Gadgetory

after all these years desktop PCs are still at the forefront of the gaming experience delivering raw performance and functionality unparalleled by other devices at the core of each PC is a processor or CPU that carries out billions of instructions per second to make everything tick for a computer part with such an important job that lives in millions of people's homes it's surprising that only two companies in the world manufacture desktop CPUs those companies are Intel and AMD and they've been waging war for ages for the last decade or so intel has dominated the cpu market with their competitor bringing little to the table over the years a lack of competition slowed the growth of the PC gaming industry with Intel rolling out increasingly lackluster products while keeping their best tech hidden perhaps awaiting the day when AMD would rise again and disrupt the market bringing innovation back into the hands of consumers that day came in March of 2017 when AMD launched their family of first generation rising processors a flexible platform strong budget offerings and the ability to tear through varied workloads with more cores made the chips an appealing option filling in the gaps of their rivals product stack this marked an exciting turning point for the industry but many folks were still disappointed by rise uns gaming performance where Intel remains supreme one year later AMD launched their second gen rise in series based on the same DNA as its predecessor this improved gaming performance slightly further increasing the value proposition of Verizon but Intel's Core processors were still the top choice for gamers chasing maximum performance that brings us to today with AMD launching their third-generation Rison 3000 series CPUs built from the ground up on a whole new 7 nanometer architecture that aims to take the most lethal shot at Intel in over a decade it's a moment in computing history that we've anticipated for so long and today we find out if it was worth the wait bang the road you finally shut up with a stupid intro are you talking out of your butthole cuz your face correcta ass get to the point show the benchmark my nipples are tingling with anticipation are you done the Rison 3000 you grow some bows a Greek boy this video is brought to you by the Corsair hydro x-series experienced best-in-class performance and beautiful aesthetics with a brand new family of custom water cooling hardware quality construction perfect fitment and next level engineering come together to give enthusiasts a cool quiet and breathtaking solution for the rig of your dreams click on the link below to learn more oh I'm sorry alright I had to kick Lyle out of the room he was just way too much for me right now sorry about that but he does kind of have a point there's bound to be plenty of in depth well made videos on Rison 3000 surfacing today so why make this one of them I'm just gonna cut to the chase with some quick testing setup before diving into a large suite of benchmarks that cover gaming streaming and editing then we'll talk about the results afterwards so holding to that AMD kicked off their Rison 3000 series with 5 new processors that launched today the company also confirmed last month that their super high-end 16 core Rison 939 50 X will be launching in September later this year for now we have two mid-range Rison 5 SKUs to high-end Rison 7 SKUs and the first-ever Rison 9 part to hit the market I've spent the last 3 days or so testing the Rison 730 700 X Rison 930 900 X and their competitors so that's what we focused on today pricing is typically what determines which CPUs from opposite corners of the octagon get pitted head-to-head and in this case the 3700 X goes up against the Intel Core i7 9700 K which is roughly 10% more expensive at the time of filming while both chips for 8 cores the 3700 X has twice the number of threads at its disposal as the 9700 Kail x hyper threading support however it does ship with higher clock speeds out of the box AMD scores the lower TDP here although it's well known by now that Intel's advertised TVP is based on face clock alone and should be taken with a grain of salt anyway the Intel part lacks any stock cooler while the 3700 X includes a wraith prism RGB unit which is a nice value add for its launch price of 329 US dollars compared to the 9700 K at 365 you have about five hundred dollars to spend on a CPU you might be considering the rise in 939 hundred X or the core I 999 hundred K which is currently 2% cheaper the 3900 exports 12 cores and 24 threads crushing the core I nines 8 and 16 configuration albeit with slower Basin blue squad frequencies understandably we see a higher TDP on the 3900 X then it's smaller risin 7 brethren which again is hard to compare to Intel's marketing spec like the 3700 X the risin 9 also ships with a wraith prism RGB cooler and launches at 499 dollars versus 489 for the 9900 K here's a quick look at the test systems for AMD we're using an MSI x5 78 motherboard and 16 gigs of DDR for 3,600 memory overclocked with little effort to 37:33 for my brief amount of tinkering memory compatibility with Rison 3000 is already chalking up to be a hundred times better and more stable than with previous generations for cpu cooler we're using the asus rog ryojun 360 millimeter a i/o using the default fan curve and will be booting off of a two terabyte or as PCIe gen 4 nvme SSD and exciting