AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT manages credible results on Geekbench placing it in the company of the Ryzen 9 3900X and Intel Core i9-10900K but its predecessor offers better value

[Redaktion]

A Matisse Refresh AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT desktop processor has been spotted on Geekbench 5.1 along with a Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master motherboard. The 12-core chip recorded results that put it in the same ballpark as the Ryzen 9 3900X and Intel Core i9-10900K, but it is likely better scores can be squeezed out of it yet.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Ryzen-9-3900XT-manages-credible-results-on-Geekbench-placing-it-in-the-company-of-the-Ryzen-9-3900X-and-Intel-Core-i9-10900K-but-its-predecessor-offers-better-value.477271.0.html

[ThatOneGuy]

I wonder why the 3900x is labelled as having a geekbench score of 10400ish while on geekbench browser its more around 12k. Seems like this article deflates the numbers for amd while boosting it for intel too. How professional.

[DougJudy]

The XT seem to be a bal deal overall, almost the same performance as the original X variant, more expensive and no cooler in the box (for a 3900 you should be buying one anyway, but the prism was capable enough to use in a pinch and a good value to have in the box)

[Francesco vigotti]

amd benchmark isn't correct
ryzen average is
1277 Single-Core Score
12040 Multi-Core Score ( AND NOT : 10,498 points )
browser.geekbench.com/processors/2587

while the i9...
1417 Single-Core Score
10770 Multi-Core Score ( AND NOT : 11,414 points )
browser.geekbench.com/processors/intel-core-i9-10900k

nice try intel marketing team ;)

[James C Nesb]

10498 for a 3900x? Have you deliberately searched for the lowest score, I'm no fan boy, but 12-13k seems to be the norm. Not that Geekbench means anything mind, but still it's quite misleading.

[Anon887]

If you believe geekbench (you shouldn't) the fastest single core I world is a ARM phone SoC...

[Jimbo Jones]

Er ... you can't really base anything around a geekbench score ... at all.

It produces very inconsistent results, and will very often score a 9700k a high multi threaded score than a 9900k. Steve Burke from GN has noted this several times. We all know the 9900k has 8 extra threads and higher clocks all around ... so why does it get a lower score in multi in geekbench?

The author and commenters would be wise to wait for official reviews before drawing their conclusions. At the end of the day, don't expect much out of a 100mhz boost to single core clocks. It is what it is, its not unicorn poo.

[mister2forme]

Something's up with the AMD benchmarks....

I got significantly higher (1312/13092) on my 3900X (granted its a late model, but still)

browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/2673923

[Vince]

I just downloaded geekbench 5 ran the benchmark and got single core 1330 and multi core 12583. My computer which has a 3900x has been on for about 5 days now amd the only thing i did was close chrome so not the most optimal conditions and its stock setting so those results they have is not true.

[D3X]

My 3900X clocks at 4.56Ghz max boost.  This article is shenanigans as there's no way a 3900XT would clock this low equalling the lower sibling, should be 4.68 at least max boost which would likely improve the single clock bench.  The multi-core bench on the 3900X is also way off!