AMD confirms Ryzen 7 5800X3D launches this spring, Zen4 Raphael in 2H 2022

[timorous]

Walls of speculative text aside, is anyone actually getting one so we can test and compare against it?

I am as a last hurrah for my B350 platform. Should give me enough performance to last for 5 years and will be a substantial upgrade from my 2200G.

 

[Joxeon]

Nah.

AM5 has higher socket power spec so 16c parts can actually stretch their legs. If you allow a 5950X or 5900X to consume about as much power as a stock 12900K then you see 20% performance increases in MT production workloads. Considering the 12900K sits between the 5900X and 5950X in production workloads that increase means the 5900X can catch up and the 5950X has a 25% or so advantage on the 12900K at similar power levels.

With a 170W max TDP it means AMD can let their 24c (One will come eventually, may be a Zen 4 part to fight off RPL or may be a Zen 5 part but it will happen at some point on the AM5 ecosystem), 16c and 12c parts fly so I can easily see above average gains with these parts in MT workloads.

On top of that a 40% performance increase on average for low thread count workloads will put it a good 10% ahead of RPL (Napkin math time. CB single thread has ADL about 15-18% ahead of Zen 3, some tweaks to RPL p cores could see that stretch to 30% max so a 40% gain for Zen 4 gives it the 10% delta over RPL in low thread count workloads).

I think RPL i7 will sit between the 8c and 12c Zen 4 parts in MT workloads if that i7 has DDR5 ram and if it has DDR4 ram then it will be closer to the 8c part. I am assuming here that the RPL i7 will be 8p 8e and have similar performance to the 12900K at much lower power draw.

As for gaming I don't really see any ADL or RPL part competing with any of AMDs Zen 4 parts.

As for the Zen 4 stack. I expect at launch, due to high DDR5 prices AMD will probably only bother with the 8c, 12c and 16c parts. I could also see a naming reshuffle to make 8c R5, 12c R7 and the 16c the 7900 R9 leaving space for a 24c 7950 should it be needed and as yield and supply becomes more abundant.

For cheaper builds that is where Zen 3 and the 5800X3D come into play. I could see AMD positioning the 5800X3D as the ultimate gaming part with 5700X being a good workhorse that will end up being priced to compete with the 12600K. The 5600X and 5600 can compete with the 6p 0e ADL parts already so just price them competitively and let the cheaper motherboards reduce the platform cost comparison. Then the 5900X and 5950X get EOL'd as the kinds of users who would look at those parts would see a huge benefit going with a Zen 4 build. Also EOL'ing the 2CCD Zen 3 parts gives more N6/N7 capacity for the v-cache, Zen 4 IO Dies, N33, N31/N32 MCDs etc.

The 5800X scores around 15k in R23 while a RPL i7 would post scores around the 12900k given the Ecore increase so 27k which would mean the Zen 4 7800X needing an 80% increase in multi core performance to match it so no it will not match the i7 even with a large increase to the power budget.

 

[Calin Banc]

Xbox One at launch £429, today on rainforest Xbox One £217, so as is said over teh course of a products life cycle cost decreases. You totally missed teh point of teh conversation at the time and now that conversation has passed

You're right. 12nm node should have been better, ergo 3800x should have been cheaper or at the same price with 2700x. Die size was about the same. It wasn't any cheaper or even at the same price.
5800x only got cheaper due to competition. Production was fine since it was viable to put a lot of tech in a $400 gaming machine.

You can't compare the price of consoles to CPUs as the cost of consoles can be kept artificially low because Sony etc will make most of that money back from the games sold to play on that console. This doesn't happen to anyhere near the same extent as CPU's.

You could however compare consoles to printers. As you can see the cost of printers has been kept relatively fairly low over the years but that's because the companies make make more money from the sale of ink cartridges used in those printers.

Of course is kept low, but while still making a profit after all the tech inside, it means the production costs are quite low, meaning 5xxx could have been the same price as 3xxx series. But hey, GPUs went in price (MSRP) as well, why not CPUs also? Probably 7xxx will bring another bump. 20% performance, for 15% price or something like that

I'm not entirely sure why this is at all relevant? A CPU is a CPU, it is the sale of an item and it isn't sold to support a software business. If no one has your console you aren't going to sell any games, if no one buys your CPU you've not actually sold the product you wanted to sell, or that individual item.

Buying a CPU for gaming is just as buying a console for gaming. Having relatively cheap hardware, available to everyone, means a big install base for developers. There's one thing for gamers to have 4-6 cores CPUs and totally different to run 8c/16 or more. Same for GPUS, SSD, RAM, etc. It means developers can target faster machines => games could be, in theory, "better". So make profit by volumes.

Leaving the high end of gaming aspect aside and some hardcore productivity, then why buy a powerful CPU? 2600x is still doing great in almost all games (with some exceptions here and there, but I'd say is mostly due to optimized coding). I'm still looking at a 5800x/5900/5800x3D as a last "hurah!" for the MB, but I can't help feeling I'm enabling some bad behavior by paying the price. Just like I did back in the day when buying a rtx2080.

