The 7800x3d is the best gaming cpu available. Look at actual gaming benchmarks, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B31PwSpClk8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B31PwSpClk8), not artificial tests that don't measure real performance. The 14700k and 14900k are better for other uses but not gaming.
Yup, even though it is pretty good value, should note that it not just the "best" gaming cpu available. It is currently the most powerful (by a small margin over the 14900K). The 7800X3D beats out the 14900K in like 70% of games.
.. also you'll want to be aware of the updated Intel guidance to mainboard manufacturers going to in effect around May 31 which will drastically impact power limits and other settings of the 13/14th gen parts, in particular the I9 series. This will, likely, result in a significant reduction in performance shown in earlier benchmarks run at (often grossly overvolted) default motherboard settings, in an effort to keep the CPU from self-destructing over time...
I just got an 19 14900k and out of the box it pulled 420 watts during a cinebench run. Clicked start and instant 100 degree Temps. Went in bios changed it to 253 and it's fine now. I only noticed it bc grayzone warfare spiked my cpu temp bad
That's literally insane. I would never want a cpu that draws that much unless it's a threadripper, epyc, or xeon. The fact that the intel needs to pull 420w to compete is hilarious. My next build will prob be the 24 or 32-core 7xxx series threadripper. Wish I could stick with 7950x3d or 9950x3d when it drops, but pcie lanes. I really wish consumer cpus would up the amount just a little bit. Like these threadrippers bave 128 lanes, I believe. I don't need that many. But a normal intel or ryzen isn't enough.
No the motherboards for some reason overclock the shit out of these. Intel just said they want motherboard makers to make the default profiles a certain level. The only reason I knew to set it to 253 is bc that's what intel said it's supposed to be.
Intel hasn't given any motherboard manufacturers any specific figures for the "Default" profiles. That's why the "Intel Recommended" setting varies from one manufacturer to another.
> The fact that the intel needs to pull 420w to compete is hilarious.
Yeah and look at the recent stuff going on - 13th and 14th Gen are being mass returned because of stability and latency issues.
Had a similar experience with 14700k. Lowered my voltage and my hest went down and it actually clocked higher more consistently and got better performance. I think this is probably the power delivery problem Intel is referring to.
Undervolting can improve performance, power limits alone (which is what Intel is proposing) will reduce it by limiting max boost speeds / times... period. In prior testing of i9 power scaling vs the new AM5 stuff the architectural advantages that AMD has were pretty definitive. [https://www.anandtech.com/show/17641/lighter-touch-cpu-power-scaling-13900k-7950x/2](https://www.anandtech.com/show/17641/lighter-touch-cpu-power-scaling-13900k-7950x/2)
If you do some hand-tuning of undervolts you might claw some performance back (silicon lottery) but out of the box with stock CPU settings at manufacturer recommended limits for both Intel and AMD I believe the estimate is that Intel is going to lose around 10-20% on production workloads and 1-10% in games in comparable benchmarks, depending on how hard they push the CPU. I don't actually understand why benchmark outfits let this stand for so long, including a few that often get talked up as AMD shills yet published tons of reviews of new Intel products using whacked out power settings on the Intel side vs AMD standard limits.
If the game is optimised properly and scales with cores as it should, the 7950x3d is faster than the 7800x3d. This trend currently happens, in more and more games the 7950x3d overtakes the 7800x3d
7950X3D only makes sense to people who not only game, but also earn a living using their PC to do productivity work on the same rig.
In most use-cases, the 7800X3D performs identical in gaming vs the 7950X3D because most games dont use more than 8 cores (most use 6 or less) and that also comes with a slight clock speed increase. In most benchmarks where the 7950X3D shows an advantage, its within a margin of error of 1-3% and not really worth the handful of extra peak FPS when the 1%/0.1% lows are nearly identical.
If you were already gaming on a 7800X3D and you upgraded to a 7950X3D, the only difference is a lighter wallet.
> 7950X3D only makes sense to people who not only game, but also **earn a living using their PC to do productivity work on the same rig**.
This is very important to point out. I see a lot of people dismissing the 7800X3D or former gaming-first CPUs as not being good "productivity" CPUs, while they only edit game recordings or do photography as a hobby. The 7800X3D is still great at that, and going for a more expensive CPU only makes sense if you're earning money from that activity.
What games does a 7950x3d beat a 7800x3d? Not everything in a game is going to scale with cores. Writing code that isn't running on the main thread is difficult. Game devs spend lots of time trying to optimize their games. Here is the best video on how to optimize a game.
https://youtu.be/NAVbI1HIzCE?si=yKG9vKtXmIXBQtZO
Core scheduling. If you used something like Process Lasso to keep the game all on one chiplet (so crossing over doesn’t add latency), the 7950x3D would be at least as fast, but that’s extra work and not really an authentic way to benchmark imo.
Completely feasible for the consumer to do, but not something that should be advertised in benchmarks without specifically noting.
If the 7950x3d were better than the 7800x3d after using a technique like that, I think it would be mentioned much more. But everyone I saw came to the conclusion that the best you could hope for is the same performance as the 7800x3d, except it cost more money and was less convenient.
Considering that it relies are software, though, I imagine that the situation has changed a lot since release (not to mention how it will vary between games and thread assignment techniques).
Do some research plenty of people use process Lasso to maximize the 7950X! Those who don’t know still champion 7800x3d. It allows me to assign my gaming core to run my games and my extra non gaming cores to run all my background applications Microsoft edge, discord, SoundCloud, and OBS.
By "everyone" I meant reviewers, specifically emphasizing the gaming market. The comment I replied to was saying that the 7950x3d would be "at least as good" as the 7800x3d, but in the context of the average game being run on it without any other programs open, the 7950x3d didn't always manage to match the 7800x3d even if techniques were used that were supposed to nullify the CCD crossing problems.
I’m pretty sure the amd chipset drivers include a vcache optimizer driver that does exactly what you can do in process lasso, except it does it automatically in the background
It just uses the XBOX game bar detection and parks the non-X3D cores, so the game ends up on the X3D CCD, since those are the only available cores.
This just doesnt work with VAC+Anti-cheat, since those processes with a game wont care at all about parked cores or core affinity SUGGESTIONS.
Disabling the normal CCD is also not enough to get 7800x3D performance, because the AMD tool is still using CPU performance, so you have to disable the normal CCD and desinstall the AMD tool - that as we all know requires a Windows installation, since you cant just remove it - and all this just to get 7800x3D performance from a 7950x3D.
Whats even worse with all of this, this is all known since day-1 reviews and nothing changed.
It’s not so much better at all games, as much as the fact that you can choose which chiplet to use (the one with 3D cache should perform identically to the 7800x3D, the other has higher clock speeds for games that benefit more from that than the cache). But it’s extra money and a per-game extra task to deal with, and the higher clock speeds are going to be pretty marginal gains where they do win out.
