I double checked the embargo date, then hit the wrong day when scheduling the video for release. Not fun when it launches at 6AM and you're dead asleep.
thank you, as someone running 1440p, i really appreciate your video, as cool as seeing the max performance lifts at 1080p is, I prefer something more relevant to my actual use case
@@CraftComputing I think it's worth having a couple of big reviewers test with the same or similar criteria (GN/LTT/HWUB) to ensure that there's little variance in methodology, but have reviewers like you and L1T test for different use cases or criteria.
Another scenario to consider is that not everyone will upgrade both CPU and GPU at the same time. I tend to take turns in upgrading CPU and GPU. Extra CPU horsepower today can be unlocked by the future GPU upgrade. Vice-versa.
This was the best review for me personally because you just tested using everything I have ordered and will be arriving Wednesday! I already have the 4070 ti Super, running on my current system. What is arriving Wednesday is the 9800X3D, Asrock Taichi X870E, G.Skills DDR5 6000, and a new Samsung 990 pro M.2. I am very happy you used my current video card instead of the 4090 that everyone else seems to use, because as I just got the 4070 ti Super 4 months ago, I have no plans to get anything faster for the foreseeable future. After all I upgraded from a 980ti GTX, so the 4070 ti super is a massive improvement. Again thank you.
Dude, you are definitely cool. Finally, I found an adequate review with tests close to life. And not like stupid reviewers with RTX4090 at low settings in 720p. From Russia with respect
Watching lots of 1080p benchmarks on other channels is fine, but I wanted to see benchmarking that closely aligns witih my current setup and you delivered. Thank you.
@nielsenrainier7710 no one (except pros) is spend $500 on a CPU to run at 1080p low settings....That's not real world. Majority play at 1440p now if they have the money for this CPU. People play at 1080p because they have to (usually kids or cash strapped people).
@@LakerTriangle the thing is you're taking everything very literally, just because they test in 720p/1080p does not mean you're gonna be playing there or they expect everyone to play there. You do know that CPU doesnt care much about resolutions right? So how will they show you the real capabilities of it, if its GPU constrained? That is what I meant by real world scenarios, those gains,fps,efficiency will still be there and you're gonna get it but it depends on the other parts you have.
@@DrMicoco I know exactly why 1080p low testing is done. And like I said it's important to know and do. But people also want to see what it might perform like in their system with games and resolutions they use. I play at 4k and 1440p and still purchased a 9800x3d because when the 5080 drops it will be worth it.
@@LakerTriangle and as I said, knowing the full capabilities of the CPU you will buy gives you the baseline to best guess its performance especially if you're planning to do parts only upgrade, and for situational scenarios (mobo+cpu combo testing, cpu+gpu combo testing, game type testing and OC/Undervolt testing) those will come later, as CPU only benchmarks are the ones that usually comes first, this is basic knowledge
Thank you for the review! Minor nitpick: I would have loved to see a third configuration, where the savings from not taking the X3D would have gone towards a better GPU, to show (what I expect to be) a much larger impact on performance in the given tests. For example 9700X+4070tis vs 9800X3D+4070tis vs 9700X+4080s. Or maybe drop the initial GPU level to make the budgets more even: For example 9700X+4070s (better cost) vs 9800X3D+4070s (better CPU) vs 9700X+4070tis (better GPU). It would (at least that's what I expect) show much better that upgrading the GPU makes more sense than the CPU when looking for the best bang for buck for the current games (or not, that would be the point of testing a third configuration)
the synthetic benchmarks really surprised me, with barely no difference. Gaming changes too, was really expecting a lot bigger of an upgrade, especially with the new version of 3d vcache. Thanks for the results
Thank you for this. Would be cool to see the uplift from say a 5800x3D, but that's a lot of extra time spent testing, so it's understandable. It gets old seeing everyone release the same video, at the same time the embargo lifts, with the same charts. It makes sense to test at 1080p to rule out GPU bottlenecks, but it's useless outside of theoretical maximums. I wish other reviewers also focused more on TDP, temps and 1% and .1% lows uplifts between generations and CPU classes.
My sadness listening to your beer reviews at the end as an Aussie who knows they'll never be able to reasonably acquire any of them cannot be measured. I envy you, sir.
I got myself a 9800X3D at launch as I wanted a smoother overall experience with my RTX 4090. I game at 4K, however with DLSS Quality (1440p) settings so 1440p still applies to me 🥰😇👍🙂↕. For many older titles Borderlands 3 etc, my rig gets ridiculously high fps so even a 5% drop in max or 1% lows isn’t worth worrying about ……. Saying that thou, many newer titles from post-2020, the 9800X3D gets much better frame times and less stuttering etc and much smoother and decent gameplay (such as UE5 titles and less optimised titles like Stalker 2)✊💪🥳! The 98003D cpu will see my rig out till the last cpu upgrade supported by AM5 now. In gaming and minor production needs, this cpu is more than enough 💪🙂↕!
