That doesn't make any sense to me. If you insist on running Cinebench in the background while playing a game, why would you start messing with core affinity? Surely you'd be better off just letting Windows manage it? Happy to test it and put up a video, I bet it works just fine if you let Windows manage it.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Poll: Ryzen 7950X3D, 7900X3D, 7800X3D
- Thread starter kindai
- Start date
That's sub optimal compared to manual intervention and making it more optimal can only be from changing the scheduler.
Given that the game bar has no idea what a game is and needs a list it may well be that it needs a second list of programs to be prioritised on the regular CCD.
I knew before this even launched it would be interesting to see what issues would come up. These are different to Intel issues because you can't just prioritise P cores first for everything then let the E cores show up for heavy multi threaded as programs genuinely would rather run on the 3D or regular from the start and that needs much more decision making.
And here it is.
Last edited:
I have a 7950X3D as well, you don't seem familiar with the numbers on this specific benchmark. The second scene usually gets around 30-40% higher fps than the first scene. The fact you have similar fps between the 2 scenes show that Cinebench is actually impacting the game performance no?
I don't really care about all this as I just do Prefer Frequency in the bios that way everything defaults to the Frequency CCD and for the games and apps that I want on Cache I'll use process lasso to put them there.
I disagree, just for gaming the 7800X3D is a very expensive CPU. It will likely be £500-£525 in the UK, plus it only makes sense if you couple it with a £1800 4090 GPU. Add in AM5 board, DDR5, thousands of pounds.
That's the furthest from "great value" you can get IMO. Great value is a DDR4 5800X3D or 12/13th gen z690 board with ddr4, coupled with a more realistically priced GPU.
My point is, if you're already spending thousands on a 4090, am5, ddr5, then an extra $250 to get double cores and binned die from 7950x3D makes 'sense'.
SOTTR enforces a frame cap (120) if you don't run it in full screen or exclusive full screen modes. Looks like its tied into monitor refresh rate (mine is 120HZ), so that's why my FPS never go over 120. As soon as you switch to either full screen mode or exclusive fullscreen the FPS goes up to 400-500.
Problem is, then you won't be able to see Task Manager or Cinbench in the same picture.Yes me either tbf, here's some screenshots of what happens between true windowed mode and full screen mode at the same resolution which was 800x600.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,626
- Location
- Cornwall
So why do some review sites show a simulated 7800X3D (I'm guessing they turned off the non-cached CCD?) As doing better than the 7950X3D?Good old internet drama.
When you cut through all the wheat and chaff it comes down to this. The TL : DR is that if it’s an obscure game, perhaps in beta and not yet released, you may have to bring up game bar when you launch the game (press the game bar hotkey) and click this is a game. Other than that, you don’t actually need to do anything else. It’s all done automatically. I’d the game prefers cache, it’ll use the cache CCD, if it prefers frequency, it’ll use the second CCD. If the game wants to use both CCDs, it can do that too like Spider-Man does. You don’t have to do anything more than this.
I’ve tested something like 30+ games in my Steam, Battle.net, Origin, GOG, Ms-Store, Ubisoft and everything was recognised and worked without issue.
I also tried the tool CapFrameX. This tool allows you to override the default behaviour and you select the CCD to use yourself, you can even switch between them in games. This is basically a simpler version of process lasso. Every time I changed the default behaviour, performance dropped, sometimes significantly. This tells you that things are working so stop messing around.
The meat and veg of it is simple though. Frame chasers hates, with a passion, AMD and AMD users. The 7950 X3D just made a mockery of the 13900K/KS, by not only being faster overall in a wide selection of games, but doing it whilst using a fraction of the power in games. It’s the fastest and most efficient chip, and it has 16 cores. This has and will continue to ruffle feathers for a while, so expect plenty of misinformation and justification from certain people why the 7950X3D is a scam. It’ll start to blow over once the 7800 X3D launches I bet.
It's bundled with Windows as a default app. You can stop it in Windows if you so desire, but obviously you should not do this with an X3D. You do not need to use powershell to disable it, however that is the only way you can actually remove it. It also does not hurt performance, so I've never bothered to remove it from Windows myself prior to X3D.
Why would you get better performance by turning off a CCD than having Windows park all the cores on that CCD?
Cinebench with 4 threads was just an example. It could be anything, steam running an update or what have you. In your video you tested cinebench with all 32 threads, which is not where the problem lies, and also you had the game limited to 116 fps? Intel's thread scheduler sends everything on the background to the ecores when you are playing games - regardless of the amount of cores those tasks are trying to utilize
EG1.. Say I have 3 tasks on the background that all utilize 1 core each, while im playing a game. Will those 3 tasks unpark the other ccd or will they all run in the 3d cache ccd?
