• expired

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 3.8 Ghz 12-Core AM4 Processor with Wraith Prism Cooler $701.10 + Delivery ($0 with Prime) @ Amazon US via AU


Not as good as the afterpay deal however pretty close!

Great cpu for everything however 4th gen launch is imminent

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Amazon Global Store
Amazon Global Store

closed Comments

  • I wouldn't say the 4th gen launch is imminent - most sources seem to think it'll be launched late September. Then you'll have to wait for availability (at reasonable prices) so it'll probably be 5-6 months before you can get hold of a 4000 series.

    • I would not be surprised if AMD pushed it back given how lacklustre Intel 10th gen is.

      • When people say 4th gen is coming out soon I thought they meant in a week or two. 6 months… That's half a year wait.

        • 6 months… That's half a year

          Thanks Captain obvious ;)

        • Yes but they are doing a refresh of the 3000 line up rumoured to come around June. So 4th gen might not be around the corner but that certainly is.

          Also waiting for 4th gen might open up its own can of worms

          4th gen most likely won’t have ddr5 support but 5th gen might which might mean you need a new board anyway.

      • What's the advantage in that? Intel still holds the advantage in gaming (albeit at a price premium) and if they're ready to go with Zen 3 they may as well drive the stake a bit further into Intel's chest.

        • Only at the top end (and I wonder how many people are still on the intel train just for the slight FPS improvements at that high-end level). In the mid-range, the Ryzen 3300X and 3600 still reign supreme.

          • @xyron: It also doubles down as a space heater , can you really put value on that?

          • @xyron: The new i5 10600K is a beast of a processor, especially when overclocked. Pricing should be on par with a 3600X or a 3700X if AMD keeps cutting down the pricing but the 10600K still beats out its competition in gaming by a fair margin.

            I'd still go AMD for mixed workloads but Intel is still king for pure gaming.

            • @pawan1993: 4% better (than the 3600X) on average at 1440p: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i5-10600k/16.h...

              Less than 2% better (than the 3600X) on average at 4K: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i5-10600k/17.h...

              and to get it, you need to spend not only more on the CPU but more on the motherboard too.

              I can't argue that 10th gen isn't better than Ryzen 3rd gen at gaming, but at the mid-range it's not by much (and I'd wager most people wouldn't even notice the marginal improvement), and you have to pay more for it.

              • @xyron: Take a look at the GN video on overclocking the 10600K. They found that OC'ing the cache memory gives even more of a benefit for very little time investment.


                You can see a 7% improvement on even the 3700X at worst and 15-20% improvement on the 3700X at best. Like I said, this is just for gaming at current price points. If you have any other mixed tasks that don't rely on higher core clocks then going Ryzen is a no-brainer. But at this price point, just for gaming, the 10600K is incredible value.

                I don't disagree that Intel 10th gen is terrible value at other price points. 3300X kills lower end i5s for value and the 10900K offers no benefit on the 10600K for gaming while the 3900X is significantly better than the i9 chip for mixed loads. I'm just making the point that for pure gaming workloads, the 10600K is just unbeatable for the price.

                • @pawan1993: No 3700X overclocked figures in there for relevance which is a shame (Steve "Tech Jesus" is usually my go-to for benchmark info), but I'll admit those OCs are impressive.

                  But if we're talking OC figures, you need to add at least another $50 for a decent cooler, and that isn't even taking into account extra power consumption.

                  I'm no fanboy, I piled on the hate for Bulldozer and Piledriver back in the day (and while my main rig is a Ryzen, my secondary-rig/couch gaming ITX PC is a 6700K). But statements like "best for gaming" really are meaningless when we're talking about the margins we're talking about, the areas where it's happening (typically only in tests returning 130+ FPS on both platforms) and when we're not taking into account the extra costs of going with Intel (including an inevitable lack of forward compatibility).

            • @pawan1993: 10th gen is meh based on the reviews

              1. You need an expensive motherboard
              2. You need expensive AIO cooling to compete with what the stock AMD air coolers can do.
              3. You need a 2080 TI or 2080 Super otherwise you hit a bottleneck
              4. The average difference is 5 to 7 percent and is game dependant at 1080p.
              5. You only care if you are a competitive gamer and need Max fps vs the price premium you pay.
              6. You get a free heater for winter with every sale
              • @shellshocked:

                1. Agreed. New motherboards come at a premium but as is the case with any new chipset, prices will eventually come down.
                2. You don't need super expensive cooling. Temps are still controllable with a very good air cooler or a mid-range AIO. Intel's die sanding brings a benefit here.
                  3/4. You do hit bottlenecks with the GPU but a) in games where you don't bottleneck and you OC it based on more informative reviews you can easily achieve more than a 5% gain; and b) where bottlenecks kick in, AMD has some overhead that result in Intel chips performing better in gaming.
                3. Agreed. If you care about FPS then these gains matter but the argument is that Intel is still better at gaming at the 10600K's price point, not whether the FPS gains are meaningful for you.

                Edit: Auto-numbering has overwritten my bullet point numbers but you probably get the point.