Deleted member 258511
D
Deleted member 258511
Are you not getting one then?
-
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
Soldato
The only gulf I'm seeing is mostly in power. Most reviews have Intel similar/better in 1% lows for the chart when averaged out across games.
Deleted member 258511
D
Deleted member 258511
When you take price into consideration it’s not great for the performance gained compared to others that are cheaper. It’s a very efficient CPU yes, but the lower end is where it’s at.
Intel are missing in most segments. The gulf is so wide Intel don’t even bother releasing products.
Will be getting one but I’m not worried about hammering down on F5 to refresh the page as someone else said.
hmm i think i can wait for that in april (we'll see lol)
Soldato
A little lacklustre from the reviews I've watched so far, 7950X wins against the 13900K in some games, Loses in others, Noting to write home about.
Last edited:
while using much less power which is something to write home about
Soldato
I honestly don't care about that, Just gimme perf numbers, Seems the 13900K and 7950X3D are both 50/50, At least there's plenty of choice now
I honestly don't care about that, Just gimme perf numbers, Seems the 13900K and 7950X3D are both 50/50, At least there's plenty of choice now
For technical point of view i think it's impressive , instead of pumping more and more power to get performance
Nice to see performance gain while lowering power consumption
It will get intel having to compete with that
Last edited:
Soldato
Yeah but if the 7600x say isnt good enough for you in games +9% for +£500 isnt going to make a difference. Its not like say 110 fps is unplayable and 120 fps will make the extra £500 worth it.
The 4090 is different. Yes its expensive but it gives you massive gains in return. This dosnt, in strictly gaming only terms.
Soldato
From my gaming perspective, for a long time cpu's have been ahead of gpu's. Anything that wasn't running at max native fps was due to gpu load at 100%. Could hang onto a top cpu for 2-3 gpu upgrades with minimal if any noticeble effect.
Now at 4k, in some games my 5950x is bottlenecking my 4090. Not a huge amount, and only a minority. But it does make me think. Could we be seeing the start of a reverse trend. Hanging onto a gpu for a couple of gens whilst the cpu's catch up.
Now at 4k, in some games my 5950x is bottlenecking my 4090. Not a huge amount, and only a minority. But it does make me think. Could we be seeing the start of a reverse trend. Hanging onto a gpu for a couple of gens whilst the cpu's catch up.
Last edited:
Soldato
Are people buying 600+ cpus that much price sensitive? I think they just want the best regardless of price
Soldato
Whoever expected the 3d to lead by more than 5-10% was delusional and had no actual clue how fast a 13900k is in gaming. Being even 5% faster is actually impressive, cause the 13900K is an absolute beast in games. Now imagine that - most likely - even a 7800x 3d will offer similar Performance, and with very low power draw. I wasn't expecting that good of a showing from the 3d, this makes buying intel right now kinda pointless.I honestly don't care about that, Just gimme perf numbers, Seems the 13900K and 7950X3D are both 50/50, At least there's plenty of choice now
Soldato
Depends which games you play, Going from multiple reviews the Intel part wins in quite a few titles but it will be interesting to see the performance and how the cache does in newer games coming out.
Last edited:
People post on the forum complaining about that kind of thing. They say they've bought a 4090 and the fps is nowhere near what a 4090 does and it turns out they don't have a good enough cpu.
But if you buy a 4090 and are handicapped by the cpu what was the point in buying the 4090 over a cheaper card like the 4080.
Maybe there's reasons but it doesn't seem good logic to buy the flagship at flagship premium and have it handicapped.
Soldato
I am at least. An extra £60 difference is a chunk and an additional can put to something else. Just cause want high end doesn't mean willing to pay silly numbers for it.
The difference back when I got the 5950x is other options were not close to the same value to performance at release.
The 12 series changed that when Intel dropped their stuff but that was a year later and the 11 series wasn't compelling at time as complete system.
This time around a 13900k if you are not worried about power draw and happy to on average after a larger game pool to be about 5% slower makes sense when you can save £160.
The difference to me is that the additional 5% and £100 on CPU wouldn't be as bad especially as I'd be buying into a platform I can likely drop a 8950x3D and possibly even a 9950x3D (whatever the decide to name them) over the next two gens. So performance similar, less power usage, an upgrade path that seems longer term viable I'd buying now would make the AMD actually compelling if it dropped below the £700 price point.
Hopefully next generation mind they work out doing both CCD with x3D and then by the following gen it is just standard to have 3D Cache on chips in honesty. Don't want it to be stagnant and the requirement for so many product lines.
Plus seeing a CCX go 6 core from 4 core would be great. That could if they can't work out doing multiple CCD at least having a 12core CCD with x3D then. But at least if you are on AM5 going forward with these a drop in replacement with something that could possibly yield another 20% IPC and more cores in 2024.