Anyway, I guess market will dictate the price. Leave or die, PC gaming/gamers has the control to say "enough". Or not

 

[Calin Banc]

The ps3 was way over complicated but powerful, the ps3's cpu is more powerful than the PS4 cpu

How do games on PS4 are compared to PS3? Best looking isn't for sure on PS3.

 

[Journey]

Buying a CPU for gaming is just as buying a console for gaming. Having relatively cheap hardware, available to everyone, means a big install base for developers.

It means developers can target faster machines => games could be, in theory, "better". So make profit by volumes.

AMD aren't game developers that is where you are missing the mark, their only interest is to sell a CPU, whether that is in an office black box, a gaming PC or a supercomputer. Not to mention AMD already supply both major high-end console manufacturers for both CPU/GPU so it is even more irrelevant.

 

[timorous]

The 5800X scores around 15k in R23 while a RPL i7 would post scores around the 12900k given the Ecore increase so 27k which would mean the Zen 4 7800X needing an 80% increase in multi core performance to match it so no it will not match the i7 even with a large increase to the power budget.

Good job I didn't say it would match then isn't it. I said the i7 will sit between the 8c and 12c parts and be closer to the 8c part with DDR4.

with a 40% uplift 8c Zen 4 should be around 22k in R23 give or take. As you say the 12900K gets around 27k with fast DDR4 or DDR5 but with 3600 C16 which is more likely to be paired with the cheaper i7 13700K it drops down to 25k.

The 12c Zen 4 part with a 40% uplift over the 5900X is around 30k. Now for the 12c part I can see the power limit increase benefiting so I could see an above average MT improvement for the 12c and 16c parts.

So we have

8c Zen 4 22k
i7 3600 C16 DDR4 25k
i7 DDR5 27k
12c Zen 4 30k.

i7 is between the two and with reasonable DDR4 it is closer to the 8c part than it is to the 12c part.

 

[Calin Banc]

AMD aren't game developers that is where you are missing the mark, their only interest is to sell a CPU, whether that is in an office black box, a gaming PC or a supercomputer. Not to mention AMD already supply both major high-end console manufacturers for both CPU/GPU so it is even more irrelevant.

Profits from consoles are small and could get more / silicon with the PC market even at lower prices than the initial launch prices.

Again, lower prices, more sells, bigger profit. Larger install base give developers more scope which leads for more love for pc gaming, which leads to more gamers, more purchases, maybe more frequent upgrades.

If I buy now a 5800x/5900x would last me as long as current gen consoles, maybe more. If the prices aren't low enough for future products, then no buy from me, no profit for AMD. Ergo, hardware vendors should have the incentive to be competitive even with themselves.

 

[Journey]

Profits from consoles are small and could get more / silicon with the PC market even at lower prices than the initial launch prices.

Again, lower prices, more sells, bigger profit. Larger install base give developers more scope which leads for more love for pc gaming, which leads to more gamers, more purchases, maybe more frequent upgrades.

If I buy now a 5800x/5900x would last me as long as current gen consoles, maybe more. If the prices aren't low enough for future products, then no buy from me, no profit for AMD. Ergo, hardware vendors should have the incentive to be competitive even with themselves.

Game development isn't lead by any CPU manufacturer, so again it is totally irrelevant. A PC can play games, but there are many more PCs on the plant that will never load a game for their whole existence. I didn't buy a 386 because it could play games, nor the 486 after that, or second 486, or third, or the first Pentium CPU, the fact I could run some games was great, still needed a graphics card though.

If you were talking about a GPU company or division then you are being somewhat relevant.

 

[chrcoluk]

I like that, it gives people on early gen Ryzen a chance to upgrade to one of the nice new cheaper Zen 3 chips like the 5500 or 5600, maybe even the 5700X.

AM4 has been one hell of a ride... 2017 to 2022, farewell, you have been good to us.

I replaced my 2600X on my B450 board with a 5600G a few days ago.

Great upgrade.

As for the 3D cache, I dont see the issue, I would take 15% out of the box performance (for games) over overclocking any day of the week.

 

[Joxeon]

Good job I didn't say it would match then isn't it. I said the i7 will sit between the 8c and 12c parts and be closer to the 8c part with DDR4.

with a 40% uplift 8c Zen 4 should be around 22k in R23 give or take. As you say the 12900K gets around 27k with fast DDR4 or DDR5 but with 3600 C16 which is more likely to be paired with the cheaper i7 13700K it drops down to 25k.

The 12c Zen 4 part with a 40% uplift over the 5900X is around 30k. Now for the 12c part I can see the power limit increase benefiting so I could see an above average MT improvement for the 12c and 16c parts.

So we have

8c Zen 4 22k
i7 3600 C16 DDR4 25k
i7 DDR5 27k
12c Zen 4 30k.

i7 is between the two and with reasonable DDR4 it is closer to the 8c part than it is to the 12c part.

If we look at the 12600k R23 scores at 17700 then add 4 more Ecores and 5% ipc for RPL improvements which is quite conservative then that already puts a 13600k at 23k so there is slim chance the 7800X will even beat that part in MT and definetly won't be close to the 13700k. Also that is assuming zen 4 improves MT by 40% which I think is a big ask without upping core counts.

