319 at microcenter. cant complain when the 7600x was 300 when it came out. the 5600x was 300 when it dropped. so yeah at this price point of the 7900x3d is way better and better value.
I was like wait, when did AMD release a 7600X3D. Had to google real quick 😅. Was just skimping through the charts and not really paying attention to the talking.
it is but also means that L3 cache is cheaper now for consumers. Back in the early 2000s, a teacher of mine once told me that if we could ever afford more Cache in our CPUs, we would see an increase in performance. I'm still mind blown how far along with have come with CPU performance in the last 20 years.
Well the 7900X3D does not make sense at all, but IF you do both gaming and some video work the 7950X3D is slightly slower than the 7950 for multicore load but as its pretty much the same gaming perf as the 7800X3D its a good deal for both things plus you still have more cores for those games that take advantage of pure core load instead of the 3DVcache and unless you are very fixated on RT both the RX7900XT and XTX seems fair deals after the price cuts or the 7800XT if you are more budget minded
No surprises here, the 7800x3d is still the price/performance king for gaming. Atleast the 7950x3d CCD issues have mainly been resolved and it now actually performs same as the 7800x3d instead of worse. Now it actually is a proper hybrid CPU
@@eugenijusdolgovas9278 7800x3d is the most popular choice for higher end CS2 builds because the game is insanely CPU heavy. We run it on resolutions much lower than 1080p on top. For comp FPS the 3d vcache is crazy valuable.
Using the 7800x3D and the only things that amazes me even more than the performance, is power draw and how easy to cool it is. Must be a lifeline for those going for ITX.
Yup, used one in a tiny 4 litre ITX case with a tiny Noctua low profile cooler and a 4060 low profile GPU. The 7800X3D draws so little power that it can still work with such a small cooler without throttling itself.
@@drew2626 no, there’s no room in this case for a bigger card. I built another system instead with a 7800X3D and 4090. It’s a slightly bigger case, a McPrue ITX case
Been running a 7800x3d on a Carbon wifi x670E with a 4080 for a few months now. Not a single issue or hiccup and all my games look amazing. Very happy with the build!
Same, X670E Carbon Wifi but with a 7950X3D in it. Been great since I put the system together. Flashback was easy to get the board ready for the processor.
@evers6214 I'm using a MSI ultrawide 1440p monitor. It's only 144hz, but waiting for these new Gen 240hz Oled ultrawide monitors to come down in price before I upgrade
I would like to see you guys make a video on undervolting the x3d products. I know every cpu will undervolt differently depending on the bin, but maybe a basic guideline on how to get started. This was a great video as well. Keep up the great work guys.
Yep for now I just set 75c thermal limit and -30 magnitude in PBO with linear fan curve from 19% at 30c that does cap its potential a bit but main interest is how to easily find the magnitude sweet spot overall/per core that is still stable (mine holds for now in medium gaming, but crash in heavy CPU tasks or power saving modes).
@@mikfhan OCCT is your friend - Small, Extreme, Variable settings and test four, three, two cores and one as well as eight (or six for a six-core) to account for varying active core counts on a CCD side. Helped me get to -26 -23 -27 -27 -19 -21 on my 7600 - it can do ~4700Mhz all-thread with the GPU running a task in BOINC as well, at 102.6 BCLK and 5600 CL40 RAM at 5974Mhz CL34 (though with 1.35/1.42 V respectively on the sticks). Don't forget to tweak your voltage and speed on the iGPU if using that as it can impact top speed due to power/thermals. Also y-Cruncher's Hybrid NTT test is good for checking an FCLK overclock/voltage tweak.
@@TheGreenReaperthe x3d parts don't have an iGpu. but do have an overclock issues. many have burnt because people tried to OC as the 3D V cache is extremly heat sensitive. also to the OP: please be careful when undervolting. it too has potential to break your cpu because of v cache sensitivity. check out derbauer's videos to learn more.
@@inkredebilchina9699 Yeah, that's true, and one potential reason not to get the X3D version (but I imagine those wanting to play around might go for a cheaper CPU anyway).
Not only that. It's still so good you also don't get stuck wondering which chip to buy and I had and still have zero buyers remorse. It has remained the best chip for almost a year now. It's pretty amazing.
Yep, absolutely. I've went from a 7600X with 6200 CL30 + tuned Subtimings to a 7800X3D. With the 7600X, the RAM tuning compared to the 5600 CL36 EXPO profile made a massive fps difference, especially 1% lows. I've tested this with the 7800X3D too and the 3D Cache is basically "Yeah whatever, give me just enough amount of RAM and I'm fine". Difference in ACC is 205 vs 220 fps avg. With the 7600X it was 120 vs drops into the 90's. 1% lows are 70 vs 145, 7600X vs 7800X3D. For simracing, the price per fps is actually lower with the 3D, lol
What memory do you have? Not BIOS settings or brand, but what are the specs? The 7800X3D is kind of picky that way. You say you didnt mess with memory tuning, but some specs are more stable than others. If that seems non-sensical, I'll explain. AMD is REALLY stable at 6000 MHz CL30, but if you are running with the 6000 MHz CL 36, you may find your system crashing under high stress gaming sessions. Same with 6400 MHz CL 36, or any other memory. A whole lot of people ran a whole lot of tests to find what the most stable memory setting is for the 7800X3D, and it turns out to be 6000 MHz CL30. Now, this is in no way saying that this setting is perfect, or that other memory settings are guaranteed to be unstable. The research I did just suggested that this is the most stable memory you can purchase, or it was as of October of 2023. (When I built my PC)
The 7900x3d was on sale for only a $30 difference from the 7800x3d, and the amount of compression and decompression I do with large files, it was a nice middle of the road upgrade from my 3900x that's starting to get a bit long in the tooth.
i prefer that my upgrade path the last three switches has been 2700k -> 9900k -> 7800x3d so here is hoping this one can last as long as that epic 2700k
@@PainX187 I went from a 6700k 16gb ddr4 memory and a Nvidia 1080. To my 7800x3d 32gb ddr5 and 7900xtx. It's the longest time I've waited for an upgrade, I used to upgrade every 2 years or sooner and not notice a big performance jump. This time it's insane I've gone from getting 30-40fps to a 130-144fps which is insane, and also great as I'm seeing the benefits from my new high refresh rate monitor. Definitely learnt to only upgrade when I need too. Another lesson, AMD cards are genuinely really good.
@@simonbaker7462 same but just a 4090 setup with a 1440p 240hz monitor i upgrade GPU steadily but CPU only if i have to and always one with room to grow if i can
It seems like to me that the 7900X3D would still be a good all-rounder between gaming and productivity tasks. Perhaps the best value option for those looking for a good balance between those.
Literally just pulled the trigger on this CPU yesterday! I need it for my 5 monitor MSFS simulator. The goal is to have the cache core running the sim while the other core handles background tasks like OBS streaming with 3 webcams, air manager touchscreen cockpit controls, NoIR Face Tracking, navigation, etc. Of course most benchmarks only show what we simulator enthusiasts call "vanilla MSFS". In other words, msfs2020 running on one monitor with no other background tasks running. There's a large portion of us simmer running much more complex systems than this, and constantly chasing the fastest hardware to try to pull it off and get a decent frame rate. We appreciate these sorts of benchmark reviews!
If you want a an idea for a very niche video for us 1,000 flight Sim enthusiasts... 😆 How about a benchmark run of these 3 cpus with msfs2020 running while cinabench or something is running in the background. Even better would be running it in triple screen mode with a heavy background task. We sim enthusiasts rely on community forums to share this kind of performance data.q
July 18, 2024. The 7900X3D can now be had for $328 US. Now it's a very interesting CPU. I'll be building a 4K / WQHD gaming and sometimes production system on an ASRock B650E Taichi Lite board, and the 7900X3D interests me quite a lot. It's still plenty fast for gaming and a whopping $212 less than a 7950X. I'm retired and not getting paid to make videos, so the lower performance is no big deal.
@@KhaledAl-cq4nc7800X3D is king for gaming. 7950X3D is good for multitasking. Consult an expert for your budget, you might go with other non-3D CPU and higher GPU combo.
Thank you for including fresh CS2 test results! The game got lots of perf. improvements over the last few months and older reviews are kind of untrustable. I'm only missing comparison against CPUs like 5600X and 5800X3D.
Yeah I think these newer gen CPUs should always have that benchmark of the great from the previous gen, I'm really interested in seeing how these perform against a 5800x3d.
I'll save you the trouble, since I just tried something similar. On a 4080, very little difference between 5900X and a 7800X3D. Maybe 15 percent on average. On a 4090, 7800X3D can pull ahead of 5000 series CPUs by 50 to even 70 percent faster in many games. So unless you buy a 4090, no sense upgrading from 5000 series at all.
honestly at the current US prices 7900x3d has some serious value to it for anyone who needs both great gaming CPU and good multi-threaded productivity CPU. thanks for the review guys!
@@ClamChowder95 power consumption and platform longevity come to mind immediatly. also, e-cores still have some issues in some applications, especially virtualization
@@itsnodee4612 I mean yeah on average and especially on GPU heavy scenarios that stands true but on CPU heavy scenarios and games like Factorio , ACC etc its quite faster than the 7600X .
The propreitary game engine in "A Plague Tale: Requiem" shows exactly why back in the day of Windows XP/7 you would need to restart a system with any extra threads beyond 8 disabled. There were so many games that didn't run well, or at all, if you didn't.
