AMD Ryzen 3900X And ​​3700X Reviews The Delivered Company Show Big On Its Product Promises

[ad_1]

<div _ngcontent-c14 = "" innerhtml = "

On Sunday AMD officially announced the availability of its third Gen Ryzen desktop processors and its APU with integrated graphics. True to AMD form, it was a multi-year tease starting all the way back to initial hints on the new capabilities of the new Zen 2 architecture, new TSMC 7nm process, and new chiplet package. With availability comes product reviews, which, for the consumer channel marketplace, means everything, but it also matters to provide an indicator of AMD.

For AMD's Zen 2 architecture, the consumer channel desktop is the opening volley. I wanted to quickly go to great lengths of time with their tests. I tested the Ryzen 9 3900X, but I'm an analyst, not a reviewer, so I will defer to them on a detailed analysis and encourage you to read them. My testing results were in alignment with the pros. I also wanted to spend time on this issue and what do you think?

What AMD announced

AMD announced six voltage and frequency unlocked desktop spanning processors 16 cores to 6, 32 threads to 12, at 4.7GHz boost to 4.2GHz., 72MB to 35MB cache at $ 499 to $ 199 price points you can see below.

AMD released two new desktop processors with integrated graphics, called the Ryzen 3000 Series.

For the remainder of this analysis, I want to focus on what I have sampled to reviewers and I, the Ryzen 9 3900X and 3700X.

Reviews we looked at

Reviewing products is a tough job, especially when there is a competitor reviews at the same time. Reviewers were hit by the new AMD Ryzens, new AMD Radeons, and new NVIDIA GeForce SUPERs, so it was tough for reviewers to pull this off. They have my total respect.

Here are the reviews we analyzed:

• AnandTech by Andrei Frumusana
• ExtremeTech by Joel Hruska
• Forbes by Antony Leather
• Hot Hardware by Marco Chiappetta
• PC Mag by Tom Brant
• PC World by Gordon Mah Ung
• Tom's Hardware by Paul Alcorn
• TweakTown by Steven Bassiri

I urge you to read them in their entirety to get their full picture and support their web sites.

Let's jump into the workloads.

Video and audio encoding

AMD says that 3^rd Gen AMD Ryzen desktop processors "Enable to command performance over the competition in rendering, encoding, color grading, and more." & Nbsp; Ironically, at Intel's keynote at Computex, an emphasis was made on streamers and content creators to have gaming performance as well as the ability to convert video files for streaming. Based on reviewers' results, AMD 's new Zen 2 processors could pose a threat to Intel' s offerings to be contented with content encoding at similar price points.

Adobe Premier 4K video export benchmarks:

• Forbes, Antony Leather
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X was the fastest CPU even beating out the Threadripper 2920X and exceeding the Core i9-9900K by 10% (18 seconds on a 183-second project) at a similar price point.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • PC World got the same results with the Ryzen 9300X outperforming the Core i9-9900K by 31% on 4K to Blue Ray and 20% on 4K to HEVC.

Photoshop CC 18.10 beta Puget Systems benchmarks:

• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X still has a performance lead versus the Core i9-9900K, but the gap is smaller at a 6% advantage.

Handbrake video encoding benchmarks:

• Forbes, Antony Leather
  • The Ryzen 3900X outperformed all the other CPUs, beating the Intel i9 9900K by about 27%. A notable accomplishment for AMD is that the Ryzen 7 3700X is second behind the Core i9-9900K.
• PC Mag, Tom Brant
  • PC Mag did a 12-minute 4K test file to 1080p conversion that resulted in the Ryzen 3900X outperforming all CPUs other than the very expensive ($ 1,999) Core i9-9980XE Extreme Edition and the Ryzen Threadripper 2950X ($ 730).
• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • Anandtech split its Handbrake benchmarks into three tests. The first one is 720p at 6,000 kbps bit rate, fast setting, high profile. Again, the Ryzen 3900X outperformed all other CPUs, more specifically the Core i9-9900K with a 19% advantage.
  • The second is 1080p at 3500 kbps constant bit rate, faster setting, main profile. The Ryzen 3900X has similar results to the first with a 24% advantage over the Core i9-9900K.
  • The third is 1080p60 HEVC at 3500 kbps variable bit rate, fast setting, main profile. The Ryzen 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K with a 9% advantage.

