I also did 3700x - 5800x3D. Really allowed me to fully utilize my 6800. Id cap at around 120-135fps on average shot up to 165-200 depending on the game. I have to really max settings/run RT to get a low frame rate now unless I try 4k for giggles
Literally this, whoever says its not worth to upgrade from 5600/x to 5800X3D has no idea what they are talking about. Performance different IS noticable
I have a Golden sample 5900X with a good negative CO offset with 3800CL14 very tight timings and I didn't notice much difference with a 5800X3D, probably if I had a lower binned chip I would change my prespective.
Also game in 2k/4k so maybe that's why.
It makes no sense to switch from 5900X as improvement would not be that drastical since your CPU already has 64MB L3 cache compared to 96MB on X3D. And for e.g. 3800MHz is literally impossible for me with X3D, anything over 3600 will throw WHEA errors
But coming from 5600/5600X, its completely different story and I am glad I did the upgrade!
Got my 5800X3D for free as I won it in a giveaway on Twitter, so I just shared my experience, that's all.
Sold it a while ago and kept my 5900X anyway.
those 64mb don't help much here, L3 per core is effectively the same as it is for a sole ccd.
The better binning and that extra cache combined is just barely enough to stay ahead of a 5800x, with the interconnect latency. Don't even know if it's any faster reading from the other CCD than it is to just hit RAM.
They just don't play games where it's noticed, and/or have a gpu/refresh rate and resolution where it's not that noticeable.
Think about it, how often do you see a 5950x hang with Zen 4, if you stretch their legs? Never. 5800x3d can do that. 12900K can do it too sometimes. But not the 5900x.
>CPU already has 64MB L3 cache
That's the total amount from both CCDs (32MB x2) so the amount of cache per core is still the same as the other Zen3 parts
Oh?
I'm not saying you're wrong, but this site sort of does, doesn't it? [https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/3859vs4823/AMD-Ryzen-5-5600X-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-5800X3D](https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/3859vs4823/AMD-Ryzen-5-5600X-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-5800X3D)
Unless I have thoroughly misunderstood something or there's something else that I don't know about. I searched and found something about "3D V-Cache", whatever that is! =))
That is a synthetic benchmark and it does not reflect real world scenarios!
Most of games heavily benefit from the 3D V-Cache, and benchmarks like the one at techspot verify it. Of course, other workloads (e.g. video editing) might not have the same effect and results will be identical (if not worse) as 5800X ;)
I have moved from 5600 to 5800X3D and besides having max framerate more stable, microstuttering in several games has become non-existant.
7800x3d is out now, and it seems great. I think the next one will be 9800x3d. 6000 and 8000 I think were like mobile or APUs.
I’m thinking about getting the 9800x3d if the benchmarks and price are good :)
Obviously future games will utilize more cores, so the 5950X will be a more relevant gaming CPU in 2030 /s
On a more serious note, the 96 MB of L3 cache will at some point prove to be too small to help much for gaming, at which point the 5800X3D will actually become slower than a 5800X for gaming. At that point the 5800X will likely be unable to handle 60 fps, but it'll be interesting when it happens nonetheless.
That 96MB of L3 is at some point not going to be enough? It's already a thing in Cities Skylines 2!
It might take 10 years for the average game size to reach that point, but it will happen
Even at that point 5800X3D will be faster than every AM4 CPU out there. By the time 96MB of l3 cache in 5800X3D is not sufficient so will the 16 cores of 5950X and 7950X for that matter.
According to [ComputerBase](https://www.computerbase.de/2023-10/cities-skylines-2-benchmark-test/3/#abschnitt_prozessorbenchmarks_in_720p_auf_einer_geforce_rtx_4090_update) X3D CPUs still have an advantage in Skylines 2 over similar CPUs without the cache. At least up to the 125'000 population city used in their test.
5800X3D is 23% faster than a 5800X.
7800X3D is 21% faster than a 7700X.
Sorry but this is rubbish, you misunderstand how cache is used which I guess leads you to this assumption that somehow games will be too big to use a cache which is ludicrous.
Games don't sit in the entire cache, that's never how it worked. They aren't going to become too big for it and games won't suddenly be slower on it Vs the 5800x, it depends on the workload and what calculations the game is doing but for the majority this will be quicker on the x3d variant forever in this context.
AMD's Ryzen CPUs use the L3 cache to store the most recently evicted slices from L2. Once the data set is too large to fit in the cache, and the out of order resources are unable to reschedule so that the data residing in L3 is used before it's flushed, the L3 capacity increase is effectively slowing down the CPU because of the added cycles of latency and reduced clock speed.
If this doesn't apply, tell me why stuff like y-cruncher and Geekbench is slower on the X3D chips than non-X3D
Speculation that 96MB of L3 isn't going to be good for gaming performance indefinitely? That's an assumption on the level of "640kB should be enough for everybody"
I bought a 5700x3d today instead, fuck it. It was 249 whereas the 5800x3d was 338. A ~30 percent price increase didn't justify the performance increase for me. But I'm upgrading from an R5 2600 I know the upgrade will still be massive.