When I built my PC last year I bought my 7900x3d & it’s been awesome. I use is for productivity, as well as gaming & because the 7800x3d is mainly a gaming processor, the 7900x3d was a no-brainer for me, as I didnt feel the need to spend more money for the 7950, because I didn’t need it:).
Imo for any multi apping with some sapping some serious power, 12-core cpu's are the go to for value and future longevity. they gaming support is slightly worse (but this test imo proves you lost nothing but few %, in some games even better, so just love it. I didn't buy cause 600€ then. But 390 dollar is insane value imo. Also the power draw is amazing.
@NamTran-xc2ip Because naming structures across nearly all tech companies have largely remained similar - for example Intel core i3 i5 i7 and i9, each sequential number targets more performance and a different audience, so ryzen 7 7800X3D is a lower number than the ryzen 9 7900X3D so the video showing the differences between 78 and 79 are important because the average person might not have the esoteric knowledge and backend information/context to know the difference between the two parts.
Regarding scheduling: It's worth checking if game is detected on 3D models. This parks non-cached CCD result should not differ from 1CCD model (for same boost frequencies). If you want to fine-tune scheduling, use Process Lasso. You need to enable high performance profile in Windows to disable core parking for this to see any benefit. Tying game to 1 CCD more often than not helps even with non-3D models, for some games I saw 10% performance increase on my old 3900X, but it depends on how many cores game is able to use.
@@ttwinsturbo Unfortunately, there are some games which work better on the chiplet without 3D cache, as it boosts higher, and there are games which just don't work with the AMD solution at all, Process Lasso lets you choose however you want your game, and your other applications, to run. It needs a bit of tinkering, but it's much more powerful than the automated system AMD has made.
@@ttwinsturbo This is more of a band aid for the masses. Problem is inflexible Windows scheduler. Process Lasso is way better tool, but it need some work and understanding.
Windows smart enough to know when i use photoshop (competitor), to not park the cores, otherwise they mostly do. Alt-tabbing disabled core parking, until you alt-tab back to game.
LOL, I plugged my PC into a watt meter (I dont know the official name) to see how much power it was drawing, and in heavy gaming (I was playing the new Avatar game) the total draw topped at around 554 watts consistently. I have a 7800X3D with a 4080, with a 1300W PSU. Clearly..... overkill, apparently. That power draw is insane, especially compared to the 7700K w/ 1080 that I used to have that was around 300-400 watts. Using afterburner, the CPU eats about 50-60W depending on the game, and keeps around 60 degrees with a 360 AIO. This thing rarely gets warm, let alone hot. It's awesome.
I bought 7950x3D to process video and game. I game at 4K so I figured the few frames it was behind the 7800x3D in tests didn’t really matter since the tests are conducted at lower resolutions where the CPU is the bottleneck. I am glad that my processor is no longer a laggard behind the 7800x3D tho Thanks for the update, Steve!
It depends on the games you play. There are a few oddballs here and there, but generally there isn't much in it. But if you manually test each game and use launch scripts to tie it to the CCD it responds the best to the 7950X3D is overall faster because there are a few games here and there that prefer frequency over cache.
I was thinking the same thing. My 5800X recently died on my and I didn't want to drop the $ to upgrade to AM5 just yet, so I dropped in a 5800X3D and it's been fantastic with my 3080 so far. But I still like to see how it compares to the current gen. Although when I do upgrade, it probably won't be until the next series of Ryzen chips.
thanks, very interesting comparison, would have been nice to also have seen the 5800X3D in the list just out of curiosity. What bugs me a bit is that 7600X3D - maybe next time don't name it like this on your graphs, it's confusing for those who pause the video or watch it without audio, and it also saves you time if you don't have to mention all time how that 7600X3D came to be.
The 5800x3d is typically anywhere between 1 to 8% slower. I have both and the difference between them is almost impossible to tell from feel alone. Definitely worth grabbing if still on AM4. If building from scratch go 7800x3d
Holy shiat this is crazy, I was thinking about buying my parts today and wanted to go for a 7950x3d but man, it’s not worth the money, I’m gonna go for the 7800x3d and save some money for the gpu instead. GREAT VIDEO!
Don't buy to expensive gpu, unless yours dying not worth it. 8800 XT is the first one who might have good enough value to upgrade, to have a 'this time' fast cpu but future proof you need to pay 1000€, anything lower meh, until 7800xt where value cranks up again (though in 3 years it will feel very tempting to upgrade again with the gpu power demand from games. I do opposite of you 7950x3d cause i love to multitask and be future proof, still using 1080 gtx cause i don't trust gpu market, plus buying one now could really hurt my wallet if new one dies in two years, so no i will wait it out, imo we need 4090 performance in 500-600€ segment, that will be the 'wonder time' to upgrade (even for lower segment)then it won't feel like 'i payed a lot but i still don't get enough fps or 4k resolution in games (basically situation now).
@@Matti6950 your opinion, im currently playing on a 3-4 years old pc and i feel the pc getting slower from day to day. I want to start from scratch so i have 2 pc´s in the end. I currently have everything here to build, i just need to safe money for a gpu then im gonna be fine for the next 3-4 years. My Plan is to build everything and then put my currently gpu in (3070) and wait 2 months and then upgrade to a 4080. Im gonna agree on that part that pc parts are sooo goddamn expensive. 2000€ for a 4090, thats a fucking car right there. im not gonna pay more than 1100-1500 at the maximum, my whole build would be worth 3k
@@TheGreenReaper since the 3D V-cache is an extra chiplet, they can simply just not pack it on top of the CCD and use it for a Ryzen 7600, 7900 or some Epyc/Threadripper chip.
every time i see a bench mark with the 7800x3d it makes me glad that i spent the extra $$ to get it over the 7700x that i was originally going to get, i see this CPU lasting alot longer then my 3600 that i had before
Generally agree, but depends as usual. This test were done in 1080p. If you play 1440p or 4k the gap is much smaller, especially if you do not play competitive FPS with 200+ frames per second. In some games the 7700x will be the same or even very slightly better, because of the higher frequency.
@@martinpro4967 The 5800X3D is already starting to show it's strengths even in a lot less extreme situations. Both Starfield and the latest versions of Modern Warfare are having problems breaking 75FPS on even quite recent CPUs, regardless of graphics settings, but the 5800X3D isn't among them. Personally I target 90-100FPS in most single player games (I don't play RTS games or factory sim games where 45-60FPS is typically perfectly fine) and there are plenty of games now where the 5600 can only just do that. Spending the extra amount for that big slab of L3 makes sense for people who generally only upgrade "when they have to".
7950X3D owner here: I've done it, and they're identical to within run-to-run variance. If I have a long-ass compile job I start it on the vanilla CCD while gaming on the V-Cache CCD.
@@andersjjensenHave you noticed any issues or downsides to doing that? Like stutters or frame drops from CCD/cores spinning up or down, or whatnot Maybe I'm misremembering, but I thought I read somewhere that there was an issue when trying to use both CCD's at the same time (the 3D CCD being used for a game) Something along the lines of when the 3D CCD is being used as primary, the other CCD gets gimped down to less than full throttle/power, something But I may be mistaken on that
@@andersjjensenPS - What sort of tasks/programs do you utilize for your non-3D productivity CCD? I'm wondering what programs/tasks the 7950X3D will do significantly better than the 7800, aside from video rendering.
Thank you for this - both the 7900x3d & 7800x3d are ''on sale'' for a 5$ CAD difference on Canada Computers and I had a hard time deciding between the two for mainly gaming. Very nice to see a video addressing the recent price changes and providing the needed data for this dilemma, cheers.
If you change a single UEFI setting, it'll force CCD0 regardless. It effectively overrides the driver. In CPU SMU settings, its called Preferred Cores or such, set it to Cache. Default is Auto which is the Driver setting.
I've picked this up for 420€ a few weeks ago after my ryzen 7700 killed itself. I'm quite happy with it, perfect gaming-productivity workhorse. Most of the dual CCD hiccups are also fixed by now.
Calm down people, I appreciate the sentiment but everything is fine. The 7700 is already RMA-d, I have the new one (kudos to AMD for the hassle free process). It may go into a different pc, not sure yet, the old pc got the upgrade to the 7900x3d. The bios also got updated to latest (also regulary) during the troubleshooting process. The old cpu was still working but it failed to post quite often. It ran a few days with the old bios around the time when it was discovered that the soc voltage shouldn't go over 1.3 volts. My guess is that something got damaged during those few days and it slowly degraded to where it wouldn't work reliably anymore.
5:54 It's worth noting that in the case of DirectX Raytracing, the 7950x3D pulls back ahead in Cyberpunk because of BVH workload spreading. If the BVH requires 10% of eight 7800x3D cores, then the 7950x3D will only lose 5% per core because it has double the cores to spread the work to. This "5%" (percentage not exact) does actually translate to higher FPS as was shown in a previous HUB video. Edit: Note this is ALSO the case with the standard 7950x, which manages to tie the 7800x3D (Cyberpunk RT) in the original review.
