The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X has officially been around for a few months now. As it stands, the CPU is still in high demand and AMD is working in overtime just to meet said demand. This review comes a little late, but since that time, I managed to crunch and obtain the benchmark number of the CPU.
So, without further ado, here is my update on the performance of the Ryzen 9 3900X.
As before, the components I used to conduct my testing on the Ryzen 9 3900X remains largely unchanged, save for the CPU cooler. Prior to this, I was using the Mugen 5 Rev.5 Scythe Air Cooler with dual high-performance fans. Unfortunately, with the air cooler, I was unable to break past the 4.1GHz mark.
Because of this limitation, I decided to swap out the Mugen 5 cooler with an AiO cooler from Corsair. Specifically, the H100i RGB Platinum Hydro Series. Upon swapping them out, the results were immediate; with an AiO cooler, the testbed was no longer shutting down due to the immense heat of the CPU, and I was able to push the 3900X well beyond 4.1GHz.
Just as I have done with my first look, I am pitting the 3900X against Intel’s Core i9-9900K. In addition to the CPU, however, I am also including the performance numbers of AMD’s other high-end desktop CPU, the Ryzen 7 3700X.
As I said, swapping out the CPU cooler enabled me to push the Ryzen 9 3900X harder and faster, but failed to reach the advertised maximum boost clock of 4.6GHz. With the H100i, I topped out at 4.4GHz with a 1200MHz memory clock and voltage set at 1.5V.
Having said that, my situation isn’t an isolated incident either. As some of you know, earlier reports from various tech sites have pointed out a flaw in 3rd generation Ryzen CPUs not reaching their maximum boost clocks. More to the point, that maximum clockspeed varies from processor to processor.
But I digress. The 3900X in my hands is by no means a slouch, and as you can see, it performs just as one expects of a high-end desktop processor should. By comparison, the CPU outperforms Intel’s own top-of-the-line consumer desktop Core i9-9900K CPU, but to be fair, it does have four extra cores.
However, it should be pointed out that the 3700X, which has the same number of cores and threads as its Intel counterpart, runs rings around the latter, and with far less effort.
On another note, let’s talk about the performance temperatures of the 3900X. In my first look, I mentioned that the 3900X was hitting temperatures as high as 109 degrees Celcius before ultimately shutting down the entire system. Even after swapping out the fans on the original air cooler, the most stable point I reached was 90 degrees Celcius.
That all changed once I installed the Corsair H100i Platinum Hydro Series AiO cooler. Instantly, there is a difference in the way the 3900X handles itself; the maximum temperature gradually peaked at 101 degrees Celcius after overclocking, but this time, the system wasn’t automatically shutting itself down due to the heat.
With the 3700X though, the difference of the workload temperatures in its factory default and overclocked states are, surprisingly, not as dramatic as the 3900X. By comparison, the temperature difference between the 3700X’s was still in the single digits zone.
At this point, it goes without saying that the Ryzen 9 3900X is doing what AMD has intended for it to be since its launch. At 12-cores, 24-threads, and with a retail SRP of RM2199, this high-end, consumer desktop CPU is clearly sticking it to Intel’s high-end Core i9-9900K.
The only fault I can find with the 3900X is its boost clockspeeds. I never managed to attain that advertised 4.6GHz, no matter how hard I pushed the CPU. But to be honest, it doesn’t really matter at this point; hitting 4.4GHz on the die and with an AiO cooler is more than plenty for me.
To that end, I’m not abashed to say that the Ryzen 9 3900X is by far one of the best AMD CPUs I’ve ever tested. That is, of course, until the impending arrival of the 16-cores-32-threads beast that is the Ryzen 9 3950X.