![[eBay Plus] AMD Ryzen 9 3950X $1072.51 Delivered @ Ninja Buy eBay](https://files.ozbargain.com.au/n/23/544923.jpg?h=dc2ae246)
Marketplace
PMON20
I think this is the lowest price till now for this CPU.
Pretty good deal.
Monster of a CPU.
[eBay Plus] AMD Ryzen 9 3950X $1072.51 Delivered @ Ninja Buy eBay
140
Covid19 on 15/06/2020 - 13:01 ebay.com.au (354 clicks)
Last edited 15/06/2020 - 13:02 by 1 other user
Last edited 15/06/2020 - 13:02 by 1 other user
Related Stores
closed Comments
That is really encouraging to see prices are coming down.
3900x seems to be a sweet-spot for performance+price.
Really want 3950x though, as I feel like i will need it down the line(virtualization, lab etc)
are they reputable sellers? did you buy from them previously?
3700X was $444.24 last week, on Amazon AU so that's ~$56 per core.
Love your idea on the $ per core concept that's a pretty neat way to present it I definitely haven't looked at it that way much before mostly I have tried to compare it to $ per benchmark or $ per fps one time even.
I guess maybe some time ago I tried doing $ per 3d mark score but it is hard to pick a single benchmark to show the whole big pixie for obvious reasons as every piece of data shows something new and different.
$ per core is genius.
Thanks for the insight ideasman.
Unfortunately performance for general users hardly scales with number of cores.
true that - but isn't single thread performance across these 4 chips pretty even?
@jztilly: Looking at gaming benchmarks which are all single core if not a 99% majority at this present moment I would say between a r5 3600 and r9 3950x the single thread performance is within 5% definitely maybe even lower like 3% or 1-2%.
My question has always been can extra cores and threads be used effectively and efficiently if you add extra operations, programs, threads, processes and etc.
Because if the extra cores and threads scale perfectly or exactly after the first one or single core ones are used then for a heavy multi tasking workload the high end CPU's with extra cores and threads might be worth it if you want to say do multiple things at the same time WHILE gaming and all that.
That is the true next question and next step imho.
Imagine playing multiple games maybe at a reduced resolution and settings on a single pc with no delay or reduced response times or overall gaming quality.. It would be just like changing channels on a TV without the lag and delay issues.
The future is here the future is now.
It is definitely not for general users not even general gaming users.
This is for enthusiast level users and enthusiast level gaming users and just overall heavy heavy multi-taskers and extreme users.
@AlienC: Yep only get full use out of it for the most CPU heavy tasks like HEVC encoding or rendering. Otherwise there's no point in getting it. Gaming is low on the list for 39xx models. Not much gain for the price difference.
Can get the 3900x for $627.20 from the same seller
~$52 per core
The Ryzen 9 3900X is now sold out.
For a more accurate assessment, I'd use $/benchmark (single or multi-threaded, depending on requirements). $/core does not take into performance characteristics of varying core counts under heavy load.
The benchmarks below are average CPU Mark scores from CPU Benchmark.net.
AMD Ryzen 5 3600 ( 65W TDP, 6c/12t, 3.6Ghz - 4.2Ghz, 17,800 CPU Mark or 2,967 per core) @ $267 => ( $15 per kCPU Mark, ~$44 per core)
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X ( 65W TDP, 8c/16t, 3.6GHz - 4.4Ghz, 22,719 CPU Mark or 2,840 per core) @ $499 => (~$22 per kCPU Mark, ~$62 per core)
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X (105W TDP, 12c/24t, 3.8Ghz - 4.6Ghz, 32,809 CPU Mark or 2,734 per core) @ $627 => (~$19 per kCPU Mark, ~$52 per core)
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X (105W TDP, 16c/32t, 3.5Ghz - 4.7Ghz, 39,282 CPU Mark or 2,455 per core) @ $1,072 => (~$27 per kCPU Mark, ~$67 per core)Unless you want cheap, the R9 3900X is still the sweet-spot for value, and the R9 3950X needs to come down to ~$800 to begin competing.
Note, after applying the discount code, they are selling the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X for $627.20.
Has anyone been able to confirm if the extra cores and threads can be used while some other cores are preoccupied in another program or operation such as most mainstream gaming that cannot use the full potential of all these threads and cores yet as far as we know.
So you could potentially play and stream and record a game and say do some video encoding or compiling at a lower capacity and hypothetically have no performance impact on the game.
The other programs and actions would of course have to do their work at a lower speed or capacity to allow the primary functions to have priority and maintain acceptable performance.
Is this possible or happening already a we know it because I can't find any information to confirm or deny it.
This is exactly what it's meant for. If your gaming while encoding then this is a huge difference (compared to Intel chips). Not too many people encode in HEVC so it's not stated much but as soon as you start doing other CPU tasks while gaming this leaps ahead. Obviously having a beefy GPU helps to keep the framerate high aswell. As soon as you do multitasking while gaming this beats the Intel flagship CPUs. Because encoding in HEVC uses near 100% CPU usage if available, it will slow other things down. But it will share the cores out so there is minimal drop. Having high timing and speed RAM helps also with encoding so get all those right and you'll see really good performance. So gameplay won't suffer as much
@Whisper Quiet: Do you have any good info on streaming or recording? That's what I will be mainly doing I will only be re encoding if I need to for smaller upload sizes for like discord which has an 8mb upload limit for non Nitro users.
@AlienC: Sorry but only encoding. Which is probably the heaviest use of the CPU. Streaming or recording I would say wouldn't affect gameplay too much compared to encoding. What you can do is limit the framerate to a capped number, otherwise the CPU will draw more power out trying to find the best possible fps constantly.
@Whisper Quiet: All good just thought to ask.
That is a good idea actually.
I could cap my settings and frames do the other programs and stuff is more responsive great idea.
I'm really curious to see how much I can get away with in terms of background or sideground performance before it starts running out of cpu and gpu power or maxes it.
I wonder why not many people have tried to measure or benchmark this like for example gaming while seeing how much other stuff they can multitask before the games start going below a certain number which for me would be 60 fps 4K ultra quality.
120hz will take some time to come down in the 40+ inch monitor and tv space.
Nvidia has some big format displays but they still cost like double the pc triple in some cases.
Ninja buy reputable ?
maybe they just forgot JACK!!
…but are they reputable sellers?
at least Ebay is reputable. You can always claim your money back if you didn't receive the product. It's just a problem of time and effort, depending on how would you like to value your time and this ~$100 saving.
Yes, it's the eBay store for PC Byte who have been around for a long time.
thanks
Any current in stock deals for this CPU?
the price per core definitely dropping on this bad boy (going off recent ozbargain prices)
3600 / 6 core / $267 / ~$44 per core
3700x / 8 core / $499 / ~$62 per core
3900x / 12 core / $658 / ~$54 per core
3950x / 16 core / $1072 / ~$67 per core