Poll: Ryzen 7950X3D, 7900X3D, 7800X3D

[uscool]

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.

I love that the CPU space is healthy unlike the GPU one looking forward to my next platform upgrade I feel some would prefer if one just was leading alone thats how much fanboy some are that just hurts the consumer

 

[uscool]

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.

games that love cache it will be ahead also lows are another metric

 

[Bencher]

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.

Again, i'd eat my couch if the 3d is faster than the 13900k. There is already a huge gap between the 13900k and zen 4. If you see the minimums a 7950x in cyberpunk ultra + RT youll know what im talking about. It doesn't compete with the 13900k. Heck it doesn't even compete with the 12900k. In fact, it's probably on par with a 10900k....i kid you not.

 

[Frenzy]

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.

Yep 100% correct its good for determining the bottle neck at a given resolution . People playing at higher resolutions (which is more likely to be with the latest cpu) are going to see less of a benefit which is the point I'm trying to make. If you are gaming at 1080p why not just go console or buy a cheaper cpu at this point?

 

[Bencher]

games that love cache it will be ahead also lows are another metric

Sure, but how many are there, and how many frames are you getting at them already? Because going from 700 to 900 fps in valorant is kind of useless.

 

[Twinz]

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 will probably wait until my PC can't do something I want before I upgrade. The AM5 X3D stuff looks impressive though.

 

[Deleted member 258511]

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.

I’d rather be interested in my use case which is 4k. I understand the testing at lower resolutions, but 1080p and 1440p are irrelevant for me using a 4k monitor.

 

[Bencher]

Yep 100% correct its good for determining the bottle neck at a given resolution . People playing at higher resolutions (which is more likely to be with the latest cpu) are going to see less of a benefit which is the point I'm trying to make. If you are gaming at 1080p why not just go console or buy a cheaper cpu at this point?

There are plenty of reasons to care. One of them is longevity. The CPU that is let's say 30% faster in 720p will be 30% faster in 4k when the time comes that a GPU fast enough exists. I remember back in 2017, the i3 8100 was as fast as the 8700k in 4k. Fast forward to today, the 8700k is still a decent CPU, the 8100 is kind of dead for gaming unless you are playing indies.

 

[uscool]

Sure, but how many are there, and how many frames are you getting at them already? Because going from 700 to 900 fps in valorant is kind of useless.

so no point either company releasing cpus anymore ? yes we got to the point where it doesnt matter other than epeeeening for one company I welcome the CPU space loving it over what we seeing with Graphics

 

[Bencher]

I’d rather be interested in my use case which is 4k. I understand the testing at lower resolutions, but 1080p and 1440p are irrelevant for me using a 4k monitor.

Well sure, let's say you looking to buy a new CPU and you are playing at 4k. CPU A and CPU B both get 80 fps at 4k, but CPU A gets 200 fps at 1080p while CPU B gets 150. Which one would you buy? CPU A ofcourse, because it will last you longer.

 

[Bencher]

so no point either company releasing cpus anymore ? yes we got to the point where it doesnt matter other than epeeeening for one company I welcome the CPU space loving it over what we seeing with Graphics

For valorant? Nope, no reason honestly.

 

[Deleted member 258511]

Again, i'd eat my couch if the 3d is faster than the 13900k. There is already a huge gap between the 13900k and zen 4. If you see the minimums a 7950x in cyberpunk ultra + RT youll know what im talking about. It doesn't compete with the 13900k. Heck it doesn't even compete with the 12900k. In fact, it's probably on par with a 10900k....i kid you not.

It might be better in one or two games. It’s not going to be a huge gap though that’s for sure. The minimums……we shall see. Again not to the extent some on here are making out.

 

[Frenzy]

Well sure, let's say you looking to buy a new CPU and you are playing at 4k. CPU A and CPU B both get 80 fps at 4k, but CPU A gets 200 fps at 1080p while CPU B gets 150. Which one would you buy? CPU A ofcourse, because it will last you longer.

Hmm, what you are saying does make sense. But by the time the cards are fast enough for this to be a significant issue won't we have updated our cpus by then anyway? I mean just look at last gen and this gen, we've also got a stagnating market where games aren't really being pushed that much further cpu wise.

 

[Bencher]

Hmm, what you are saying does make sense. But by the time the cards are fast enough for this to be a significant issue won't we have updated our cpus by then anyway? I mean just look at last gen and this gen, we've also got a stagnating market where games aren't really being pushed that much further cpu wise.

