Damn, I did not expect such a step-up from the 7800X3D, that's kinda insane actually.
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
86 points (100.0% liked)
Games
16764 readers
754 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It is pretty incredible. But it takes more power to reach those high clocks.
Avg FPS from all tests:
Source (German): https://www.computerbase.de/artikel/prozessoren/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-test.90151/
Especially after amd advertised it as just a 8% avg uplift
Cannot wait for UserBenchmark's review.
It'll probably say AMD turned to satanism.
Wtf is this poll:
3k people really unsure if they bought or not
Well, did you?
I don't know!
Will there be an equivalent Ryzen 9 upgrade coming soon as well?
Edit: I'm not as familiar with AMD as I am Intel, but I want to switch over next build. It looks like the last major relase was in August, with a 7 and a 9. Does this mean the 9 will get a similar upgrade to match the 9800X3D?
Yes, but it's likely that it will not be any better than this for gaming, and might even be worse if they go hybrid again
Is that the case with most 7's and 9's? I did see people recommend 7 more for gaming, but I couldn't tell if that was just because it was a better price to performance ratio or if 7's were objectively better for gaming.
Usually 9s are better than 7s due to higher clock speeds but since the ccx with the extra cache already ran at its limit there's (or was) no room for improvement for x3d parts. And in zen4 only one ccx (half the cores) had extra cache in the case of 7900x3d and 7950x3d, making performance inconsistent
Oh damn, I'll be eagerly awaiting more news about this come January. (Not that I can afford it right when it comes out though haha)
As with intel, I would recommend not really paying attention to the 3, 5, 7, 9 numbers. Those are just marketing vague indicators; ideally of performance, but realistically just of cost.
Instead, look at the actual model numbers and seek out benchmarks performed by groups you trust with workloads similar to what you might actually do with them. E.g. If you are a gamer, look for comparisons between CPUs as to how they perform in various games. Linus Tech Tips do videos about recent CPU releases and compare how they do vs the competition in a bunch of games, and it shouldn't be hard to find websites with the same kind of comparisons.
But also, yes, they are due to release a 9900x3D and 9950x3D early next year, supposedly. I am keen to see if the 9950x3D is symmetrical this time around; the 7950x3D was asymmetrical so I avoided it.
I'm tempted, but I would miss the raw core count of my 7950x for my workloads. Hope those vague rumours I heard about the 9950x3D having the extra cache on both chiplets are true, because then I'd just get that one.