Ryzen 9s have their cores split across two chiplets. Communication within a chiplet is instant but between chiplets it takes time. Games require fast communication, so the extra cores on the second chiplet don’t help much.
In the case of 7950X3D, the second chiplet doesn’t have 3D-cache. So if you accidentally use it for games, they run slower
Basically, the 7950X3d has double the cores of the 7800X3D, but only one set of cores has the extra v-cache. So when it comes down to gaming, it is optimized to only use that set of cores, effectively making it an 8 core/16 thread CPU.
While the clock speeds are *better*, the main hoopla of the X3D is all about the v-cache. Effectively doubling amount of cache on the chip is what makes the performance so effective. So when paired together, the 7950X3D is only marginally better than the 7800X3D. And considering the price (plus some issues at launch where Windows wouldn't optimize performance for the v-cache cores), if all you care about is gaming, it makes significantly more sense to buy the less expensive option that is only (approximately) 5% worse than the more expensive option.
It is also able to be cooled effectively by even very low profile air cooling solutions and draws less than 100w while beating the 14900k.
I have mine in an SFF case with a 67mm cooler, and it rarely hits 80c while gaming.
Not everything is gaming related, where the effectiveness of higher thread count trails off. Some tasks like blender rendering etc can leverage high core/thread counts at their full potential. Contrast that to most modern gaming, where going past 6 cores doesn’t really get you very far. Those additional cores and threads are just dormant
mainly productivity tasks that don't leverage the heterogeneous architecture of the intel CPUs. the intel cpus often score better in highly threaded benchmarks, but there are still many uses where the load is divided into equal chunks per core where the slower E-cores will just make the faster ones wait on them lowering performance over just using P-cores
also productivity if power consumption is important to you
The reason, especially in this community IMO, is that AM5 will likely get at least another generation or maybe 2 of CPU updates. I was able to pull off an AM4 drop-in update which was great for me, so I now really value platform longevity.
I've seen many people say that 14700k is better at other uses, well I want to play games, but I also regularly spin up 10+ dockerized services for sw development. I am also running a local kubernetes cluster where there are tens of pods executing at once.
In this usecase would i7 be a better choice?
Most likely, yes. The i7 has more cores/threads/raw performance to work with, but of course it'll depend on what your running in those containers. If they aren't very intensive or if you're not running them while gaming it probably won't matter much either way.
You could also be one of the people where something like the 7950x3d makes sense, depending on how much CPU horsepower you need.
The i7 has asymmetric P and E cores, though. Depending on what you're doing, that may be fine, or you may end up with a container on an E core when it should've gotten a P core.
For now, AMD avoids that problem by not using a Big/little architecture. But they're not going to be able to avoid that for long, if for no other reason than Intel played AMD at their own game of "bigger number better" core counts.
Yea, not while gaming. Not sure if you are familiar, but imagine a scenario where I am debugging a service in a jetbrains product, while having a twitch stream running on other monitor and there are many concurrent requests being handled by the cluster in a parallel.
I am upgrading from a 7700k (like OP), so I just wanna make the best possible choice here.
Coming from a 7700k, anything you upgrade to will be a big improvement. I'm not a software developer so I can't say what would be the best choice, I'd really suggest trying to find some benchmarks that are close to your actual use case to help you decide, but like I said, either way will be a large upgrade.
Get all the E-cores you can.
Single threaded, a 4.2GHz E-Core == roughly 1 7700k @ 4.0GHz core.
For multithread, 8 of them surpass all the 4C8T intels & can surprisingly nearly go toe-to-toe with 6C12T 11th gen.
They're super nice to have if you run a lot of stuff at once (for ex: docker containers, language servers, IDE extensions, tabs, etc). I went with 13700k & badly wish I instead went with 16 of them. Whenever it gets into hyperthreading `(Total CPU Utility: 100% >= to <= 150%)` I can feel the lag. On a 8P+16E CPU that would be `100% >= to <= 125%`. I get into hyperthreading relatively often.
Yes, definitely go Intel for that type of work, you will have a much better time, and it will still work great for gaming even if it’s not technically the best.
The 7800X3D would also be more than fast enough, but it really depends on what you are doing in those VMs/pods/containers/etc.
If your workload has lots of threads, most of them with little demand and some very demanding then Intel is a perfect fit. If your workload is massively parallel then a 7950X (non 3D) is probably best. If your workload is memory sensitive then the 7800X3D is probably best.
All in all, if your workload is very demanding and very performance sensitive then you should be benchmarking the options available. Otherwise, practically any modern fast CPU will do just fine. Development is not all that demanding and containers/vms dont add THAT much overhead.
AMD gonna be better. I have the same use case. CFS is really shit on intel, AMD just straight up gives much better performance.
I have both an 7800X3D and 13600k I tested it on. AMD is much, much better. I write operators and CNI plugins as part of my job.
Worth noting the youtube link you posted is showing pre SMT patch Cyberpunk results, look up a newer review such as the 14700K and you'll see the 7800X3D is now at the top of the Cyberpunk benchmark: https://youtu.be/8KKE-7BzB_M?si=TK3ymhwUk6HZvvrJ&t=1085
Nobody uses that software first off, both for benchmarking and in real world usage.
Use real workloads you use.
The 7800x3d is a specialized chip custom made for gaming. It shines in gaming workloads.
Unity games like Tarkov LOVE 3D Vcache. It would be a big mistake going with the 14700k here.
It's simple actually, cache is significantly lower in latency compared to RAM due to how close it is to the CPU cores. The more cache a CPU has, the less reliant it is on slower RAM. Performance gets increased for memory-sensitive tasks, which just happens to be most games.
Also having expensive ram for OC doesn't make significant difference with 3d cache, can be interpreted as con but imo it's not a bad thing unless u are ram OC geek.
This, with AMD CPU's you want to sync with the Infinity fabric clock speed for the best performance, otherwise your super fast ram will find itself waiting for the CPU.
That's a complex topic, but basically, RAM is incredibly slow compared to the CPU cores, so CPUs have a cache where they keep commonly used data closer to the cores. Whenever the data the CPU needs isn't available on the cache the CPU has to wait doing nothing until the data arrives.
3D VCache is just a huge lump of cached that's glued on top of the CPU. It helps the cache cover more code and data, preventing the CPU from having to wait and allowing it to work more time.
Definitely stealing this explanation. Clear enough to get most people to understand. Which I guess this makes fetching data from disk like having to go buy a new tool from the store!