Ye it's reason i bought 7950x3d: to have more overhead, backup to keep the gaming core clean of latency penalty, i've used a photoshop (competitor) software with a game (window but heavy on cpu) next to it, and it's super nice: fps don't drop weither i use software or not weight i use image rendering or not. Also better for power consumption, most of my cores work at 1ghz for small tasks, it's known to be insanely power efficient there. the 7800x3d cores would clock higher, probably using more power, even with the dual cCD 10 watt penalty in power use.
really happy to see the cross CCD issues looking better for the 7950x3d. Realistically, that sort of design is going to be required in the future to reach a good number of cores and thermals. May as well work out the kinks now.
Here in EU(Italy) I don't think I've seen a Ryzen 9 7950X3D under 620 US$ while the 7800X3D you can get it at around 350 US$(prices after euro to dollar conversion). So, Ryzen 7 7800X3D still makes sense, even in non-gaming, because for general home/office use, you just don't need more.
Black friday had it for 580€ 7950x3d, i payed 700€ (plus game valued at 100€ back then) july 2023, old pas was becoming issue and ram was about to get more expensive so i pulled trigger (plus motherboard was 50€ off and i knew it wouldnt last in high-end x670E. Right choice, even with high price, no regret (7800x3d was 500€ then so imo overpriced) and i abuse multi core a lot.
I mean no one said it's a bad cpu for non gaming purposes. It's just bad if you wanna do professional level productivity stuff, which most users don't fall under.
The 7900x3d is going for $327 right now during Amazon prime day. I was intrigued, It's a decent deal for people who need the extra 4 cores. Glad to see HU had a similar thought recently.
The 12core Ryzen 9 options (7900x 7900x3d 7900) are competing very well with the meteor lake i7s (13700s 14700s) in both gaming and productivity with significantly lower power consumption and better platform socket
I built my new system back in mid January 2024 with a 7800X3D + RTX4090 and couldn't be happier with the performance when paired with a 32" 240Hz display. The last system I built prior to this was way back in 2002 during the Athlon XP era! Up to this point I had mainly been using Mac for productivity tasks and consoles for gaming. All said this is a massive uplift for me and a refreshing change.
@ZRay507 100% I started buying parts in July 2023 so took a little while to get to the finish line. The hardest part and most conflicting for me was deciding on which GPU to go with. I had originally intended to go with the AMD 7900XTX from the beginning, but then I made a complete U-turn getting the RTX4090 over the 7900XTX after also considering the RTX4070/4080 Super refresh. I certainly can feel the different when compared to my Xbox Series X.
My new setup will be 7800x3d with a 4090 as I do competitive sim racing with vr. Also with am5 at least I can just change cpu in the near future to cut costs down in a few years. The review was great Steve happy Easter mate
7900x3D for $390 is a killer.. 12 cores means extra heavy cores games in next 2 years won't hurt your CPU Also, Windows sometimes do some BS while U playing like updating apps or whatever.. Getting 12 cores instead of 8 for nearly same price is a better buy Also.. 7900x3D have slightly better boost frequency compared to 7800x3D (5.6 GHz Vs 5.0 GHz) because 7800x3D use the 3D chip above the core die, while the 7900x3D / 7950x3D they use the 3D chip above only 1 die, while other is just vanilla die with max turbo
Agre, ivy bridge 4 core had about after 6th and 8th year that i owned it a lot of trouble to multitask while gaming, was still good but clearly buttlenecked and killing fps even on single core working games. 8 core now, everyone thinks 'omg i'll never need more' imo 8 cores are now what 4 cores were in past, good now but not in future, that's why i always wanted 12 cores, 5900x3d was my target, but didnt came out then 7900x3d was to expensive old pc died almost, so pushed myself to 7950x3d, no regrets, its amazing to watch this cpu in task manager like HW64info. Most cores do little stuff on 1ghz (wich is very efficient) and core parking also works (wich makes 7900x3d more efficient in gaming then 7900x).
@Matti6950 Yeah, I also had Intel 6600k (4C - 4T) back I'm 2016.. which showed bottleneck in heavy titles like AC Origins, which needed around 6 Threads to be smooth (which was rare in 2016/2017 titles to use more than 4 Threads) Then upgraded to intel 7700 (4C - 8T) and got like 20% smoother fps in AC Origins Lol Then got Ryzen 2600x , Ryzen 3600x , Ryzen 5600x (all of them were 6C - 12T) But their turbo & IPC gains were betwen 10% to 20% each Gen.. which was super rare back in Intel monopoly Scam xD Personally I bought Ryzen 5 models from China (cheaper than local stores & Amazon) and sold them at the same price I bought in my country since not everyone know how to transport cheap CPUs from China Lol.. so it wasn't a loss Overall.. getting 8C CPU will serve you will for up to 2026 minimum.. and getting newer 8C CPU will work better than old 12C CPUs for example (Ryzen 7 - 7700x Vs Ryzen 9 - 3900x) Getting the 3D version is even better if the price is not that expensive
@lharsay architecture? You probably mean optimizations & utilization That's totally depends on developers & how they handle the load spread on cores But that won't mean from 6 cores to 13 cores utilization will give you 100% more performance The more cores you add, the less beneficial they get (especially in games) A lot of games engines (especially old ones) rely heavily on 1-4 cores, the better IPC & Frequency, the better the fps On small workstations, montage & designing programs, they mostly benefit from higher cores count, while in gaming.. games now barely even use 6C - 12T.. even Triple AAA games rarely use the full power of 8C - 16C.. we still a few years from 12C & up.. maybe in next 3 years At least that is what I seen & experienced with my 500+ steam game library (including bad optimized games like Ubi$oft & Bethesda games..etc)
@@Jack_Sparrow131 the Ryzen 9 CPUs have two compute chiplets losely wired to an I/O die which results massive latency between the two. We also see an other factor in play here. There is basically no performance difference between the 7700X, 7900X and 7950X while the 7900X3D lags behind the other two X3D chips, which makes me conclude that the non-X3D chips are bottlenecked by their cache capacity which prevents the proper utilization of all 8 cores on the CCD.
The ryzen 9 7950x3d is like having a v16 engine and deciding to turbocharging just 8 cylinders on the same side The 7950x3d was destined to greatness And amd made it half wit failure I believed in it soo much I named my Minecraft sword after it like a year before it was announced
Bingo and also it does not dump so much excess heat inside the case as the wattage is so much lower 80W vs like 200W at least even gaming for 14900KS never mind full loaded CPU 14900KS even Intel limits enforced 320W yikes amount of heat dumped into the case. Power consumption would not be important if Intel was 120 watts max and AMD was 90 watts max or 100 watts vs 50 watts. But on a small CPU to cool, 253+ watts vs only 80 to 120 watts is important for a quiet PC and avoiding degradation as so much power on a small die is just bad for the chip unlike the RTX 4090 which despite 400 Watts power, it is a large die and overall PCB board and easy to get rid of the heat plus it sonly one thing taking lots of power inside case not 2 when you go AMD with RTX 4090 route.
It's the 7900X3D with the non-3D V-Cache CCD disabled. Steve mentioned at the start of the benchmarks that it's a theoretical part, like how he used this configuration on the 7950X3D to effectively review the 7800X3D before it released.
My guess with A Plague Tale is that the game targets using 8 cores and the 6+6 core chips suffer a heavily penalty from cross-CCD communication, while the rest can keep all the game's threads on one CCD. Smarter thread scheduling on the game's part could certainly fix that (treat 6+6 like a 6 core CPU.)
I'm gonna go with the 7900x for two reasons. Will need it for other productivity task video editing and programming. Microcenter has a sweet bundle with a mobo and 32 gbs ram
I think the 7950x3D is a pretty awesome choice for streaming as well. You basically get a 7800x3D dedicated to gaming and a 7800x (non 3D) dedicated to running OBS (x264) and other crap in the background.
Great video, the 7900X3d is a very compelling option for me. I'm an Audio Engineer and Musician so I need something with great Single Core performance, Multi Core performance for Virtual Instrument libraries, but I also love gaming. I'm still torn between the 7900X3D and the 7950X3D, but leaning more towards the 7900 and putting the extra money into other components.
I picked up the 7950X3D over a year ago for $549 and I've been loving it. My games run like butta and production work is a breeze. Highly recommend it if you can get it on a deal or just need all the ooomphh you can get without burning down the building with Intel lol
Would you ever consider doing a competitive settings cpu benchmark video? Like Fortnite performance mode low settings, csgo low settings, valorant low settings and COD warzone/multiplayer low settings.
I LOVE my 7950x3D. Even in years to come after I upgrade my main rig, it'll be a powerhouse of a CPU to transfer to a secondary PC. A 16/32 CPU with 3D V-Cache is going to be a relevant CPU for a long time to come.
Same here, love my 7950x3d, it's future prove in all ways: power efficiency, 3d cache in games, multitasking like video rendering, platform longevity, etc
AMD's software scheduling is very good actually, having a 7950x3D for 3 months now and it rocks every game i've tried on it without any manual intervention in regards to setting core affinity, even though there's a very, ever so very very tiny advantage if you do so but it's so small you shouldn't even bother tbh.
Another way to look at 7900x3d is if you’ve got a Job that would require you to have a 7900x3d, you have the money to spend to spend the extra for a 7950x3d.
So satisfied that I was able to purchase the 7800x3d on the day it was released. thanks for the review. I have heard that w11 handles the scheduling better than w10, Is this proven?
If the price here was anywhere close to the US$ prices you quoted, I would've gone for the X3D versions, but since I use this for gaming and work, I ended up with the 7900X instead. Still a solid choice over the 7800X3D for my use case, but the 7950X3D is still between 640 and 700+ euros, which is insane.
