Yes, the Zen 3 CPUs appear to offer solid performance for their price.
Yes, the Zen 3 CPUs appear to offer solid performance for their price.
Hey there, I was thinking about switching my old PC to a 3950x. I shared my thoughts in a forum thread too, and I was hoping to wait for the Zen 3 lineup. The Zen 3 looks promising to me. It felt like a solid upgrade. But while I was browsing online, I noticed some folks were not thrilled about the $50 price increase and were thinking about the 3000-series chips now. How big is the leap from the 3000-series to the 5000-series compared to the jump from the 2000-series to the 3000-series? Do you think people see the 5900x upgrading to the 3950x as impressive? And regarding the 5000 series—do you think its performance per dollar is similar, better, or worse than what we're seeing now? Share your thoughts on my question and what you think about the upcoming chips! Thanks!
It's significantly larger than the 3000 series since all chiplets now have eight cores and can communicate freely without relying on the infinity fabric. Many overlook that it also increases manufacturing costs compared to the older design where two four-core chips are bonded together. At $50, it's a substantial investment for a performance boost of over 20% in gaming. While the price seems high, I still think the extra cores justify it. It's confusing why people assume AMD is meant to be the budget option when they actually outperform them in many scenarios—especially with AVX workloads.
5900x offers good value, while 3950x is only a minor concern at the higher range. 5600x feels too expensive compared to 3600 and 5800x, which are significantly overpriced. 3700x is also a bit too high.
It would be hard to provide a solid response without concrete performance data—so consider checking reviews before deciding.
For a 3000-series CPU, the upgrade isn't necessary right now. Just hold off until AM5 arrives. If you're running a Ryzen 1000 or 2000, it will be a major improvement. Keep in mind: New releases every month don’t automatically mean the Ryzen 3000 series is outdated or slow. They remain strong processors and offer better value.
Yes, personally I found the 5900x and 5950x prices to be good. Can't say much about the rest. I don't think that AMD is supposed to be the cheap brand, reading online articles about people basically being exaggeratedly disappointed about the $50 made me a bit confused.
I’m curious about how these recent performance enhancements and design changes strengthen the 5900x against the 3950x. I’m sharing this before the benchmarks, just in case my take is off. Still, it seems like if the 5800x had more cores, it would perform better. I think the 5900x might offer a bit more single-core speed compared to the 3950x, but overall multicore performance could be slightly lower, though still similar. Got it. The 3000 series was already solid, now it feels even more affordable in your area. At my setup—Intel i7 2600k—I’d probably lean toward the 5000 series. The only 3000 model I’d think about is the 3950x. They’re clearly strong CPUs, and with prices dropping, they should offer better value overall.
It seems the 5900X and 3950X perform similarly in multithreaded tasks, though that comparison might be too idealized. We'll get to the details eventually.
I visualized the 2700x versus 3600 situation, yet it didn’t catch my attention that the core and thread count gap doubles when comparing 5900x to 3950x. Still, I think similar multi-threaded performance could remain possible, but as you mentioned, we’ll discover more soon.