I wish people would test actual cpu intensive games like MS flight sim, a large park in planet coaster or DCS when giving benchmarks. It's all the same cyberpunk from the other dozen channels talking about the same thing.
I watched this yesterday lol, but I didn't get a chance to comment. Thank you for testing the way you do. I understand why reviewers test in the way they do, as it shows the "true" performance difference. However, at the same time, those numbers have no real meaning for me. Seeing the ACTUAL performance difference I can expect at a resolution I play at and specs reasonably comparable to what I have is exactly what I wish would be presented more. Yes, the CPU can have a 10% performance difference at 1080, but if at 1440 the performance difference tanks to 2%, there's no reason for me to consider an upgrade.
yes until you need to upgrade when the games/application gets more demanding. Faster CPU's tend to degrade less overtime in terms of performance, gets more frequent update and scale's well with newer GPU's.
I wish someone tested CS2 on 1280x960 mid-low settings how most truly competittve players really play with their 360hz-540hz monitors. We are interested to see those 1% and 0.1% lows
Really curious about the game squad. A year ago I upgraded my PC to a 4090 and a ryzen 9 7900x and was kind of left disappointed. Maybe it's where games are so unoptimized now, but I was expecting better from the ryzen 9 chip. Do you think there would be a good increase of FPS and 1% lows with the 9800x3d for a game like squad or hell let loose? should I wait for the ryzen 9 9950x3d?
Regarding your little disclaimer in the beginning: are you sure AMD didn't get to watch the video before it went live? ^^ Just kidding. Great work as always!
Building a matx pc coming from a 3930k using my 2080ti until new gpus come out. Targeting something in the $500 range. Interested in the 9600x vs 9700x b/c of low temps. Mostly play 1440p single player /rst/turn base games. WhIch of the two cpus would you recommend. Thanks in advance.
Can the 9800 handle a stream load on top of playing hell divers 2 in ultra? With out massive frame drop? My I 7 10700 gets 30 fps on hell divers I need to upgrade lol!
Sometimes hardware and software do not mix well on new production CPU's. It takes time to optimize operating systems and gaming to perform as they should. Sometimes UEFI bios need new tweaks rewrites to do thier job. GPU's can be painful to setup especially on Linux systems. On my Archlinux 8 and 16 core systems I have been running my Windows GOG games in bottles using the Flatpak installs. I also install bottles from git repositories and compiled it, and achieved over 35 plus hours of flawless game play with Fallout 3 and Elder Scrolls Skyrim. It takes time to get the software dependencies right. If you run a rolling Linux release once your software is setup I would turn off the system updates if your running unstable versions (I run linux-lts versions). Nvidia Linux driver updates have been nothing short of phenomenal on Archlinux. Updates this kind of success in earlier times was not always so. I stuck with Linux over many many years and know the ins and outs of system recovery.
The only other reason to buy this thing would be if you play at 1080 and push frames as hard as you can. Otherwise anything within the past three years will be plenty fast. I rock the 5800X3D. It's a hell of a lot slower than the new version, but i also don't run a 4090... So I'll probably stay put for a hot minute. :P Gotta work on what car I drive before worrying about the computer. ;)
there are a lot of reason to buy this CPU, for its price and performance it really is a great deal. You basically future-proof yourself with this CPU(if you're a mid/high end gamer that is) and don't have to worry at all, so in your use case you definitely dont need it, but for others its very viable
1:52 "1080p is officially dead as a resolution"....never mind that pesky Steam survey that shows over 57% of gaming is still at 1080p. We make our own reality here.
@@CraftComputing That statement is a little too broad. Not all new PCs use dedicated GPUs. At least partially due to economics, legions of mini-pcs are flying off the shelves now and becoming inexpensive gaming PCs that game well at 1080p. An AMD Ryzen 7 5800H for example is "good enough" for many people for most games, especially older titles and MMORPGs, in a not so great economy. The number of sales of 1080p monitors and televisions still being sold is also an indicator that like it or not, 1080p isn't going anywhere as a standard for some time. Now, admittedly for a dedicated PC build with a nice modern GPU, preferably one that has power connectors that don't melt and catch on fire, something better than 1080p would be a good choice.
There's dozens of reviews that show you the theoretical performance at 1080p. Every other one out there, basically. Thank fuck for someone finally making a practical, real life review.
This review is excellent because: 1440p instead of 1080p 4070 super instead of 4090 Comparing to 9700x It answers real questions instead of advertising performance of 9800x3d in unreal computer configurations
The bigger reviewers use 1080p and the best GPUs because they don't want to introduce a GPU bottleneck. I mean what's the point of reviewing anything stronger than what's currently available if you're going to restrain it anyway? Ideally, a review would have the 3 most popular resolutions, but that takes an insane amount of time. It's all good anyway, it gives other creators an opportunity to review in a different setting.
