
126
Looks like I might have to flash it based on that list assuming the board ships with a lesser BIOS version? But it seems the board has the ability to update flash via USB and a button on there, even if no CPU/Memory installed. So should be ok?
Yes, you should be OK. And if you currently have the board booting with another CPU, consider flashing it to the newest BIOS with the current CPU installed, it should work OK.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MalVeauX

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,584
2,738
136
Giving that you have a working system, you have the option to wait or not - obviously. The only Zen3 processor that seems to have some availability if the 5800X, so you should be able to put together a system in a reasonable time frame. I believe that AMD will come out with a less expensive 8-core CPU, but I don't know the time frame. If you get the 5800X, spend a bit extra to get a good quality Air cooler for AIO. The board you chose looks good for it's price range, assuming you don't need WIFI. This board is perfect for upgrading to a new BIOS

BIOS FlashBack™ is the simplest and safest (UEFI) BIOS update method. Simply drop the (UEFI) BIOS file onto a FAT32 formatted USB stick, plug it into the USB BIOS FlashBack™ port and press the button. Updates can even be performed without having memory or a CPU installed.
It doesn't get better than that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MalVeauX

moinmoin

Platinum Member
Jun 1, 2017
2,069
2,474
106
Do you plan to upgrade your observatory computer as well? Ryzen 5000 series would be a great pick if your workload is limited by single thread. If it is profiting most by amount of cores, and availability of an e.g. 5800X is too far off, you could just go with a 3900X first. If you then should notice that single thread is indeed a bottleneck you want to lift down the line you could then buy a 5900X like next year or after and move the 3900X to your observatory computer. Even with a 3900X the upgrade for you should be so big that I wouldn't wait longer. And if you get a Ryzen 5000 series later the BIOS situation for it should be settled as a bonus. (Btw. if even with 3900X amount of cores is the bottleneck you could consider going with a Threadripper as the next step.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: MalVeauX

MalVeauX

Senior member
Dec 19, 2008
390
29
91
Giving that you have a working system, you have the option to wait or not - obviously. The only Zen3 processor that seems to have some availability if the 5800X, so you should be able to put together a system in a reasonable time frame. I believe that AMD will come out with a less expensive 8-core CPU, but I don't know the time frame. If you get the 5800X, spend a bit extra to get a good quality Air cooler for AIO. The board you chose looks good for it's price range, assuming you don't need WIFI. This board is perfect for upgrading to a new BIOS

It doesn't get better than that.
True, thanks. Not interested in a lower end CPU at this point, I don't mind spending money for something good. It's mostly the value aspect. I currently have a Hyper 212 EVO Black Edition ready to slap on whatever I get.

Do you plan to upgrade your observatory computer as well? Ryzen 5000 series would be a great pick if your workload is limited by single thread. If it is profiting most by amount of cores, and availability of an e.g. 5800X is too far off, you could just go with a 3900X first. If you then should notice that single thread is indeed a bottleneck you want to lift down the line you could then buy a 5900X like next year or after and move the 3900X to your observatory computer. Even with a 3900X the upgrade for you should be so big that I wouldn't wait longer. And if you get a Ryzen 5000 series later the BIOS situation for it should be settled as a bonus. (Btw. if even with 3900X amount of cores is the bottleneck you could consider going with a Threadripper as the next step.)
I just re-built my observatory PC, the laptop failed after years of service, moved on to build a B450 based Athlon 3000G and 16Gb RAM system in there. It does very little work other than to be a fast system bus to allow my high speed CMOS cameras to dump RAW data to a 1TB SSD at maximum throughput with zero dropped frames, which it does splendidly. This PC just generates RAW data. I then transfer that data to my workstation in my house to work on it and process it, which takes a long time with this aged FX8350.

Defiitely avoiding Threadripper, just looking at prices and the performance of the Threadrippers vs the 3900X, it just doesn't seem to make sense to go Threadripper. I guess I don't need 64+ cores yet. I need a better balance of single core speed and multi-core performance, so the 3700/3800/3900 and 5000 series equivalents seem to make more sense just looking at benchmarks, though none of those benches represent what I do at all.