Great video! I just don't like the idea of having split CCD's with x3d and non x3d. I don't trust the apps to pick the right cores. 7800x3d is what i would go with, however... i see no reason at this time to upgrade from my 5900x.
That's why 12 cores are great: they last so long you don't feel need to upgrade, 5800x3d are already feeling slow for non gaming work (30-40% slower then 7800x3d, so even more then 7900x3d). It's why i got 7950x3d (7900x3d was my first target but 600€ was simply to much for it). Now i would buy it in a blast).
I decided to pull the trigger on a non x3D, I went for the R9 7950x. I upgraded from a i7 6700k so you can imagine how life changing this new chip has been for me, every game used to be CPU bottlenecked to hell, I struggled for a long time especially on CSGO/CS2. My god, the power of this CPU, every single day it impresses me at 1440p.
7900x3D is for those who actually needs a 7950x3D type of hybrid processor but can't afford it so it is somewhat geared towards budget minded people. Competing on price is the right move.
Not investing in this until the motherboard prices aren't completely insane, I ended up building am4 5800x3d for my Linux side PC simply because the price of the Mobo was just so much better and it wasn't worth the value or performance increase and I'm saying that with having no price restrictions for myself I just couldn't justify even without price restrictions to spend that much more for modest gains bc the Mobo cost 😅
There's some good 200$ motherboards right now, even cheaper but they are very naked feature wise. Cheaper i would not expect, motherboard companies decided to take the pc price hike to get safer (they really had small) margins. One good thing: i think they won't soon increase them more or they will definitely lose customers, but i forgot name but there is a guy on youtube who compared gpu's what to buy and not recently did motherboard AMD buying guide, he mentioned gigabyte and msi launched NEW motherboard at 200-230$ with good feature set, i would look for that vide if i were you i don't think it will improve much more.
I had missed the price reduction.🤦♂ Must say I am interested in this CPU. 1. I like to have something "weird", something I would not recommend to my friends, something that is a bit irrational, just because it is fun. 2. I do other projects on my pc. FEM calculations, Video encoding, Video Editing, CAD and Blender, thus sometime I just could use all the cores that I can get. (And all the memory) 3. I do like benchmarking and finding the "optimal" graphics settings for the games I play, and changing CPU configuration would just be one more thing to test. 4. I do not find it interesting to just bay the most expense pc I can get, it is fun to try to finde some balance optimized for the things I use my pc for.
They have. But those are eye watering expensive Epyc CPUs for scientific compute. That's where the technology originated, but some AMD engineer got the bright idea of ordering one of those CCDs put on an AM4 socket and started testing which desktop applications would respond well to it... and discovered that quite a few games went on steroids from it.
I just have to say. Hardware Unboxed has the most INFORMATIVE no nonsense videos for people comparing components for PC builds. I own M27Q and M28U monitors, M28 in landscape, M27 in Portrait because of the information this channel provides on specs and performance of gear. This channel is also why I have a 5950x. The guesswork is gone. Can't wait to see the reports you guys put out on the 9000 series AM5 chips, and the 5090 when it drops.
Thank you for the video. Based of the top of my head, I've recently bought a 5700x3d, I assumed an around 5% perf dif to the 5800x3d, and I came from an 5600x. It was an expensive upgrade, but I game at 1080P mainly online games. My son inherited my 5600x, from a 2600, it was a nice upgrade for him as well.
Now the 7900x3d is cheaper than the 7800x3d. That’s why I came here.
Yep, and now it’s a good buy if you do literally ANYTHING in addition to gaming.
Lol so we all came here for the same reason
319 at microcenter. cant complain when the 7600x was 300 when it came out. the 5600x was 300 when it dropped. so yeah at this price point of the 7900x3d is way better and better value.
Yup lol
Same 😂
In your charts, I would have renamed AMD Ryzen 5 7600X3D to "Simulated 7600X3D" just to avoid confusion.
I was like wait, when did AMD release a 7600X3D. Had to google real quick 😅. Was just skimping through the charts and not really paying attention to the talking.
Right! At first, I was like, "Oooooh... that exists?!" Nope, doesn't exist. :(
Was just as confused initially, had to do a double take. Either that or least add quotations to distinguish it isn't real.
he only says it a million times
He mentioned it was "simulated" many times .
x3d is the most exciting thing in CPU's in a long time, and AMD shoving it into literally everything is great.
it is but also means that L3 cache is cheaper now for consumers. Back in the early 2000s, a teacher of mine once told me that if we could ever afford more Cache in our CPUs, we would see an increase in performance. I'm still mind blown how far along with have come with CPU performance in the last 20 years.
@@rudy_dstroys1821 But why that cache was that expensive ?
@@hirootto2771 because everything back then was basically in beta mode. Nothing was refined since it was literally just being built.
Best gaming CPU for only 370$, if only GPU market was this good : /
Shh, don’t give them any ideas!
The intel cards are good value for money with the new drivers and hopefully battlemage will be even better
@@rodiculous9464 knowing Intel, they might be pricier as well. I mean we all hope they won't but remains to be seen.
7900xt at 699 is pretty compelling....
Well the 7900X3D does not make sense at all, but IF you do both gaming and some video work the 7950X3D is slightly slower than the 7950 for multicore load but as its pretty much the same gaming perf as the 7800X3D its a good deal for both things plus you still have more cores for those games that take advantage of pure core load instead of the 3DVcache and unless you are very fixated on RT both the RX7900XT and XTX seems fair deals after the price cuts or the 7800XT if you are more budget minded
No surprises here, the 7800x3d is still the price/performance king for gaming. Atleast the 7950x3d CCD issues have mainly been resolved and it now actually performs same as the 7800x3d instead of worse. Now it actually is a proper hybrid CPU
@@BikeeMikee ?
Lil bro is a bit confused
My next cpu is 7800x3d 👍
@@BikeeMikeewhat if I do? are you jealous?
Youre the lil bro here. This comment is about cpu performance, gpu bottlenecking is a thing but was never brought up, what's your point exactly
finally a 7900x3d review, thank you so much legends! 😎
@@eugenijusdolgovas9278 omg, we get it, you are clueless. They have explained why they do it this way but no, mr. Smarta$$ here knows better...
Would have been interesting to see some productivity workloads, but he mentioned that isn't really their purview.
@@eugenijusdolgovas9278 7800x3d is the most popular choice for higher end CS2 builds because the game is insanely CPU heavy. We run it on resolutions much lower than 1080p on top. For comp FPS the 3d vcache is crazy valuable.
@@eugenijusdolgovas9278people upgrade GPUs more often. Today's 1080p is going to be tomorrow's 1440p
Its a bad cpu
Using the 7800x3D and the only things that amazes me even more than the performance, is power draw and how easy to cool it is. Must be a lifeline for those going for ITX.
It is amazing for a Lian Li ITX H2O case. Can't even hear AIO cooler pump most of the time.
Yup, used one in a tiny 4 litre ITX case with a tiny Noctua low profile cooler and a 4060 low profile GPU. The 7800X3D draws so little power that it can still work with such a small cooler without throttling itself.
Amazing CPU. Coming from Intel, I almost can't believe the stats.
@@little_fluffy_cloudsare you planning on upgrading the GPU?
@@drew2626 no, there’s no room in this case for a bigger card. I built another system instead with a 7800X3D and 4090. It’s a slightly bigger case, a McPrue ITX case
Balen, mate, the B roll is excellent, always appreciate the effort watching this at 4K on a big screen.
Thanks for this, glad you appreciate the effort! :)
@@BalinThomasAnd the living legend responds!
Been running a 7800x3d on a Carbon wifi x670E with a 4080 for a few months now. Not a single issue or hiccup and all my games look amazing. Very happy with the build!
Nice! What model monitor are you using?
Same, X670E Carbon Wifi but with a 7950X3D in it. Been great since I put the system together. Flashback was easy to get the board ready for the processor.
@evers6214 I'm using a MSI ultrawide 1440p monitor. It's only 144hz, but waiting for these new Gen 240hz Oled ultrawide monitors to come down in price before I upgrade
4080+1440p = 7800X3D being irrelevant. You could use a 7600 and see no practical difference with that platform.
I got that exact setup.. best CPU + didnt like the 4070s lack of VRAM so got 4080
What a timing! I just ordered my 7800x3d!
it's a beast of CPU, congratz!
Enjoy!
even AMD released it later than both of r9s with 3D V cache because they knew it would outsell the 7950 and 7900 x3d's. kudos!
A video comparing Process Lasso management, disabling a CCD and running stock would be interesting to me for the 2 CCD parts.
I would like to see you guys make a video on undervolting the x3d products. I know every cpu will undervolt differently depending on the bin, but maybe a basic guideline on how to get started. This was a great video as well. Keep up the great work guys.
Yep for now I just set 75c thermal limit and -30 magnitude in PBO with linear fan curve from 19% at 30c that does cap its potential a bit but main interest is how to easily find the magnitude sweet spot overall/per core that is still stable (mine holds for now in medium gaming, but crash in heavy CPU tasks or power saving modes).