@@flushfire This review shows that 1440p is not not causing GPU bottleneck. This is what we want to know! Is there any reason to buy expensive 9800x3d for resolution other than 1080p. These reviews seem to show that there is reason to spend more money for 1440p.
@@Tiberithow is resolution a matter of preference? Fps being equal, no sane person will look at 1440p image next to a 1080p image and chose the 1080. It is objectively better.
What does a 20% difference make when you're getting over three HUNDRED fps? It's insanity. Get a 9600x or 9700x. Use the difference for a better video card, better monitor, or better sound.
Here come the reviews...... *insert Ed Stark meme here* It does look like a good CPU, but with the price might just go with the 7800X3D with it's price drop.
great, so this means, the 9800x3d its just for ppl with high end GPU using a 1080p @ 320hz monitor, i'm about to build a mid end PC, and i was hyped by the 9800x3d but then all reviews came out.... there is no logic on why i would buy it... 9700x would be fine...
Instead of a 9800x3d i would pick a 7700 and use the saving to upgrade the 4070 ti super to a 4080 Super. "7700 + 4080 Super" will beat the "9800x3d + 4070 ti super" everyday of the week.
Cpu bottlenecks are a hardwall though, you cant change game settings to improve the cpu bottleneck like you can with gpu. If a game is hitting the cpu bottleneck theres nothing u can do to work around it, but if it hits a gpu bottleneck you can lower settings to make it run better without needing to upgrade the gpu itself. For 1% lows in singleplayer games and future proofing i would pick the 9800x3d 4070ti combo instead
@@jordan-mn6yy You are very rarely going to hit CPU bottleneck at 1440p even with 7700, which is what this video is about. At 1440p, you are going to be mostly GPU limited.
@CraftComputing Availability does not equal what people use in the real world. For you to declare that 1080p is dead when 56% of gamers are still happily at that resolution and less than 25% are at 1440p or higher(see Steam survey) is disconnected nonsense at best and deliberately deceitful at worst, hopefully the former. Everything else you touched on was fairly spot on, so what was the pointless and inaccurate jab at 1080p?
It is good to see an x3d CPU that can do more than just gaming. However, it is still results in an overpriced platform in my opinion, so still a hard decision for anyone that needs a multitasking PC.
1080p ain't dead until I can get a 4k monitor for $200 tops (Canadian funds) and once that happens there better be a GPU that can handle it and once that happens I forgot the most important thing first before I spend $500 tops for a GPU and monitor, theres gotta be a killer app... theres gotta be a game worth playing not the same games I played 20 years ago with more polygons. I half kid but really it's about the software, so I don't care about lack of hardware improvements I want to see software improvements.
I just got a 1080p gaming monitor. The thing is, if you get a high resolution monitor, you also need a high end GPU to match it. Since I don't have a high end GPU nor intend to buy one in the near future, what is the point in getting a monitor above 1080p? I should also point out that my needs outside gaming also don't need anything above 1080p.
Musta been rough accidentally scheduling this yesterday, hope they don’t penalize you for this. Otherwise, pointing out the advantages of having the best CPU even without an absolute TOTL GPU is informative even if the full extent of the CPU’s performance isn’t something we can learn from this
This is how you actually review a CPU and talk about real world performance. Most reviews only focus on gaming and only show the high end instead of what most people can actually afford. Thanks Jeff for taking your own criticism about how reviewers were doing a bad job (after the LTT and GN drama). Between you and Wendell at L1T, I know that you both will give us the truth, straight and how real world usage looks. 🎉
Lol, how 1080p gaming can be dead when even Steam stats show that 57+% of users are still using 1080p? I get what you are trying to show here, but personally I'm upgrading PC right now with a GPU upgrade planned early next year. So newest processor and newest GPU, potentially 5080, which may be similar to 4090 in performance. And I will be buying 1440 monitor only because I can't find 1080p MiniLED monitor in my area.
Yeah but the fact that 57% of users still game at 1080p means that most probably when they update their systems they would be going for higher resolutions. This is the trend. So in terms of making hardware purchasing decisions today, most people would be looking at higher resolutions. The fact you can´t find 1080p monitors in your area with the display technology you are looking for kind of tell you everything you need to know. 1080p is becoming legacy technology in terms of what manufacturers do.