PC Mark 10 Image Editing Benchmarks:

• Forbes, Antony Leather
  • Not only did the Ryzen 9 3900X outperform the Core i9-9900K by a 20% margin, but the Ryzen 7 3700X outperformed the Core i9-9900K.

iTunes 10.6 11 songs WAV to Apple benchmarks:

• PC Mag, Tom Brant
  • This is an older version of iTunes for a "real-world look at single-core performance." Intel's chipsets beat all of AMD's to prove that "parallel Intel chips offer better single-core performance when running certain app." The Ryzen 9 3900X was 22% slower than the Core i9-9900K. This test likely uses Intel special instructions and not AMD's.

The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed its main competition, Intel Core i9-9900K, in just about every benchmark for encoding video and audio. The only benchmark that the Ryzen 3900X did not outperform in the iTunes 10.6 11 songs WAV to Apple that lay stress on single-core performance and possible some special instructions. The Ryzen 9 3900X will not always outperform the i9 9900K in these workloads, from the many benchmark results, it will MOST of the time, and by a wide margin.

Visualization and rendering

When it comes to rendering and visualization, it should be no surprise that the Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms the Core i9-9900K because it has more cores and more threads and these workloads eat that up.

Blender benchmark:

• ExtremeTech, Joel Hruska
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X is 1.34 times faster than the Corei9-9900K in ExtremeTech's Blender benchmark. Both used 32 GB of DDR4-3200 memory.
• PC Mag, Tom Brant
  • The rendering was a test of a flying squirrel and the Ryzen 9 3900X finished at the same time as the Core i9-9900K.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • The rendering used a test file called Gooseberry that was more intensive than the flying squirrel used by PC Mag. The Ryzen 9 3900X had a 43% advantage over the Core i9-9900K.

The Cinebench R20 is a newer version of the Cinebench R15 benchmark and is based on Cinema 4 R20. It is configurable to test multi-threaded performance, single threaded performance. The single core test also gives a good indicator of instructions per clock (IPC) and frequency. Users would not only use one core or one thread, but they would be able to use the multi-core test.Cinebench R20 benchmark:

• Forbes, Antony Leather
  • For the single-threaded test, the Ryzen 9 3900X was barely able to outperform the Core i9-9900K. The Ryzen 9 3900X is not only shown beating the 9900K, but also the improvements it has over the last year's 2700X.
  • For the multi-threaded test, Ryzen 9 3900X pulled ahead significantly from the competition with a 47% advantage over the Core i9-9900K.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • In the single threaded test, the Ryzen 9 3900X pulled ahead with a 3% advantage.
  • In the multi-threaded test, the Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by 42%.

Cinebench R15 benchmark:

• PC Mag, Tom Brant
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X had 5% less performance on the single core test but 45% higher performance on the multi-core performance.
• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X had 6% less performance on the single threaded test and 45% higher performance on the multi-threaded test.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • The Ryzen 3900X was 3% less than the Core i9-9900K for single threaded performance and 54% higher than the Core i9-9900K for multi-threaded performance.

POV-Ray 3.7 benchmark:

• PC Mag, Tim Brant
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X had a 16-second advantage over the Core i9-9900K in the multicore test but was 42 seconds longer than the Core i9-9900K in the single core test.
• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • Using the Built-in benchmarks, the Ryzen 9 3900X dominated the test and outperformed the Core i9-9900K by about 16%.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • Using similar tests to AnandTech, the Ryzen 9 3900X was 44% faster than the Core i9-9900K in multi-threaded mode.

Corona 1.3 benchmark:

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by 36%
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by 32% in the multi-threaded test.

VRAY Next benchmark

• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by 31%.

Luxmark v1.3 benchmark

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • AnandTech did two different tests for the benchmark. The first one was for C ++, and the 3900X Ryzen 9 showed 48% higher performance than the Core i9-9900K.
  • The second one was for OpenCL, and the Ryzen 9 3900X showed 27% higher performance than the Core i9-9900K.

The Ryzen 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K in just about every benchmark, only to be slightly below the Core i9-9900K for single core and single thread benchmarks. Previous tests favored Intel over AMD for all single core benchmarks, so the fact that AMD can hang with Intel for single core tests is exciting for AMD, particularly as it operates at a lower frequency. This suggests IPC is stellar.