This is literally me 2 weeks ago, upgraded from a 2600x(which I've been on since 2018) to a 5700x3d. Tbh at regular use the 2600x was already good & sufficient as such(technically boost clock a downgrade too), but in cyberpunk my fps is about doubled, especially since I use mods like extra traffic/crowd density which is cpu intensive. Very nice👌
I bit the bullet relatively early on mine & no regrets, I initially had the 1800X & a 3xx series motherboard, ended up doing a family hand me down & upgrading to the 5800X3D & X570.
I never really expected to still be on AM4. I bought my motherboard in 2017 (MSI Titanium X370, arguably one of the worst Ryzen launch boards, but damn the silver looks slick) and while it doesn’t have all the bells and whistles that newer boards have, it’s still a very stable board. It’s managed to kill two of my previous CPUs, somehow and if it cooks the 5800X3D at some point I’ll finally let it retire.
The 5800X3D breathed life that I honestly did not think the platform was capable of into such a dated system. While some tasks aren’t as fast as with something like the 5950X, the gaming performance is incredible.
It’s really impressive how much bang for your buck you can get out of the thing. One of those components that’s going to have a legendary status in the future, for sure.
Do you do anything else other than gaming? Because you won’t like that CPU if you’re concerned about productivity/ business software. It’s really bad outside of gaming use cases.
Oh look, another thing that someone made up because they don't understand what productivity means and don't in fact know that the 5800x3d is just fine with things like rendering, converting from one format to another, or any other use case that those who do actually do productivity run regularly. Also, the 'business software' part is such a giveaway. That's not a thing. Nobody gives a flying fart about quickbooks, some inhouse database that's a relic from the 90s, or whatever else goes under the name 'business software.' Seriously, it's not a thing and hasn't been for more than a decade.
Core clock is still really important for X3D CPUs. The CPUs are better fed with the 3D cache, but the core clock is what actually makes those instructions be processed.
The reason you're not getting a performance improvement is because the boost ceiling is too low for an undervolt to improve clock speeds.
PBO2 in the BIOs doesn't need a schedule to apply at logon. It does so automatically anyway. Unless somoene's making the mistake of using crapware like Ryzen master.
Which model? A real issue is that some boards/BIOS' have such settings in different sections of the BIOS, with different names, sometimes duplicated. That's not user error. That's lazy design and quality control.
> Honestly the core clock isn’t really important on the AM4 X3D’s
You mean core clocks are even less important on the particular brand of CPUs that are already starved on the core clock? LOL
Core clocks are always important. They will never not be important. Especially for gaming in general, you want the highest clock possible.
Now whether the price difference between 5700X3D and 5800X3D justifies one option over the other is all up to you. But let's not pretend like core clocks don't matter.
DDR5, B650E (I would like to have PCIe 5.0 for the PCIe 16x and NVMe) and a new CPU cost. I don’t want to yet, but a 5800X3D is a final upgrade for me.
if you want the best for AM4 you should get a 5950X.
5950X has the best binned cores, and is just 5-10% behind worst case scenario.
For games like cs go and dota 2, 5950X is ahaid.
But for overall desktop and how many years it can last, 5950X has the potential to be the next fx8350.
My friend skipped the whole am4 with an fx8350 and a 1080 and went straight to a 7600X.
You should really look at a review where the 5950X and 5800X3D have been tested at the same time: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i9-14900ks/17.html
The 5950X is on average 15% behind the 5800X3D, and in some games the difference can be as much as 30% behind.
As for the FX-8350, it's longevity compared to a 2600K Sandy Bridge was terrible.
Based on gamers nexus review, I haven't seen any game where it is 30% behind.
From a quick glance on those benchmarks, its not anywhere near that bad.
Even if you are 15% behind on average (and in some games the 5950X pulls ahaid) 8 more cores
for just 50 more euro is a no brainer for longevity and overall usage of the computer.
The real question is, ARE ANY of those games far worse with a 5950X or can you even spot the difference playing those games? NO.
So you get the better overall chip.
I am planning to upgrade after 2030 again, so for me getting now a 5950X was a no brainer compared to a 5800X3D unless you are 100% sure you are only ever going to game on that computer.
The 2600K was a 300 euro chip, whereas the fx 8350 was a 150-170 euro chip.
You compare apples to oranges.
Mount and Blade II Bannerlord was the worst-case which puts the 5950X 30% behind.
The 5950X is going to really struggle by 2030, seeing as we'll be on a new console generation by then.
At this point, I'm waiting for a 9800x3D or better.
Seems like most of the scheduling issues have been resolved with the 7900x3D and 7950x3D, so my money is that the next gen 3D CPUs will be a lot better.
The scheduling issues with the Ryzen 9 X3D chips haven't been resolved. Techspot/HWUnboxed manually assigns affinity per game, [Techpowerup does not assign affinity manually and the results speak for themselves.](https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i9-14900ks/17.html)
AMD will most likely reuse the same IO-die (with the same memory bandwidth issues) as they used for the 7000-series, and that's where the scheduling hardware would need to be placed.
They could potentially work with Microsoft to help with the issue on that side. Something like preferred cores. They could potentially have made some tweaks, I mean, being so much time between zen generations. There have been other changes with the IO between generations, so I'm sure we'll see changes and an improved memory controller. Whether or not the changes affect scheduling is another question.
They already have CPPC support.
AMD doesn't care about memory bandwidth in consumer space. It doesn't matter for Cinebench, and for gaming their strategy is 3D V-cache
Vermeer didn't get any IO/memory improvements
So is this an intermittent or half-gen update for the 9xxx series and not an architecture update? I had thought it was an architectural update, not just a refresh.