@@DMEGC With inflation and prices that skyrocket, while game optimization is the last thing publishers are thinking... why do you think people are looking into upgrading specifically to 1440p? Half a year ago I have built a new PC for my wife with 7800X3D. And she asked for a 1080p high refresh monitor instead of 1440p. Same thing I wanted to do, but can't because no 1080p MiniLEDs are available in my region. If we want, we are switching to our 4k TV that's connected to both of our PCs all the time to play something on a big screen with all the details. I'll take higher fps all the time instead of higher resolution. And I guess a huge amount of people will say the same. So 1080p is definitely not dead.
@@LandsOfDespair Because that´s the trend. You just have to take a look at the % of users gaming at 1080p now, and 5 years ago, and 10 years ago. 1080p is the cheapest option now, just like prior resolutions were in the past. You can´t find any option manufactured nowadays with lower resolution than 1080p, and when these things happened in the past that signaled the begining of the end for those resolutions. Hence my take of 1080p being on their way out. Also, as you pointed yourself, manufacturers are not implementing their state of the art technologies for 1080p. You can´t find the last display technology in 1080p displays. They use very reliable and very tested technology that due to economies of scale has become cheaper and cheaper, because that´s what 1080p has become on the market, the super budget option. Again, this signals that this resolution is on it´s way out. You mention inflation and the economy, but monitors have never been as cheap as nowadays. You can find 4k displays for less than $200, and gaming 1440p for less than $200. With the options for upscaling method that we have today a decent number of fps for non competitive fps games it´s easily doable at higher resolutions than 1080p, that´s not to say that graphical settings have suddenly stopped impacting framerates. The fact that it´s used less and less everyday based on the same statistics you mentioned don´t leave a lot of room for discusion. It´s just a fact, it´s going down which means it´s being bought less and less. You can claim that it´s going to take a while to see those statistics about the 1080p resolution actually used in gaming to drop to negligible values, but my point always was that when buying today, 1080p, for a gamer, is on it´s way out.
Hey... I think I saw this review yesterday lol
My guess was that the video was set for the wrong day by accident, hence why it was pulled.
I'm here SPECIFICALLY because I saw it yesterday morning, clicked a different video first, and have been waiting for it to reappear.
I double checked the embargo date, then hit the wrong day when scheduling the video for release. Not fun when it launches at 6AM and you're dead asleep.
@CraftComputing I can imagine. Should you have titled it AMD's (and Jeff's) Worst kept secret.
@@CraftComputing That's what I thought.
Jeff's caught in his own personal Groundhog Day.
this video was also a badly kept secret :)
THANK YOU FOR BEING LIKE THE ONLY OUTLET TO DO HELLDIVERS 2, I WANTED TO SEE 1% LOWS VS MY 5800X3D AND I GOT EM, THANK YOU!
thank you, as someone running 1440p, i really appreciate your video, as cool as seeing the max performance lifts at 1080p is, I prefer something more relevant to my actual use case
This video seems familiar...
Appreciate the reality perspective of showing how 1% and 0.1% frame rate improvements are noticeable when paired with sub $2000 GPUs 👍
Great take! Not everyone has to be GN / HWUB / J2C / PH etc. I liked your take.
I've never understood why people want every reviewer to test with the exact same criteria.
@@CraftComputing I think it's worth having a couple of big reviewers test with the same or similar criteria (GN/LTT/HWUB) to ensure that there's little variance in methodology, but have reviewers like you and L1T test for different use cases or criteria.
Another scenario to consider is that not everyone will upgrade both CPU and GPU at the same time. I tend to take turns in upgrading CPU and GPU. Extra CPU horsepower today can be unlocked by the future GPU upgrade. Vice-versa.
It was here yesterday... then while watching it was gone.
Same. Too funny.
I bought a 9700X and I am perfectly happy. Will not change for a while.
Lower TDP is also a plus for me.
Not only did we get a useful and realistic review, but I also learned of Wreckfest.
This was the best review for me personally because you just tested using everything I have ordered and will be arriving Wednesday! I already have the 4070 ti Super, running on my current system. What is arriving Wednesday is the 9800X3D, Asrock Taichi X870E, G.Skills DDR5 6000, and a new Samsung 990 pro M.2. I am very happy you used my current video card instead of the 4090 that everyone else seems to use, because as I just got the 4070 ti Super 4 months ago, I have no plans to get anything faster for the foreseeable future. After all I upgraded from a 980ti GTX, so the 4070 ti super is a massive improvement. Again thank you.
More 1440p tests please, I felt like I was trying to find a needle in a haystack for 1440p performance numbers.
Dude, you are definitely cool.
Finally, I found an adequate review with tests close to life.
And not like stupid reviewers with RTX4090 at low settings in 720p.
From Russia with respect
Watching lots of 1080p benchmarks on other channels is fine, but I wanted to see benchmarking that closely aligns witih my current setup and you delivered. Thank you.
This is exactly the sort of review that I value! Thank you so much for this real world perspective
Ither reviews are important but I like real world use case reviews.
those are real world scenarios too, maybe what you mean is relevant to your current use case.