@@mikfhan OCCT is your friend - Small, Extreme, Variable settings and test four, three, two cores and one as well as eight (or six for a six-core) to account for varying active core counts on a CCD side. Helped me get to -26 -23 -27 -27 -19 -21 on my 7600 - it can do ~4700Mhz all-thread with the GPU running a task in BOINC as well, at 102.6 BCLK and 5600 CL40 RAM at 5974Mhz CL34 (though with 1.35/1.42 V respectively on the sticks). Don't forget to tweak your voltage and speed on the iGPU if using that as it can impact top speed due to power/thermals. Also y-Cruncher's Hybrid NTT test is good for checking an FCLK overclock/voltage tweak.
@@TheGreenReaperthe x3d parts don't have an iGpu. but do have an overclock issues. many have burnt because people tried to OC as the 3D V cache is extremly heat sensitive.
also to the OP: please be careful when undervolting. it too has potential to break your cpu because of v cache sensitivity. check out derbauer's videos to learn more.
@@inkredebilchina9699 Yeah, that's true, and one potential reason not to get the X3D version (but I imagine those wanting to play around might go for a cheaper CPU anyway).
@@inkredebilchina9699 I can verify that the 7900X3D does indeed have an iGPU.
The best thing about my 7800X3D is that I didn't waste a single second of my life with silly memory tuning. It's the fastest right out of the box
Not only that. It's still so good you also don't get stuck wondering which chip to buy and I had and still have zero buyers remorse. It has remained the best chip for almost a year now. It's pretty amazing.
but... 14900KS with custom water loop and all those steps needed for APO
Noob
Yep, absolutely. I've went from a 7600X with 6200 CL30 + tuned Subtimings to a 7800X3D. With the 7600X, the RAM tuning compared to the 5600 CL36 EXPO profile made a massive fps difference, especially 1% lows.
I've tested this with the 7800X3D too and the 3D Cache is basically "Yeah whatever, give me just enough amount of RAM and I'm fine".
Difference in ACC is 205 vs 220 fps avg. With the 7600X it was 120 vs drops into the 90's.
1% lows are 70 vs 145, 7600X vs 7800X3D.
For simracing, the price per fps is actually lower with the 3D, lol
What memory do you have? Not BIOS settings or brand, but what are the specs? The 7800X3D is kind of picky that way. You say you didnt mess with memory tuning, but some specs are more stable than others.
If that seems non-sensical, I'll explain. AMD is REALLY stable at 6000 MHz CL30, but if you are running with the 6000 MHz CL 36, you may find your system crashing under high stress gaming sessions. Same with 6400 MHz CL 36, or any other memory. A whole lot of people ran a whole lot of tests to find what the most stable memory setting is for the 7800X3D, and it turns out to be 6000 MHz CL30. Now, this is in no way saying that this setting is perfect, or that other memory settings are guaranteed to be unstable. The research I did just suggested that this is the most stable memory you can purchase, or it was as of October of 2023. (When I built my PC)
The 7900x3d was on sale for only a $30 difference from the 7800x3d, and the amount of compression and decompression I do with large files, it was a nice middle of the road upgrade from my 3900x that's starting to get a bit long in the tooth.
May I ask what kind of workload it is that requires compression and decompression?
Except that it sucks so bad that you have to constantly fight it.
Exactly 7900x3d and 7950x3d imo are perfect cpu's for people who bought and actually made use of 3900x/5900x, HU tone to negative imo.
& now it's $10 cheaper than the 7800x3d.
Still happy I picked the 7800x3d as a gaming build. I hope it lasts me a few years with a possible change in GPU that doesn't hold it back.
i prefer that my upgrade path the last three switches has been 2700k -> 9900k -> 7800x3d so here is hoping this one can last as long as that epic 2700k
@@PainX187 I went from a 6700k 16gb ddr4 memory and a Nvidia 1080. To my 7800x3d 32gb ddr5 and 7900xtx. It's the longest time I've waited for an upgrade, I used to upgrade every 2 years or sooner and not notice a big performance jump.
This time it's insane I've gone from getting 30-40fps to a 130-144fps which is insane, and also great as I'm seeing the benefits from my new high refresh rate monitor.
Definitely learnt to only upgrade when I need too.
Another lesson, AMD cards are genuinely really good.
@@simonbaker7462 same but just a 4090 setup with a 1440p 240hz monitor i upgrade GPU steadily but CPU only if i have to and always one with room to grow if i can
7800X3D is the king
It's amazing! I got it a couple of months ago to replace my aging i7 8700K and the performance uplift I got is unreal!
If you're primarily a gamer and have money there's no reason to get anything else as far as I can tell!
@@TheDarksideFNothingYeap, I only use my system for gaming & media, web surfing, music listening etc. No workload whatsoever.
@Annihilator-zv6xh what u mean not anymore? The 7950x3d came before the 7800x3d and overall in gaming the 7800x3d is still king
Technically the 7950X3D is the best. 7800X3D is the price to performance king.
It seems like to me that the 7900X3D would still be a good all-rounder between gaming and productivity tasks. Perhaps the best value option for those looking for a good balance between those.
Great review! I run the 7950X3D on my rig which does work + gaming so I was happy with it.
Thats why Im getting the 7950x3d aswell. I want a workstation that can give me those kind of frames aswell.
Literally just pulled the trigger on this CPU yesterday!
I need it for my 5 monitor MSFS simulator. The goal is to have the cache core running the sim while the other core handles background tasks like OBS streaming with 3 webcams, air manager touchscreen cockpit controls, NoIR Face Tracking, navigation, etc.
Of course most benchmarks only show what we simulator enthusiasts call "vanilla MSFS". In other words, msfs2020 running on one monitor with no other background tasks running. There's a large portion of us simmer running much more complex systems than this, and constantly chasing the fastest hardware to try to pull it off and get a decent frame rate.
We appreciate these sorts of benchmark reviews!
If you want a an idea for a very niche video for us 1,000 flight Sim enthusiasts... 😆
How about a benchmark run of these 3 cpus with msfs2020 running while cinabench or something is running in the background. Even better would be running it in triple screen mode with a heavy background task.
We sim enthusiasts rely on community forums to share this kind of performance data.q
Microsoft Flight Simulator simulator? That's like saying ATM machine...
@@IndyMiraaga Thank you for the correction. You have added so much value to my day!
I bought the 7900X3D also for my FS2020 rig, but I'm running in VR. The CPU isn't the bottleneck in my case. Process Lasso to the rescue.
July 18, 2024. The 7900X3D can now be had for $328 US. Now it's a very interesting CPU.
I'll be building a 4K / WQHD gaming and sometimes production system on an ASRock B650E Taichi Lite board, and the 7900X3D interests me quite a lot. It's still plenty fast for gaming and a whopping $212 less than a 7950X. I'm retired and not getting paid to make videos, so the lower performance is no big deal.
In my countrie the 7800x3d is 610 usd and the 7900x3d is 410usd and i think those 2 extra 3d cores are not worth 150 usd more
New budget gaming king was shown here 1st..7600x3d...cant wait!
Really helpful review as I was considering the 7900X3D for a hybrid work pc and gaming pc. It fits my budget and needs.
So what you choose? Im confused too 😭 helpp
@@KhaledAl-cq4nc7800X3D is king for gaming. 7950X3D is good for multitasking. Consult an expert for your budget, you might go with other non-3D CPU and higher GPU combo.
Should probably have put an asterisk or something next to the name 7600X3D* on the charts to visually indicate it’s different.
Thank you for including fresh CS2 test results! The game got lots of perf. improvements over the last few months and older reviews are kind of untrustable. I'm only missing comparison against CPUs like 5600X and 5800X3D.
Yeah I think these newer gen CPUs should always have that benchmark of the great from the previous gen, I'm really interested in seeing how these perform against a 5800x3d.
I'll save you the trouble, since I just tried something similar. On a 4080, very little difference between 5900X and a 7800X3D. Maybe 15 percent on average. On a 4090, 7800X3D can pull ahead of 5000 series CPUs by 50 to even 70 percent faster in many games. So unless you buy a 4090, no sense upgrading from 5000 series at all.
honestly at the current US prices 7900x3d has some serious value to it for anyone who needs both great gaming CPU and good multi-threaded productivity CPU. thanks for the review guys!
Yeah, the 7900X3D is underrated, IMO.
Full disclosure that I don't know the exact breakdowns, but why not just get a high end Intel chip at that point?
Edit: I got my answers guys. Thanks.
@@ClamChowder95 Because the x3d chip is faster in a lot of real productivity stuff while using 1/3rd of the watts.
@@ClamChowder95 The way intel change the plataform non stop
@@ClamChowder95 power consumption and platform longevity come to mind immediatly.
also, e-cores still have some issues in some applications, especially virtualization
The benchmarks from you guys helped me choose the 7800X3D. Could not be happier! Keep up the great work.
Wish there was a 5800X3D thrown in there , to represent the best AM4 has to offer for comparison .
It matched the 7600x, Thats how I usually see it.
@@itsnodee4612 I mean yeah on average and especially on GPU heavy scenarios that stands true but on CPU heavy scenarios and games like Factorio , ACC etc its quite faster than the 7600X .
The propreitary game engine in "A Plague Tale: Requiem" shows exactly why back in the day of Windows XP/7 you would need to restart a system with any extra threads beyond 8 disabled. There were so many games that didn't run well, or at all, if you didn't.