Gaming- 1080P

Straight up gaming is more of a lower core performance, so in these tests, the more cores and threads will not be much of value for Ryzen. Even though the Ryzen 3900X does not beat the Intel i9-9900K when it comes to gaming, AMD has still closed the gap on gaming performance. In some of these tests, you will notice that the frames are the same, with less than a frame for a second difference. The gap between frames for the GTX 2080. Some games, even if there is a numerical difference with a GTX 2080, the game is already cranking out such high frame rates (148/354/186), it would be hard for me to imagine any experiential difference. If you're a gamer who is synonymous with streams or video, the Ryzen 3900X is the best choice in the world.

The testing of 1080p gaming by the reviewers is on average frames for second (fps) and covers many different gaming titles.

AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor

• Ashes Classic DX12 1080p Standard, GTX 1080
  • The results are similar to Shadow of War with the Ryzen 9 3900X being 3 fps less (3%) than the Core i9-9900K at 103 fps.
• F1 2018 1080p Medium, GTX 1080
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X came out with 3 more fps (1%) than the Core i9-9900K being at 207 fps.
• GTA V 1080p Ultra, GTX 1080
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X had 3 less fps (2%) than the Core i9-9900K at 160 fps.
• Shadow of War at 1080p Ultra, GTX 1080
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X was a bit closer to only 4 fps (4%) than the Core i9-9900K at 101 fps.
• Strange Brigade 1080p Medium, GTX 1080
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X and the Core i9-9900K both had the same fps at around 196 fps.
• World of Tanks at 768p, GTX 1080
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X had 57 less fps (14%) than the Core i9-9900K at 396 fps.

PC World, Gordon Ung

• Counterstrike: Go 1080p High GTX 1080 FE
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X was 15 less fps (4%) than the Core i9-9900K at 370 fps.
• EX Mankind Divided 1080p Ultra, RTX 2080 Ti FE
  • The Ryzen 9-3900X was 9 less fps (7%) than the Core i9-9900K at 121 fps.
• Far Cry 5 1080p Ultra RTX 2080 Ti
  • With the GTX 2080 making the difference, the Ryzen 9 3900X was 25 less fps (17%) than the Core i9-9900K at 148 fps.
• Rainbow Siege 1080p Ultra, RTX 2080 Ti
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X was 19 less fps (2%) than the Core i9-9900K at 354 fps.
• Rise of the Raider Tomb 1080p VH, GTX 1080 FE
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X has 3 less fps (2%) than the Core i9-9900K at 141 fps.
• Rise of the Raider Tomb 1080p VH, RTX 2080 Ti FE
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X has 6 less fps (3%) than the Core i9-9900K at 186 fps.
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1080p HQ, GTX 1080 FE
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X was neck and neck with the Core i9-9900K, the Ryzen 9 3900X being just shy of 3 fps.
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider HQ 1080p, RTX 2080 Ti FE
  • Switching to the GTX 2080, the Core i9-9900K, at 146 fps, and 10 fps more (7%) than the Ryzen 9 3900X.

While the Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by, for the most part, a considerable margin in every use-box other than gaming. Intel has long been dominant when it comes to lower resolution gaming, but now, said by Gordon Ung at PC World, "anything below an RTX 2080 will likely make it nearly impossible to tell the difference between the two CPUs at 1920×1080."

Gaming High-Resolution Gaming, 1440P and 4K

For high res gaming, PC World's Gordon Ung did not even bother placing benchmarks for anything higher than 2560×1440 because he explains that the gaming performance will be so similar. & Nbsp; PCMag reinforces this by explaining that in 4K, they saw all of the CPUs perform nearly identically (within a few frames per second) with the GeForce RTX 2080 Ti.

All this makes sense as high res gaming focuses on the performance of the graphics rather than the performance of the CPU. We refer to this as "GPU-limited" versus "CPU-limited."

Office productivity

Similar to the audio and video encoding and the visualization and rendering segments, office productivity takes advantage of multiple data compression and conversion, and most of the time. I was disappointed that reviewers did not test PC Mark a lot and am exploring why they did not.