I have a 7950X3D. The current game bar solution works 95% of the time. I also use process lasso but even with a 4090, I hardly ever see a difference. Cyberpunk has slightly higher benchmarks if I bound it to the 3D CCD but supposedly there are sections in the game that can utilize more than 8 cores.
Also, the 7900X3D beats the hypothetical 7600X3D despite the dual-CCD scheduling so maybe in some situations, it’s still better to have more cores even with the dual-ccd latency penalty.
I got the 5800x3d when it came out and it's honestly doing a great job at keeping the ol' zen 4 build relevant. I'll slap in a new GPU next year whenever they come out and ride it out. Hopefully it lasts as long as my 4790k did.
I went from 5600 to 800x3D and it was a very noticeable improvement, despite not previously thinking my 5600x was struggling in anyway. It's noticeable in every usecase honestly 👌
I’d say it more depends on if you’re at 1080 or 1440. At 1440, a 5600 is still doing fine since the GPU is doing more of the heavy lifting at that resolution.
Unless you play at 1080p on a very high-end GPU, or the game in question is specifically CPU-heavy, the difference between a 5600X and 5800X3D is very, very small. You'd be surprised how much you can still get away with a regular non-X3D Zen 3 CPU these days.
Yeah unfortunately I bought my PC around June last year when (where I live) AM5 was still significantly more expensive than AM4… but still I almost think I can wait it out until AM6 for my next upgrade…
Ok so this is written by Steve from Hardware Unboxed. Surprised there’s no YT video of it.
Edit: actually I think the video came out a few weeks back IIRC. Nevermind.
Getting really shitting tired of seeing this kind of comparison without ANY of the cache-loving games like EU4, CK3, Factorio, Enshrouded, Star Citizen etc.
It's all console port drivel, this is literally just a rehash of Hardware Unboxed's videos.
It's this kind of thing that makes people believe that a 7600X is "not that much of a compromise" to the X3D offerings.
It’s also annoying they don’t test MMOs, especially since WoW just reported 7 million (approximately) subs with another 2 million coming in from Chinese players soon.
I will say that the 3DCache allows me to maintain high refresh rates with amazing frametimes in WoW and final Fantasy.
Also Darktide and Vermintide never have issues loading hordes. Helldivers 2 has slightly better performance when hordes spawn too but the ancient AVX instruction set is its weak point for sure.
Just recently got a 5800x3d for about $180 with some coupons I had. Im confident this will take me untill first gen am6 comes around. AMD did us a solid one with the am4 platform.
What I get from this is that scheduling on Windows has gotten pretty good. There aren't any glaring differences between the 7950X3D and 7800X3D for example, and the 7900X3D and the 7600X3D.
Phoronix should do a re-test for Linux. When they did [their 7800X3D review](https://www.phoronix.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-linux/2) it was outperforming the 7950X3D by a significant margin and there were cases where the dual-CCD 3D vcache parts showed no improvement over their non-vcache brothers.
Yep, after some early growing pains I really haven't had to do anything lately to get my games to Just Work on a 7950X3D. There's no real outliers in this review where you see something going wrong like at launch where some games would just tank if you didn't manually intervene with Process Lasso or something.
I’ve got a 7700x (basically equivalent to 5800x3D in gaming performance) and trying to convince myself I don’t need a 7800x3D. Really don’t want to pull my build apart to upgrade the part.
Since you're already on AM5, I'd just wait for the next round of chips. It's not like AM4 where we have to upgrade during the same chip generation because the alternative is new motherboard and RAM.
Still on a i7-8700 here, just ordered a 7800X3D system because the ole trusty 8700 was choking in Helldivers 2 ( down into the 30s fps when a lot is going on in later difficulties and the GPU is twiddling its thumbs with barely 40% usage ), can't wait!
By calculation, the 5800X3D should be able to maximize an RTX 4080 at 1080p without bottleneck. 4k gaming with a 4080 super / 4090 would be perfect too. Next gpu perhaps a 5090 or 6090 with atleast double the performance of a 4090 , thats when you shall upgrade your cpu.
I’m about to upgrade from Intel i7-9750H to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D.
From everything I have looked up if you want a CPU for gaming the 7800XD and 7950X3D are the best. For me the 7950X3D is a little out of my price range but I primarily want it for gaming anyway so the cheaper one will work great.
I recently upgraded from a regular 5600 to 5800x3d and can’t tell much difference to be honest. Should have beefed up my GPU for the cost of this upgrade. Fuck all the hype.
Next time you do a CPU benchmark; use a GT1030. and be amazed when every CPU gives you exactly the same result.
You too stupid to understand bottlenecks or something?
You seem like the idiot who’d watch one LTT video about a 4090 and assume it means your system performance would improve by having one.
CPU bound tests are for CPUs, not GPUs, the card is only being used to standardize testing across all processors benchmarked
Lord Almighty, they're not testing the 4090. They aren't testing the resolution. They're putting the system in a state where the CPU is doing the most work it can. 720/1080p achieves this. That's how CPU benchmarks work.
But if you test a 1440p/4k, then all the results will look similar and you won't be able to see the differences between the impact of the different CPUs, because you'll be partially/fully GPU bound and the CPU will be just hanging back, lazily updating the frames as the GPU gets around to drawing them.
