OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£260PassMark multi-core score:32498N. of physical cores:12CPU boost clock speed:4.6 GHzCPU socket:AM4TDP (Thermal design power):105 W

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 53 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
7.9/10

Overall score

Score
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 92% of models
Score components

40%

7.3

Technical score

25%

8.9

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

8.7

Sentiment score

★Better than 92% of processors
8.3

Value for money

Value for money
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 95% of models
Score components

70%

7.9

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

★Better than 95%
7.3

Technical score

Technical score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 75% of models
Score components

60%

7.7

Performance

18%

6.6

Architecture

10%

7.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 75%
8.9

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 99% of models

80%

8.6

Average grade

20%

9.9

Popularity

Grades by review (53)
30 reviews: 10 with a printed score, 20 estimated from the review. 23 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
★Better than 99%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • amd-ryzen-9-3900x
  • amd-ryzen-9-3900x
  • amd-ryzen-9-3900x
  • amd-ryzen-9-3900x
  • amd-ryzen-9-3900x
  • amd-ryzen-9-3900x
amd-ryzen-9-3900x
amd-ryzen-9-3900x
amd-ryzen-9-3900x
amd-ryzen-9-3900x
amd-ryzen-9-3900x
amd-ryzen-9-3900x
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X

Based on 10 · 29

Reviewers praise its multi-core muscle and value for content creation, but single-core speed lags and opinions on gaming are split.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X

Based on 186 owners sharing their experience in online comments

67%positive11%mixed22%negative

Owners love its many-core speed and value, though high temperatures, cooler noise, and inconsistent boost disappoint some.

What owners dislike

  • High temperatures at idle and under load14
  • Owners who pulled the stock cooler off found the CPU stuck to the thermal paste and yanked out of the socket, bending pins in the process.8
  • In games, owners say it trails the Intel i9-9900K at 1440p and 4K, and some see only small FPS gains over older chips, with micro-stutters.7
  • The bundled Wraith cooler runs the 3900X hot under sustained load, and owners say it performs noticeably worse than an aftermarket cooler.6
  • Owners say the 4.6 GHz boost only lasts a second or two on one core, and all-core overclocks are limited to around 4.3 GHz at high voltage.6
  • The stock Wraith Prism cooler and many AIO pumps get loud under heavy load, and owners switch to a quieter cooler to reduce the noise.5
  • Some owners report that a BIOS update or microcode change lowered boost clocks or caused instability, and a few had to wait for a fixed BIOS.4
  • Can bottleneck powerful graphics cards3
  • Owners report frame-rate dips and micro-stutters in some games, such as racing sims, which feel much worse than the average FPS suggests.3
  • The default Windows power plan can keep idle clocks high or handle core scheduling poorly, so owners install third-party power tools for better results.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 9 3900X

Technical score
Technical score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 75% of models
Score components:

60%

7.7

Performance

18%

6.6

Architecture

10%

7.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

7.3
Reviews score
8.9
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 95% of models
Score components:

70%

7.9

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

8.3
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
AM4
This processor uses the AM4 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 75.1% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Chipset
X570, B550, A520, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320
This processor supports X570, B550, A520, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 74.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 85.3% of processors and equal to that of 6% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
N. of physical cores
12
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 12 CPU cores, which is more than 79.9% of processors and equal to 5.7% of processors.
CPU threads
24
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 24 CPU threads, which is more than 89.7% of processors and equal to 4.4% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.6 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.6 GHz which is higher than that of 59.9% of processors and equal to that of 4.7% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
12x 3.8 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 12x3.8 GHz which is higher than that of 93.8% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
32,498
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 32,498 in PassMark, which is higher than 88.2% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
7 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 7 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 70.4% of processors and equal to that of 10.5% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 7 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 7 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 55.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L3 cache
64 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 64 MB which is larger than that of 94.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.8% of processors.
L2 cache
6 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 6 MB which is larger than that of 65.6% of processors and equal to that of 3.9% of processors.
L1 cache
768 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 768 KB which is larger than that of 77.6% of processors and equal to that of 3.3% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
3,200 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 3,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 49.8% of processors and equal to 8.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-3200 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-3200 MHz, which is higher than that of 46.1% of processors and equal to 9.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
105 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 105 W which is higher than that of 89.7% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
105 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 105 W which is higher than that of 89.9% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.83x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (32,498 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    32,498 vs 11,469
  • 8 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (12 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    12 vs 4
  • 2.11x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (10,983 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    10,983 vs 5,209
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 2.53x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (7,100 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    7,100 vs 2,804.5
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 7.11x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (64 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    64 MB vs 9 MB
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (12x3.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    12x3.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 32.8% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.9/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 99% of models