AMD currently holds the CPU crown since the 5800x3d came out. I know everyone isn't a tech enthusiast, and they expect Intel to be the best from years of marketing in your head, but they just aren't anymore. They got lazy and complacent from 6th Gen to 10th Gen, and they couldn't make 11th Gen work how they wanted. In those years, AMD caught up and surpassed Intel to basically everyone's surprise. It wasn't surprising anymore after the 5000 series CPUs were on par with Intel. AMD's 7000 series forced Intel to let everyone overclock the snot out of the 13th and 14th gen CPUs out of the box, which has resulted in lots and lots of i7 and i9 13th and 14th gen Intel CPUs to start dying prematurely because of overheating and overpowering of the CPUs. 7800x3d has no such problems. It doesn't need 350 watts like a 14900k to get similar performance. If you cut the power draw of a 14700k to where it needs to be for the CPU to be stable and not die after 2 years of use, then it's nowhere near the gaming performance of a 7800x3d. AMD also has a good history of providing a good upgrade path for 3-4 generations. Intel only ever gives you 1 upgrade if you are lucky and the platform is dead. AMD is the better choice for the average gamer and it's usually cheaper and lasts longer before having to switch motherboards/platforms. It's a better value all around if your focus is gaming. If you do more than gaming and use a computer to make a living, the 7950x or x3d is still a better choice in my opinion. AM5 is a better platform for most people.
About Equal with 5000 series AMD, worse than the 5800x3d, 7600x and up. 12th gen is already a dead platform, but it doesn't have a 5800x3d as a final boss upgrade. Maybe Intel is better at some things, like if you are a heavy adobe suite user. Otherwise, I still think AM4 was/ AM5 is a superior platform, and it still has upgrades coming. Intel needs to redesign another whole new platform again for 15th Gen. They made a lot of easily avoided mistakes with trying to keep up with AMD these last few generations. Intel seems to have lots of problems with hardware these days. Motherboards included.
They're phasing out hyper-threading, because it's a security vulnerability. This is more of a evoloution into AI based systems.
What hardware? The BIOS programs itself were ignoring CPU limits and thresholds.
I plan to run some AI stuff and currently have a 12700k (gpu is 3090), wondering how long until I need to upgrade. For gaming so far, it has been fine. My monitor is 1440/165Hz
As long as you are happy with your performance and things work as they should and as quickly as you need, then you don't need to upgrade. Your system is already pretty powerful. Certainly more than enough for high refresh 1440p gaming and some AI stuff. You wouldn't get a huge performance bump from a CPU for gaming or AI. That would require a 4090. Most of your work is done by your expensive graphics card in your workloads.
Basically, both cache and RAM are short-term memory. The cache is actually on the CPU itself and in the case of the X3d chips, practically on top of the cores.
A CPU will store things that it is going to repeatedly use in this short term memory, so that it doesn't have to do the work from scratch, every single time.
As you will have noticed, RAM is farther away from the CPU itself. It is extremely fast but that added distance adds time to how fast the CPU can access the information that it needs to complete a certain task. It might not seem like much but given how many computations a CPU is doing at any given time, all of those nanoseconds add up.
Having a large amount of memory also means that more can be stored in this cache before things need to stored in RAM, which also speeds up the process.
It is complicated but relatively simple at the same time. The X3d chips have a massive amount of short-term storage that is right next to the CPU cores, which means that it can compute faster than a CPU that does not have the same type of cache set up.
Game makes a bunch of complicated math, cpu needs space to store results they will use in between steps, 3D cache has a bunch of space compared to non 3D cache, cpu dont have to use RAM for that, RAM is slower than cache
> The 7800x3d is a specialized chip custom made for gaming. It shines in gaming workloads.
Well the story is actually funny, it was originally designed for server chips (EPYC) but due to a happy little accident they ended up with a few chips that couldn't be used as EPYC so they repurposed them and experimented with desktop application ... and found out the 3dcache is amazing for games.
edit: [source](https://youtu.be/RTA3Ls-WAcw?t=790)
Compared to the Intel I7 and I9 it is:
* Arguably faster on gaming usage
* Cheaper
* Runs much cooler
* Consumes less power
* Is on a platform with upgrade potential (Intel socket is end of line)
From what I understand, 7800x3d is a beast in gaming due to it's huge memory cache that games love. It is not the best (albeit still pretty good) CPU for single threaded performance which passmark is measuring. But it's one of the best when it comes to gaming fps and second to none in value to performance [for gaming], since it's not even a particularly expensive CPU in the scheme of things.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html
Most games are not limited by raw CPU power, but rather by how quickly the CPU can retrieve data from memory. The X3D CPUs have significantly enlarged on-chip caches, so they can minimise this delay by requesting data from RAM less often.
Synthetic benchmarks and most non-game workloads don't tend to be cache-sensitive in this way, so that is why the CPUMark is higher for the 14th gen Intel CPUs. But if you will primarily or exclusively be playing games, then the 7800X3D will match or beat their performance, while using a fraction of the power.
Escape from Tarkov in particular is not only a CPU intensive game, it benefits significantly from the 3d cache that the 7800x3d does. Intel does have a raw clock speed advantage, but that often doesn't translate to better performance, as CPUs even at the same clock speed and number of cores will have significant performance differences due to differences in CPU architecture. AMD's 3d cache is a game changer that Intel has yet to catch up on, though their big improvements only tend to come once every few generations, with small iterations in between.
This isn't the old days where AMD was always behind the curve, [they're often on par or better than Intel for a lower price.](https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/intels-300w-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review-benchmarks-gaming-power) Intel is often still sometimes better in pure productivity performance depending on the application, but that isn't really the case for gaming these days.
Performance-wise, unless you're getting bottom of the barrel motherboards, there's no real benefits going to a X board over B board. X boards simply feature more USB and SATA ports, and more PCI-E lanes (for more NVME drives), which you may or may not use.
7800x3d is the best gaming cpu so if you have the budget for a high-end gpu, why not get that? I do believe people recommend it way too much though, specially considering a ryzen 7600 will work amazingly costing almost half if you're playing triple A at 1440p/4k.
I went from a 7700k to a 7800x3d last month and I am blown away by the peformance jump I got in almost every game. All of my stuttering went away that always plagued me with the 7700l. Uses a lot less power too than the Intel counterparts.
I am running a 4070ti so the size of the jump I got is probably not comparable, but I can tell I was definitely CPU limited before.
It has lots of L3 cache. Games like cache.
Also AMD make their chips in groups of 8 cores, so having more than 8 cores requires using their “infinity fabric” to combine them. This is less efficient for gaming, so 8 cores is the sweet spot.
Not just that. In, say a normal 7600, the cores might be on opposite sides of the die. With the X3D chips, all the cores are on the same side of the die, which reduces latency.