When I built my PC last year I bought my 7900x3d & it’s been awesome. I use is for productivity, as well as gaming & because the 7800x3d is mainly a gaming processor, the 7900x3d was a no-brainer for me, as I didnt feel the need to spend more money for the 7950, because I didn’t need it:).
It's a good all-rounder at it's current price, basically an i7 14700K with half the power draw.
@@lharsayHalf the power draw and the 14900k needs DDR5-7200 to keep up with the 7900X3D in gaming. And it's on a dead platform.
Imo for any multi apping with some sapping some serious power, 12-core cpu's are the go to for value and future longevity. they gaming support is slightly worse (but this test imo proves you lost nothing but few %, in some games even better, so just love it. I didn't buy cause 600€ then. But 390 dollar is insane value imo.
Also the power draw is amazing.
As someone about to build a new dedicated high-end gaming PC, this video hits at exactly the right time.
You dont need this video to see that 7800x3d is the go to for high end gaming cpu
@@NamTran-xc2ip what if their high end pc is not just for gaming ? Like 7800X3D isn't a great cpu for multicore workloads you know
@NamTran-xc2ip Because naming structures across nearly all tech companies have largely remained similar - for example Intel core i3 i5 i7 and i9, each sequential number targets more performance and a different audience, so ryzen 7 7800X3D is a lower number than the ryzen 9 7900X3D so the video showing the differences between 78 and 79 are important because the average person might not have the esoteric knowledge and backend information/context to know the difference between the two parts.
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat The comment says to build a dedicated high end gaming pc.
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombatWell, they said it's a dedicated gaming PC. With that said they should look no further than a 7800X3D.
Playing a drinking game every time Steve says "X3D" would be a disaster 😂
Please don't! :)
Regarding scheduling:
It's worth checking if game is detected on 3D models. This parks non-cached CCD result should not differ from 1CCD model (for same boost frequencies).
If you want to fine-tune scheduling, use Process Lasso. You need to enable high performance profile in Windows to disable core parking for this to see any benefit.
Tying game to 1 CCD more often than not helps even with non-3D models, for some games I saw 10% performance increase on my old 3900X, but it depends on how many cores game is able to use.
It is exactly the tool people need to use whenever they will get a 7900x3d or 7950x3d. Really makes a world of difference.
@@cyberpunk59 all you need is chipset driver form Amd site and this driver park correctly 3D v cache cores in games on Ryzens 9 with 3d cache.
@@ttwinsturbo Unfortunately, there are some games which work better on the chiplet without 3D cache, as it boosts higher, and there are games which just don't work with the AMD solution at all, Process Lasso lets you choose however you want your game, and your other applications, to run. It needs a bit of tinkering, but it's much more powerful than the automated system AMD has made.
@@ttwinsturbo This is more of a band aid for the masses. Problem is inflexible Windows scheduler. Process Lasso is way better tool, but it need some work and understanding.
Windows smart enough to know when i use photoshop (competitor), to not park the cores, otherwise they mostly do. Alt-tabbing disabled core parking, until you alt-tab back to game.
What is so impressive about the 7800X3D is the power draw, playing GTA 5 which is a quite CPU hungry game uses around 40 watts and runs so cool.
@@noir-13 Not anymore. Though it used to be when it was released on PC in 2015.
Any modern CPU will chill while doing gta 5 lol.
Troll
LOL, I plugged my PC into a watt meter (I dont know the official name) to see how much power it was drawing, and in heavy gaming (I was playing the new Avatar game) the total draw topped at around 554 watts consistently. I have a 7800X3D with a 4080, with a 1300W PSU. Clearly..... overkill, apparently. That power draw is insane, especially compared to the 7700K w/ 1080 that I used to have that was around 300-400 watts.
Using afterburner, the CPU eats about 50-60W depending on the game, and keeps around 60 degrees with a 360 AIO. This thing rarely gets warm, let alone hot. It's awesome.
@@Miguel-th3wx turn on self radio and see
I bought 7950x3D to process video and game. I game at 4K so I figured the few frames it was behind the 7800x3D in tests didn’t really matter since the tests are conducted at lower resolutions where the CPU is the bottleneck. I am glad that my processor is no longer a laggard behind the 7800x3D tho
Thanks for the update, Steve!
It depends on the games you play. There are a few oddballs here and there, but generally there isn't much in it. But if you manually test each game and use launch scripts to tie it to the CCD it responds the best to the 7950X3D is overall faster because there are a few games here and there that prefer frequency over cache.
Damn, you guys post videos right when I need them.
I know it's impractical, but I'd love to see the 5800X3D in this comparison as well
7600 and it would do worse in newer games @unholydonuts
Steve’s already done that: th-cam.com/video/7L9rPNSuPCA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=gKn6iwMOqQKoV6SD
I was thinking the same thing. My 5800X recently died on my and I didn't want to drop the $ to upgrade to AM5 just yet, so I dropped in a 5800X3D and it's been fantastic with my 3080 so far. But I still like to see how it compares to the current gen. Although when I do upgrade, it probably won't be until the next series of Ryzen chips.
@@CargoShorts7it has already been done by reviewers. The 5800X3D still does ok, but falls way short of the 7800X3D.
Now that AM5 has had time to mature and iron out the initial bios issues, a review at this time is really valuable. 👍
Thank you for your thorough analysis, as always. I'm in the process of putting together a system, so your timing is perfect!
thanks, very interesting comparison, would have been nice to also have seen the 5800X3D in the list just out of curiosity. What bugs me a bit is that 7600X3D - maybe next time don't name it like this on your graphs, it's confusing for those who pause the video or watch it without audio, and it also saves you time if you don't have to mention all time how that 7600X3D came to be.
The 5800x3d is typically anywhere between 1 to 8% slower. I have both and the difference between them is almost impossible to tell from feel alone. Definitely worth grabbing if still on AM4. If building from scratch go 7800x3d
Holy shiat this is crazy, I was thinking about buying my parts today and wanted to go for a 7950x3d but man, it’s not worth the money, I’m gonna go for the 7800x3d and save some money for the gpu instead. GREAT VIDEO!
Don't buy to expensive gpu, unless yours dying not worth it. 8800 XT is the first one who might have good enough value to upgrade, to have a 'this time' fast cpu but future proof you need to pay 1000€, anything lower meh, until 7800xt where value cranks up again (though in 3 years it will feel very tempting to upgrade again with the gpu power demand from games. I do opposite of you 7950x3d cause i love to multitask and be future proof, still using 1080 gtx cause i don't trust gpu market, plus buying one now could really hurt my wallet if new one dies in two years, so no i will wait it out, imo we need 4090 performance in 500-600€ segment, that will be the 'wonder time' to upgrade (even for lower segment)then it won't feel like 'i payed a lot but i still don't get enough fps or 4k resolution in games (basically situation now).
@@Matti6950 your opinion, im currently playing on a 3-4 years old pc and i feel the pc getting slower from day to day. I want to start from scratch so i have 2 pc´s in the end. I currently have everything here to build, i just need to safe money for a gpu then im gonna be fine for the next 3-4 years. My Plan is to build everything and then put my currently gpu in (3070) and wait 2 months and then upgrade to a 4080.
Im gonna agree on that part that pc parts are sooo goddamn expensive. 2000€ for a 4090, thats a fucking car right there. im not gonna pay more than 1100-1500 at the maximum, my whole build would be worth 3k
How were you about to buy the 7950x3d and didn't know it was primarily for productivity?
takeaway from this is 7600X3D if it existed for a good price would be a real dark horse for gaming
Fairly confident we'll see those *eventually* with all the failed 7800X3D chips, just like the 5600X3D
within a year, it will probably appear ....
@@Collin_J Thing is if you think about it those failed CCDs are going into the 7900X3D. They can test the CCDs separately.
@@TheGreenReaper since the 3D V-cache is an extra chiplet, they can simply just not pack it on top of the CCD and use it for a Ryzen 7600, 7900 or some Epyc/Threadripper chip.
every time i see a bench mark with the 7800x3d it makes me glad that i spent the extra $$ to get it over the 7700x that i was originally going to get, i see this CPU lasting alot longer then my 3600 that i had before
Generally agree, but depends as usual. This test were done in 1080p. If you play 1440p or 4k the gap is much smaller, especially if you do not play competitive FPS with 200+ frames per second. In some games the 7700x will be the same or even very slightly better, because of the higher frequency.
@@martinpro4967 The 5800X3D is already starting to show it's strengths even in a lot less extreme situations. Both Starfield and the latest versions of Modern Warfare are having problems breaking 75FPS on even quite recent CPUs, regardless of graphics settings, but the 5800X3D isn't among them. Personally I target 90-100FPS in most single player games (I don't play RTS games or factory sim games where 45-60FPS is typically perfectly fine) and there are plenty of games now where the 5600 can only just do that. Spending the extra amount for that big slab of L3 makes sense for people who generally only upgrade "when they have to".
I want to see 7950X3D in simulated 7800X3D mode vs an actual 7800X3D.
he already made videos like that a year ago when the 7800x3d got released and before its release
if i remember correctly the simulated 7800X3D is even or up to 5% faster in games due to higher clock speed of the 7950X3D
7950X3D owner here: I've done it, and they're identical to within run-to-run variance. If I have a long-ass compile job I start it on the vanilla CCD while gaming on the V-Cache CCD.