If your main concern is gaming, then why would you upgrade your CPU? Let's say you buy a 7800x 3d, I don't think you need to buy a new CPU for the next 5 years in regards to gaming. Of course in computer forums people upgrade their PCs just to tinker with them and not because they have any need to do so, but these are the enthusiasts. If you are one of those, do benchmarks matter at all? Even 4k benchmarks are irrelevant for an enthusiast that is going to upgrade in a year. Any latest CPU will drive any latest GPU at 4k just fine. So weird as it may sound, reviews and benchmarks are more relevant to the general population that have to make a purchasing decision that is going to last 3 to 5 or even more years, rather than us few enthusiasts that will just upgrade in the next 6 months.

 

[Deleted member 258511]

Hmm, what you are saying does make sense. But by the time the cards are fast enough for this to be a significant issue won't we have updated our cpus by then anyway? I mean just look at last gen and this gen, we've also got a stagnating market where games aren't really being pushed that much further cpu wise.

If someone asked me what CPU they should buy, I would ask them what games they play and what resolution they play at. Sometimes people are so fixated on the hardware they forget about the games they bought it to play on.

 

[Robert896r1]

Hmm, what you are saying does make sense. But by the time the cards are fast enough for this to be a significant issue won't we have updated our cpus by then anyway? I mean just look at last gen and this gen, we've also got a stagnating market where games aren't really being pushed that much further cpu wise.

We learned that lesson already with the 4090. It's faster than the current gen of CPU's. Right now, the current batch of CPU/Mem hold back a 4090 at 1080p/1440p in a lot of games. The point of testing cpu's without a gpu bottleneck is exactly trying to see how long into the future it'll scale once GPU's get faster.

 

[Frenzy]

We learned that lesson already with the 4090. It's faster than the current gen of CPU's. Right now, the current batch of CPU/Mem hold back a 4090 at 1080p/1440p in a lot of games. The point of testing cpu's without a gpu bottleneck is exactly trying to see how long into the future it'll scale once GPU's get faster.

Makes sense, thanks. If you're going to keep it for a long time the metric is important for how long the cpus being compared would last you. I feel like I was being very dumb before.

 

[Grim5]

We learned that lesson already with the 4090. It's faster than the current gen of CPU's. Right now, the current batch of CPU/Mem hold back a 4090 at 1080p/1440p in a lot of games. The point of testing cpu's without a gpu bottleneck is exactly trying to see how long into the future it'll scale once GPU's get faster.

This is definitely the case in the modern warfare 2 warzone game. I've seen a lot of comparisons showing it losing to the 7900xtx in this game, but what those comparisons failed to mention and what I found out when I tested the game myself is that even at 4k the 4090 is getting bottlenecked - it's only when I set the resolution to 6k or 8k that I see the 4090 run at full power.

 

[Curlyriff]

Hi there

I shall add my thoughts whilst I can as AMD have given me zero information yet, as such I am not breaking any NDA with my thoughts and educated guess work. I'd hazard 7800X 3D is 10-15% faster than 5800X 3D, the 7900/7950 faster again in games/apps which can gain from the core count and high boost clocks.

Pricing I'd guess launch pricing as follows:

7950X 3D @ $899
7900X 3D @ $699
7800X 3D @ $499

Best case $100 below the above, worse case $100 above. Expect $100-200 discounts later in the year potentially around Black Friday.


P.S. 13900KS we have in stock, you can order it 12th January!

If the 7800x3D is only 10-15% faster than the 5800x3D it is also slower than the 7700x as that on a tatal average of 40 games is about 15% than the 5800x3D although some games are tied. with 1 or 2 slower. That would be shockingly bad if it is only that. And the prices are mental as well. That is a 50% premimum on the 7900x3D over the 7900x currently being sold at. The 5800x3D was a 30% over previous selling price of the 5800x and actually at same MSRP. These are not and that woudl be criminal pricing honestly.

 

[Deleted member 258511]

If the 7800x3D is only 10-15% faster than the 5800x3D it is also slower than the 7700x as that on a tatal average of 40 games is about 15% than the 5800x3D although some games are tied. with 1 or 2 slower. That would be shockingly bad if it is only that. And the prices are mental as well. That is a 50% premimum on the 7900x3D over the 7900x currently being sold at. The 5800x3D was a 30% over previous selling price of the 5800x and actually at same MSRP. These are not and that woudl be criminal pricing honestly.

Price to performance is always the main factor to most. Strange it doesn’t seem to be the case this time around.