@nielsenrainier7710 no one (except pros) is spend $500 on a CPU to run at 1080p low settings....That's not real world. Majority play at 1440p now if they have the money for this CPU. People play at 1080p because they have to (usually kids or cash strapped people).
@@LakerTriangle the thing is you're taking everything very literally, just because they test in 720p/1080p does not mean you're gonna be playing there or they expect everyone to play there. You do know that CPU doesnt care much about resolutions right? So how will they show you the real capabilities of it, if its GPU constrained? That is what I meant by real world scenarios, those gains,fps,efficiency will still be there and you're gonna get it but it depends on the other parts you have.
@@DrMicoco I know exactly why 1080p low testing is done. And like I said it's important to know and do. But people also want to see what it might perform like in their system with games and resolutions they use. I play at 4k and 1440p and still purchased a 9800x3d because when the 5080 drops it will be worth it.
@@LakerTriangle and as I said, knowing the full capabilities of the CPU you will buy gives you the baseline to best guess its performance especially if you're planning to do parts only upgrade, and for situational scenarios (mobo+cpu combo testing, cpu+gpu combo testing, game type testing and OC/Undervolt testing) those will come later, as CPU only benchmarks are the ones that usually comes first, this is basic knowledge
Great testing there Jeff! Cheers mate!
Great review. It is good to see a comparison with hardware and game settings that are realistic for a good upper tier gaming PC.
Nice to see realistic benchmarks.
Not that there isn't good reason to test it the way most do but this adds a level of practicality to it
I said exactly that during the video too. Figuring out max theoretical performance is important, but it's not the ONLY way to review hardware.
Thank you for the review!
Minor nitpick: I would have loved to see a third configuration, where the savings from not taking the X3D would have gone towards a better GPU, to show (what I expect to be) a much larger impact on performance in the given tests.
For example 9700X+4070tis vs 9800X3D+4070tis vs 9700X+4080s. Or maybe drop the initial GPU level to make the budgets more even: For example 9700X+4070s (better cost) vs 9800X3D+4070s (better CPU) vs 9700X+4070tis (better GPU). It would (at least that's what I expect) show much better that upgrading the GPU makes more sense than the CPU when looking for the best bang for buck for the current games (or not, that would be the point of testing a third configuration)
That's exactly the test i wanted to see
the synthetic benchmarks really surprised me, with barely no difference. Gaming changes too, was really expecting a lot bigger of an upgrade, especially with the new version of 3d vcache. Thanks for the results
Thank you for this. Would be cool to see the uplift from say a 5800x3D, but that's a lot of extra time spent testing, so it's understandable.
It gets old seeing everyone release the same video, at the same time the embargo lifts, with the same charts. It makes sense to test at 1080p to rule out GPU bottlenecks, but it's useless outside of theoretical maximums. I wish other reviewers also focused more on TDP, temps and 1% and .1% lows uplifts between generations and CPU classes.
Great video and excellent test bench. 🍺🤘👍
My sadness listening to your beer reviews at the end as an Aussie who knows they'll never be able to reasonably acquire any of them cannot be measured. I envy you, sir.
New genre of reviews: Realistic ones
Thank you for your practical review
This is what I was looking for. 1440p real gaming and not in a 4090.
Thank you.
??
@@AbbasDalal1000 What?
Question: if we review a scenario where the 4070ti super is the bottleneck, isn't that data that we already had access to in the 4070ti super review?
Thanks for always being the voice of reality, instead of one of pipe dreams
You should test 9800x3d vs 7800x3d this way.
I got myself a 9800X3D at launch as I wanted a smoother overall experience with my RTX 4090. I game at 4K, however with DLSS Quality (1440p) settings so 1440p still applies to me 🥰😇👍🙂↕. For many older titles Borderlands 3 etc, my rig gets ridiculously high fps so even a 5% drop in max or 1% lows isn’t worth worrying about ……. Saying that thou, many newer titles from post-2020, the 9800X3D gets much better frame times and less stuttering etc and much smoother and decent gameplay (such as UE5 titles and less optimised titles like Stalker 2)✊💪🥳!
The 98003D cpu will see my rig out till the last cpu upgrade supported by AM5 now. In gaming and minor production needs, this cpu is more than enough 💪🙂↕!
Why 9700? A three way comparison of 3D cache generations at 1440p would be appreciated
What trackball is that in the video?
This and L1T's review have the most useful information for my purposes. Thank you!
I watched your video yesterday but I did it again to support you!
I wish people would test actual cpu intensive games like MS flight sim, a large park in planet coaster or DCS when giving benchmarks. It's all the same cyberpunk from the other dozen channels talking about the same thing.
i think this is the best way to review CPU, because as viewers or potential buyers we need real life reviews not which CPU is the fastest.