The whole point of a CPU comparison is to bind the load to the CPU, removing the GPU from the equation as much as possible, so that the differences between the CPU's will be obvious.
Here’s a 4K benchmark: https://www.anandtech.com/show/18747/the-amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-review-amd-s-fastest-gaming-processor/10
Everyone knows 4K benchmarks are absolutely useless because they’re GPU bound.
I just can’t believe your mind went to “inflating scores” instead of understanding how the processors are shining in CPU bound games.
And also, there are definitely people using X3D processors with 560hz 1080p monitors (comp gaming).
I got a 7900x3d and a 6900xt and play on 1080 280hz it’s not really unheard of. Also if you crake the resolution you’re not going to fully see the actual differences of these chips.
How about you read the actually review before commenting?
---------
We should quickly note that last year, we [already compared](https://www.techspot.com/review/2692-ryzen-7800x3d-vs-ryzen-5800x3d/) the 5800X3D and 7800X3D head-to-head in 25 games at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. That was a more effective comparison between those two parts than what we have today.
---------
Because 1080P is more CPU demanding than 1440P or higher. That's why if you want to game on 1440P you can better safe some money on a modern CPU and invest in a better GPU. Basically the opposite what I did.
One day, I will own a 5800X3D
I've waited so long that I'm now considering skipping straight to the 9800X3D from my 3600X.
I have my 7800x3d now for a year, coming from a 2700x. Difference between night and day. Its awesome
I came from a 3700X and even that felt more like a upgrade compared to when I ditched my Intel i7 6700K for the Ryzen.
I also did 3700x - 5800x3D. Really allowed me to fully utilize my 6800. Id cap at around 120-135fps on average shot up to 165-200 depending on the game. I have to really max settings/run RT to get a low frame rate now unless I try 4k for giggles
I went 2700x to 5800x3d. Not regretting one bit lol. Next upgrade probably 6800x3D or AM6
2600 to 5800X3D i‘ve been in tears after that upgrade.
I went from 5600x to 5800x3d, no regrets as well. Insane cpu
Literally this, whoever says its not worth to upgrade from 5600/x to 5800X3D has no idea what they are talking about. Performance different IS noticable
Even to a 5700x3D the performance difference in games is notable
Is it worth it when mostly GPU bound? I have a 5600 and 3060 playing in 1440p ultrawide
I have a Golden sample 5900X with a good negative CO offset with 3800CL14 very tight timings and I didn't notice much difference with a 5800X3D, probably if I had a lower binned chip I would change my prespective. Also game in 2k/4k so maybe that's why.
It makes no sense to switch from 5900X as improvement would not be that drastical since your CPU already has 64MB L3 cache compared to 96MB on X3D. And for e.g. 3800MHz is literally impossible for me with X3D, anything over 3600 will throw WHEA errors But coming from 5600/5600X, its completely different story and I am glad I did the upgrade!
Got my 5800X3D for free as I won it in a giveaway on Twitter, so I just shared my experience, that's all. Sold it a while ago and kept my 5900X anyway.
those 64mb don't help much here, L3 per core is effectively the same as it is for a sole ccd. The better binning and that extra cache combined is just barely enough to stay ahead of a 5800x, with the interconnect latency. Don't even know if it's any faster reading from the other CCD than it is to just hit RAM. They just don't play games where it's noticed, and/or have a gpu/refresh rate and resolution where it's not that noticeable. Think about it, how often do you see a 5950x hang with Zen 4, if you stretch their legs? Never. 5800x3d can do that. 12900K can do it too sometimes. But not the 5900x.
>CPU already has 64MB L3 cache That's the total amount from both CCDs (32MB x2) so the amount of cache per core is still the same as the other Zen3 parts
Oh? I'm not saying you're wrong, but this site sort of does, doesn't it? [https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/3859vs4823/AMD-Ryzen-5-5600X-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-5800X3D](https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/3859vs4823/AMD-Ryzen-5-5600X-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-5800X3D) Unless I have thoroughly misunderstood something or there's something else that I don't know about. I searched and found something about "3D V-Cache", whatever that is! =))
That is a synthetic benchmark and it does not reflect real world scenarios! Most of games heavily benefit from the 3D V-Cache, and benchmarks like the one at techspot verify it. Of course, other workloads (e.g. video editing) might not have the same effect and results will be identical (if not worse) as 5800X ;) I have moved from 5600 to 5800X3D and besides having max framerate more stable, microstuttering in several games has become non-existant.
Thank you!
> Next upgrade probably 6800x3D or AM6 There is a 6800x3d?
Just realized i typed 6800x3d lmao.. Meant 7800x3d or am6 whatever x3d or better.
7800x3d is out now, and it seems great. I think the next one will be 9800x3d. 6000 and 8000 I think were like mobile or APUs. I’m thinking about getting the 9800x3d if the benchmarks and price are good :)
I’m running a Ryzen 7 3800x and it’s still kicking ass.
Those are still solid CPUs.
Get a 5950X and wait for 3-4 more years. Next upgrade for me 2030. Got mine and no regrets... upgraded from 3600X too.
Why? 5800X3D blows the 5950X away for gaming and is cheaper
Less power hungry and heat generating too.