Web-WebPRT 2018

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by 4%.

Web Speedometer 2

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X performed higher than the Core i9-9900K by 6%.

Web- Google Octane 2.0

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X performed higher than the Core i9-9900K by 10%

Web- Mozilla Kraken1.1

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • Octane, The Ryzen 9 3900X has a 10% better than the Core i9-9900K.

Photo conversion- Agisoft

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X has a 14% higher performance than the i9-9900K with 2D to 3D conversion.

File compression / decompression- 7-ZIP 16.04

• PC Mag
  • PC mag used a dictionary for the test, and the Ryzen 9 3900X has a 39% higher performance score than the Core i9-9900K. The extra threads help out for compressing and decompressing files.
• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • Combining the compression and decompression tests the Ryzen 9 3900X has a 58% higher performance than the Core i9-9900K.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • For compression, the Ryzen 9 3900X has a 44% higher performance than the Core i9-9900K and a 60% higher performance for decompression.

File compression / decompression – WinRAR

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • AnandTech tested WinRAR by running a compression of thirty 60-second video files and 2000 small web-based files. The results ended up being a wash.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • PC World used RARlab's WinRAR 5.71 that has a built-in benchmark. The Ryzen 9 3900X played by 4% less than the Core i9-9900K.

Security- AES Encryption

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms the Core i9-9900K by 46%.

The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K in just about every office productivity benchmark, as expected. I was a bit disappointed that one benchmarked PC Mark and am getting underneath that.

So what?

Reviews of AMD's 3^rd Gen Ryzen desktop has been published on the web and has been published. While I would like to see a lot of things, I think it's a lot of things. AMD 's performance is similar to Intel' s Intel chipset, and a wash in 1400P or 4K games. At any resolution, AMD is the best choice in gaming while streaming and gaming, video footage capture and editing.

Overall, AMD's 3^rd Gen Ryzen 3900X and 3700X are real winners when it comes to a balanced system.

So, does a great product always mean great sales? It helps, but it's not assured. AMD intelligently started with a wide range of Zen 2-based processors. The channel consumer is a combination of DIY consumers and smaller whitebox makers who build a smaller number of systems. This audience is very unloyal and buys what they think provides the best bang for the buck. Unless Intel changes the equation, I believe that AMD can supply enough product, its partners can ship enough ecosystem motherboards, and AMD properly incents the channel, AMD will do well in consumer channel desktop. I would expect to spend a lot of time on it. What I do not expect is an impact of Tier 1 and commercial desktop pricing. Intel is better off losing some share than taking a price cut, and again, I expect Intel to invest big into channel promotions.

AMD showed us again with 3^rd Gen Ryzen is the name of the company, which is one of the most important of the two.

Note: Moor Insights & amp; Internal Strategy Jacob Freyman contributed to this article.

Disclosure:

Moor Insights & amp; Strategy, consulting, research, consulting, consulting, consulting, consulting, consulting, consultingAdvanced Micro Devices, Apstra,ARM Holdings, Bitfusion,Cisco Systems,DellEMC, Diablo Technologies, Echelon, Ericsson, Frame, Gen Z Consortium, Glue Networks, GlobalFoundries,Google(Nest)HPInc. Hewlett Packard Enterprise,Huaweitechnologies,IBM,Jabil Circuit,Intel, Interdigital, Konica Minolta,Lenovo, Linux Foundation, MACOM (Applied Micro), MapBox, Mavenir, & nbsp;mesosphere,Microsoft,National Instruments, NOKIA (Alcatel Lucent), Nortek,NVIDIA, UNOG, OpenStack Foundation, Peraso, Portworx, Protequus, Pure Storage,Qualcomm, Rackspace, Rambus,Red Hat, Samsung Technologies, Silver Peak, SONY, Springpath, Sprint, Stratus Technologies, TensTorrent, Tobii Technology, & nbsp;Synaptics& Nbsp;Verizon Communications, Vidyo Wellsmith, & nbsp;Xilinx, Zebra, which may be cited in this article.& Nbsp;& Nbsp;

& Nbsp;

">

On Sunday AMD officially announced the availability of its third Gen Ryzen desktop processors and its APU with integrated graphics. True to AMD form, it was a multi-year tease starting all the way back to initial hints on the new capabilities of the new Zen 2 architecture, new TSMC 7nm process, and new chiplet package. With availability comes product reviews, which, for the consumer channel marketplace, means everything, but it also matters to provide an indicator of AMD.