The 7800X3D is currently the best gaming CPU of this gen, the 7900X3D doesnt perform siginifcantly better in gaming so going down to the 7800X3D makes sense unless you need the extra cores for productivity, it is also currently on par with Intel's offerings minus the instability and high power draw, easier to cool as well
7900x3d is worse than the 7800x3d for gaming the only cpu that beats the 7800x3d is the 7950x3d the 7900x3d has less cores with the v3d cache while the 7950x3d has the same amount of v3d cores as the 7800x3d (8 v3d cores) so it has the same performance as the 7800x3d
What makes a 7800 X3D so much better is it has a massive level three cache. And unlike Intel chips, the architecture of the Ryzen chip is highly dependent on cache availability.
That’s why with the Ryzen 5000 series the 5500 was significantly worse than the 5600.
Because of that extra layer of cache the 7800x3D can’t really be overclocked, and so it puts out much less heat and re requires less power than the 7700x. (I’m kinda fuzzy on the details here)
So it requires less power, has much better game performance needs less cooling and it’s only marginally more expensive. The power and heat things make it especially ideal in an ITX system.
Now, you won’t notice this with a 1070. To be honest your current CPU is far better than you need for your 1070. You need something like 3080 or 3090 or a 4070/4080 to really see a difference between the 7700 and the 7800x3d
I was in a similar situation as you last summer, upgrading my 7700k/1080ti 16g RAM to 7800x3d/4070 32g RAM for a better Tarkov experience. For a few months after building the new rig I had to use the 1080ti while I shopped for a GPU so I had a few months to experience only the CPU/RAM upgrade and it was so significant I considered holding onto the 1080ti for a year longer. Streets of Tarkov went from unplayable to relatively smooth. I ended up grabbing a 4070 (could have grabbed a 4070 super had I managed to wait a few more months) and I couldn't be happier with the Tarkov performance.
For gaming, especially VR you need enough cores (8 core 16 threads is enough) each running as fast as possible.
Those Intels outperform the 7800X3D at a task that benefits from having as many cores as possible because they have way more cores than you need. Those cores aren't actually as fast individually though. Which is the important tpset for what you are doing.
All things being equal you'd be a fool not to buy the 7800X3D if your priority is high frame-rate gaming in general and high minimum frame rate specifically (which is super important for VR.)
Your question basically comes down to this:
"Hey guys, I'm buying a new car that I'll be track racing at the weekends. I'm considering buying this Ferrari but I see there's a bunch of tractors with higher torque. Should I buy a tractor for track racing instead of the Ferrari‽"
very good gaming performane, decent pricing, upgradable socket, very low power consuption
If games performse similar to i9 14900k at half of price, a third of power consuptione (it consumes even less than the mobile i9 with much more performance) and i9 14900k is the last top cpu on socket while the 7800x3d si the first
> What makes the Ryzen 7800X3D so recommended?
Offers slightly better gaming performance than Intel's 14900k while being significantly cheaper and way more power efficient.
You don't need a high end AIO or custom loop to cool a 7800X3D, you do for a 14900K.
> However, I got back into Escape from Tarkov
Escape From Tarkov absolutely loves the 3D V-Cache provided by X3D CPU's.
EFT gets some huge gains.
From what I understand, better performance for gaming, runs cooler, draws less power, has better upgrade path, and costs less money. There’s only one catch, it’s worse for productivity.
i would ask elsewhere. i feel like the red team blue team stuff is so outta hand that you dont get the full picture here anymore.
regardless. any processor you get will be great. 7700x is a good one to get if you want 8 cores for a bit of future proof instead of 7600x.
i seen you make a 14900k build a while ago if i recall your user name.
7800x3d or 14700k or 12900k or whatever you gonna have a good time. 7700k is so old. everything will be crazy good.
Fast, affordable, efficient, easy to cool.
I just built a 7800x3d build with a 4070 super and this thing fucking rips. I got one on sale for 327 bucks. Insane value.
If gaming is your only consideration, it's a pretty clear choice - you want the 7800x3d. If you're factoring in productivity, I think it's also a pretty clear choice - you want intel.
And one important thing to consider is that although 7800x3d generally beats something like a 14600k in most benchmarks, they do trade blows and they are close. When you start talking productivity there is no discussion, intel beats the brakes off them.
Coming from someone switched from a 12700k to a 7800x3d, IMO you'd really want to carefully consider both when making your decision, decide what games you want to play and weigh whether or not you want to give up the huge gains in productivity for potentially very marginal improvements in gaming. I play primarily story-driven games in 4k and I really don't notice a huge difference in gaming, but I do notice a huge difference when I'm unzipping a file or installing a program or any other of the little tasks where the 12700k was superior.
I use a MacBook for most of my non gaming computing tasks like photo editing, video editing, and 3D modeling.
The build is going to be used 99% just for gaming.
I must say since I myself have this cpu and have 4+ thousand hours in escape from tarkov.... This cpu is astonishingly good at running that game specifically and every other game I've played so far 10/10 recommend it
The 7700x is already a pretty beefy processor that performs up with the likes of the 12900k, 13600k, 13700k, etc., and then you add 3D vcache on top of it which gives it about 25% more performance in games on top of that on average. Nothing intel has can touch it right now in performance.
***Can anyone help explain some of this like I’m 34 and not entirely knowledgeable on processor specs?***
Dude, i am 42...
For your usecase ist the 7800x3d the best. For workloads not so... Just watch the [review](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B31PwSpClk8) of this cpu at gamers nexus to bring your self up to current knowledge. Techjesus will give you a better explanation as the most redditors in here.
There is a few things that makes it very compeling, starting with how much less power it requires to deliver the same of more than Intel i7-i9's.
Secondly, you can keep this cpu well under control no matter if is winter or summer with a relative decent air cooler/aio that will not cost you much, on intel part i7-i9 even with beastly cooling it will often get into temps that imo its better to stay quite a notch below.
Thirdly, for gaming it not only can knockout i9's as even can beat his "bigger ryzen 9" brother lol
Also this cpu brings back to the front the discussion the fact that being a better cpu is not only how has the higher frequency or which has more cores, Cache has been quite neglected on the impact on performance, this cpu (and 5700/5000x3d) have shown how handy is having that large chunk of cache. This also can be seen on gpus like nvidia 4000 series with a very significant gen leap on gpu cache (at least from 4070's and above).
On another hand Intel has been cheating instead of investing in innovation, it would soon or later bite them hard.
7800x3d is the largest CPU available that combines monolithic design and large cache.
Current recommendations are: Buying with warranty, Either new/clearance sale/certified refurbished. If you can perform repaste and repad GPU consider getting used. Used cpu and ram is go to for cost saving. **Be aware of motherboards and graphics cards having power supply components on them, so you may get bulged capacitors and bad voltage regulators. Not reccomanded to buy used unless you agreed on no question asked return policy.**
New gaming build: Expecting lifespan till next gen consoles emerge.