first as the x5 70 platform marks the arrival of PCIe gen for support our GPU is NVIDIA GeForce r-tx 2080 founders Edition running stock while using an RT X 20 ATT I would have shown more disparity in gaming performance between CPUs I opted for a more realistic approach in a world where few gamers have over a thousand dollars to spend on a video card there's also bound to be no shortage of Rison 3000 reviews using our TX 20 ATT eyes if you're looking for them Intel CPUs were tested on the gigabyte horas Z 390 extreme with 16 gigs of DDR 4 at 3400 bearing in mind that Intel CPUs don't benefit from high memory frequency in most applications like Rison chips do the system uses the same cooler GPU and power supply is the AMD test bed but boots off a WD black SN 750 PCIe gen3 SSD Windows 10 Pro on build 1903 and GeForce wickel driver for thirty eight six four onions with that out of the way let's talk benchmarks a couple polls confirmed that the vast majority of you would use the new high-end Rison chips for gaming and content creation like streaming and editing and that you mostly gaming at 1920 by 1080 and 2560 by 1440 so those are the workloads and resolutions I've tested in today none of the CPUs were manually overclocked however multi-core enhancement was enabled on both systems motherboards multi-core enhancement or MCE applies a factory overclock of sorts that can potentially make the chips operate out of spec the MCE setting is enabled by default on both of these boards so the results you're about to see most closely reflect the performance of a bone-stock plug-and-play experience with the given Hardware ambient temperature was 22 degrees Celsius or 72 Fahrenheit so right out of the gate we see the risin family topping the charts and fire strike extreme even if it is by a small margin the 3900 X brings home the highest overall score followed by the 3700 X but the Intel part's trailing behind the best graphics core however goes to the 9700 K the 9900 K practically ties the 3900 X's graphics core and its own bloodlines main score adding to the somewhat in conclusiveness of this test in particular once again the 3900 X takes the top overall score and time spot this time followed by the 9900 K then the 3700 X with the 9700 K in dead last by quite a bit the 3900 X also leads with the graphics core while the remaining skews Duke it out and land just a few points apart our first full title tested is ashes of the singularity at 1080p and here we see Intel pull ahead by a whopping 13% an average frame rates and even more so with one-percent lows as expected the gaps close a bit at 14:40 P as we become more GPU bound but Intel retains its lead especially the 9900 K with a 7% uplift over its competitors battlefield 5 a 1080p show similar results but the difference isn't quite as extreme here in AMD seems to be holding fast Rison 3000 promised IPC improvement appears to be at work here keeping the path clear for the monstrous RT X 2080 echoing the results at 1440p the Intel chips take a modest lead approaching the highly sought after 144 FPS mark doom was the only game I did not test at 1080p due to both systems maxing out its 200 framerate cap at said resolution but at 1440p we see all four contenders neck-and-neck and average frame rates although something kind of funky is afoot with our 1% lows the 9900 K was technically the best and worth forming chip in this regard but sometimes benchmarks are just funny that way since I feel bad for taking away that 1080p slide I threw in doom at 4k to make things right this is the only 4k gaming test today though so don't get used to it again very comparable results here which is a given for this resolution with our GPU handling much of the legwork GTA 5 is a very CPU intensive game so it's great for this kind of testing the 9900 Kay takes a 9% lead over the 3900 X and average frame rates while the 9700 K enjoys a hefty 15% bump over the 3700 X GTA 5 does a great job at leveraging multiple threads but having 16 of them is probably overkill and ultimately it's Intel's wicked IPC that has this round in the back the 9900 quenette's 6% more frames than its rival at 1440p while the 9700 K continues thrashing the 3700 X this time by 10% we see a brief role reversal in the Resident Evil 2 remake with the 3900 X delivering 3% more frames on average and the 3700 X having some revenge on the core i7 by about 5% oddly enough Intel steals back the crown at 1440p as if only to let AMD taste victory for a single fleeting moment now the shadow of the Tomb Raider built-in benchmark kept reporting a minimum frame rate of zero FPS for all CPUs so this isn't the best slide by any means you might say it's rather average still we can see the 9900 K and 9700 K are 6% and 9% faster than their direct competitors respectively with high resolutions being the great FPS equalizer for CPUs we see a stalemate begin to form at 1440p at this point we can switch gears to professional workloads I tried my best to keep my workstation tests as realistic and practical as possible in order to give you an idea of how the hardware might perform in real world situations for my streaming benchmark I ran GTA 5 on the streamer system at 1440p based on the poll results you guys gave earlier the game was streamed out to twitch at 1080p 60 frames per second with a 5,000 kilobits per second bitrate as per the platform's recommendation for that resolution