In a shock email late on Friday, AMD has released a statement to clarify the situation it is in with the manufacturing of its latest Ryzen processors. And, depending on what kind of a processor you're after, it's both a good and bad announcement.

The downside? AMD is delaying its release of the 16 core Ryzen 9 3950X. Their flagship consumer desktop CPU, which will feature a full 16 CPU cores, was originally slated for September; however it is now delayed until November. According to the company, the delay is needed due to the high demand for these parts and that time is needed to ensure that sufficient stock is available

AMD Ryzen 3000 7 & 9 Series CPUs
AnandTech Cores
TDP Launch Date Price
Ryzen 9 3950X 16C 32T 3.5 4.7 8 MB 64 MB 16+4+4 105W Nov. 2019 $749
Ryzen 9 3900X 12C 24T 3.8 4.6 6 MB 64 MB 16+4+4 105W July 2019 $499
Ryzen 7 3800X 8C 16T 3.9 4.5 4 MB 32 MB 16+4+4 105W July 2019 $399
Ryzen 7 3700X 8C 16T 3.6 4.4 4 MB 32 MB 16+4+4 65W July 2019 $329

The upside? The next generation of Threadripper processors are coming, and they will enter the market in November as well. These parts will start at 24 cores, so anyone needing single-socket CPUs with more than 12 cores will find themselves with an abundance of options to choose from.

The statement from AMD says:

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. 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.

As far as we understand, this is nothing to do with recent reports of TSMC requiring 6 months for new 7nm orders: the silicon for these processors would have been ordered months ago, with the only real factor being binning and meeting demand. It will be interesting to see how the intersection of the 16 core with next gen Ryzen will play out. 

Related Articles:

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Haawser - Monday, September 23, 2019 - link

    My bad, I meant 7nm Threadripper, obviously.
  • Valantar - Tuesday, September 24, 2019 - link

    I obviously meant no upgrade path without jumping to ridiculous core counts - TR4 compatibility for the upcoming Threadripper series is all but a given. 12-16 cores can be utilized for relatively common workstation tasks. 24 and above is another thing entirely. Personally I would hope for a high-boosting 16-core as the low end part of the next generation of TR - it would be a very sensible while still meaningful upgrade for any 1st-gen Threadripper system. But as I said, if the 24-core boosts as high as the Ryzen 7s and 9s, and uses the same boost mechanism (i.e. dynamically clocks higher when fewer cores are active) that could be a decent compromise.
  • TEAMSWITCHER - Sunday, September 22, 2019 - link

    I'll pass on both of them... Threadripper has never been a good platform for gaming, and the Ryzen 3950X is clearly having issues reaching it's promised boost clock... that's probably why it was delayed. Not to mention, the 3900X was introduced in July and it STILL isn't available at MSRP right now... It's a horrifically poor value.

    9900K still is the gaming king and with hyper threading has well deserved it's i9 designation - just look at the Bench results compared to the 7900X. You can get the 9900k at for only $450 and then get another $30 off the motherboard... and most important ... it's ACTUALLY in stock!!

  • Korguz - Sunday, September 22, 2019 - link

    " Threadripper has never been a good platform for gaming " it never was meant to be a gaming platform.
    " Ryzen 3950X is clearly having issues reaching it's promised boost clock " and where did you see this ? post a source.
    " STILL isn't available at MSRP right now. " which could be due to demand, there has been other products that arent at msrp at release, and for a few months after, whats your point ?
    " It's a horrifically poor value. " where i am, its the same price as the 9900k how is that not a good value ? more cores, faster in multi threaded, and the few FPS you would get over the 9900k, most people, wont even notice, AND uses quite a bit LESS power
    " for only $450 " are you forgetting that you will NEED to get a cooler for this cpu ? and dont think that 50 buck cooler is going to cut it, you will need to get a cooler that is at least $70 or MORE to keep this cpu cool enough in order to get the performance you are raving about. the local comp stores here, usually have it in stock, so maybe stores there just cant get them in.
  • catavalon21 - Sunday, September 22, 2019 - link

    Not sure why you would want to compare the 3900x against the 9900k. The mere 3700x is pretty evenly matched against the 9900k, and is available for $349 with an appropriate cooler.
  • Targon - Tuesday, September 24, 2019 - link

    Price to price comparison. The 3900X is a $499 CPU(I don't count war profiteers increasing the prices to $750 for a $500 CPU). The i9-9900k is a $480 CPU that doesn't come with a cooler, so if anything, the 3900X is actually less expensive.

    Multi-threaded edge goes to AMD with the 3900X, single threaded goes to Intel. Overall performance lead goes to the 3900X due to people doing more than a single thing with their computers.
  • Trikkiedikkie - Thursday, September 26, 2019 - link

    And single threaded is mostly games. Serious users want multi threaded
  • Korguz - Thursday, September 26, 2019 - link

    not to mention, the single thread performance difference in games, most wont even be able to tell the difference. but the 9900x " should " be compared to its counterpart, the 3800x, which is also an 8 core, 16 thread cpu.
  • Spunjji - Monday, September 23, 2019 - link

    Obvious disinformation shill comment is obvious.
  • NICOXIS - Tuesday, September 24, 2019 - link

    Will TR have a 64 core version?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now