For AMD's Zen 2 architecture, the consumer channel desktop is the opening volley. I wanted to quickly go to great lengths of time with their tests. I tested the Ryzen 9 3900X, but I'm an analyst, not a reviewer, so I will defer to them on a detailed analysis and encourage you to read them. My testing results were in alignment with the pros. I also wanted to spend time on this issue and what do you think?

What AMD announced

AMD announced six voltage and frequency unlocked desktop spanning processors 16 cores to 6, 32 threads to 12, at 4.7GHz boost to 4.2GHz., 72MB to 35MB cache at $ 499 to $ 199 price points you can see below.

AMD released two new desktop processors with integrated graphics, called the Ryzen 3000 Series.

For the remainder of this analysis, I want to focus on what I have sampled to reviewers and I, the Ryzen 9 3900X and 3700X.

Reviews we looked at

Reviewing products is a tough job, especially when there is a competitor reviews at the same time. Reviewers were hit by the new AMD Ryzens, new AMD Radeons, and new NVIDIA GeForce SUPERs, so it was tough for reviewers to pull this off. They have my total respect.

Here are the reviews we analyzed:

I urge you to read them in their entirety to get their full picture and support their web sites.

Let's jump into the workloads.

Video and audio encoding

AMD says that 3^rd Gen AMD Ryzen desktop processors "Enable to command performance performance over the competition in rendering, encoding, color grading, and more." Ironically, at Intel's keynote at Computex, an emphasis was on streamers and content creators to have gaming performance as well the ability to convert video files for streaming. Based on reviewers' results, AMD 's new Zen 2 processors could pose a threat to Intel' s offerings to be contented with content encoding at similar price points.

Adobe Premier 4K video export benchmarks:

• Forbes, Antony Leather
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X was the fastest CPU even beating out the Threadripper 2920X and exceeding the Core i9-9900K by 10% (18 seconds on a 183-second project) at a similar price point.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • PC World got the same results with the Ryzen 9300X outperforming the Core i9-9900K by 31% on 4K to Blue Ray and 20% on 4K to HEVC.

Photoshop CC 18.10 beta Puget Systems benchmarks:

• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X still has a performance lead versus the Core i9-9900K, but the gap is smaller at a 6% advantage.

Handbrake video encoding benchmarks:

• Forbes, Antony Leather
  • The Ryzen 3900X outperformed all the other CPUs, beating the Intel i9 9900K by about 27%. A notable accomplishment for AMD is that the Ryzen 7 3700X is second behind the Core i9-9900K.
• PC Mag, Tom Brant
  • PC Mag did a 12-minute 4K test file to 1080p conversion that resulted in the Ryzen 3900X outperforming all CPUs other than the very expensive ($ 1,999) Core i9-9980XE Extreme Edition and the Ryzen Threadripper 2950X ($ 730).
• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • Anandtech split its Handbrake benchmarks into three tests. The first one is 720p at 6,000 kbps bit rate, fast setting, high profile. Again, the Ryzen 3900X outperformed all other CPUs, more specifically the Core i9-9900K with a 19% advantage.
  • The second is 1080p at 3500 kbps constant bit rate, faster setting, main profile. The Ryzen 3900X has similar results to the first with a 24% advantage over the Core i9-9900K.
  • The third is 1080p60 HEVC at 3500 kbps variable bit rate, fast setting, main profile. The Ryzen 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K with a 9% advantage.

PC Mark 10 Image Editing Benchmarks:

• Forbes, Antony Leather
  • Not only did the Ryzen 9 3900X outperform the Core i9-9900K by a 20% margin, but the Ryzen 7 3700X outperformed the Core i9-9900K.

iTunes 10.6 11 songs WAV to Apple benchmarks:

• PC Mag, Tom Brant
  • This is an older version of iTunes for a "real-world look at single-core performance." Intel's chipsets beat all of AMD's to prove that "parallel Intel chips offer better single-core performance when running certain app." The Ryzen 9 3900X was 22% slower than the Core i9-9900K. This test likely uses Intel special instructions and not AMD's.