Very best,
 

MalVeauX

Senior member
Dec 19, 2008
390
29
91
Hrm,

Well, just looking this over, I guess I overlooked that the 3700X is 8C/16T at $279 and the 3800X is 8C/16T at $339. Then the 3900X at 12C/24T at $450. These are just current Amazon prices that I searched. I looked up some performance reviews, and the 3700/3800 are so close that I wonder why anyone would push for a 3800 unless I'm missing something? The 3700 is lower power consumption, will run cooler, not overclocking, the performance gap is miniscule compared to the 21% increase in cost just for what looks like a 2~6% increase in performance in only some cases? The 3900x definitely shows off its strength in multi-core benches, but in blended stuff with single core and multi-core the 3700X seems to be pretty high up there relative to other CPUs and its significantly less costly.

I could do a 3700X, B550 MB and 32Gb 3600Mhz DDR for $530 new basically. Versus $710 for the same thing but with a 3900X.

$279 is a lot easier to swallow until a used 5900X hits the market?

Very best,
 

moinmoin

Platinum Member
Jun 1, 2017
2,069
2,474
106
Between 3700X and 3800X the former is most certainly the far more popular chip. The latter is better binned, but the performance increase is not really worth the higher price. Also you should be able to get them cheaper than that, if you're in the US do you happen to have a Microcenter nearby?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MalVeauX

MalVeauX

Senior member
Dec 19, 2008
390
29
91
Between 3700X and 3800X the former is most certainly the far more popular chip. The latter is better binned, but the performance increase is not really worth the higher price. Also you should be able to get them cheaper than that, if you're in the US do you happen to have a Microcenter nearby?
Thanks; I live in BFE west coast Florida in the swamps with a dark sky and good atmospheric seeing. No stores of any nature with this kind of hardware. So buying online is a must basically.

The more I look at things the 3700X is just a better value than the 3800X. The real head to head question becomes.... 3700X or 3900X for nearly double. I'm starting to think the 3700X would do a good job for a while, until a used 5000 series 5700/5800/5900 comes up as a deal, then just do the swap. I can always use the 3700X in another build later on like a gaming machine that is separate from my workstation.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Question (to anyone):

I'm thinking then of a 3700x CPU.
I'm reading that it's ideally better to have 4 sticks of memory on a board than only filling 2. Is this really true?
I'm reading that 3600mhz CL16 memory should be my target, without having to get into timings and stuff.
I'm not interested in overclocking, I'm interested in stability. I'm happy to make BIOS adjustments if it really matters as long as its not a stability thing.

Sound about right?

Very best,
 
Last edited:

WilliamM2

Golden Member
Jun 14, 2012
1,711
89
91
Hrm,

Well, just looking this over, I guess I overlooked that the 3700X is 8C/16T at $279 and the 3800X is 8C/16T at $339. Then the 3900X at 12C/24T at $450. These are just current Amazon prices that I searched. I looked up some performance reviews, and the 3700/3800 are so close that I wonder why anyone would push for a 3800 unless I'm missing something? The 3700 is lower power consumption, will run cooler, not overclocking, the performance gap is miniscule compared to the 21% increase in cost just for what looks like a 2~6% increase in performance in only some cases? The 3900x definitely shows off its strength in multi-core benches, but in blended stuff with single core and multi-core the 3700X seems to be pretty high up there relative to other CPUs and its significantly less costly.

I could do a 3700X, B550 MB and 32Gb 3600Mhz DDR for $530 new basically. Versus $710 for the same thing but with a 3900X.

$279 is a lot easier to swallow until a used 5900X hits the market?

Very best,
I went with a 3700x this morning from Newegg. It's $279 there right now too. I have been collecting parts since May for my build, and got tired of waiting for the 5000 series to be available. The way it looks, the 5700X if it's ever released will be 6 months away. Also picked up 3600 B-die, Asrock B550, and a Samsung 980 pro.

I see the 3700's selling for more than $280 used on Ebay, so I figure I won't lose much if I decide it's worth upgrading later. my only fear was that the 3700x will drop below $200 when the 5000 series is readily available. But with all the PC part shortages this year, it probably won't get any cheaper.

My thought anyways.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY