AMD released three new processors, the Ryzen 5 3600XT, Ryzen 7 3800XT and Ryzen 9 3900XT. They are slighly higher clocked versions of the X models, but unlike them only the 3600XT comes with a cooler.
Positioned like that it was clear from the beginning they would have a hard time: The 3600X and 3800X were already bad options compared to the almost equally fast Ryzen 5 3600 and Ryzen 7 3700X. The XT versions don’t change that. In benchmarks they are either minimally faster or just equally fast. Thus the cheaper versions remain the better deal, a higher performance increase would have been needed. And for the 3900XT the 3900X is just too close, while also being cheaper.
The reviews point that out clearly.
That brings us to the end of one of the strangest CPU reviews we’ve written. It appears as though AMD decided to release three ‘new’ CPUs that offer nothing new and no one should consider buying them at launch prices. Perhaps mad overclockers who want to juice every last bit they can out of a 3rd-gen Ryzen processor? But even that’d be a stretch.
Computerbase writes (in german):
The deciding factor between X and XT is the price. Currently the price difference is definitely too high. The MSRP of the Ryzen 9 3900XT and Ryzen 7 3800XT is 100 Euro, the MSRP of the Ryzen 5 3600XT 80 Euro above the price of their X variants. Given the achieved performance difference that is way too much.
In the pc-kombo meta benchmark the XT processors reach high positions thanks to their incremental improvements:
But their gaming performance still does not reach what the i5-10600K offers, and in applications the 3800XT is slower than the (so far equally priced) Ryzen 9 3900X. It’s a matter of price then, and the initial asking prices of the XT processors are too high.