and framerate lucky for all four of our contenders OBS reported zero dropped frames for all and our hypothetical viewers on the receiving end enjoyed equally smooth playback of similar quality across the board as you might expect the results are more varied on the host side with the end chips delivering 13% more frames on average to the streamer Cinebench is an exciting test because it's the first time we get to see the 3900 X spread its wings this is what it was built for and what it does best with a multi-threaded score that's 42 percent higher than the 9900 K and 88 percent higher than the 9700 K the 3900 X is a computing monstrosity partly thanks to its higher thread count the risin 7 part is no slouch either the 9900 K barely beats the significantly cheaper 3700 X by just four percent and the 3700 X crushes the 9700 K by 27 percent single threaded scores are grouped much closer together with the 9900 k leading by about 1.6 percent over its direct competitor and the 9700 K which sees a 2.5 percent bump over the 3700 X hand brake is a great rendering benchmark because it leverages all threads typically at 100% utilization here the 3900 X renders a 10-minute 4k clip 11% faster than the 9900 K and 9% faster than the 9700 K which surprisingly bests its hyper-threaded Ally the 3700 X takes about 8 percent longer to finish than the rise in 9 part but renders up to 4 percent faster than both Intel CPUs it's not a huge lead but still impressive given its lower price our first encoding test in Premiere Pro Creative Cloud renders a 10 minute 4k timeline of footage that includes color correction effects and video transitions to help tax the system this time the 99 hundred K barely edges out the 3700 X and renders much faster than the 9700 K but trails behind the 3900 X which does the job nearly 7 percent faster I also ran a second rendering test and premiere just to see how things hold up with gameplay footage overlaid with the shrunken piece of video where a streamer might be displayed twitch streamers often cut together highlight reels of their streams for their YouTube channels so this seemed like a handy test to include the 10 minute clip was rendered at 1080p 60 frames per second which is pretty standard for this type of content here we see the same ranking play out as the last slide although here the 3900 X is just 2% faster than the 9900 K while being 11.6 percent faster than the 9700 K it's also about 7% faster than the 3700 X which is just 5.3 percent slower than the 99 kay when it comes to rendering the 3900 X is the definitive breadwinner whereas the 9700 K seems to be the weakest link of the bunch the 9900 K and 3700 X seem to trade blows in this category which is an accomplishment for the significantly cheaper risin seven part now I made this next multicam test with serious editors in mind the objective is to playback three 4k clips simultaneously at various playback speeds and record the number of dropped frames after one to three minutes depending on the speed I worked on dozens of multicam projects in my day and there's nothing worse than trying to scrub through several clips at once only to have them chug into a choppy mess at 1x real-time speed our 9700 K is the only skew that drops frames 163 in fact which causes the playback to stutter consistently at 2x all CPUs drop frames like they're hot but the 9700 K does so poorly the playback is too fragmented to edit comfortably while the 3900 X drops the least amount of frames at 2x and higher the 3700 X and 9900 K are so close behind that perceptible playback smoothness between these three cpus is indistinguishable even a NEX playback looks beautiful on each of these high-end processors except the 9700 K it's worth pointing out that the 9900 K and the 3700 X are rubbing up against each other again and should probably get a room at this point now in my testing today I did not find the task demanding enough to show the full benefits of X 570s PCIe gen 4 standard but it is something editors should factor into their buying decision and do more research on if they plan on needing superfast nvme storage for things like a que editing and other extreme workflows for the average prosumer making YouTube videos or low-budget productions existing PCIe gen3 nvme drives are still insanely fast now that we've covered all the data which CPU should you buy as usual it boils down to your budget and what kind of workloads you plan on running let's first address gamers who aren't concerned with doing any other intensive tasks besides gaming looking back at Rison 720 720 700 X gaming benchmarks the new Rison series has roughly cut the performance gap between Intel in half a significant jump over last gen that puts rising 3,000 hot on the heels of big blue having said that it's evident that Intel is still the gaming champ and still the choice for enthusiasts looking to max out their frame rates especially users with extremely high end video cards like the RT X xx atti as the higher IPC will help these GPUs reach their full potential if this applies to you and the only intensive task you're doing with your system is gaming I would strongly recommend the 9700 Kay over the 9900 K due to its significantly lower price and the fact that there's virtually no difference in gaming performance between the two like the 9900 K the 3900 X is a bad value if gaming is your only agenda because it's more expensive and