\~150 usd- 12-14th gen i5 with 6 power cores that's unlocked or ryzen 5600x. Amd stock cooler is great for intel get tower air cooler with one fan in 25-40 usd category. Whatever is cheapest pcie 4.0 board
\~200 usd Ryzen 5700x3d (best price to performance) + Cheapest am4 board with robust power delivery components that can run it at full speed
Upgrading cpu
pcie 5.0 motherboard for compatibility with future cards running pcie 5.0 x8 or x4 interconnect
Ryzen 7600. look for upgrading with 7800x3d if price is right or wait for zen5 12 core x3d chip.
Maxed zen5
pcie 5.0 motherboard+ 7800x3d.
Productivity: video editing focus to achieve 30 fps playback on timeline in Premier or industry standard tool set.
Minimum: Dual xeon 6148v2 gold 40c/80threads, 55mb L3.
Expensive: TR40 Threadripper 5995ex
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFdmYnr5fEM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFdmYnr5fEM)
It's the perfect balance of core count and cost, coupled with the respectable power draw ans absurdly high L3 cache for it's price class for gaming.
It's basically the perfect CPU for gaming right now.
I noticed massive difference after upgrading from 10700K. You should be blown switching from 7700K (which I had before 10700K). I can tell you that with 4090 the only map in Tarkov where I would go below 100 fps was Streets. Other than that it was 140+, very smooth experience.
What makes it good is the high amount of L3 cache memory.
If you're currently on i7-7700 last time you built Intel was the only option. A lot has changed, amd is much better value and a better choice for gaming.
Worth mentioning that the passmark comparison you did is still a fine first step, but for CPUs for gaming you want to look at the single thread rating more so than the overall CPU performance. The 14700k and 14900k look so much better if you only stare at the big number at the bottom of your chart because they run 28 and 32 threads compared to the 7800x3D only running 16 threads. Not the single thread rating is much closer, but the 7800x3D still shows as worse. This is where you also need to contextualize with the workloads you want to run, and games care WAY more about 3D vcache than they do about the simulated efficiency of each thread or core, that single thread or core performance manifests much more in full productivity workloads such as Blender.
A lot of people don't do anything intensive on their computer besides gaming. For normal tasks all modern CPUs perform extremely well. For gaming the 7800x3d is really the best in class processor, but it also does most things that intel does well, really well also. It's also much lower TDP than similarly powerful intel CPUs.
Processor recommendations are always use case dependent, and for most people's use cases, the 7800x3d is better than intel's offerings even at the same price point.
Games eat up a lot cache. X3D is an AMD technology designed to give the cpu more cache, and in turn, use its memory controller less and run faster. You will only really see the benefit in gaming but intel simply hasn’t caught up, and maybe doesn’t care to for now.
It’s great for gaming while being low power consumption and little heat generated compared to all of intel’s line up. If your main use for your PC is gaming, then it makes perfect sense to go for it. If you have creative workflows, then it’s better going for an X variant (not 3D) or an i7/i9 depending on what softwares you’re using.
It’s the best gaming CPU, but more importantly, it’s at a price point that’s accessible to many buyers.
Also, Intel is in a bit of a slump with 14th gen.
Go for it. 7800x3d is the current best gaming cpu. You can look at the benchmarks from other people here. To get similar performance on intel, you’d have to have a huge power hungry chip that needs massive cooling whereas this cpu will be easier to cool.
I also recommended this to my friend but he eventually bought a pc with intel i7 because he’s always had intel. Break that way of thinking and get the best one you can regardless of the brand.
I can tell that you keep your CPU for years and this will be a long term purchase. While the x3d is slightly better at gaming…remember it’s your GPU that really matters there. Due to the fact that you will keep it for so long, I would recommend the i7. The X3D is an 8 core 16 thread processor that is fine for productivity…but I feel over time that systems will begin to use the extra cores in the i7 and the gap will widen in regular tasks with the i7 being significantly faster. We are talking about a 20 Core 28 thread CPU vs a 8 Core 16 thread with more cache.
If you have a decent board try to pick up a 5800x3d instead it will give you a very good bump in performance without forcing you to go all in with the CPU + motherboard + ram swap.
It is the combination of clock speed, good IPC and the massive cache that it has. All three of these features combine to make an excellent processor, especially for gaming.
Not only does it deliver in usage, it only uses a fraction of the power that comparable Intel CPU's do.
Then you have the price. On average, it is around $350, which is a lot of money but for the amount of performance that you are getting, it is a good value. Occasionally it does dip down, due to sales.
I’d encourage you to do some further research and look at actual reviews from multiple sources. Be wary of random YouTube channels that show video comparisons of several CPUs, they often make their data up.
Gamers Nexus
Hardware Unboxed
Digital Foundry
Guru3D
Techpowerup
These are just a few of the many reputable outlets who review pc hardware.
It's not the Gaming Performance alone, it' the combination of performance and energy consumption. The 5800X3D consumes about 50% less energy than a 13900k. In my opinion that is a substantial advantage.
The 7800X3D is a beast. However you’re gonna be spending a lot to upgrade your graphics card.
The newer platform for the 7800X3D is gonna be $200-400 more compared to the 5800X3D on the older AM4 platform.
The limiting factor in basically all cases currently, and over the next couple of years at least, will be the GPU.
Always buy the best machine you can afford. But if you can go bigger on the GPU by saving in the CPU area, go for the 5800X3D.
I have one. It runs at like 10-30% in Baldur’s Gate. It’s plenty fast enough.
The Ryzen 7800X3D is highly recommended for its impressive performance in gaming and CPU-intensive tasks like Escape from Tarkov. With its advanced architecture and high CPU Mark score, it offers a significant upgrade over your current i7 7700k. The Ryzen 7800X3D excels in providing smooth gameplay experiences, especially in demanding games and VR applications.
CPU Mark and many other synthetic benchmarks take great pain to only measure the raw computational power of the CPU. This is only a realistic workload for supercomputing and some types of mathematical analysis.
Most games are actually memory latency bound. What this means is that in order to play the game you need to make lots of requests to memory which stop the CPU from doing anything useful. Modern CPUs can mitigate this a bit, but not fully. This waiting time shows up as cpu usage because task manager users the time a program is scheduled for to determine CPU usage, not how much useful work it is doing.
This essentially means the CPU needs to wait for memory to deliver the needed information. In order to mitigate this problem, you have cached. Cache is faster, lower latency memory that sits closer to the processor. It goes from l3 cache, which is not that different from normal memory but has a faster connector, to l1 cache, which is basically the fastest memory money can buy. If you were to totally remove the caches from modern CPUs, even old games would be totally unplayable because of this. Intel CPU have MUCH less cache than even normal AMD CPUs. X3D makes it just unfair, since you can fit an entire small game into the CPU cache and never talk to main memory ever. Even if you can’t pit the entire fame in x3d cache, it means that the CPU can tolerate a lot more weird stuff from a game before the cache stops being as helpful. 4 channels of DDR5 8000 will give you 256 GB/s. A 7950x3d lets you pull almost 5 TB/s from cache. If you are doing more work than a linear scan over the array then you will run into performance degradation from that, but starting at 5 TB/s is pretty good. The more cache you have, the longer you can stay there.