Last edited:
Maybe but getting another 8 cores for "cheap" is money set on fire if you then spend the next 3 years gaming gaming and gaming.
It's all bad value to buy premium products at launch but spending more just in case sounds bad vs spending money knowing you're going to use what you paid extra for.
Not been following the thread? Many posts discussing this. Cyberpunk, Spiderman, both need > 8 cores for 4k ultra with RT on. Few other games have better minimums with > 8 core also, for those of us that like to run common background applications while gaming (discord, youtube, spotify etc).
This is from people like myself, with access to 4090 and 8 core, 16 and 24 core CPU's.
It's true, but to clarify, they need more than 8 cores if you drop the resolution in order to make it CPU bound. At 4k with DLSS Q which is what you would normally be running with a 4090 - 6 cores would be enough - let alone 8.
Running the wrong power mode. There is zero possibility the 7800x3d will run faster in any game.
They share the same TDP120W, so there will be more power budget to the 7800X3D cores in theory with the 7950X3D second CCD asleep, however it will have lower boost clocks. Some games will definitely prefer a single CCD and that's what review shows.
However, depending on the GPU and in game settings used (heavy RT) in some scenarios the 7950X3D will be faster due to the extra cores.
With both tuned, I'd still rather have the 16 core variant personally. It'll be the better overall chip IMO, basing this off the 7950X vs the 7700X.
The 7800X3D will be perfect for the mainstream though as the best plug and play gaming chip.
Steam running an update? Come on mate pull the other one.
That's windows enforcing a FPS cap up to the refresh rate of your monitor when using windowed mode. Looks like it's some new annoying feature they added a while back.
It'll do whatever is best. Minor tasks like the example you've provided will run on the CCD that is active for optimal performance. It would not make sense to move them to a different CCD if it would hurt performance. It's just common sense.
Last edited:
Why does no-one actually read what people write in this thread ?
Yes it's a very expensive cpu, but I said COMPARED TO THE 7950X3D. The gaming performance is almost the same, for £250 cheaper.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,626
- Location
- Cornwall
Why do some games prefer a single CCD? Surely that's what all this game bar stuff is supposed to solve, so that when running one of those games the 7950X3D only uses 1 CCD?They share the same TDP120W, so there will be more power budget to the 7800X3D cores in theory with the 7950X3D second CCD asleep, however it will have lower boost clocks. Some games will definitely prefer a single CCD and that's what review shows.
However, depending on the GPU and in game settings used (heavy RT) in some scenarios the 7950X3D will be faster due to the extra cores.
With both tuned, I'd still rather have the 16 core variant personally. It'll be the better overall chip IMO, basing this off the 7950X vs the 7700X.
The 7800X3D will be perfect for the mainstream though as the best plug and play gaming chip.
Steam running an update? Come on mate pull the other one.
That's windows enforcing a FPS cap up to the refresh rate of your monitor when using windowed mode. Looks like it's some new annoying feature they added a while back.
It'll do whatever is best. Minor tasks like the example you've provided will run on the CCD that is active for optimal performance. It would not make sense to move them to a different CCD if it would hurt performance. It's just common sense.
It just parks the other CCD if it's not being used. But the game will still see 32 logical cores and may request to use them. Then you have potential issues of data needing to move between CCD's which incurs latency.
On the 7800X3D, the game would only ever see the cores from the 1 CCD, so can't use anything more. Less cores, but no intra-CCD latency to contend with.
For the reasons I'd just mentioned.
Putting one CCD to sleep saves some power, but not having them there at all will save more power. Makes sense if you think about it. The second CCD is basically in a deep sleep state, but can be woken up to work if required.
That's exactly what happens in the video here when I decide to launch a CPU stress test as I'm playing Spiderman. Not a realistic scenario at all mind you, but you can do this if you so require. Just let Windows manage it, it works fine. Don't try and fix what isn't broken, basically.
Don't forget, Some games prefer two CCDs from my testing, even if it appears like the workload is stuck on one CCD. I don't yet understand myself why this phenomenon occurs. Spiderman, Cyberpunk, COD/Warzone, Doom Eternal to name a few off the top of my head, all ran faster (when paired with a 4090) with both CCDs enabled on my 7950X3D. I was losing performance with just one CCD+SMT enabled and in some scenarios (the sort Bencher mentioned above, Cyberpunk2077 + heavy RT + lower resolution) the performance differences were noticeable. I doubt many reviewers will test these scenarios though.
Last edited: