AMD Brings Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen 5 3500X To Life
by Dr. Ian Cutress on October 8, 2019 5:20 PM EST
Seemingly always with AMD’s product portfolio, there is a persistent drip of new products being inserted into the product stack throughout the lifetime of a given generation of hardware. Aside from the five Ryzen 3000 series processors launched back in July, we are expecting a new 16-core flagship on top of that list come in November. Until then, AMD has inserted two new processors: one for worldwide consumption, and another for the Chinese OEM market only.
AMD’s Zen 2 platform has been a source of major success for the company, both in its consumer form as Ryzen 3000 ‘Matisse’ parts, and its server based EPYC 7002 series ‘Rome’ hardware. Being the first x86 platform on 7nm, affording significant reductions in power, as well as going above and beyond the mainstream raw performance-per-clock from Intel, has accelerated the fortunes of AMD and pushed the company into being major players in consumer and enterprise, despite being a fraction of the size.
As with any product portfolio, the diversity of offerings is key to attaching to the various markets. Making that also align with manufacturing strategies for performance and stock levels becomes a tricky business, and throughout the life cycle of a platform, companies often launch new parts to satisfy demand. To this end, AMD is launching a lower power 12-core Ryzen 9 3900 into the world-wide market for system integrators, and a Chinese market OEM-only Ryzen 5 3500X for lower cost implementations.
| AMD 'Matisse' Ryzen 3000 Series CPUs | |||||||||||
| AnandTech | Cores Threads |
Base Freq |
Boost Freq |
L2 Cache |
L3 Cache |
PCIe 4.0 |
Chiplets IO+CPU |
TDP | Price (SEP) |
||
| Ryzen 9 | 3950X | 16C | 32T | 3.5 | 4.7 | 8 MB | 64 MB | 16+4+4 | 1+2 | 105W | $749 |
| Ryzen 9 | 3900X | 12C | 24T | 3.8 | 4.6 | 6 MB | 64 MB | 16+4+4 | 1+2 | 105W | $499 |
| Ryzen 9 | 3900 | 12C | 24T | 3.1 | 4.3 | 6 MB | 64 MB | 16+4+4 | 1+2 | 65W | - |
| Ryzen 7 | 3800X | 8C | 16T | 3.9 | 4.5 | 4 MB | 32 MB | 16+4+4 | 1+1 | 105W | $399 |
| Ryzen 7 | 3700X | 8C | 16T | 3.6 | 4.4 | 4 MB | 32 MB | 16+4+4 | 1+1 | 65W | $329 |
| Ryzen 5 | 3600X | 6C | 12T | 3.8 | 4.4 | 3 MB | 32 MB | 16+4+4 | 1+1 | 95W | $249 |
| Ryzen 5 | 3600 | 6C | 12T | 3.6 | 4.2 | 3 MB | 32 MB | 16+4+4 | 1+1 | 65W | $199 |
| Ryzen 5 | 3500X | 6C | 6T | 3.6 | 4.1 | 3 MB | 32 MB | 16+4+4 | 1+1 | 65W | - |
The Ryzen 9 3900, in order to match its lower 65W TDP, has a lower base clock than the 3900X and a slightly lower single-core turbo frequency. There will also be a corresponding Ryzen 9 Pro 3900 CPU for business use.
For the Ryzen 5 3500X, despite sending us an email telling us about its launch, AMD hasn’t actually given any specifications on it. (Edit: AMD does have specifications on the 3500X - on the Chinese website). Other PC manufacturers have listed the Ryzen 5 3500 (non-X), so it will be interesting to see if AMD acknowledges its existence.
Having OEM-only processors isn’t new for AMD. In the last generation AMD launched the Ryzen 5 2500X and the Ryzen 3 2300X into the pre-built and system integrator market, with no retail packaging or focus. Personally I’d love to see these for sale somewhere at retail as chip-only, even if it was through AMD itself.