I think we'll likely see a 30% increase in SC and 25% MT for zen4 which is still an excellent generational improvement but I don't think it will be enough for the comprehensive victory over RPL that some are predicting.

 

[Calin Banc]

Game development isn't lead by any CPU manufacturer, so again it is totally irrelevant. A PC can play games, but there are many more PCs on the plant that will never load a game for their whole existence. I didn't buy a 386 because it could play games, nor the 486 after that, or second 486, or third, or the first Pentium CPU, the fact I could run some games was great, still needed a graphics card though.

If you were talking about a GPU company or division then you are being somewhat relevant.

Why upgrade from an older CPU for office or regular use? Productivity kinda pay itself, so I get why those people may not care about pricing.

Gaming drives sales for this mid-high end CPUs (again, outside of productivity). Plus all the "fuzz" about Intel being faster is/was in games and their usually "poor" coding.

 

[humbug]

I replaced my 2600X on my B450 board with a 5600G a few days ago.

Great upgrade.

As for the 3D cache, I dont see the issue, I would take 15% out of the box performance (for games) over overclocking any day of the week.

I went from a Ryzen 3600 to the 5800X, it was a nice little bump

 

[Ross Thomson]

The 5800X scores around 15k in R23 while a RPL i7 would post scores around the 12900k given the Ecore increase so 27k which would mean the Zen 4 7800X needing an 80% increase in multi core performance to match it so no it will not match the i7 even with a large increase to the power budget.

who gives a **** what score the CPU gets in R23. R23 is willy waving at its finest.

 

[humbug]

For once i agree with him, Cinebench isn't just a benchmark.

It was originally a performance testing tool for Cinema4D, which is a similar application to Blender, 3DSMax.... its a real thing and the type of productivity work you would use a high core count CPU for, Cinebench was originally popularised by Intel as they used it to showcase performance in this type of very common workload.

As for the 12700K and the RTL equivalent, the 12700K is frankly little different to the 12900K, this is Intel bunching CPU's up toward the high end, AMD could do exactly the same, and perhaps will now given the reason @Joxeon pointed out, what we may see in Zen 4 if they are sticking to 16 cores for the top level is a 14 core 7900X, a 12 core 7800X, a 10 core 7600X, an 8 core 7500X and a 6 core 7400X.

 

[Grim5]

How do games on PS4 are compared to PS3? Best looking isn't for sure on PS3.

i wasn't aware that the cpu is responsible for graphics please enlighten me

 

[timorous]

If we look at the 12600k R23 scores at 17700 then add 4 more Ecores and 5% ipc for RPL improvements which is quite conservative then that already puts a 13600k at 23k so there is slim chance the 7800X will even beat that part in MT and definetly won't be close to the 13700k. Also that is assuming zen 4 improves MT by 40% which I think is a big ask without upping core counts.

I think we'll likely see a 30% increase in SC and 25% MT for zen4 which is still an excellent generational improvement but I don't think it will be enough for the comprehensive victory over RPL that some are predicting.

For 12 and 16C I expect MT improvement to out pace ST improvement due to higher power limits. Zen 3 in the 5950X already gains 20% MT performance if you match power consumption with the 12900K so with a 20% IPC increase and a power bump you are already at 40% without factoring in clock speed improvements as well so I would not be at all surprised to see the multi CCD parts just run away into the distance.

8c will be limited by thermal density so may not go up as much but 25% ipc + 10% clock speed is a total gain of 38% so a 40% performance increrase all in looks doable.

Maybe the 8c part will trade blows with the 600 RPL part for MT workloads. I don't expect RPL to win in ST though and if you look at my numbers the low end of a 13700 should be > 10% faster in MT than the 8c Zen 4 part so not sure why you think I expect them to be closer. Being closer to the 8c part than the 12c part is a very different statement to being close in MT performance.

 

[Calin Banc]

i wasn't aware that the cpu is responsible for graphics please enlighten me

Draw calls, geometry, shadows come to mind. Then AI, physics, animation can also make a world seem alive. The world from Assassin's creed unity feels more alive than the emltyness of Valhalla, for instance. Best looking I don't mean necessarily by the advancements of graphics. IE: a big vibrant city with thousands of AI everywhere could be "better looking" artistically than a perfect ray traced one with with a handful of characters. But sure, the more powerful package of the ps4 played its roll as well.

 

[ChocAndGray]

I'm looking forward to benchmarks. If there's any improvement for gaming at high resolutions regardless of how small I'll likely sell the 5950x and buy this.

In theory it could be a "free" upgrade as I'd hopefully sell my current cpu for more than the 5800X3d costs

 

[Trick]

Did you buy a 5950X for gaming?

 

[ChocAndGray]

Did you buy a 5950X for gaming?

My pc is used primarily for gaming but at the time of purchase I thought I'd use the pc for more than that. It has turned out to be a waste which is why I'm strongly considering selling up.

The 5800X3D seems ideal on paper.