Skip to main content

AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Hits 4.3 GHz On All 16 Cores With Water Cooling

AMD's 16-core 32-thread Ryzen 9 3950X may have hit a small snag on its way to market, but the enthusiast world is eagerly awaiting the arrival of a new record-setting core count for the mainstream desktop. And according to Gigabyte, overclockers may have even more reason to be excited than "just" a generous helping of cores and threads. 

Gigabyte has released a Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking guide where the motherboard manufacturer was able to push its sample to an impressive 4.3 GHz on all 16 cores while using a beefy liquid cooling solution, and at a mere ~1.4V. 

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

*Ryzen 9 3950X benchmarks from Gigabyte, other results from Tom's Hardware labs

Gigabyte paired its Ryzen 9 3950X with the brand's own X570 Aorus Master motherboard, Aorus 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-3200 memory kit and EKWB's EK-KIT P360 liquid cooling kit. The motherboard manufacturer used Cinebench R15 to evaluate the 16-core chip's stock and overclocked performance, which allows us to compare those results to ours.

At stock, the Ryzen 9 3950X scored 3,932 points in Cinebench R15, which is 92.4% faster than a stock Core i9-9900K and 81% faster than the Core i9-9900K overclocked to 5 GHz on all cores (which would be similar to a stock Core i9-9900KS). For now, the Core i9 series from Intel stands as its most powerful competing chip on a mainstream platform, and that isn't likely to change soon.

At stock settings, AMD's upcoming flagship also delivers up to 25.5% more performance than the existing Ryzen 9 3900X. As you can see above, the results are even more impressive once Gigabyte pushed the chip to 4.3 GHz.

The fact that the Ryzen 9 3950X could hit 4.3 GHz on all its cores is a great achievement, especially when Ryzen 3000-series processors are famous for not having much manual overclocking headroom. For comparison, our Ryzen 9 3900X sample, which has four fewer cores, maxes out at 4.1 GHz. That implies that AMD is setting aside the absolute best 7nm dies for its 16-core, 32-thread chip, especially given that Gigabyte hit a Prime95-stable (one hour run) 4.3 GHz with only 1.4 vCore. Gigabyte's Ryzen 9 3950X sample could even hit a devastating 4.4 GHz, but the company insinuated that it was only stable enough to pass a Cinebench R15 run.

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

There are also a few other interesting takeways from Gigabyte's Ryzen 9 3950X overclocking guide. For starters, Gigabyte states that 1.45V is the maximum safe voltage. The value might be too high for everyone's taste, and keeping it around 1.4V sounds more reasonable. In terms of thermals, Gigabyte noted that the Ryzen 9 3950X's operating temperatures are right in the same ballpark as last year's Ryzen 7 2700X.

That's pretty remarkable, so we'll say it again: According to Gigabyte, the 16-core Ryzen 9 3950X is as easy to cool as an 8-core part.

SEP (USD)Cores / ThreadsTDP (Watts)Base Frequency (GHz)Boost Frequency (GHz)Total Cache (MB)PCIe 4.0 Lanes (Processor / Chipset)Launch Date
Ryzen 9 3950X$74916 / 32105W3.54.77224 / 16September
Ryzen 9 3900X$49912 / 24105W3.84.67024 / 16July 7, 2019
Ryzen 7 3800X$3998 / 16105W3.94.53624 / 16July 7, 2019
Ryzen 7 3700X$3298 / 1665W3.64.43624 / 16July 7, 2019
Ryzen 5 3600X$2496 / 1295W3.84.43524 / 16July 7, 2019
Ryzen 5 3600$1996 / 1265W3.64.23524 / 16July 7, 2019

The $749 Ryzen 9 3950X, which originally was scheduled to launch last month, has been pushed to November. Let's keep our fingers crossed that AMD doesn't have any more setbacks. We still have some time to wait for the 3950X, but if you want to see AMD's unreleased Ryzen 9 3900 take a few world records, head over to our exclusive testing here

  • King_V
    In terms of thermals, Gigabyte noted that the Ryzen 9 3950X's operating temperatures are right in the same ballpark as last year's Ryzen 7 2700X.

    That's pretty remarkable, so we'll say it again: According to Gigabyte, the 16-core Ryzen 9 3950X is as easy to cool as an 8-core part.

    That's the part that made me raise my eyebrows. Pretty impressive.
    Reply
  • joeblowsmynose
    Dang ... 200mghz all core OC over what the 3900 can achieve ... I wish AMD had more "top quality" chiplets though and spread them a little better amongst the lower core count parts. I mean as you add cores, you don't really need to also add mhz, which I find odd, but I do understand how since Intel's propaganda (and Nvidia's) has pushed the idea of how important it is to own the "flagship" product to impress the masses - AMD is trying to beat them at their own games. I get that. But I just wish we had 4.7 single core boost on the 8 cores as well, not just the 3950x.

    Poor Intel HEDT ... I hope them cutting prices by 54% was enough ... ;)
    Reply
  • Gurg
    All you need is $750 for the CPU and $400-450++++ for a "beefy P360 cooler kit." Guess that is cheaper and more practical than using liquid nitrogen like TH did in a recent article trying to get AMD cpus to stated boost. Maybe this also explains why AMD will offer the 3950x without the $43 Wraith Prism cooler.

    https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ryzen-3000-liquid-nitrogen-boost-clock,6359.html
    https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-3950x-without-stock-cooler,40500.html
    Reply
  • kinggremlin
    joeblowsmynose said:
    Poor Intel HEDT ... I hope them cutting prices by 54% was enough ... ;)

    Based on Skylake X overclocking, with the same cooler used in these tests, we should expect Cascade Lake X to OC on all cores in the 4.8-5Ghz range up to at least the 14 core. With those clock speeds, even the 10 core 10900x will be faster for pretty much any desktop user than the 3950x at 4.3 Ghz. There is very, very little software or situations that home users, even enthusiasts, encounter that would benefit more going from 8 cores to 16 cores than from higher per core performance. If you want to win multithreaded benchmark competitions like Cinebench, sure go for the 3950x. If you want to actually have a faster computer for every day use, a higher clock lower core count is the way to go.
    Reply
  • nirmal019
    When you were planning to buy Aorus Liquid cooler and realize Gigabyte did not use their own liquid cooler :unsure:
    Reply
  • mdd1963
    temps 'similar to those of the 2700X' is really not quite the same thing as saying 'as easy to cool as the 2700X'...(unless testing them with the same cooling solution)
    Reply
  • escksu
    Its not really easy to cool if you are overclocking. 4.3GHz @ 1.4V....... the power consumption will be well over 200W when all 16 cores are loaded. Running IBT or AVX could be 300W or more.
    Reply
  • dcapo25
    admin said:
    Gigabyte manages to push a Ryzen 9 3950X to 4.3 GHz on all its cores using AIO liquid cooling...at a mere 1.4 vCore.

    AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Hits 4.3 GHz On All 16 Cores With AIO Cooler : Read more
    Reply
  • dcapo25
    What type of package utilized on the Ryzen 9 3950X? Curious to know the heatspreader lid material? thanks -

    Does AMD use AMKOR?
    Reply
  • vMax
    Is the EK-P360 water cooling kit really an AIO? Seems like a starter custom water cooling kit and not what I would call an AIO especially at near $400!!! ...though I could be wrong...
    Reply