    80%

    8.6

    Average grade

    20%

    9.9

    Popularity

    Grades by review (53)
    30 reviews: 10 with a printed score, 20 estimated from the review. 23 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.9 vs 6.7
  • 20.8% higher sentiment score
    8.7 vs 7.2
  • 13.6% better value for money
    AMD Ryzen 9 3900X has better value for money than the average processor (8.28 vs 7.3).
    8.28 vs 7.29
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (AM4 vs FP5).
    AM4 vs FP5
  • Broader instruction support
    This processor supports a broader instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 2.83x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (32,498 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    32,498 vs 11,469
  • 8 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (12 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    12 vs 4
  • 2.11x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (10,983 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    10,983 vs 5,209
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 2.53x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (7,100 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    7,100 vs 2,804.5
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (12x3.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    12x3.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 4.5% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 11% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,704 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,704 vs 1,535
  • 10 higher clock multiplier
    This processor has a higher clock multiplier than the average processor (38 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    38 vs 28
  • 5.7% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,703 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,703 vs 2,558
  • 7.11x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (64 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    64 MB vs 9 MB
  • 2.88x more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (5.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    5.33 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 41.7% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (7 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    7 nm vs 12 nm
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Matisse vs Kaby Lake).
    Matisse vs Kaby Lake
  • 2x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (768 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    768 KB vs 384 KB
  • 2x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (6 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    6 MB vs 3 MB
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 7 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 7 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4.0 vs 3.0
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • 5 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 70.8% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (116.4 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    116.4 vs 398.015
  • 2.33x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (105 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    105 W vs 45 W
  • 54.2% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (273 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    273 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 2.33x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (105 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    105 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, SME, SEV, SKINIT vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, SME, SEV, SKINIT vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, SME, SEV, SKINIT vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, SME, SEV, SKINIT vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 70.8% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (116.4 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    116.4 vs 398.015
  • 54.2% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (273 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    273 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.33x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (105 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    105 W vs 45 W
  • 2.33x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (105 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    105 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0
Hurrycane
≈ estimated
17/02/2023
Mining analysis · cost-efficiency spreadsheet and used prices
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is the most cost-efficient CPU on the market for CPU mining, though total build costs add up.
9.0
Tech Progress
≈ estimated
16/11/2020
Upgrade review · benchmarks and Premiere Pro editing
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a very good buy for 12 cores, especially if you skip the 5900X.
5.0
PeaJayTheGr8
≈ estimated
30/08/2020
Follow-up experience · motherboard problems and buyer's regret
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X wasn't worth the upgrade, and the chip may need an RMA or resale.
9.0
Lin Chear
≈ estimated
02/06/2020
Upgrade test · rendering and CPU usage on an older board
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a clear speed gain on an older AM4 board and should last a while before the next upgrade.
9.5
FGtech Tips
≈ estimated
22/03/2020
Hands-on review · install, overclocking, benchmarks and gaming
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is powerful enough to justify switching from Intel after twenty years.
9.0
DannyzReviews
≈ estimated
18/10/2019
Benchmark comparison · Elder Scrolls Online frame rates
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X runs Elder Scrolls Online well, with much higher frame rates than the previous generation.
9.5
Nicolas11x12 English
≈ estimated
07/09/2019
Hands-on review · multi-core, gaming and temperature tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is nearly perfect for heavy multi-core work, though it needs a strong cooler.
8.0
DannyzReviews
≈ estimated
01/09/2019
Boost clock analysis · light, multi-core and gaming tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X's boost clocks fall short of advertised figures, but it remains an excellent processor overall.
6.0
DannyzReviews
≈ estimated
24/08/2019
Benchmark test · 1440p gaming results
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X performs much like the 1800X at 1440p, since the graphics card sets the pace.
9.0
DannyzReviews
≈ estimated
11/08/2019
Hands-on review · benchmarks and upgrade from Ryzen 7 1800X
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a strong pick for productivity and content creation, but less compelling for gaming alone.
9.0
Digital Foundry
≈ estimated
09/08/2019
Gaming and encoding tests · upgrade from an older Ryzen
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a clear step up for 60fps gaming and video encoding in early testing.
8.0
optimum
≈ estimated
16/07/2019
Undervolting test · multi-core and single-core benchmarks
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is recommended for heavy multi-threaded workloads, but not for gaming or single-core tasks.
More graded video reviews (8)
creator’s own scoreestimated by us