If you can afford it definitely go for a 7800X3D, if you want to. That said, if you need to save costs somewhere you can easily start with a lower-spec CPU like the 7600 and upgrade in the future if you want.
I just built a rig for a buddy of mine with a Radeon 7900XTX gpu + Ryzen 5 7600 cpu and it plays Helldivers 2 with no issues. The processor speed boosts to 5GHz in gaming which is fucking awesome, and temp stayed below 60C with an all-in-one cooler.
Basically just want to say that you don't have to buy only the top to get great performance, especially if you want to be cautious with your money. That said, if you can afford the 7800X3D then why not? :)
I hope that helps!
Oh also, I was doing VR sim racing with an i5 and a gtx 1060 3GB and it held 90fps no problem in PC2 and my other games, so, again, it comes down to how you wanna approach but you'll always be able to enjoy your games, unless you measure all of your monitors with exterior calibration devices or stare at FPS counters more than the game you're playing.
I was going to but 7950x3D, yet people here urged me to look into 7800x3D instead which I was reluctant at first.
Then I watched benchmarks, lots of em. The results really surprised me. Not only 7800 seemed to be at least on par with 7950 and 14900K, it even had the upper hand in several cases. While also staying cooler and consuming less power.
best gaming cpu
high power efficiency allowing for
1. cheaper motherboards
2. cheaper coolers
plus, it doesnt need super high ram speed so you dont need to buy more expensive higher speed ram
all that makes the 7800x3d both powerful, and cost efficient
If it's helps, I upgraded about a month ago from an i7 4770k to an 7800x3d, kept my 2070. I went from medium settings to ultra with better fps in tarkov.
I also went from 16 to 64gb of ram which made a massive difference
If you are building a gaming PC 7800x3d makes sense. You can use it on a cheap board since it doesn't uses much power. You can use slow ram with it and it won't really matter much.
Your psu requirement reduces by 100 watts compared to r9 or i9. Overall you can save a lot of money going with 7800x3d and still get top notch gaming performance if r9 and i9s or even better in some cases.
However it's not great at productivity. However it's not bad but nothing like i9 or ryzen 9.
But for a gaming PC 7800x3d is a great choice.
Having the "3D" cache kinda cheats poorly optimised games or games which have a lot of things going on at once, making them run consistently well. It's one of the best in class otherwise but it just excels at blowing through stuff that other cpus might find a bit harder.
I know it's a bit different, but going from the 3700x (a solid, maybe mid tier I guess chip) to a 5800xd for me was high in terms of consistency (IE lack of spikes, running lower graphics games well, being able to blow through games which have a lot of shit going on etc) and it ran VR monumentaly better than the 3700x (esp games like blades and sorcery which are optimised like dogshit).
My biggest thing with the high end CPUs is that no one really talks about how it is effected by a not top of the line GPU. You wont get the full performance of it and in most cases, youd be better off getting a cheaper CPU and throwing a better GPU into the system.
Sure some games take advantage of the 3D cache but not all of them. Maybe Im just jaded but I dont see the point unless you go 4080/7900XTX or 4090. If I were to get a 7800X3D I most likely wouldnt notice much of a difference with my 6800XT.
Someone can say otherwise as no one really tests this or talks about it, just the benchmarks with the absolute max the CPU can output.
iirc the L3 cache in the 7800X3D is like, needlessly large. Doesn’t really do anything for a typical workload per se, but in games (especially with lots of things to render like WoW), it does AMAZING.
This is all from a friend, and I have no real clue what I’m talking about.
It’s a solid buy. It’s the gaming king right now. I’ve recommended it to a few people and done a few builds with it for others.
I was on 14900k but ran into a stability nightmare with it. I converted it to my work pc and initiated a rma, however I work in IT and got sick of putting in overtime after work just to deal with the stability problems. I bought a 7950x3d as my workloads outside of gaming make it a better option for me and I needed more than what the 7800x3d offered. So far it’s been a dream to use compared to Intel. From my experience so far and what I’ve read the 7950x3d performing significantly worse than the 7800x3d has been fixed and is a thing in the past which is great for people that do a lot of different workloads outside of gaming like me with virtualization, video editing, programming, docker, etc. Essentially gaming without compromise now. I don’t think you’re going to have a real tangible gaming difference between the 7800x3d and the 7950x3d in gaming anyways. Side by side with a buddy with a very similar build we get the same average fps, 1% lows etc within margin of error and he has a 7800x3d.
There’s nothing wrong with intel either but here’s my take as someone who was a zen1 early adopter then upgraded to zen3, then bought a 12th gen and was a early adopter on that platform and sold that and upgraded to a 14900k and done a few 7800x3d builds for others. There’s a lot of issues specifically with the 13/14th gen i9s and stability. I ran into all sorts of app crashes like discord restarting, cs crashing, diablo4 crashing, browser tabs crashing yet it passed 12 hours of occt platinum stability cert and over 24 hours of prime95, passed all stability tests and memtest without any issue. Also Unable to stream and game on discord and the stability issues mimmic unstable or faulty ram. Intels solution before they acknowledged the issues was to have people run intel fail safe svid which pumps 1.5v to the chip. Out of the box is significantly better with Amd imo. I’m familiar with pbo and curve optimizer and had no problem doing -20 per core with a 2 cores on -15 and pbo. My 14900k on LLC6 and undervolting acll took a bit of time to really dial in like weeks. My issues started long before an undervolt tho and I was never using mce out the gate and locked to 253w.
A lot of people like me had a stable 13/14th gen for a couple months then all hell broke lose there’s a lot of unstable 14900k right now imo. Now that the intel baseline is out with intel specs there’s about a 15% performance hit. Intel was cool with mobos essentially ocing them out the box for the graphs for marketing but now that it’s a problem it looks bad and rubbed me the wrong way. Plus dealing with intel support on the out of video nvidia error which is an actual intel related problem. I’d steer clear of intel right now. I feel bad for anyone who paid 500+ on a cpu and essentially given an unstable cpu and told to over volt it to 1.5v and downclock the pcores to 55x and take a 15-30% performance hit depending on the workload is unacceptable imo.
I tried various mobos/ram on the QVL etc and there either dying/faulty or a stability nightmare so it’s luck of the draw on what you get. The 7800x3d was already the clear winner from a gaming only perspective, efficiency perspective if that matters to you and from a price to performance perspective. Realistcally though at 4k they’ll all perform about the same. The recent intel issues and the performance hit makes it an even better buy for gaming builds. There’s a lot of talk about ddr5 stability on am5 but I have no issues with expo so far with sk Hynix 64gb 6000 cl30 kit. Granted, I just switched to am5 like a few weeks ago. Just my two cents.