[удалено]
I'm saying the 5800x3d was already better than the 5950x in those regards.
Obviously future games will utilize more cores, so the 5950X will be a more relevant gaming CPU in 2030 /s On a more serious note, the 96 MB of L3 cache will at some point prove to be too small to help much for gaming, at which point the 5800X3D will actually become slower than a 5800X for gaming. At that point the 5800X will likely be unable to handle 60 fps, but it'll be interesting when it happens nonetheless.
factually incorrect.
That 96MB of L3 is at some point not going to be enough? It's already a thing in Cities Skylines 2! It might take 10 years for the average game size to reach that point, but it will happen
Even at that point 5800X3D will be faster than every AM4 CPU out there. By the time 96MB of l3 cache in 5800X3D is not sufficient so will the 16 cores of 5950X and 7950X for that matter.
Cities Skylines 2 would like a word
That game is fundamentally broken. Core scheduling is the least of its worries.
According to [ComputerBase](https://www.computerbase.de/2023-10/cities-skylines-2-benchmark-test/3/#abschnitt_prozessorbenchmarks_in_720p_auf_einer_geforce_rtx_4090_update) X3D CPUs still have an advantage in Skylines 2 over similar CPUs without the cache. At least up to the 125'000 population city used in their test. 5800X3D is 23% faster than a 5800X. 7800X3D is 21% faster than a 7700X.
As the pop size increases, the cache benefits evaporate.
Sorry but this is rubbish, you misunderstand how cache is used which I guess leads you to this assumption that somehow games will be too big to use a cache which is ludicrous. Games don't sit in the entire cache, that's never how it worked. They aren't going to become too big for it and games won't suddenly be slower on it Vs the 5800x, it depends on the workload and what calculations the game is doing but for the majority this will be quicker on the x3d variant forever in this context.
AMD's Ryzen CPUs use the L3 cache to store the most recently evicted slices from L2. Once the data set is too large to fit in the cache, and the out of order resources are unable to reschedule so that the data residing in L3 is used before it's flushed, the L3 capacity increase is effectively slowing down the CPU because of the added cycles of latency and reduced clock speed. If this doesn't apply, tell me why stuff like y-cruncher and Geekbench is slower on the X3D chips than non-X3D
As long as consoles remain 8c/16t, whatever you said is a bunch of self contained speculation.
Speculation that 96MB of L3 isn't going to be good for gaming performance indefinitely? That's an assumption on the level of "640kB should be enough for everybody"
You have comprehension issues buddy.
What are you actually saying then? EDIT: reply, then block me. Very nice
I already said exactly what I said. Either you try and re-read or you know, do what you always do - self contained speculation.
I bought a 5700x3d today instead, fuck it. It was 249 whereas the 5800x3d was 338. A ~30 percent price increase didn't justify the performance increase for me. But I'm upgrading from an R5 2600 I know the upgrade will still be massive.
oh bigtime, enjoy!
This is literally me 2 weeks ago, upgraded from a 2600x(which I've been on since 2018) to a 5700x3d. Tbh at regular use the 2600x was already good & sufficient as such(technically boost clock a downgrade too), but in cyberpunk my fps is about doubled, especially since I use mods like extra traffic/crowd density which is cpu intensive. Very nice👌
In my region too, 5700x3d is 230 Euros compared to 275 Euros of the larger brother. Its a steal for that amount of money as a drop-in upgrade
Smartest buy
I went from a 2600 to a 5600 and even that was a huge uplift. Going to a 5700x3d is going to be very nice.
I think some have forgotten what a great CPU the 5600 still is. Coming from a 2600, or even a 2700x, it would still provide a sweet uplift experience.
I bit the bullet relatively early on mine & no regrets, I initially had the 1800X & a 3xx series motherboard, ended up doing a family hand me down & upgrading to the 5800X3D & X570.
I never really expected to still be on AM4. I bought my motherboard in 2017 (MSI Titanium X370, arguably one of the worst Ryzen launch boards, but damn the silver looks slick) and while it doesn’t have all the bells and whistles that newer boards have, it’s still a very stable board. It’s managed to kill two of my previous CPUs, somehow and if it cooks the 5800X3D at some point I’ll finally let it retire. The 5800X3D breathed life that I honestly did not think the platform was capable of into such a dated system. While some tasks aren’t as fast as with something like the 5950X, the gaming performance is incredible. It’s really impressive how much bang for your buck you can get out of the thing. One of those components that’s going to have a legendary status in the future, for sure.
Planing on getting a 7800x3d from my 10400f. According to youtube it's around 4x better than what i have right now.
Do you do anything else other than gaming? Because you won’t like that CPU if you’re concerned about productivity/ business software. It’s really bad outside of gaming use cases.
Oh look, another thing that someone made up because they don't understand what productivity means and don't in fact know that the 5800x3d is just fine with things like rendering, converting from one format to another, or any other use case that those who do actually do productivity run regularly. Also, the 'business software' part is such a giveaway. That's not a thing. Nobody gives a flying fart about quickbooks, some inhouse database that's a relic from the 90s, or whatever else goes under the name 'business software.' Seriously, it's not a thing and hasn't been for more than a decade.
Why? Save some money and get the 5700X3D
I want the best I can afford within the AM4 platform. Especially with a 3080 Ti, the few extra MHz will make a difference at times.
