• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Speculation: Ryzen 3000 series

Page 143 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

What will Ryzen 3000 for AM4 look like?

  • 16-core monolithic CPU (four 4-core CCXs on SoC die)

    Votes: 13 5.7%

  • 12-core monolithic CPU (three 4-core CCXs on SoC die)

    Votes: 19 8.3%

  • 8-core monolithic CPU (two 4-core CCXs on SoC die)

    Votes: 24 10.4%

  • 8-core monolithic APU (two 4-core CCXs and an iGPU on SoC die)

    Votes: 8 3.5%

  • 4-core monolithic APU (one 4-core CCX and an iGPU on SoC die)

    Votes: 12 5.2%

  • 16-core modular CPU (two 8-core CPU chiplets + IO chiplet)

    Votes: 146 63.5%

  • 8-core modular CPU (one 8-core CPU chiplet + IO chiplet)

    Votes: 47 20.4%

  • 8-core modular APU (one 8-core CPU chiplet + IO chiplet + GPU chiplet)

    Votes: 23 10.0%

  • 8-core modular APU (one 8-core CPU chiplet + IO chiplet with iGPU)

    Votes: 15 6.5%

  • Something else (specify below)

    Votes: 11 4.8%
  • Total voters
    230
I'm curious about the Ryzen 5 3600. How accurate will the 65 watt TDP be? I've got a 2200G and a 1050 Ti crammed in a NES (OG grey Nintendo console) case, so saving every watt really helps keep the thermals down. I went with the 2200G since I can move it to a work PC if I do upgrade. What are the chances the 3600 will be more power efficient than the older 4-core 4-thread 2200G?
 
DisarmedDespot said:
I'm curious about the Ryzen 5 3600. How accurate will the 65 watt TDP be? I've got a 2200G and a 1050 Ti crammed in a NES (OG grey Nintendo console) case, so saving every watt really helps keep the thermals down. I went with the 2200G since I can move it to a work PC if I do upgrade. What are the chances the 3600 will be more power efficient than the older 4-core 4-thread 2200G?
Click to expand...

I got a feeling its gonna be nearly the same or a hair more? I would be certainly blown away if this 3600 is that efficient. I hope its that efficient. I got a FX8350 rig as a htpc and JUST maybe i may have a bit of fun with a 3600 upgrade. I need a excuse to build something new. Who knows perhaps my 8700 non k will land in htpc territory. Bad enough i sat on 4 cores going from 2008 till 2018. I miss the upgrade bug 🙂

Btw i like your build its pretty genius. 🙂 What games are you playing with that set up?
 
DisarmedDespot said:
I'm curious about the Ryzen 5 3600. How accurate will the 65 watt TDP be? I've got a 2200G and a 1050 Ti crammed in a NES (OG grey Nintendo console) case, so saving every watt really helps keep the thermals down. I went with the 2200G since I can move it to a work PC if I do upgrade. What are the chances the 3600 will be more power efficient than the older 4-core 4-thread 2200G?
Click to expand...
There's a 100% chance the 3600 is more power efficient than 2200G.

You may be surprised but while using a dGPU the stock 2200G uses around the same power as any AMD 6c/12t 65W TDP CPU and any stock configured Intel CPU.

power_gaming.png

AMD calculates CPU TDP based on the cooler they use and on the temperature point they want to keep the SKU for optimal operation. Considering they'll use the same coolers for Zen2 and that the temperature points are unlikely to change much, I'm pretty sure the R5 3600 stock will stay very close to the power numbers you're already used to in 2200G.

For the same amount of power the R5 2600 is probably 25% faster in games than 2200G, and based on the minimal data we have on Zen2 in gaming we can presume R5 3600 will be about 20% faster than R5 2600 for a total of 50% improved performance at iso power. If you're willing to trade some of that performance for lower power, you can always disable turbo on the 3600 and end up with both more performance and significantly lower power draw.
 
coercitiv said:
You may be surprised but while using a dGPU the stock 2200G uses around the same power as any AMD 6c/12t 65W TDP CPU and any stock configured Intel CPU.

power_gaming.png
Click to expand...

