They still won't switch because AM5 motherboards are too expensive and the new X3D CPUs are even more expensive than non X3D models. I don't see mass adoption away from AM4 to AM5 until Zen5 arrives in 2024
Last edited:
-
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
They still won't switch because AM5 motherboards are too expensive and the new X3D CPUs are even more expensive than non X3D models. I don't see mass adoption away from AM4 to AM5 until Zen5 arrives in 2024
I'm way out of the loop with PC tech right now, but I am one of those with a 3600 and have been holding off on upgrading my CPU to the 5800x3d.
To me it looks like AMD is in quite a tricky spot right now due to the cost of upgrading to AM5 in general. The new chips will really need to be quite impressive to entice myself to upgrade instead of buying the 5800x3d but even then I don't personally see AMD being able to price these chips low enough to offset the already high AM5 costs.
To me it looks like AMD is in quite a tricky spot right now due to the cost of upgrading to AM5 in general. The new chips will really need to be quite impressive to entice myself to upgrade instead of buying the 5800x3d but even then I don't personally see AMD being able to price these chips low enough to offset the already high AM5 costs.
Last edited:
Soldato
Looking forward to when you have it in stock. Hopefully we get a specific date soon.
Caporegime
For this chart the 7800X3D being 15% faster than the 5800X3D would put it at 261 vs 250 vs the 13900K, +5%
The 7700X its self is not far behind the 13900K with it being 4% faster, that would make the 7800X3D 9% faster than the 7700X.
The 7950X3D should be another 10% on top of that making it 15% faster than the 13900K and 20% faster than the 5800X3D.
It all seems slightly low to me, by about 5% but lets go with that.
Frankly for nearly half the price of the 13900K the 7700X is damned good as a pure gaming chip. Even the 7600X looks tasty.
The 7700X its self is not far behind the 13900K with it being 4% faster, that would make the 7800X3D 9% faster than the 7700X.
The 7950X3D should be another 10% on top of that making it 15% faster than the 13900K and 20% faster than the 5800X3D.
It all seems slightly low to me, by about 5% but lets go with that.
Frankly for nearly half the price of the 13900K the 7700X is damned good as a pure gaming chip. Even the 7600X looks tasty.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Dont forget 720P gaming it’s where they really shine. You know, the resolution No one uses while gaming unless you are on a console.
Caporegime
Now....come on Matt, even consoles no longer do 720P.
Associate
Here it is just for you. Would be interesting to see how it compares with my 13900k and RAM at 7600Mhz, I've not even overclocked my CPU yet but I've been messing with the memory timings getting the latency down to 58ns (just with the secondary timings). Also according to Asus I have an SP of 108, or 118 for just the P-Cores on the 13900k. That's basically a 13900KS.
With a 4090, there'll be a difference in minimum FPS values. Also a HUGE difference in TDP, as 3D cache chips are so efficient. 13900KS will be horribly inefficient. Also, most 13900k can already do 6Ghz on one core, making the whole launch rather silly and just an attempt to regain a % or two against X3D.
Also the "bin tier" comment I made is obviously sarcasm, which is even more obvious looking at the post I quoted. Even my young nieces are old enough to detect this level of sarcasm...
Last edited:
Are you trolling? I can't tell. The TDP is lower because the cache makes the chip run hotter, not because they are more efficient....
edit: the trolling in general is getting tiresome because you can't believe everything you read on the forum anymore, it also creates a hostile environment. It's sad, it should stop. I used to have respect for certain individuals on here but when they post so much crap its tempting to just put them on ignore. On top of that there appear to be people that are so strongly biased towards a brand they post anything to put that brand in a positive light, Ill call out humbug here. Watched the guy post for years and he has never changed his loyalty but it feels like he has gotten worse. At times I think he is a direct employee of AMD.
Last edited:
If you read my post, it should be clear that I'm describing how the TDP of the 7950X (120W) will be significantly lower than the 13900KS TDP (actual real world power use, not the Intel/AMD advertised value). It's not "trolling" to mention this, it's just simple fact.
Well yes, but you made out its because of efficiency when in fact its because they are running hotter so can't be pushed as far.
Last edited:
Caporegime
I've probably caused the sale of a lot of CPU's for AMD over the years, i should be on commission, but i'm not, unfortunately i have no connection to AMD what so ever, would i like to be in the employment of AMD? Who wouldn't?
Having said that you are selectively observant, i have flat out recommended Intel CPU's to many in this room over the years. I'm not on commission with them either, sadly. I would like to be, if you're reading this Intel.
Last edited:
Maybe, but the recent posts have really been irking me maybe i should chill out a bit lol.
Caporegime
I have been in this game for too long and do admit to taking a bit too much joy from seeing Intel struggle, to me its karma, maybe i should cool off a bit.
But when it comes to people spending their hard earned money i will always steer them as right as i can without bias, i ran Intel my self during most of the bulldozer years.
Soldato
If the 7950x 3d is 15% faster than the 13900k in games, ill eat my couch. Honestly i dont think you believe that either, but who knows, amd fans constantly come up with some insanely ridiculous claims, so you might actually believe it. Right now I have both a 12900k and a 13900k, and since people have the 7950x we can test and see how this graph holds up in reality.For this chart the 7800X3D being 15% faster than the 5800X3D would put it at 261 vs 250 vs the 13900K, +5%
The 7700X its self is not far behind the 13900K with it being 4% faster, that would make the 7800X3D 9% faster than the 7700X.
The 7950X3D should be another 10% on top of that making it 15% faster than the 13900K and 20% faster than the 5800X3D.
It all seems slightly low to me, by about 5% but lets go with that.
Frankly for nearly half the price of the 13900K the 7700X is damned good as a pure gaming chip. Even the 7600X looks tasty.
I'm surprised by how much people care about these results considering these are the top of the range cpus and the results being shown are 1080p. Doesn't make much logical sense to me.
Last edited:
Deleted member 258511
D
Deleted member 258511
I have a 13900k and it can be very efficient, it also runs very cool which is something I think the 3d chip won’t be. Yes the minimums will be better but not as much as you are exaggerating.
Now I see why you get mentioned so much on here. The way you act as a grown man is very strange indeed.
Soldato
The resolution is irrelevant. You test the CPU at a resolution that it becomes the bottleneck. That resolution can be 480, 720p, 1080p or even 8k. It doesn't matter, all it matters is the CPU to be your limiting factor. The easiest way to do that, is to skip high resolution and jump straight to 720p or even 480p.