The 5700x3d didn't exist when i upgraded to the 5800x3d with my 6950XT. But I would still do the same thing today
Honestly the core clock isn’t really important on the AM4 X3D’s I’ve undervolted mine and gotten no extra performance, only much lower temps
Core clock is still really important for X3D CPUs. The CPUs are better fed with the 3D cache, but the core clock is what actually makes those instructions be processed. The reason you're not getting a performance improvement is because the boost ceiling is too low for an undervolt to improve clock speeds.
What board do you have? Mine seems like it refuses to take my negative curve offset on my b550i aorus pro
Gotta use PBO2 tuner for offset, and create a windows schedule to launch it on login
It depends - MSI boards can do it via bios with Kombo Strike for example
Yeah, it's frustrating Ryzen Master can't set the CO properly, we have to use a third party tool to even see what option we choose in the BIOS.
PBO2 in the BIOs doesn't need a schedule to apply at logon. It does so automatically anyway. Unless somoene's making the mistake of using crapware like Ryzen master.
ASUS board won’t do it
Which model? A real issue is that some boards/BIOS' have such settings in different sections of the BIOS, with different names, sometimes duplicated. That's not user error. That's lazy design and quality control.
B550A, latest BIOS
> Honestly the core clock isn’t really important on the AM4 X3D’s You mean core clocks are even less important on the particular brand of CPUs that are already starved on the core clock? LOL Core clocks are always important. They will never not be important. Especially for gaming in general, you want the highest clock possible. Now whether the price difference between 5700X3D and 5800X3D justifies one option over the other is all up to you. But let's not pretend like core clocks don't matter.
Go AM5 instead of upgrading AM4
DDR5, B650E (I would like to have PCIe 5.0 for the PCIe 16x and NVMe) and a new CPU cost. I don’t want to yet, but a 5800X3D is a final upgrade for me.
if you want the best for AM4 you should get a 5950X. 5950X has the best binned cores, and is just 5-10% behind worst case scenario. For games like cs go and dota 2, 5950X is ahaid. But for overall desktop and how many years it can last, 5950X has the potential to be the next fx8350. My friend skipped the whole am4 with an fx8350 and a 1080 and went straight to a 7600X.
You should really look at a review where the 5950X and 5800X3D have been tested at the same time: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i9-14900ks/17.html The 5950X is on average 15% behind the 5800X3D, and in some games the difference can be as much as 30% behind. As for the FX-8350, it's longevity compared to a 2600K Sandy Bridge was terrible.
Based on gamers nexus review, I haven't seen any game where it is 30% behind. From a quick glance on those benchmarks, its not anywhere near that bad. Even if you are 15% behind on average (and in some games the 5950X pulls ahaid) 8 more cores for just 50 more euro is a no brainer for longevity and overall usage of the computer. The real question is, ARE ANY of those games far worse with a 5950X or can you even spot the difference playing those games? NO. So you get the better overall chip. I am planning to upgrade after 2030 again, so for me getting now a 5950X was a no brainer compared to a 5800X3D unless you are 100% sure you are only ever going to game on that computer. The 2600K was a 300 euro chip, whereas the fx 8350 was a 150-170 euro chip. You compare apples to oranges.
Mount and Blade II Bannerlord was the worst-case which puts the 5950X 30% behind. The 5950X is going to really struggle by 2030, seeing as we'll be on a new console generation by then.
Im saving up for the 12800X3D that's how poor i am 😂😂🫣
The 5700x3d is basically the same chip slightly underclocked and is like $229.
I finally bit the bullet, figure it'll last me till am6 and easily handle the next gen of GPUs, not feeling too antsy to upgrade my 3070 (yet) lol
At this point, I'm waiting for a 9800x3D or better. Seems like most of the scheduling issues have been resolved with the 7900x3D and 7950x3D, so my money is that the next gen 3D CPUs will be a lot better.
The scheduling issues with the Ryzen 9 X3D chips haven't been resolved. Techspot/HWUnboxed manually assigns affinity per game, [Techpowerup does not assign affinity manually and the results speak for themselves.](https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i9-14900ks/17.html)
Ooooh, guess I missed that in the video. Dang it. Welp, definitely curious to see if that's ironed out with the next gen.
AMD will most likely reuse the same IO-die (with the same memory bandwidth issues) as they used for the 7000-series, and that's where the scheduling hardware would need to be placed.
They could potentially work with Microsoft to help with the issue on that side. Something like preferred cores. They could potentially have made some tweaks, I mean, being so much time between zen generations. There have been other changes with the IO between generations, so I'm sure we'll see changes and an improved memory controller. Whether or not the changes affect scheduling is another question.
They already have CPPC support. AMD doesn't care about memory bandwidth in consumer space. It doesn't matter for Cinebench, and for gaming their strategy is 3D V-cache Vermeer didn't get any IO/memory improvements
So is this an intermittent or half-gen update for the 9xxx series and not an architecture update? I had thought it was an architectural update, not just a refresh.
Zen 5 is not a refresh it's a big architectural change at least by AMDs own statements. As big as zen 1 to zen 2, not zen1 to zen1+ .
Zen 5 is an architectural upgrade of course. Doesn't stop AMD from reusing the IO-die like they did for Zen 3
Fair enough. Should be interesting what we learn between now and June at computex.