The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed its main competition, Intel Core i9-9900K, in just about every benchmark for encoding video and audio. The only benchmark that the Ryzen 3900X did not outperform in the iTunes 10.6 11 songs WAV to Apple that lay stress on single-core performance and possible some special instructions. The Ryzen 9 3900X will not always outperform the i9 9900K in these workloads, from the many benchmark results, it will MOST of the time, and by a wide margin.

Visualization and rendering

When it comes to rendering and visualization, it should be no surprise that the Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms the Core i9-9900K because it has more cores and more threads and these workloads eat that up.

Blender benchmark:

• ExtremeTech, Joel Hruska
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X is 1.34 times faster than the Corei9-9900K in ExtremeTech's Blender benchmark. Both used 32 GB of DDR4-3200 memory.
• PC Mag, Tom Brant
  • The rendering was a test of a flying squirrel and the Ryzen 9 3900X finished at the same time as the Core i9-9900K.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • The rendering used a test file called Gooseberry that was more intensive than the flying squirrel used by PC Mag. The Ryzen 9 3900X had a 43% advantage over the Core i9-9900K.

The Cinebench R20 is a newer version of the Cinebench R15 benchmark and is based on Cinema 4 R20. It is configurable to test multi-threaded performance, single threaded performance. The single core test also gives a good indicator of instructions per clock (IPC) and frequency. Users would not only use one core or one thread, but they would be able to use the multi-core test.Cinebench R20 benchmark:

• Forbes, Antony Leather
  • For the single-threaded test, the Ryzen 9 3900X was barely able to outperform the Core i9-9900K. The Ryzen 9 3900X is not only shown beating the 9900K, but also the improvements it has over the last year's 2700X.
  • For the multi-threaded test, Ryzen 9 3900X pulled ahead significantly from the competition with a 47% advantage over the Core i9-9900K.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • In the single threaded test, the Ryzen 9 3900X pulled ahead with a 3% advantage.
  • In the multi-threaded test, the Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by 42%.

Cinebench R15 benchmark:

• PC Mag, Tom Brant
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X had 5% less performance on the single core test but 45% higher performance on the multi-core performance.
• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X had 6% less performance on the single threaded test and 45% higher performance on the multi-threaded test.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • The Ryzen 3900X was 3% less than the Core i9-9900K for single threaded performance and 54% higher than the Core i9-9900K for multi-threaded performance.

POV-Ray 3.7 benchmark:

• PC Mag, Tim Brant
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X had a 16-second advantage over the Core i9-9900K in the multicore test but was 42 seconds longer than the Core i9-9900K in the single core test.
• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • Using the Built-in benchmarks, the Ryzen 9 3900X dominated the test and outperformed the Core i9-9900K by about 16%.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • Using similar tests to AnandTech, the Ryzen 9 3900X was 44% faster than the Core i9-9900K in multi-threaded mode.

Corona 1.3 benchmark:

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by 36%
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by 32% in the multi-threaded test.

VRAY Next benchmark

• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by 31%.

Luxmark v1.3 benchmark

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • AnandTech did two different tests for the benchmark. The first one was for C ++, and the 3900X Ryzen 9 showed 48% higher performance than the Core i9-9900K.
  • The second one was for OpenCL, and the Ryzen 9 3900X showed 27% higher performance than the Core i9-9900K.

The Ryzen 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K in just about every benchmark, only to be slightly below the Core i9-9900K for single core and single thread benchmarks. Previous tests favored Intel over AMD for all single core benchmarks, so the fact that AMD can hang with Intel for single core tests is exciting for AMD, particularly as it operates at a lower frequency. This suggests IPC is stellar.

Gaming- 1080P

Straight up gaming relies more on lower count core performance, so in these tests, the more cores and threads won’t be much of value for Ryzen. Even though the Ryzen 3900X doesn’t beat the Intel i9-9900K when it comes to gaming, AMD has still closed the gap on gaming performance. In some of these tests, you will notice that the frames per second are almost the same, with less than a five frame per second difference. The gap between frames per second doesn’t start to show until the GTX 2080. Some games, even if there is a numerical difference with a GTX 2080, the game is already cranking out such high frame rates (148/354/186), it would be hard for me to imagine any experiential difference. If you’re a gamer who simultaneously streams or captures and edits video, the Ryzen 3900X is the better choice as the core count advantage kicks in.