As these new CPUs are OEM parts, as with previous OEM hardware, AMD doesn’t give official pricing on them. The Ryzen 5 3500X is China-only at this point, but we would expect it to be cheaper than the 3600. Similarly with the Ryzen 9 3900, one would expect it to sit between the 3900X and 3800X in pricing. Given reports about the lack of Ryzen 9 3900X on shelves at this point, or inflated pricing where available, it would be interesting to hear how many of these parts are actually available to OEMs and system integrator partners.
Related Reading
- AMD Announces Ryzen Pro 3000 Series CPUs For Q4
- AMD Ryzen 9 3900: A 12-Core 65W CPU Listed
- AMD Ryzen 5 3500 & 3500X Support Spotted
- AMD: Next Gen Threadripper and Ryzen 9 3950X, Coming November
- The AMD 3rd Gen Ryzen Deep Dive Review: 3700X and 3900X Raising The Bar
- All Ryzen: Q&A with AMD CEO Dr. Lisa Su
- Fireside Chat with Ian and Wendell: Ryzen 3000, Zen 2, Navi, Xeon W
- AMD Zen 2 Microarchitecture Analysis: Ryzen 3000 and EPYC Rome
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
39 Comments
View All Comments
brakdoo - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link
"Given reports about the lack of Ryzen 9 3900X on shelves at this point, or inflated pricing where available"The 3900x is in stock in Germany for (non-elevated) 529 Euro for a few weeks now (availability changing from alternate.de to mindfactory.de, Germanys biggest DIY PC retailers; Mindfactory shipped more than 1500 3900x in the last three weeks).
As the elevated prices are coming down around the globe (just look at amazon.com $564.99, but available) one can assume that the avalability is not that big of a problem anymore.
brakdoo - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link
"PC manufacturers have listed the Ryzen 5 3500 (non-X), so it will be interesting to see if AMD acknowledges its existence."The first retailers have 3500 non-X systems are in stock. It's getting hard not to acknowledge their existence.
brakdoo - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link
The TP01-0000ng (in stock at alternate.de) even has a Promontory B550A chipset (unacknowledged?).edzieba - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link
"There is no 14-core in this stack, with AMD's official reasoning being that they assess the market with each generation and they don't believe there's a suitable price point for such a part when the 12C and 16C parts are so close. Most people will point the finger and say that no-14 core AMD part means no direct comparison with the Intel i9-10940X, which is something to think about.."Sorry, couldn't resist a bit of snark after seeing two variations on the same theme in as many articles. Joking aside, there's little numeric gap left between 3900x and 3950x for a 14-core part to fit into.
nevcairiel - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link
The numeric gap is AMDs making alone. If they wanted a 14-core, they could've made a gap.Haawser - Thursday, October 10, 2019 - link
It's because you have to remove cores in pairs, ie- you can't have one CCX with 4 cores and the other with 3. Something to do with balancing the IF load afaia. So a 14 core is not actually possible on Zen2. Maybe if Zen3 uses the rumored 'Single 8 core CCX' design that might change.1_rick - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link
"Most people will point the finger and say that no-14 core AMD part means no direct comparison with the Intel i9-10940X, which is something to think about."Well, the flip side of that is to note that Intel left a 16-core part of the 109x0X series, meaning no direct comparison with the 3950X.
edzieba - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link
"Well, the flip side of that is to note that Intel left a 16-core part of the 109x0X series, meaning no direct comparison with the 3950X."I'm well aware, I was poking fun that both of Anandtech's Cascade Lake announcement posts called out the lack of a 14-core part (even the Xeon post, which is a different market segment).
Dodozoid - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link
Only AMD's lineup was first and there is a technical reason for their core count.As it stands now, there is the same number of cores per CCX on all current CPUs. Creating a 14core part would need a mix of 3-core and 4-core CCXes and would create a lot of heterogenity as a result...
John_M - Friday, October 11, 2019 - link
"...there's little numeric gap left between 3900x and 3950x". There are 49 numbers available between 3900 and 3950, so 98 SKUs depending whether there's an X suffix or not! That aside, 14-core parts don't seem likely to happen due their necessary asymmetry.