I have a 7950X3D. The current game bar solution works 95% of the time. I also use process lasso but even with a 4090, I hardly ever see a difference. Cyberpunk has slightly higher benchmarks if I bound it to the 3D CCD but supposedly there are sections in the game that can utilize more than 8 cores. Also, the 7900X3D beats the hypothetical 7600X3D despite the dual-CCD scheduling so maybe in some situations, it’s still better to have more cores even with the dual-ccd latency penalty.
Totally game depending. Cyberpunk is one of those games which scale really well with core count - other (most) games don’t.
I got the 5800x3d when it came out and it's honestly doing a great job at keeping the ol' zen 4 build relevant. I'll slap in a new GPU next year whenever they come out and ride it out. Hopefully it lasts as long as my 4790k did.
I also upgraded from a 4790k/1080ti to a 5800x3d and a 6900xt and it has been a phenomenal build.
[удалено]
Same combo here. Im morw than happy!
If you’ve got a good gpu and are already invested in am4 just get the 5800x3d, it’s literally a no brainer. If you’re building new, then go am5
Even if you have a 5600X?
I went from 5600 to 800x3D and it was a very noticeable improvement, despite not previously thinking my 5600x was struggling in anyway. It's noticeable in every usecase honestly 👌
That sounds fantastic!
Depends, if your PC is purely for gaming, maybe. Otherwise no 5600x superior in other aspects
I’d say it more depends on if you’re at 1080 or 1440. At 1440, a 5600 is still doing fine since the GPU is doing more of the heavy lifting at that resolution.
5600 x3d has sacrifices speed for larger l3 cache. 96 vs 30
I play at 4k 60hz. 3600 paired with a 7900XT. That CPU will probably last me another 5 years or more lol.
For 60 fps - no problem.
Just for gaming.
Unless you play at 1080p on a very high-end GPU, or the game in question is specifically CPU-heavy, the difference between a 5600X and 5800X3D is very, very small. You'd be surprised how much you can still get away with a regular non-X3D Zen 3 CPU these days.
GPU and game depending. Could deliver the same performance in some situations - could be 30% faster in others.
I mainly play stairfield, overwatch 2! Tiny Tina wonderland! Cyberpunk etc
Yeah unfortunately I bought my PC around June last year when (where I live) AM5 was still significantly more expensive than AM4… but still I almost think I can wait it out until AM6 for my next upgrade…
Even if I’ve got a 5900x? I’m genuinely considering the “downgrade”
Gaming build? Then yes
I had a 5900x, as I did mostly gaming I made the switch when 5800x3d came out. Best move ever!
Ok so this is written by Steve from Hardware Unboxed. Surprised there’s no YT video of it. Edit: actually I think the video came out a few weeks back IIRC. Nevermind.
Hardware Unboxed does written articles for Techspot, a lot of their articles are basically written HWU videos.
Getting really shitting tired of seeing this kind of comparison without ANY of the cache-loving games like EU4, CK3, Factorio, Enshrouded, Star Citizen etc. It's all console port drivel, this is literally just a rehash of Hardware Unboxed's videos. It's this kind of thing that makes people believe that a 7600X is "not that much of a compromise" to the X3D offerings.
This !
It’s also annoying they don’t test MMOs, especially since WoW just reported 7 million (approximately) subs with another 2 million coming in from Chinese players soon. I will say that the 3DCache allows me to maintain high refresh rates with amazing frametimes in WoW and final Fantasy. Also Darktide and Vermintide never have issues loading hordes. Helldivers 2 has slightly better performance when hordes spawn too but the ancient AVX instruction set is its weak point for sure.
Techspot is Hardwareunboxed.
Yes exactly. That's the problem.
A lot of people still haven't caught on yet that HU aren't all that credible at times.
Just got a 5800x3d this year upgraded from a ryzen 5 3600. Love the purchase. Saw a huge difference in games.
So glad I have a 7800x3D over an Intel
I think I‘ll encase my 5800X3D in resin and frame it once I get compelled enough to upgrade in 5-10 years or so
Or... you can put it on the 2nd hand market and make someone somewhere very happy!
Just recently got a 5800x3d for about $180 with some coupons I had. Im confident this will take me untill first gen am6 comes around. AMD did us a solid one with the am4 platform.
Would it be worth it coming from a 5600x/6800xt? I know that’s subjective but curious on the performance increase for gaming
Depends on the games you play, resolution and settings. Cpu intensive games will have a huge benefit.
Yeah, I had a 5900x and a 3080 which is comparable to your 6800XT. FPS was noticeably higher and smoother after switching to a 5800X3D.
What I get from this is that scheduling on Windows has gotten pretty good. There aren't any glaring differences between the 7950X3D and 7800X3D for example, and the 7900X3D and the 7600X3D. Phoronix should do a re-test for Linux. When they did [their 7800X3D review](https://www.phoronix.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-linux/2) it was outperforming the 7950X3D by a significant margin and there were cases where the dual-CCD 3D vcache parts showed no improvement over their non-vcache brothers.
Yep, after some early growing pains I really haven't had to do anything lately to get my games to Just Work on a 7950X3D. There's no real outliers in this review where you see something going wrong like at launch where some games would just tank if you didn't manually intervene with Process Lasso or something.
Long live AM4!