The testing of 1080p gaming by the reviewers is on average frames per second (fps) and covers many different gaming titles.

AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor

• Ashes Classic DX12 1080p Standard, GTX 1080
  • The results are similar to Shadow of War with the Ryzen 9 3900X being 3 fps less (3%) than the Core i9-9900K at 103 fps.
• F1 2018 1080p Medium, GTX 1080
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X came out on top with this title with 3 more fps (1%) than the Core i9-9900K being at 207 fps.
• GTA V 1080p Ultra, GTX 1080
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X had 3 less fps (2%) than the Core i9-9900K at 160 fps.
• Shadow of War at 1080p Ultra, GTX 1080
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X was a bit closer with only 4 fps (4%) less than the Core i9-9900K at 101 fps.
• Strange Brigade 1080p Medium, GTX 1080
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X and the Core i9-9900K both had the same fps at around 196 fps.
• World of Tanks at 768p, GTX 1080
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X had 57 less fps (14%) than the Core i9-9900K at 396 fps.

PC World, Gordon Ung

• Counterstrike: Go 1080p high GTX 1080 FE
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X was 15 less fps (4%) than the Core i9-9900K at 370 fps.
• Dues EX Mankind Divided 1080p Ultra, RTX 2080 Ti FE
  • The Ryzen 9-3900X was 9 less fps (7%) than the Core i9-9900K at 121 fps.
• Far Cry 5 1080p Ultra RTX 2080 Ti
  • With the GTX 2080 making the difference a little greater, the Ryzen 9 3900X was 25 less fps (17%) than the Core i9-9900K at 148 fps.
• Rainbow Siege 1080p Ultra, RTX 2080 Ti
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X was 19 less fps (2%) than the Core i9-9900K at 354 fps.
• Rise of the Tomb Raider 1080p VH ,GTX 1080 FE
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X has 3 less fps (2%) than the Core i9-9900K at 141 fps.
• Rise of the Tomb Raider 1080p VH, RTX 2080 Ti FE
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X has 6 less fps (3%) than the Core i9-9900K at 186 fps.
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1080p HQ, GTX 1080 FE
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X was neck and neck with the Core i9-9900K, the Ryzen 9 3900X being just shy of 3 fps.
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1080p HQ, RTX 2080 Ti FE
  • Switching to the GTX 2080, the Core i9-9900K, at 146 fps, pulled away a bit and was 10 fps more (7%) than the Ryzen 9 3900X.

While the Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by, for the most part, a considerable margin in every use-case other than gaming. Intel has long been dominant when it comes to lower resolution gaming, but now, said best by Gordon Ung at PC World, “anything below an RTX 2080 will likely make it nearly impossible to tell the difference between the two CPUs at 1920×1080.”

Gaming- high-resolution gaming, 1440P and 4K

For high res gaming, PC World’s Gordon Ung didn’t even bother placing benchmarks for anything higher than 2560×1440 because he explains that the gaming performance will be so similar.  PCMag reinforces this by explaining that in 4K, they saw all of the CPUs perform nearly identically (within a few frames per second) with the GeForce RTX 2080 Ti.

All this makes sense as high res gaming focuses more on the performance of the graphics cards rather than the performance of the CPU. We refer to this as being “GPU-limited” versus “CPU-limited.”

Office productivity

Similar to the audio and video encoding and the visualization and rending segments, office productivity takes advantage of compressing and decompressing data as well as moving around data and converting data to different formats, most all which take advantage of multiple cores and multiple threads. I was disappointed that reviewers didn’t test PC Mark a lot and am exploring why they didn’t.

Web- WebXPRT 2018

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K by 4%.

Web- Speedometer 2

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X performed higher than the Core i9-9900K by 6%.

Web- Google Octane 2.0

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X performed higher than the Core i9-9900K by 10%

Web- Mozilla Kraken1.1

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • Similar results to the Google Octane, The Ryzen 9 3900X has a 10% better than the Core i9-9900K.

Photo conversion- Agisoft

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X has a 14% higher performance than the i9-9900K with 2D to 3D conversion.