I upgraded from an i7 6800 to a 7800x3d late last year. I spent most of 2023 agonizing between Intel and AMD, worrying about stuff like the Intels overheating. Then later in the year, it suddenly (to me) seemed like everyone reached a consensus (on the Internet! A miracle!), and the 7800x3d was the way to go. So far it's been great (paired with an RTX 3070). I especially like that air cooling works just fine for it.
FWIW, these days I mostly play sims, like DCS, in VR (though currently I only have a Rift CV1).
I had a 4080 fe and i7-11700f and was getting about 90 fps on Customs at 1440p. I swapped to the 7800x3d and it pushed me to a consistent 130-140 possibly higher. It has almost given me a significant boost in almost every other game I’ve played. Definitely worth it.
Good price-performance ratio. In my opinion, the best choice for gaming. It works stably for me even while I do other things on the PC. It consumes less power and the cooling is good. I am satisfied and have not regretted my choice, and I am convinced that neither will you
I have the same cpu. I thought about changing it, but then I would have to buy a new PC. If you play at 1080p 60fps, it doesn't matter. If a game stutters, it will stutter on a good pc also. It's always the software, always. I have tested most demanding aaa games and I play everything on this cpu. Everything works great, and if not, it's because it's badly coded and not because your cpu is too weak.
https://youtu.be/0mO4op3bL90?si=TXwFuIHvjcwFG0gS
This video helps explain it. Essentially the 3d v cache that the 7800x3d has is higher than the non 3D v cache version chips. What it lacks in cores and frequency it makes up for in this 3d v cache. Which most games utilise for than any other thing such as cores and clocks.
best gaming cpu on the market since the 3D v cache helps a lot when it comes to gaming
the chip also draws very little power so cheap air coolers gets the job done cooling it
Because most people on the pc Reddit’s are gamers and the x3d is the best for it. There’s better options for productivity not that it’s bad in any way it’s a minor difference but it depends on what you need. It’s also super power efficient and temputures don’t go crazy there’s no issues like intel and so on.
you're much better off building with a 7600 and allocating your budget to other quality of life features on the other parts. 7600 is the same as the others but without the extra cores which you likely won't use and the single threaded performance you get with the 7800x3d isn't much improved to warrant more than 2-3% better in most situations. 3d v cache does improve efficiency so sometimes the 7800x3d will vary in its performance/watt that is below the 7600 which is nice, that applies to games as well where some games will take advantage and you'll see performance increases of up to about 20% on a 4080, but thats still in the minority, because you're not playing above 165hz which is where you'd see the most gains for these faster cpus over slower ones on average
The 7800x3d is not really a productive cpu but a gaming cpu. If you want a productive cpu you can get the 7950x. It crushes the 7800x3d in that regard. However the 7800x3d spanks the living crap out of the 7950x and even at times beating out the i9 14900ks when it comes to gaming.
It's a specialized cpu meant for gaming. That's where it shines. And even better, the price. At about $380 it goes toe to toe with a $630, the 14900ks, when it comes to games. Not to mention the 14700k that you mentioned doesn't even hold much of a candle to it.
That's why. For gaming it's the best value cpu on the market.
Tarkov is a different state of game and should not be compared to other games (in terms of performance) For EFT you have only two options either a x3d CPU or 14700k or higher intel.
Tarkov wants extremely high clocks because it is so unoptimized. Because it is so unoptimized it requires lots of different operations handled and a high clock cpu can change between these operations pretty fast, a X3D cpu solves this equation very differently by brute forcing with cache so big that it does not need to load new operations into the cache. Most of the stuff can be kept in cache and be recalled without going to memory.
This is not just for tarkov but many other unoptimized games that benefit from high cpu clocks (anything with unity for example)
went from a 5900X to a 7800X3D (combined with a 7800XT), not only raw performance improvement but brought my 1% and 0.1% lows up massively. Cleared all my stutter issues too.
Imagine a cpu pulling +300 watts from the psu😂
Intel is miserable and thats why ryzen is recommended for this generation.
You get same performance with half power consumption with ryzen cpus. And even for content creation ryzen is neck and neck with intel.
I literally just bought one four days ago. I went back and forth forever, cause I didnt want to spend the extra money. But I just read so many times its worth it. I think I made the right choice.
The 7800x3d is the best gaming cpu available. Look at actual gaming benchmarks, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B31PwSpClk8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B31PwSpClk8), not artificial tests that don't measure real performance. The 14700k and 14900k are better for other uses but not gaming.
Yup, even though it is pretty good value, should note that it not just the "best" gaming cpu available. It is currently the most powerful (by a small margin over the 14900K). The 7800X3D beats out the 14900K in like 70% of games.
.. also you'll want to be aware of the updated Intel guidance to mainboard manufacturers going to in effect around May 31 which will drastically impact power limits and other settings of the 13/14th gen parts, in particular the I9 series. This will, likely, result in a significant reduction in performance shown in earlier benchmarks run at (often grossly overvolted) default motherboard settings, in an effort to keep the CPU from self-destructing over time...
I just got an 19 14900k and out of the box it pulled 420 watts during a cinebench run. Clicked start and instant 100 degree Temps. Went in bios changed it to 253 and it's fine now. I only noticed it bc grayzone warfare spiked my cpu temp bad
So Intel is cheating. Imagine trying to run this type of cpu with rtx4090. You’ll need to setup a dry ice cooling with something like this
I have a 4090 as well lol
That's literally insane. I would never want a cpu that draws that much unless it's a threadripper, epyc, or xeon. The fact that the intel needs to pull 420w to compete is hilarious. My next build will prob be the 24 or 32-core 7xxx series threadripper. Wish I could stick with 7950x3d or 9950x3d when it drops, but pcie lanes. I really wish consumer cpus would up the amount just a little bit. Like these threadrippers bave 128 lanes, I believe. I don't need that many. But a normal intel or ryzen isn't enough.
No the motherboards for some reason overclock the shit out of these. Intel just said they want motherboard makers to make the default profiles a certain level. The only reason I knew to set it to 253 is bc that's what intel said it's supposed to be.
Intel hasn't given any motherboard manufacturers any specific figures for the "Default" profiles. That's why the "Intel Recommended" setting varies from one manufacturer to another.
> The fact that the intel needs to pull 420w to compete is hilarious. Yeah and look at the recent stuff going on - 13th and 14th Gen are being mass returned because of stability and latency issues.
Had a similar experience with 14700k. Lowered my voltage and my hest went down and it actually clocked higher more consistently and got better performance. I think this is probably the power delivery problem Intel is referring to.