I watched this yesterday lol, but I didn't get a chance to comment. Thank you for testing the way you do. I understand why reviewers test in the way they do, as it shows the "true" performance difference. However, at the same time, those numbers have no real meaning for me. Seeing the ACTUAL performance difference I can expect at a resolution I play at and specs reasonably comparable to what I have is exactly what I wish would be presented more. Yes, the CPU can have a 10% performance difference at 1080, but if at 1440 the performance difference tanks to 2%, there's no reason for me to consider an upgrade.
yes until you need to upgrade when the games/application gets more demanding. Faster CPU's tend to degrade less overtime in terms of performance, gets more frequent update and scale's well with newer GPU's.
I wish someone tested CS2 on 1280x960 mid-low settings how most truly competittve players really play with their 360hz-540hz monitors. We are interested to see those 1% and 0.1% lows
Competitive CS2 is done at 1080P.
I love the dig at Jerry Jones and the Cowboys. So unexpected but sooooo good.
Really curious about the game squad. A year ago I upgraded my PC to a 4090 and a ryzen 9 7900x and was kind of left disappointed. Maybe it's where games are so unoptimized now, but I was expecting better from the ryzen 9 chip. Do you think there would be a good increase of FPS and 1% lows with the 9800x3d for a game like squad or hell let loose? should I wait for the ryzen 9 9950x3d?
Regarding your little disclaimer in the beginning: are you sure AMD didn't get to watch the video before it went live? ^^
Just kidding. Great work as always!
...I mostly play CPU bound games like Factorio, modded Minecraft (sans shaders), etc. I'm seeing a disappointing lack of coverage for gamers like me.
Building a matx pc coming from a 3930k using my 2080ti until new gpus come out. Targeting something in the $500 range. Interested in the 9600x vs 9700x b/c of low temps. Mostly play 1440p single player /rst/turn base games. WhIch of the two cpus would you recommend. Thanks in advance.
Can the 9800 handle a stream load on top of playing hell divers 2 in ultra? With out massive frame drop? My I 7 10700 gets 30 fps on hell divers I need to upgrade lol!
seems kinda familiar =_=
DejaVu.....
Wow, an actual common sense real use review that will apply to most users!
Nice shout out to Jeff :)
Welcome Back!
Something’s wrong with the upload time 😂
They still going to send you future parts, or did you get blacklisted?
In checking tonight the 7800X3D on Amazon is over $500 now.
Sometimes hardware and software do not mix well on new production CPU's. It takes time to optimize operating systems and gaming to perform as they should. Sometimes UEFI bios need new tweaks rewrites to do thier job. GPU's can be painful to setup especially on Linux systems. On my Archlinux 8 and 16 core systems I have been running my Windows GOG games in bottles using the Flatpak installs. I also install bottles from git repositories and compiled it, and achieved over 35 plus hours of flawless game play with Fallout 3 and Elder Scrolls Skyrim. It takes time to get the software dependencies right. If you run a rolling Linux release once your software is setup I would turn off the system updates if your running unstable versions (I run linux-lts versions). Nvidia Linux driver updates have been nothing short of phenomenal on Archlinux. Updates this kind of success in earlier times was not always so. I stuck with Linux over many many years and know the ins and outs of system recovery.
I'm replacing my i9-9900k with the ryzen 9800x3d this week. Lol not sure how big in % it'll be but I know it should be good!
What secret? There NEVER was any mention of a secret.
Good review. Thanks.
Watching this literally every day, nice.
Did John Barleyman have to die for this video?
I'm fairly certain I've seen this... Or am I getting too old for my memory? 😂
I would consult with a neurologist
The only other reason to buy this thing would be if you play at 1080 and push frames as hard as you can. Otherwise anything within the past three years will be plenty fast. I rock the 5800X3D. It's a hell of a lot slower than the new version, but i also don't run a 4090... So I'll probably stay put for a hot minute. :P
Gotta work on what car I drive before worrying about the computer. ;)
there are a lot of reason to buy this CPU, for its price and performance it really is a great deal. You basically future-proof yourself with this CPU(if you're a mid/high end gamer that is) and don't have to worry at all, so in your use case you definitely dont need it, but for others its very viable
1:52 "1080p is officially dead as a resolution"....never mind that pesky Steam survey that shows over 57% of gaming is still at 1080p. We make our own reality here.
*for new PCs
You're not buying a 4070 TiS to drive a 25" 1080p screen.