Interesting numbers, i wonder which game they used for getting these numbers. Fair assumption its a lightly threaded one? My 8700 non k barely registers usage in most of my games which keeps the thermals very much in check. I have to stress test my cpu to honestly have temps normally hit over 60cel. I don't even hit 60cel in BF5 and that is with a cheap CM 212 in a single fan config
 
With all the cpu power at hand at lowish tdp I think the time has come to help the climate - lol
With a 3700x 8c at 65tdp that's what my boy teen gets next time. He simply burns electricity like crazy as he plays 144hz 1440 and never accepts anything going below 120Hz while he watch a YouTube video or 2 and keep contact on social media with 50 tabs.
Perhaps a change of his Vega 56 too but I am a bit more sceptical here for the efficiency of the new gpu as ddr6 power usage vs hbm 2 is a lot to compensate for.
 
Mockingbird said:
Anyone familiar with AMD thinking would have known that AMD would only pushed down the prices at the top.

What AMD wanted most was to increase profit margin and steal sales from Intel.

AMD was already dominating the <$200 market; Intel simply isn't very competitive in this segment.

It's the $200-$500 market that AMD has its eyes on; Intel dominate this segment.

If AMD increase the core count across the lineup, it would make the whole lineup much more attractive, which is not what AMD want.

Instead, AMD want to draw consumers attention especially to the $500 Ryzen 9, and did so by giving 50% more core count than Intel did
Click to expand...

Well you are not wrong but that doesn't mean you are right either. AMD certainly wants to raise ASP. They have been doing that for awhile. But I think it's a bit different. The 12c is less about having a $500 product. It would make little difference if this was a 12 or 16c product. The problem is a 16c CPU drives the whole product stack down a peg when you also have a 12c selection. I think AMD sees 8c CPU's being the sweet spot and between that and the increased production costs want to keep 6c and 8c prices from bottoming out. Part of that is at least with enthusiasts they happen to do really well in the sub $200 product ranges, but the part being that they really really don't want to push those two down there just yet. It would strengthen their lead but if people aren't moving to the higher core products then lowering the price on those two will only hurt their ASP.
 
Still on 3770k at 4.6ghz with a rtx 2070. I was looking really closely at upgrading to a Ryzen 2700 during the recent sales but the single core performance is more or less the same as what I already have so it wasnt worth it as I only do some 1440p gaming and then just typical web browsing. I dont stream gaming I dont do any video editing or anything needing a ton of cores. I would be looking at a near $500 expense for cpu+ram+mobo with only a small 10fps gain.

Will be interested to see what kind of single core performance the R2 3700 has and if its confirmed to have spectre hardware fixes.
 
A heresy?

With AMD aiming for roughly an annual release cadence in their CPUs, should the budget enthusiast continue to buy at the lower end of the range and upgrade more often? It seems to me that future proofing a build has gone away, at least for the next few years.

Zen3 and further derivatives should push the limits as for example, I'm starting to hear a bit about Soft machines tech being used soon.
 
maddie said:
should the budget enthusiast continue to buy at the lower end of the range and upgrade more often? It seems to me that future proofing a build has gone away, at least for the next few years.
Click to expand...

If you are genuinely interested in Matisse and want something that will last for awhile without breaking the budget, I would think a 3700x with an oversized cooler for OC (if necessary) might be a good way to go.

Or you can try to go cheaper with a 3600.

AMD plans to keep hitting year after year, so if you wait, yes, you will be rewarded. But eventually you will want to buy something.
 