@@andersjjensenHave you noticed any issues or downsides to doing that? Like stutters or frame drops from CCD/cores spinning up or down, or whatnot
Maybe I'm misremembering, but I thought I read somewhere that there was an issue when trying to use both CCD's at the same time (the 3D CCD being used for a game)
Something along the lines of when the 3D CCD is being used as primary, the other CCD gets gimped down to less than full throttle/power, something
But I may be mistaken on that
@@andersjjensenPS - What sort of tasks/programs do you utilize for your non-3D productivity CCD?
I'm wondering what programs/tasks the 7950X3D will do significantly better than the 7800, aside from video rendering.
Thank you for this - both the 7900x3d & 7800x3d are ''on sale'' for a 5$ CAD difference on Canada Computers and I had a hard time deciding between the two for mainly gaming. Very nice to see a video addressing the recent price changes and providing the needed data for this dilemma, cheers.
Congrats on 1 Million subs!
If you change a single UEFI setting, it'll force CCD0 regardless. It effectively overrides the driver. In CPU SMU settings, its called Preferred Cores or such, set it to Cache. Default is Auto which is the Driver setting.
I've picked this up for 420€ a few weeks ago after my ryzen 7700 killed itself. I'm quite happy with it, perfect gaming-productivity workhorse. Most of the dual CCD hiccups are also fixed by now.
Your 7700 killed 'itself'? If it's not your doing then you can send it back for warranty. Should have at least 2 years.
Killed itself? You may want to update your motherboard BIOS if your CPU died on its own
Calm down people, I appreciate the sentiment but everything is fine. The 7700 is already RMA-d, I have the new one (kudos to AMD for the hassle free process). It may go into a different pc, not sure yet, the old pc got the upgrade to the 7900x3d.
The bios also got updated to latest (also regulary) during the troubleshooting process. The old cpu was still working but it failed to post quite often. It ran a few days with the old bios around the time when it was discovered that the soc voltage shouldn't go over 1.3 volts. My guess is that something got damaged during those few days and it slowly degraded to where it wouldn't work reliably anymore.
5:54
It's worth noting that in the case of DirectX Raytracing, the 7950x3D pulls back ahead in Cyberpunk because of BVH workload spreading. If the BVH requires 10% of eight 7800x3D cores, then the 7950x3D will only lose 5% per core because it has double the cores to spread the work to. This "5%" (percentage not exact) does actually translate to higher FPS as was shown in a previous HUB video.
Edit: Note this is ALSO the case with the standard 7950x, which manages to tie the 7800x3D (Cyberpunk RT) in the original review.
Ye it's reason i bought 7950x3d: to have more overhead, backup to keep the gaming core clean of latency penalty, i've used a photoshop (competitor) software with a game (window but heavy on cpu) next to it, and it's super nice: fps don't drop weither i use software or not weight i use image rendering or not. Also better for power consumption, most of my cores work at 1ghz for small tasks, it's known to be insanely power efficient there. the 7800x3d cores would clock higher, probably using more power, even with the dual cCD 10 watt penalty in power use.
I upgraded my PC a month ago, and chose the 7800X3D.
I am so glad I made the right choice...
really happy to see the cross CCD issues looking better for the 7950x3d. Realistically, that sort of design is going to be required in the future to reach a good number of cores and thermals. May as well work out the kinks now.
Here in EU(Italy) I don't think I've seen a Ryzen 9 7950X3D under 620 US$ while the 7800X3D you can get it at around 350 US$(prices after euro to dollar conversion). So, Ryzen 7 7800X3D still makes sense, even in non-gaming, because for general home/office use, you just don't need more.
Black friday had it for 580€ 7950x3d, i payed 700€ (plus game valued at 100€ back then) july 2023, old pas was becoming issue and ram was about to get more expensive so i pulled trigger (plus motherboard was 50€ off and i knew it wouldnt last in high-end x670E. Right choice, even with high price, no regret (7800x3d was 500€ then so imo overpriced) and i abuse multi core a lot.
I mean no one said it's a bad cpu for non gaming purposes. It's just bad if you wanna do professional level productivity stuff, which most users don't fall under.
The 7900x3d is going for $327 right now during Amazon prime day. I was intrigued, It's a decent deal for people who need the extra 4 cores. Glad to see HU had a similar thought recently.
7800X3D is better with 13 fps avg at 1080 pixel than 7900X3D. 13 fps average are nothing. I will buy 7900X3D, because this CPU is 12 core, not 8 core.
The 12core Ryzen 9 options (7900x 7900x3d 7900) are competing very well with the meteor lake i7s (13700s 14700s) in both gaming and productivity with significantly lower power consumption and better platform socket
Absolutely loving the 7800X3D. The 7700X is also a very good CPU as it pairs very well with my sons 6950 XT. The 7700X is just in a weird price point
Love the fact that CS2 is part of benchmarks
I built my new system back in mid January 2024 with a 7800X3D + RTX4090 and couldn't be happier with the performance when paired with a 32" 240Hz display. The last system I built prior to this was way back in 2002 during the Athlon XP era! Up to this point I had mainly been using Mac for productivity tasks and consoles for gaming. All said this is a massive uplift for me and a refreshing change.
Wow, what a jump you made!
@ZRay507 100% I started buying parts in July 2023 so took a little while to get to the finish line. The hardest part and most conflicting for me was deciding on which GPU to go with. I had originally intended to go with the AMD 7900XTX from the beginning, but then I made a complete U-turn getting the RTX4090 over the 7900XTX after also considering the RTX4070/4080 Super refresh. I certainly can feel the different when compared to my Xbox Series X.
The moment i saw 7600x3d i paused the vid and went to search for it, wondering when did it release and how did i miss it lol
Same here
Yeah, he should have put in quotes in the charts. Ryzen 5 "7600X3D"
I am glad with how you referenced the lovely video about why you limit GPU bottleneck for CPU testing for gaming benchmarks.
I thought 7900x3d gonna be better than 7800x3d
My new setup will be 7800x3d with a 4090 as I do competitive sim racing with vr. Also with am5 at least I can just change cpu in the near future to cut costs down in a few years. The review was great Steve happy Easter mate
7900x3D for $390 is a killer.. 12 cores means extra heavy cores games in next 2 years won't hurt your CPU
Also, Windows sometimes do some BS while U playing like updating apps or whatever..
Getting 12 cores instead of 8 for nearly same price is a better buy
Also.. 7900x3D have slightly better boost frequency compared to 7800x3D (5.6 GHz Vs 5.0 GHz) because 7800x3D use the 3D chip above the core die, while the 7900x3D / 7950x3D they use the 3D chip above only 1 die, while other is just vanilla die with max turbo
Agre, ivy bridge 4 core had about after 6th and 8th year that i owned it a lot of trouble to multitask while gaming, was still good but clearly buttlenecked and killing fps even on single core working games. 8 core now, everyone thinks 'omg i'll never need more' imo 8 cores are now what 4 cores were in past, good now but not in future, that's why i always wanted 12 cores, 5900x3d was my target, but didnt came out then 7900x3d was to expensive old pc died almost, so pushed myself to 7950x3d, no regrets, its amazing to watch this cpu in task manager like HW64info. Most cores do little stuff on 1ghz (wich is very efficient) and core parking also works (wich makes 7900x3d more efficient in gaming then 7900x).
@Matti6950 Yeah, I also had Intel 6600k (4C - 4T) back I'm 2016.. which showed bottleneck in heavy titles like AC Origins, which needed around 6 Threads to be smooth (which was rare in 2016/2017 titles to use more than 4 Threads)
Then upgraded to intel 7700 (4C - 8T) and got like 20% smoother fps in AC Origins Lol
Then got Ryzen 2600x , Ryzen 3600x , Ryzen 5600x (all of them were 6C - 12T) But their turbo & IPC gains were betwen 10% to 20% each Gen.. which was super rare back in Intel monopoly Scam xD
Personally I bought Ryzen 5 models from China (cheaper than local stores & Amazon) and sold them at the same price I bought in my country since not everyone know how to transport cheap CPUs from China Lol.. so it wasn't a loss
Overall.. getting 8C CPU will serve you will for up to 2026 minimum.. and getting newer 8C CPU will work better than old 12C CPUs for example (Ryzen 7 - 7700x Vs Ryzen 9 - 3900x)
Getting the 3D version is even better if the price is not that expensive
You are assuming that the architecture would let those 12 cores to be fully utilized.
@lharsay architecture? You probably mean optimizations & utilization
That's totally depends on developers & how they handle the load spread on cores
But that won't mean from 6 cores to 13 cores utilization will give you 100% more performance
The more cores you add, the less beneficial they get (especially in games)
A lot of games engines (especially old ones) rely heavily on 1-4 cores, the better IPC & Frequency, the better the fps
On small workstations, montage & designing programs, they mostly benefit from higher cores count, while in gaming.. games now barely even use 6C - 12T.. even Triple AAA games rarely use the full power of 8C - 16C.. we still a few years from 12C & up.. maybe in next 3 years
At least that is what I seen & experienced with my 500+ steam game library (including bad optimized games like Ubi$oft & Bethesda games..etc)
@@Jack_Sparrow131 the Ryzen 9 CPUs have two compute chiplets losely wired to an I/O die which results massive latency between the two. We also see an other factor in play here. There is basically no performance difference between the 7700X, 7900X and 7950X while the 7900X3D lags behind the other two X3D chips, which makes me conclude that the non-X3D chips are bottlenecked by their cache capacity which prevents the proper utilization of all 8 cores on the CCD.