@@CraftComputing That statement is a little too broad. Not all new PCs use dedicated GPUs. At least partially due to economics, legions of mini-pcs are flying off the shelves now and becoming inexpensive gaming PCs that game well at 1080p. An AMD Ryzen 7 5800H for example is "good enough" for many people for most games, especially older titles and MMORPGs, in a not so great economy. The number of sales of 1080p monitors and televisions still being sold is also an indicator that like it or not, 1080p isn't going anywhere as a standard for some time. Now, admittedly for a dedicated PC build with a nice modern GPU, preferably one that has power connectors that don't melt and catch on fire, something better than 1080p would be a good choice.
There's dozens of reviews that show you the theoretical performance at 1080p. Every other one out there, basically. Thank fuck for someone finally making a practical, real life review.
@@CraftComputing valorant
basically lower fps than my 1200k(well tuned with ram at 7600 and an 6900xt gpu in games such as cs2). these settings are waaaay too gpu bound.
$2700 is more than my car is worth too!
Cpus are holding back gaming alot when you need a the best cpu to get 1% lows of 100fps when 120hz tv have already been out for a few years already.
Great video. I noticed other reviews testing with a 4090 and had to laugh.
I missed this one yesterday 😆
I salute u for the choice I wish though we can test other graphic cards 4070, 4060, 7900xtx and xt so we can see how much realistic is the benchmarks
This review is excellent because:
1440p instead of 1080p
4070 super instead of 4090
Comparing to 9700x
It answers real questions instead of advertising performance of 9800x3d in unreal computer configurations
The bigger reviewers use 1080p and the best GPUs because they don't want to introduce a GPU bottleneck. I mean what's the point of reviewing anything stronger than what's currently available if you're going to restrain it anyway? Ideally, a review would have the 3 most popular resolutions, but that takes an insane amount of time. It's all good anyway, it gives other creators an opportunity to review in a different setting.
@@flushfire
This review shows that 1440p is not not causing GPU bottleneck. This is what we want to know! Is there any reason to buy expensive 9800x3d for resolution other than 1080p.
These reviews seem to show that there is reason to spend more money for 1440p.
Look no further than Steam hardware statistics page! 1080p.
I was speaking to new builds. 1080P is still the most popular resolution, but not for new systems.
@CraftComputing Ok. Resolution is a matter of preference. With long lasting AM5 this x3ds could be an upgrade.
@@Tiberithow is resolution a matter of preference? Fps being equal, no sane person will look at 1440p image next to a 1080p image and chose the 1080. It is objectively better.
What does a 20% difference make when you're getting over three HUNDRED fps? It's insanity. Get a 9600x or 9700x. Use the difference for a better video card, better monitor, or better sound.
Got a few sites and channels showing pics from a leak. Your infamous Jeff 😅 hope you didnt get any back lash over a simple mistake.
Costs 70% more than 9700x 340 vs 580€ here in eu, not worth it
Wonderful video.
meh not even here are none gaming tests?
Here come the reviews...... *insert Ed Stark meme here*
It does look like a good CPU, but with the price might just go with the 7800X3D with it's price drop.
out of all the reviews of this new cpu, your review makes the most sense...
great, so this means, the 9800x3d its just for ppl with high end GPU using a 1080p @ 320hz monitor, i'm about to build a mid end PC, and i was hyped by the 9800x3d but then all reviews came out.... there is no logic on why i would buy it... 9700x would be fine...
Instead of a 9800x3d i would pick a 7700 and use the saving to upgrade the 4070 ti super to a 4080 Super. "7700 + 4080 Super" will beat the "9800x3d + 4070 ti super" everyday of the week.
Cpu bottlenecks are a hardwall though, you cant change game settings to improve the cpu bottleneck like you can with gpu. If a game is hitting the cpu bottleneck theres nothing u can do to work around it, but if it hits a gpu bottleneck you can lower settings to make it run better without needing to upgrade the gpu itself. For 1% lows in singleplayer games and future proofing i would pick the 9800x3d 4070ti combo instead
@@jordan-mn6yy You are very rarely going to hit CPU bottleneck at 1440p even with 7700, which is what this video is about. At 1440p, you are going to be mostly GPU limited.
@CraftComputing
Availability does not equal what people use in the real world. For you to declare that 1080p is dead when 56% of gamers are still happily at that resolution and less than 25% are at 1440p or higher(see Steam survey) is disconnected nonsense at best and deliberately deceitful at worst, hopefully the former. Everything else you touched on was fairly spot on, so what was the pointless and inaccurate jab at 1080p?
No drinking while coding.... You will wreck your source control.
Saw this yesterday
It is good to see an x3d CPU that can do more than just gaming. However, it is still results in an overpriced platform in my opinion, so still a hard decision for anyone that needs a multitasking PC.
Welcome everyone... As always I'mmmm JeffX3D ... 😅😊
Deja vu
Hello there, again ;)
you from long island? or a doppleganger lol
Never even been to Long Island.
@CraftComputing okay . You can pass for this dude that use to work at Victory Computers. Ten years ago
Thanks for doing more realistic testing. For me results over 240 fps are just worthless.
so who is still using 1440p panels.