Markfw said:
Somewhere in this thread it was mentioned that for older motherboards, only PART of the PCIE4 would work. Thats why its not a problem. I don't remember if its the video or the M.2 that is enabled, but only one of the two vs x570 has everything enabled.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I wouldn't expect anything from the chipset to run PCI-e 4.0 on older boards. I'm actually kind of surprised the 1x slots on x570 seem like they are 4.0. Chipset was all 2.0 on Ryzen before, I thought they'd drop to 3.0 for x570. I'd guess the reason this runs hot is the chipset is essentially a pci-e 4.0 pci-e switch, and not a really simple one either. Some of the pci-e 2.0 versions of those required at least passive cooling.
 
maddie said:
It seems to me that future proofing a build has gone away, at least for the next few years.
Click to expand...

Don't understand?
You mean it has went away as it is so ridiculously easy now?

If you bought a good AM4 board in 2017, be it X370 or top end B350 you have had at least 3 generations of CPUs. Your X370 might even get a PCIe4 slot and you might see as much as a doubling of compute performance from 1800X to 3900X.

You have to go all the way back to the days of Skt939 to have anything like that change in performance - and that was because core count doubled.
 
DisarmedDespot said:
I'm curious about the Ryzen 5 3600. How accurate will the 65 watt TDP be? I've got a 2200G and a 1050 Ti crammed in a NES (OG grey Nintendo console) case, so saving every watt really helps keep the thermals down. I went with the 2200G since I can move it to a work PC if I do upgrade. What are the chances the 3600 will be more power efficient than the older 4-core 4-thread 2200G?
Click to expand...

I can undervolt and OC (3.6 - 3.7 all core) the R7 1700 and it only pulls maybe 80w according to hwinfo64.

The 2200g system idles at 21w and maybe does 60w ish full load in Win10 with the power plan tweaked, based on the kill-a-watt meter.

A pure under-volt on the 3600 could make it very cool.
 
beginner99 said:
I think his point was if AMD releases ryzen 4 in a year with even more cores, higher IPC, higher clocks and ddr5, then that sounds like worth the wait.
Click to expand...
But "it may be worth the wait" always has been the case, only the years between Sandy Bridge and the launch of Zen had a prolonged period of performance "stability" where the updates where relatively minor and could as well be achieved by overclocking.
 
moinmoin said:
But "it may be worth the wait" always has been the case, only the years between Sandy Bridge and the launch of Zen had a prolonged period of performance "stability" where the updates where relatively minor and could as well be achieved by overclocking.
Click to expand...

plus realistically ddr5 will be like all other new memory
Twice the price for the same performance
**at least when it’s first launched**
 
Specs on the 3700X aren't quite as juicy as what had been speculated; I'm not sure if ASRock is planning beta BIOS for my board as of yet. That TDP sure is nice though.

Don't really need the PCIe 4.0 yet but I don't really want to swap in a new board at the moment. The X570 boards that are currently advertised are far too RGB-fabulous for my taste.
 
EXCellR8 said:
Specs on the 3700X aren't quite as juicy as what had been speculated; I'm not sure if ASRock is planning beta BIOS for my board as of yet. That TDP sure is nice though.

Don't really need the PCIe 4.0 yet but I don't really want to swap in a new board at the moment. The X570 boards that are currently advertised are far too RGB-fabulous for my taste.
Click to expand...

I’m having a similar thought. Needing the extra drive speed isn’t that important to me. Starting to wonder if I should go with a decent X470 board.
 
Atari2600 said:
If your gonna wait for the next big thing, you'd never get off the fence!
Click to expand...

Not really. You would then have pcie4 and ddr5. AFAIK pcie5 isn't really client focused and there is no apparent need for it either in contrast to ddr5. So if in a year you buy a 16-core ryzen 4 with ddr5 and pcie4 you are set for >5 years. I don't see what would be the next big thing then. plus maybe it's a new socket on AMD side for which you will have upgrade options in case there actually is a next big thing. But I doubt the will go above 16-cores on client anytime soon, some stagnation like with quads.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top