Just realised.. You hit the 1 million subs mark! Congrats.
The ryzen 9 7950x3d is like having a v16 engine and deciding to turbocharging just 8 cylinders on the same side
The 7950x3d was destined to greatness
And amd made it half wit failure
I believed in it soo much I named my Minecraft sword after it like a year before it was announced
Love my 7800X3D, with PBO at -15 its faster than 14900KS in games and takes maximum 80w..
Bingo and also it does not dump so much excess heat inside the case as the wattage is so much lower 80W vs like 200W at least even gaming for 14900KS never mind full loaded CPU 14900KS even Intel limits enforced 320W yikes amount of heat dumped into the case.
Power consumption would not be important if Intel was 120 watts max and AMD was 90 watts max or 100 watts vs 50 watts. But on a small CPU to cool, 253+ watts vs only 80 to 120 watts is important for a quiet PC and avoiding degradation as so much power on a small die is just bad for the chip unlike the RTX 4090 which despite 400 Watts power, it is a large die and overall PCB board and easy to get rid of the heat plus it sonly one thing taking lots of power inside case not 2 when you go AMD with RTX 4090 route.
7600X3D? You are going to confuse people thinking that there is a unreleased cpu
I mean sure, if they can't listen or read the subtitles :D
not if they have ears. he states MULTIPLE times that it's a theoretical cpu.
Lol me. I couldn't believe I missed that launch. I skipped directly to the benchmarks.
I talk about how it's not a real part multiple times during the benchmarks.
It's the 7900X3D with the non-3D V-Cache CCD disabled. Steve mentioned at the start of the benchmarks that it's a theoretical part, like how he used this configuration on the 7950X3D to effectively review the 7800X3D before it released.
My guess with A Plague Tale is that the game targets using 8 cores and the 6+6 core chips suffer a heavily penalty from cross-CCD communication, while the rest can keep all the game's threads on one CCD. Smarter thread scheduling on the game's part could certainly fix that (treat 6+6 like a 6 core CPU.)
Yea that seemed very likely the case to me as well.
7600x3d whattt!!!! is this real ??
It's the projected performance. I seem to remember this being done before (maybe the 7950x3d was the one)
I'm gonna go with the 7900x for two reasons.
Will need it for other productivity task video editing and programming.
Microcenter has a sweet bundle with a mobo and 32 gbs ram
got a new 7800x3d for 250, its still way cheaper
Where?
@@P.7005 some dude was selling it new after buying it and deciding intel is better, I said OK and walked home with my "worse" cpu
@@Demonwickedhis loss 😂
Nice I paid 310 EUR and thought that was a steal!
I think the 7950x3D is a pretty awesome choice for streaming as well. You basically get a 7800x3D dedicated to gaming and a 7800x (non 3D) dedicated to running OBS (x264) and other crap in the background.
Ryzen 5 7600X3D???????
just watch whole video, he expains it at some point, its ryzen 9 7900x3d with only 3d cores enabled
Just picked up the 7900x3d for $327, crazy good deal and it was cheaper than the 7 7800x3d which was also on sale
Great video, the 7900X3d is a very compelling option for me. I'm an Audio Engineer and Musician so I need something with great Single Core performance, Multi Core performance for Virtual Instrument libraries, but I also love gaming. I'm still torn between the 7900X3D and the 7950X3D, but leaning more towards the 7900 and putting the extra money into other components.
thx a lot, I already decided on 7900X3D but apparently that was a bad decision, cheaper 7800X3D appears better nearly all the time
I picked up the 7950X3D over a year ago for $549 and I've been loving it. My games run like butta and production work is a breeze. Highly recommend it if you can get it on a deal or just need all the ooomphh you can get without burning down the building with Intel lol
Love mine too, july last year i got it.
Thanks Steve, it was an incredibly informative review!
Would you ever consider doing a competitive settings cpu benchmark video? Like Fortnite performance mode low settings, csgo low settings, valorant low settings and COD warzone/multiplayer low settings.
I LOVE my 7950x3D. Even in years to come after I upgrade my main rig, it'll be a powerhouse of a CPU to transfer to a secondary PC. A 16/32 CPU with 3D V-Cache is going to be a relevant CPU for a long time to come.
Same here, love my 7950x3d, it's future prove in all ways: power efficiency, 3d cache in games, multitasking like video rendering, platform longevity, etc
The perfect timing, been looking for a 7800x3d and 7900x3d comparison the whole past month.
AMD's software scheduling is very good actually, having a 7950x3D for 3 months now and it rocks every game i've tried on it without any manual intervention in regards to setting core affinity, even though there's a very, ever so very very tiny advantage if you do so but it's so small you shouldn't even bother tbh.
Love mine too, also very few issues regarding scheduling. Only alt-tabbing out of game is issue (it moves to unparked cores then shortly).
Another way to look at 7900x3d is if you’ve got a Job that would require you to have a 7900x3d, you have the money to spend to spend the extra for a 7950x3d.
So satisfied that I was able to purchase the 7800x3d on the day it was released. thanks for the review. I have heard that w11 handles the scheduling better than w10, Is this proven?
If the price here was anywhere close to the US$ prices you quoted, I would've gone for the X3D versions, but since I use this for gaming and work, I ended up with the 7900X instead. Still a solid choice over the 7800X3D for my use case, but the 7950X3D is still between 640 and 700+ euros, which is insane.
Great video! I just don't like the idea of having split CCD's with x3d and non x3d. I don't trust the apps to pick the right cores. 7800x3d is what i would go with, however... i see no reason at this time to upgrade from my 5900x.
That's why 12 cores are great: they last so long you don't feel need to upgrade, 5800x3d are already feeling slow for non gaming work (30-40% slower then 7800x3d, so even more then 7900x3d). It's why i got 7950x3d (7900x3d was my first target but 600€ was simply to much for it). Now i would buy it in a blast).
Hope next-gen launches with 6 core X3D.
Another great review, straight to the point, relevant facts, no fluff.
I decided to pull the trigger on a non x3D, I went for the R9 7950x.
I upgraded from a i7 6700k so you can imagine how life changing this new chip has been for me, every game used to be CPU bottlenecked to hell, I struggled for a long time especially on CSGO/CS2.
My god, the power of this CPU, every single day it impresses me at 1440p.
Your reviews are the best for me, as being a sim racer, it's great to see ACC as part of your testing suite.
Did you use any schedule software for 7900x3d and 7950x3d or only AMD Driver?
7900x3D is for those who actually needs a 7950x3D type of hybrid processor but can't afford it so it is somewhat geared towards budget minded people. Competing on price is the right move.
Not investing in this until the motherboard prices aren't completely insane, I ended up building am4 5800x3d for my Linux side PC simply because the price of the Mobo was just so much better and it wasn't worth the value or performance increase and I'm saying that with having no price restrictions for myself I just couldn't justify even without price restrictions to spend that much more for modest gains bc the Mobo cost 😅
There's some good 200$ motherboards right now, even cheaper but they are very naked feature wise. Cheaper i would not expect, motherboard companies decided to take the pc price hike to get safer (they really had small) margins. One good thing: i think they won't soon increase them more or they will definitely lose customers, but i forgot name but there is a guy on youtube who compared gpu's what to buy and not recently did motherboard AMD buying guide, he mentioned gigabyte and msi launched NEW motherboard at 200-230$ with good feature set, i would look for that vide if i were you i don't think it will improve much more.
Got 7950X3D recently, it's been solid so far.
I had missed the price reduction.🤦♂
Must say I am interested in this CPU.
1. I like to have something "weird", something I would not recommend to my friends, something that is a bit irrational, just because it is fun.
2. I do other projects on my pc. FEM calculations, Video encoding, Video Editing, CAD and Blender, thus sometime I just could use all the cores that I can get. (And all the memory)
3. I do like benchmarking and finding the "optimal" graphics settings for the games I play, and changing CPU configuration would just be one more thing to test.
4. I do not find it interesting to just bay the most expense pc I can get, it is fun to try to finde some balance optimized for the things I use my pc for.
The 7900X3D at $20 more than the 78003D is insane.
The 7950X 3D is marvelous. Fast in and out of gaming.
Great video as always. I wonder if will AMD ever design a CPU with every CCD having its own 3D V-cache.
They have. But those are eye watering expensive Epyc CPUs for scientific compute. That's where the technology originated, but some AMD engineer got the bright idea of ordering one of those CCDs put on an AM4 socket and started testing which desktop applications would respond well to it... and discovered that quite a few games went on steroids from it.
I just have to say. Hardware Unboxed has the most INFORMATIVE no nonsense videos for people comparing components for PC builds. I own M27Q and M28U monitors, M28 in landscape, M27 in Portrait because of the information this channel provides on specs and performance of gear. This channel is also why I have a 5950x. The guesswork is gone. Can't wait to see the reports you guys put out on the 9000 series AM5 chips, and the 5090 when it drops.
Thank you for the video. Based of the top of my head, I've recently bought a 5700x3d, I assumed an around 5% perf dif to the 5800x3d, and I came from an 5600x. It was an expensive upgrade, but I game at 1080P mainly online games. My son inherited my 5600x, from a 2600, it was a nice upgrade for him as well.
thanks bro, i was thinking about the 7800x3d for my next build and now i am learning towards it... seems more reasonable enough