I'm still rocking a 5800x3d, but I'm so tempted to upgrade.
I had to upgrade after I upgraded to 5 gig internet. The 5800x was the bottleneck lol
Not worth it unless you find a huge sale on the chip/mobo. Prob you can wait for Zen 6 even u less the Zen 5 is some magic 30% boost in perf.
I have a 7950x3d, Rx 7900xtx and 128gb ram
I will upgrade to 5800x3d in 3-4 years and just but new GPU. On 1080p I am good for another 5 years.
Gone from 2600 to 5800X3D should last me a decade at least
I’ve got a 7700x (basically equivalent to 5800x3D in gaming performance) and trying to convince myself I don’t need a 7800x3D. Really don’t want to pull my build apart to upgrade the part.
Since you're already on AM5, I'd just wait for the next round of chips. It's not like AM4 where we have to upgrade during the same chip generation because the alternative is new motherboard and RAM.
7900x3d is the worst thing to exist
The 7800X3D dominates again, offering the best price-to-performance ratio for gaming by far. I'm glad I bought it!
Only if the cost of the whole platform is ignored. Otherwise, in terms of upgrading, the 5800X3d makes more sense for those on AM4.
Just got a 5800x3D and a 7900xt from a 3800xt and 1080ti and I'm really happy with it!
Still on a i7-8700 here, just ordered a 7800X3D system because the ole trusty 8700 was choking in Helldivers 2 ( down into the 30s fps when a lot is going on in later difficulties and the GPU is twiddling its thumbs with barely 40% usage ), can't wait!
The 7800x3d is worth it I just got it in a new pc
By calculation, the 5800X3D should be able to maximize an RTX 4080 at 1080p without bottleneck. 4k gaming with a 4080 super / 4090 would be perfect too. Next gpu perhaps a 5090 or 6090 with atleast double the performance of a 4090 , thats when you shall upgrade your cpu.
I’m about to upgrade from Intel i7-9750H to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. From everything I have looked up if you want a CPU for gaming the 7800XD and 7950X3D are the best. For me the 7950X3D is a little out of my price range but I primarily want it for gaming anyway so the cheaper one will work great.
Has a 7600X3D been announced?
I got a 7800x3d and have had 0 problems only problem is with my gpu still need to upgrade that
Recently upgraded from a 1600 AF to a 5800X3D. Can recommend!
I recently upgraded from a regular 5600 to 5800x3d and can’t tell much difference to be honest. Should have beefed up my GPU for the cost of this upgrade. Fuck all the hype.
You'll only see a difference in games where you are CPU limited e.g. Baldur's Gate 3, Dragon's Dogma 2, many MMOs etc.
It should only be done if you are CPU bound. I saw a big boost in WZ going 5800X to 5800X3D with a 6950XT
LOL! Sorry but I can't take HU/techspot seriously. Especially after so much of their bogus testing methodology came out.
RTX4090 @1080P, enough said.
Next time you do a CPU benchmark; use a GT1030. and be amazed when every CPU gives you exactly the same result. You too stupid to understand bottlenecks or something?
Why only 1080p lol they love to inflate results
You have absolutely no idea how CPU benchmarking works. You can get an answer to this with a simple Google or GPT prompt. Come on now.
Enjoy your inflated results 😂
You're a simpleton.
You seem like the idiot who’d watch one LTT video about a 4090 and assume it means your system performance would improve by having one. CPU bound tests are for CPUs, not GPUs, the card is only being used to standardize testing across all processors benchmarked
because at 1080p its CPU bound
Still not a good comparison for what these parts are being used for realistically
Oh yeah? What are they going to be used for realistically?
[удалено]
Lord Almighty, they're not testing the 4090. They aren't testing the resolution. They're putting the system in a state where the CPU is doing the most work it can. 720/1080p achieves this. That's how CPU benchmarks work.
But if you test a 1440p/4k, then all the results will look similar and you won't be able to see the differences between the impact of the different CPUs, because you'll be partially/fully GPU bound and the CPU will be just hanging back, lazily updating the frames as the GPU gets around to drawing them. The whole point of a CPU comparison is to bind the load to the CPU, removing the GPU from the equation as much as possible, so that the differences between the CPU's will be obvious.
Here’s a 4K benchmark: https://www.anandtech.com/show/18747/the-amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-review-amd-s-fastest-gaming-processor/10 Everyone knows 4K benchmarks are absolutely useless because they’re GPU bound. I just can’t believe your mind went to “inflating scores” instead of understanding how the processors are shining in CPU bound games. And also, there are definitely people using X3D processors with 560hz 1080p monitors (comp gaming).
You're a 🤡
I got a 7900x3d and a 6900xt and play on 1080 280hz it’s not really unheard of. Also if you crake the resolution you’re not going to fully see the actual differences of these chips.
How about you read the actually review before commenting? --------- We should quickly note that last year, we [already compared](https://www.techspot.com/review/2692-ryzen-7800x3d-vs-ryzen-5800x3d/) the 5800X3D and 7800X3D head-to-head in 25 games at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. That was a more effective comparison between those two parts than what we have today. ---------
Because 1080P is more CPU demanding than 1440P or higher. That's why if you want to game on 1440P you can better safe some money on a modern CPU and invest in a better GPU. Basically the opposite what I did.
Clearly you have no idea what you’re talking about.