Many people. Most people still using 1080p. But people buying a 9800x3D processor probably not.
You need to test with Rust. Counter Strike 2 is not an outlier. Its a good game worth playing. Those other guys are just singleplayer trash.
1080p ain't dead until I can get a 4k monitor for $200 tops (Canadian funds) and once that happens there better be a GPU that can handle it and once that happens I forgot the most important thing first before I spend $500 tops for a GPU and monitor, theres gotta be a killer app... theres gotta be a game worth playing not the same games I played 20 years ago with more polygons. I half kid but really it's about the software, so I don't care about lack of hardware improvements I want to see software improvements.
I just got a 1080p gaming monitor. The thing is, if you get a high resolution monitor, you also need a high end GPU to match it. Since I don't have a high end GPU nor intend to buy one in the near future, what is the point in getting a monitor above 1080p? I should also point out that my needs outside gaming also don't need anything above 1080p.
What happened to 1440p?
27" 4K IPS monitor with 70Hz refresh for $179 USD: amzn.to/40AIp7H
Hello again
saw this yesterday. so i guess you've been sued by AMD?
Musta been rough accidentally scheduling this yesterday, hope they don’t penalize you for this. Otherwise, pointing out the advantages of having the best CPU even without an absolute TOTL GPU is informative even if the full extent of the CPU’s performance isn’t something we can learn from this
I hope that wrong upload yesterday wont put you in hot water x.x
This is how you actually review a CPU and talk about real world performance. Most reviews only focus on gaming and only show the high end instead of what most people can actually afford. Thanks Jeff for taking your own criticism about how reviewers were doing a bad job (after the LTT and GN drama). Between you and Wendell at L1T, I know that you both will give us the truth, straight and how real world usage looks. 🎉
LTT actually addressed 'daily driven' results in their review today. Highly recommend you give that review a watch as well.
Lol, how 1080p gaming can be dead when even Steam stats show that 57+% of users are still using 1080p?
I get what you are trying to show here, but personally I'm upgrading PC right now with a GPU upgrade planned early next year. So newest processor and newest GPU, potentially 5080, which may be similar to 4090 in performance. And I will be buying 1440 monitor only because I can't find 1080p MiniLED monitor in my area.
Yeah but the fact that 57% of users still game at 1080p means that most probably when they update their systems they would be going for higher resolutions. This is the trend. So in terms of making hardware purchasing decisions today, most people would be looking at higher resolutions. The fact you can´t find 1080p monitors in your area with the display technology you are looking for kind of tell you everything you need to know. 1080p is becoming legacy technology in terms of what manufacturers do.
@@DMEGC With inflation and prices that skyrocket, while game optimization is the last thing publishers are thinking... why do you think people are looking into upgrading specifically to 1440p?
Half a year ago I have built a new PC for my wife with 7800X3D. And she asked for a 1080p high refresh monitor instead of 1440p. Same thing I wanted to do, but can't because no 1080p MiniLEDs are available in my region.
If we want, we are switching to our 4k TV that's connected to both of our PCs all the time to play something on a big screen with all the details.
I'll take higher fps all the time instead of higher resolution. And I guess a huge amount of people will say the same.
So 1080p is definitely not dead.
@@LandsOfDespair Because that´s the trend. You just have to take a look at the % of users gaming at 1080p now, and 5 years ago, and 10 years ago.
1080p is the cheapest option now, just like prior resolutions were in the past. You can´t find any option manufactured nowadays with lower resolution than 1080p, and when these things happened in the past that signaled the begining of the end for those resolutions. Hence my take of 1080p being on their way out.
Also, as you pointed yourself, manufacturers are not implementing their state of the art technologies for 1080p. You can´t find the last display technology in 1080p displays. They use very reliable and very tested technology that due to economies of scale has become cheaper and cheaper, because that´s what 1080p has become on the market, the super budget option. Again, this signals that this resolution is on it´s way out. You mention inflation and the economy, but monitors have never been as cheap as nowadays. You can find 4k displays for less than $200, and gaming 1440p for less than $200. With the options for upscaling method that we have today a decent number of fps for non competitive fps games it´s easily doable at higher resolutions than 1080p, that´s not to say that graphical settings have suddenly stopped impacting framerates. The fact that it´s used less and less everyday based on the same statistics you mentioned don´t leave a lot of room for discusion. It´s just a fact, it´s going down which means it´s being bought less and less.
You can claim that it´s going to take a while to see those statistics about the 1080p resolution actually used in gaming to drop to negligible values, but my point always was that when buying today, 1080p, for a gamer, is on it´s way out.
u r so quiet about its down sides?
The downside is it's expensive and consumes a little bit more power than the 7800X3D