File compression/decompression- 7-ZIP 16.04

• PC Mag
  • PC mag used a dictionary file for the test, and the Ryzen 9 3900X has a 39% higher performance score than the Core i9-9900K. The extra threads help out for compressing and decompressing files.
• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • Combining the compression and decompression tests the Ryzen 9 3900X has a 58% higher performance than the Core i9-9900K.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • For compression, the Ryzen 9 3900X has a 44% higher performance than the Core i9-9900K and a 60% higher performance for decompression.

File compression/decompression – WinRAR

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • AnandTech tested WinRAR by running a compression of thirty 60-second video files and 2000 small web-based files. The results ended up being a wash.
• PC World, Gordon Ung
  • PC World used RARlab’s WinRAR 5.71 that has a built-in benchmark. The Ryzen 9 3900X performed by 4% less than the Core i9-9900K.

Security- AES Encryption

• AnandTech, Andrei Frumusanu and Gavin Bonshor
  • The Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms the Core i9-9900K by 46%.

The Ryzen 9 3900X outperformed the Core i9-9900K in just about every office productivity benchmark, as expected. I was a bit disappointed that no one benchmarked PC Mark and am getting underneath that.

So what?

Reviews of AMD’s 3^rd Gen Ryzen desktop showed definitive and large wins at similar price points on multithreaded workloads like video, audio and image editing and encoding, visualization, and rendering. While I would have liked to have seen more PC Mark numbers, reviews show AMD has a lead in office productivity, a big deal given many of those applications struggle to use many threads and cores, so it comes down to single to eight core performance. AMD’s performance was similar to Intel’s on 1080P gaming with a slight and likely unnoticeable Intel lead, and a wash in 1400P or 4K games as the system gets GPU limited. At any resolution, AMD is the better choice in gaming while streaming and gaming, video footage capture and editing.

Overall, AMD’s 3^rd Gen Ryzen 3900X and 3700X are real winners when it comes to a balanced system.

So, does a great product always mean great sales? It helps, but it’s not assured. AMD intelligently started with channel consumer desktop to show off the first in a long lineup of Zen 2-based processors. The channel consumer is a combination of DIY consumers and smaller whitebox makers who build a smaller number of systems. This audience is very brand unloyal and buys what they think provides the best bang for the buck. Unless Intel changes the equation, I believe that if AMD can supply enough product, its partners can ship enough ecosystem motherboards, and AMD properly incents the channel, AMD will do quite well in consumer channel desktop. I would expect Intel to rapidly increase its channel marketing spend and may pull a few rabbits out of its hat product-wise. What I don’t expect is an Intel price reduction as this would impact not only channel consumer desktop but also Tier 1 and commercial desktop pricing. Intel’s better off losing some share than taking a price cut, and again, I expect Intel to invest big into channel promotions.

AMD showed us again with 3^rd Gen Ryzen desktop that the company continues to exceed the promises it makes which bodes well for all products based on the Zen 2 architecture.

Note: Moor Insights & Strategy intern Jacob Freyman contributed to this article.

Disclosure:

Moor Insights & Strategy, like all research and analyst firms, provides or has provided paid research, analysis, advising, or consulting to many high-tech companies in the industry, including Advanced Micro Devices, Apstra, ARM Holdings, Bitfusion, Cisco Systems,DellEMC, Diablo Technologies, Echelon, Ericsson, Frame, Gen Z Consortium, Glue Networks, GlobalFoundries, Google (Nest), HP Inc. Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Huawei Technologies, IBM,Jabil Circuit,Intel, Interdigital, Konica Minolta, Lenovo, Linux Foundation, MACOM (Applied Micro), MapBox, Mavenir, Mesosphere,Microsoft,National Instruments, NOKIA (Alcatel Lucent), Nortek, NVIDIA, ONUG, OpenStack Foundation, Peraso, Portworx, Protequus, Pure Storage, Qualcomm, Rackspace, Rambus, Red Hat, Samsung Technologies, Silver Peak, SONY, Springpath, Sprint, Stratus Technologies, TensTorrent, Tobii Technology, Synaptics, Verizon Communications, Vidyo, Wellsmith, Xilinx, Zebra, which may be cited in this article.