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
07/07/2019
Lab test · Multi-core benchmarks
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a 12-core chip that leads in multi-core work and video encoding but trails Intel in older single-thread software and some games.
5.0
rockpapershotgun.com
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Gaming test · Frame rate comparison
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is quick for desktop and multi-core work, but the Core i9-9900K stays ahead in games unless you add faster RAM.
9.0
pcworld.com
≈ estimated
17/07/2019
Lab test · Creative apps
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X beats the Core i9 in most video and 3D rendering, but Intel's QuickSync and viewport performance still come out ahead.
9.0
trustedreviews.com
✓ explicit
10/09/2019
Lab test · Creative workloads
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X suits video editing and rendering best, while the Intel Core i9-9900K is the better buy for pure gaming.
10
techradar.com
✓ explicit
18/11/2019
Hands-on test · Multi-core chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is the strongest mainstream chip for multi-threaded work and PCIe 4.0 storage, but it runs hot and trails Intel in single-core speed.
9.5
windowscentral.com
≈ estimated
25/11/2019
Lab test · High-end desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X handles video editing and other heavy multi-core work well, but Intel's Core i9-9900K still wins most game tests.
9.0
notebookcheck.net
≈ estimated
12/08/2019
Game benchmarks · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a 12-core AM4 chip that raises game frame rates over the 2700X, with gains varying by title.
9.0
digitaltrends.com
≈ estimated
11/09/2019
Benchmark review · Multi-core CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a good pick for editing and encoding, edges out Intel's Core i9-9900K in most games tested, but trails it in single-core speed.
9.5
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Lab test · Desktop processor
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a multi-core leader that beats the Core i9-9900K in apps but trails it slightly in games.
9.4
chip.de
✓ explicit
07/07/2019
Lab test · Core i9 comparison
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a fast, efficient twelve-core chip that beats the Core i9-9900K in many tests but needs a separate graphics card.
9.0
pcwelt.de
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Test results · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X edges out the Core i9-9900K in single-core speed, beats it by over 60% in multi-core work, and fits older AM4 boards.
9.0
notebookcheck.com
≈ estimated
12/08/2019
Benchmark test · Gaming frame rates
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a 12-core chip that raises gaming frame rates over the Ryzen 7 2700X, though the gain depends on the game.
6.0
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
16/08/2019
Lab test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a 12-core chip for audio, video and rendering, and it trails Intel's best only slightly in games.
8.0
hardwarecooking.fr
≈ estimated
21/08/2019
Hands-on test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a 12-core chip for AM4 boards, but it has no integrated graphics and needs a separate graphics card.
9.0
miroir-mag.fr
≈ estimated
17/12/2021
Full review · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a good pick if you need many cores for video, photo and content work, though games gain less from the extra cores.
9.2
profesionalreview.com
✓ explicit
07/07/2019
Unboxing · Design review
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a 12-core chip that fits older AM4 boards and offers PCIe 4.0, but it needs a separate graphics card.
9.5
hwupgrade.it
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Benchmark roundup · Category averages
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X beats the Threadripper 2920X with the same core count, and trails Intel only slightly in games.
9.5
global.techradar.com
≈ estimated
08/07/2019
Lab test · Multi-thread speed
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is the best mainstream chip for multi-thread work and video editing, but trails Intel in single-thread speed and runs hot with the bundled cooler.
10
riccardo.im
✓ explicit
07/02/2020
Build log · Quiet cooling setup
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X in this build is nearly silent in everyday use, but heavy Premiere Pro exports and Linux power tuning are its weak points.
9.5
digitalworlditalia.it
≈ estimated
09/07/2019
Benchmark test · Content creation
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X beats the Core i9-9900K at 3D rendering and video conversion with its 12 cores, but Intel's built-in encoder is far faster.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 9 3900X

  • Exceptional multi-threaded performance with 12 cores and 24 threads, ideal for heavy productivity tasks like video editing and 3D rendering.
  • Excellent value-for-money compared to similarly priced competitors, offering higher core counts at the same price point.
  • Native support for PCIe 4.0, providing increased bandwidth for compatible high-speed NVMe SSDs.
  • High energy efficiency for its performance class, benefiting from the 7nm manufacturing process.
  • Includes a capable and aesthetically pleasing Wraith Prism RGB stock cooler.
  • Strong backward compatibility with existing AM4 motherboards (via BIOS updates).
  • Large 'GameCache' (70MB total L3 cache) helps reduce memory latency and improves gaming performance over previous generations.

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 9 3900X

  • Single-core performance and 1080p gaming frame rates slightly trail behind top Intel competitors in some scenarios.
  • Can run hot under heavy multi-core loads, with many users recommending an aftermarket liquid cooler (AIO) for best results.
  • Limited manual overclocking headroom as the chip often ships close to its maximum potential out of the box.
  • Included stock cooler can become quite noisy when the processor is under heavy workloads.
  • Initial launch was marred by early BIOS/AGESA issues and availability shortages.

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is a high-performance desktop processor based on the 7nm Zen 2 architecture, featuring 12 cores, 24 threads, a 3.8 GHz base clock, and a 4.6 GHz max boost. It is built for the AM4 socket, supports PCIe 4.0 for increased bandwidth, and includes a massive 64MB of L3 cache with a 105W TDP. Main pros include its exceptional multi-threaded performance for workstation tasks like video editing and 3D rendering, high energy efficiency compared to competitors, and the inclusion of an attractive Wraith Prism RGB cooler. Cons include single-core performance and 1080p gaming speeds that can fall slightly behind rival Intel chips, the lack of integrated graphics, and limited manual overclocking headroom as the chip often operates near its thermal and frequency limits out of the box.

Compare AMD Ryzen 9 3900X with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Ryzen 9 3900X and other processors

No results found