performs worse in games than the 9700 K compared to the 3700 X the 9700 K is up to 15% faster possibly more in certain titles not tested here but the 3700 X is still a viable gaming only chip if you're trying to stretch your budget since it's a bit cheaper than the core i7 and it includes a cooler combine that saves you roughly 60 bucks that you can pocket or put towards a faster graphics card for example it has to be said that like all rise in 3000 SKUs the 3700 X also benefits from a scalable a m4 platform that's backward and forward compatible with existing and future rise in CPUs as long as AMD continues making good on their promises this simplifies and lessens the cost of upgrading processors down the line and is worth considering in your buying decision the a m4 platform also supports PCIe gen 4 although currently it's a feature that's less beneficial to gamers than it is to content creators and therefore should not be given as much weight for an exclusive gaming machine from a gamers perspective the 3700 X delivers a better overall value than the 9700 K with its lower price flexible platform and bonus ads on the same token the 9700 K offers the better gaming experience and will allow current and next gen top-tier GPUs to deliver more frames to the screen moving on to users who plan to game and stream with their PCs are 1080p 60fps test proves that all the CPUs provided an equally smooth stream with 0 dropped frames the deciding factor then comes down to gaming performance on the streamer side which clearly favors our Intel SKUs if you're like most streamers targeting 1080p 60fps the 9700 is technically the strongest option right now since it delivered higher frame rates than both Rison ships and it's much cheaper than the 9900 K and 3900 X that being said it technically has the worst multi-threaded performance here meaning it's probably less equipped to handle streaming for the long-haul than any of these CPUs it's difficult to say what the streaming landscape will look like one or two years from now and beyond so while the 9700 K is multi-threaded performance is adequate for most streamers today it'll likely begin showing its age in the face of higher streaming demands before the 9900 K and its competitors as mentioned the 9900 K won't improve your framerate much but it's higher thread count makes it a smarter choice for serious streamers than the 9700 K the 3900 x1 up to the 9900 K in multi-threaded performance which should give it a longer lifespan as a streaming CPU but falls behind in gaming so you'll want to choose one of these chips based on which workload you prioritize 9900 K for gaming 3900 X for streaming like the 9700 K the 3700 X is a viable budget option for streamers but for different reasons it trades in some gaming performance for higher multi-threaded performance which might not be needed now but it does make the part more future ready for streaming if you have less than four hundred dollars to spend on a streaming CPU you'll have to decide if you want higher frame rates today or better streaming tomorrow now if we had video editing and rendering to the picture for a fully fledged content creation workflow the multi-threaded performance of the 3900 X makes it the clear winner with faster render times and fewer dropped frames than the 9900 K it also has support for PCIe gen 4 should that be required and the option to easily upgrade to the 16 core Rison 939 50 X down the line however the 3900 X should last most users a very long time as it's a beast of a chip and the best damn value of any dodeca core CPU ever the 3700 X's editing prowess is comparable to the 9900 K but it's nearly $200 cheaper and can also leverage PCIe gen for making it a much better value for this use case the 9700 K should be avoided here due to with slower render times and inability to handle more intensive editing work close finally if you could care less about gaming and editing is your sole objective only the risin ship should be considered as they perform better than their direct competitors for roughly the same price or cheaper of course serious buyers should also consider high-end desktop platforms like Scylla X and thread refer to but if those are too pricey or overkill for your needs choosing between the 3700 X and 3900 X is a decision best left up to your wallet as both parts offer great price to performance so there you have it at the end of the day each of these processors fulfills different needs for different users it'd be easy if we had one chip to rule them all but we already kind of had that when Intel was on top and unchallenged by AMD for so many years before Rison came along and that wasn't fun Rison 3000 improves upon the platform's existing pillars of strength further leveling the playing field to a degree we haven't felt in a very long time for now it seems strong competition in the CPU market is here to stay but let me know what you guys think of these rising CPUs and which skew from Team red or blue you'll be dropping into your system apart from that guys feel free to toss a like before you go and feel free to consider becoming a member of the channel for five bucks a month where you'll get custom badges emojis and other pointless things that are just so fun for some reason also be sure to subscribe to the channel for more tech stuff on the way thanks again for watching have a good one and I'll see you all in the next video