16-Core AMD Ryzen 9 3950X CPU launch delayed until November 2019

Written by Jon Sutton on Mon, Sep 23, 2019 11:17 AM

AMD announced over the weekend that the launch of its flagship AMD Ryzen 9 3950X 16-Core processor has been delayed. Originally expected to launch at the end of this month, the Ryzen 3950X will now be shipping in volume at some point in November.

The top-end Ryzen 9 part will be joined in November by the arrival of the next-generation of Threadripper processors. These are likely to be well outside of what you’ll need for gaming purposes but these high-end desktop parts should appeal to workstation users.

“We are focusing on meeting the strong demand for our 3rd generation AMD Ryzen processors in the market and now plan to launch both the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X and initial members of the 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen Threadripper processor family in volume this November,” writes AMD. 

“We are confident that when enthusiasts get their hands on the world’s first 16-core mainstream desktop processor and our next-generation of high-end desktop processors, the wait will be well worth it.”

  Ryzen 5 3600 Ryzen 5 3600X Ryzen 7 3700X Ryzen 7 3800X Ryzen 9 3900X Ryzen 9 3950X
Cores/Threads 6/12 6/12 8/16 8/16 12/24 16/32
Base Clock 3.6 GHz 3.8 GHz 3.6 GHz 3.9 GHz 3.8 GHz 3.5 GHz
Boost Clock 4.2 GHz 4.4 GHz 4.4 GHz 4.5 GHz 4.6 GHz 4.7 GHz
Cache 35MB 35MB 36MB 36MB 70MB 72MB
TDP 65W 95W 65W 105W 105W 105W
Price $199 $249 $329 $399 $499 $749
Release Date July 7 July 7 July 7 July 7 July 7 November

I do hear that supplies of the Ryzen 3rd Gen CPUs are already pretty limited although this is perhaps on a country by country basis. Right now, here in the UK, I can have my pick of just about any Ryzen 3000 processor with a few discounts to boot. The one exception is the current top-end part, the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X, which is currently sold out.

Factor in TSMC’s recent announcement that 7nm chips now face a 6-month lead time for fabrication and AMD could find itself in a situation where it’s got the must-have products and yet can’t physically get them manufactured fast enough to take advantage of this demand. It’s one of those good problems to have but still far from ideal.

Login or Register to join the debate

Rep
55
Offline
14:18 Sep-23-2019

This CPU will be the Cookie Monster of CPUs and all other Intel offerings are the cookies :)

0
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
11:58 Sep-23-2019

Yay... 16 cores... oh wait... 16 cores... Hey AMD how about we get 50% bigger core, 8 core chips? Think of the consumer for once, you don't have to have insane profits, sacrafice a little of them and give us 50% bigger and thus faster cores, don't keep your engineers bored... migh even justify the price of 3rd gen Ryzen CPUs... -_-

8
Rep
97
Offline
admin approved badge
05:53 Sep-24-2019

Agreed.


And as for Intel, oof they need serious help with themselves.

0
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
06:55 Sep-24-2019

Intel did what amd did in the mid 2000s they thought the other would'nt be able to compete so they sat on the same architecture for a decade with incremental improvements, minimizing costs and now they are screwed in comparison.

0
Rep
97
Offline
admin approved badge
06:01 Sep-25-2019

And kept delaying 10nm because problems

0
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
10:20 Sep-25-2019

Doesn't matter, 14nm+++ is very good.

0
Rep
97
Offline
admin approved badge
11:40 Sep-25-2019

No, it's not. Not good enough.

0
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
11:58 Sep-25-2019

Obviously it is... why is it not good enough? The only thing that is not good enough is Intel's supply... they are still facing a shortage and that's not because it's 14nm, but because intel were expecting to be producing 10nm by 2016...

0
Rep
97
Offline
admin approved badge
23:17 Sep-25-2019

2015 actually


if 14nm+++ is good enough, then they should be able to increase IPC, or take measures to ensure that the CPUs will be completely secure. And make sure the TDP doesn't go so high.


They measure TDP by the base clock.

0
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
06:00 Sep-26-2019

An architecture design takes about 4 years to develop and I'm talking about a new architecture design, not the incremental improvements they've done in the past decade. And chances are they started in 2017. Otherwise they can fully remove the bottleneck in their current architecture at the cost of clock speeds and bigger die size, which without a shortage would be fine and would net about 20% higher ipc at slightly lower clock speeds.


And there is nothing wrong with high TDP, the higher the better you can cool the cpu in general.

1
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
06:08 Sep-26-2019

On top of that the i9 9900k has a die size of 176mm^2. An 8 core Zen2 chiplet has a die size of 80mm^2 at 7nm and 3.9Billion transistors, the I/O is at 12nm at 125mm^2 die size and 2.1 Billion transistors, so if we are to scale it to 7nm it would be 80mm^2, which would make the I/O + 8 core chiplet a total of 160mm^2. This means that the i9 9900k is only 10% less dense than a full 8 core chiplet + I/O Zen2 chip.

1
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
06:09 Sep-26-2019

The only reason you and most people are hating on 14nm+++ is because it still says "14" in the front the NM and the "+++" make it seem like it's the same, but slightly better... but if TSMC was in charge of naming Intel's process nodes 14nm+ would be 12nm, 14nm++ would be 10nm and 14nm+++ would be 7-8nm.


Just like they did with 20nm. 20nm is 20nm, 16nm is 20nm+ and 12nm is 20nm++ if intel were to name TSMC's process nodes and people fell for it. Technically from 14nm to 14nm+ alone there is more improvement than from 20nm to 12nm(20nm++).

1
Rep
97
Offline
admin approved badge
11:51 Sep-23-2019

Damn, that sucks.

0
Rep
191
Offline
junior admin badge
11:22 Sep-23-2019

It is what it is.
Watched Gamers Nexus YT vid on the topic just yesterday.
The situation will probably remain unchanged for the next few months.

0

Can They Run... |

| 60FPS, Ultra, 1440p
Core i9-7940X 14-Core 3.1GHz GeForce RTX 3080 Asus TUF Gaming OC 10GB 64GB
Core i9-12900K 16-Core 3.7GHz GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 16GB
Ryzen 5 4600H 6-Core 3.0GHz GeForce GTX 1650 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 60FPS, Medium, 1080p
Core i5-11400H 6-Core 2.20GHz GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile 16GB
100% Yes [2 votes]