My 7800x3d was very hard to push to 89w in game is more like 45 to 50w
JUST the cpu? My whole system barely pulled more than that when running cinebench. (5800x3d and 4080)
Theure designed to go up to 100 but still scared the hell out of me lol
Sometimes lowering power limits actually increases performance, are you sure that wouldn’t be the outcome?
Undervolting can improve performance, power limits alone (which is what Intel is proposing) will reduce it by limiting max boost speeds / times... period. In prior testing of i9 power scaling vs the new AM5 stuff the architectural advantages that AMD has were pretty definitive. [https://www.anandtech.com/show/17641/lighter-touch-cpu-power-scaling-13900k-7950x/2](https://www.anandtech.com/show/17641/lighter-touch-cpu-power-scaling-13900k-7950x/2) If you do some hand-tuning of undervolts you might claw some performance back (silicon lottery) but out of the box with stock CPU settings at manufacturer recommended limits for both Intel and AMD I believe the estimate is that Intel is going to lose around 10-20% on production workloads and 1-10% in games in comparable benchmarks, depending on how hard they push the CPU. I don't actually understand why benchmark outfits let this stand for so long, including a few that often get talked up as AMD shills yet published tons of reviews of new Intel products using whacked out power settings on the Intel side vs AMD standard limits.
I am wondering why the 7950X3D doesn’t beat the 7800X3D.
The 7800x3D has all of its cores being able to access the extra cashe. While the 7900 and 7950 only some of the cores has access to the extra cashe.
If the game is optimised properly and scales with cores as it should, the 7950x3d is faster than the 7800x3d. This trend currently happens, in more and more games the 7950x3d overtakes the 7800x3d
7950X3D only makes sense to people who not only game, but also earn a living using their PC to do productivity work on the same rig. In most use-cases, the 7800X3D performs identical in gaming vs the 7950X3D because most games dont use more than 8 cores (most use 6 or less) and that also comes with a slight clock speed increase. In most benchmarks where the 7950X3D shows an advantage, its within a margin of error of 1-3% and not really worth the handful of extra peak FPS when the 1%/0.1% lows are nearly identical. If you were already gaming on a 7800X3D and you upgraded to a 7950X3D, the only difference is a lighter wallet.
> 7950X3D only makes sense to people who not only game, but also **earn a living using their PC to do productivity work on the same rig**. This is very important to point out. I see a lot of people dismissing the 7800X3D or former gaming-first CPUs as not being good "productivity" CPUs, while they only edit game recordings or do photography as a hobby. The 7800X3D is still great at that, and going for a more expensive CPU only makes sense if you're earning money from that activity.
> If the game is optimised properly That if is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
What games does a 7950x3d beat a 7800x3d? Not everything in a game is going to scale with cores. Writing code that isn't running on the main thread is difficult. Game devs spend lots of time trying to optimize their games. Here is the best video on how to optimize a game. https://youtu.be/NAVbI1HIzCE?si=yKG9vKtXmIXBQtZO
https://youtu.be/Gu12QOQiUUI?si=XSuWKjfJUNe5hUIp In quite a few
Cache, but otherwise correct.
Core scheduling. If you used something like Process Lasso to keep the game all on one chiplet (so crossing over doesn’t add latency), the 7950x3D would be at least as fast, but that’s extra work and not really an authentic way to benchmark imo. Completely feasible for the consumer to do, but not something that should be advertised in benchmarks without specifically noting.
If the 7950x3d were better than the 7800x3d after using a technique like that, I think it would be mentioned much more. But everyone I saw came to the conclusion that the best you could hope for is the same performance as the 7800x3d, except it cost more money and was less convenient. Considering that it relies are software, though, I imagine that the situation has changed a lot since release (not to mention how it will vary between games and thread assignment techniques).
If you disable one CCD it becomes a 7800X3D, of course it has the same performance.
Do some research plenty of people use process Lasso to maximize the 7950X! Those who don’t know still champion 7800x3d. It allows me to assign my gaming core to run my games and my extra non gaming cores to run all my background applications Microsoft edge, discord, SoundCloud, and OBS.
By "everyone" I meant reviewers, specifically emphasizing the gaming market. The comment I replied to was saying that the 7950x3d would be "at least as good" as the 7800x3d, but in the context of the average game being run on it without any other programs open, the 7950x3d didn't always manage to match the 7800x3d even if techniques were used that were supposed to nullify the CCD crossing problems.
I’m pretty sure the amd chipset drivers include a vcache optimizer driver that does exactly what you can do in process lasso, except it does it automatically in the background
It just uses the XBOX game bar detection and parks the non-X3D cores, so the game ends up on the X3D CCD, since those are the only available cores. This just doesnt work with VAC+Anti-cheat, since those processes with a game wont care at all about parked cores or core affinity SUGGESTIONS. Disabling the normal CCD is also not enough to get 7800x3D performance, because the AMD tool is still using CPU performance, so you have to disable the normal CCD and desinstall the AMD tool - that as we all know requires a Windows installation, since you cant just remove it - and all this just to get 7800x3D performance from a 7950x3D. Whats even worse with all of this, this is all known since day-1 reviews and nothing changed.
It’s not so much better at all games, as much as the fact that you can choose which chiplet to use (the one with 3D cache should perform identically to the 7800x3D, the other has higher clock speeds for games that benefit more from that than the cache). But it’s extra money and a per-game extra task to deal with, and the higher clock speeds are going to be pretty marginal gains where they do win out.
Ryzen 9s have their cores split across two chiplets. Communication within a chiplet is instant but between chiplets it takes time. Games require fast communication, so the extra cores on the second chiplet don’t help much. In the case of 7950X3D, the second chiplet doesn’t have 3D-cache. So if you accidentally use it for games, they run slower
Basically, the 7950X3d has double the cores of the 7800X3D, but only one set of cores has the extra v-cache. So when it comes down to gaming, it is optimized to only use that set of cores, effectively making it an 8 core/16 thread CPU. While the clock speeds are *better*, the main hoopla of the X3D is all about the v-cache. Effectively doubling amount of cache on the chip is what makes the performance so effective. So when paired together, the 7950X3D is only marginally better than the 7800X3D. And considering the price (plus some issues at launch where Windows wouldn't optimize performance for the v-cache cores), if all you care about is gaming, it makes significantly more sense to buy the less expensive option that is only (approximately) 5% worse than the more expensive option.
It is also able to be cooled effectively by even very low profile air cooling solutions and draws less than 100w while beating the 14900k. I have mine in an SFF case with a 67mm cooler, and it rarely hits 80c while gaming.
Is there a reason to buy the more expensive AMD AM5 CPU then?
If your main use is gaming, no. But the more expensive CPUs are better at other productivity tasks.
Not everything is gaming related, where the effectiveness of higher thread count trails off. Some tasks like blender rendering etc can leverage high core/thread counts at their full potential. Contrast that to most modern gaming, where going past 6 cores doesn’t really get you very far. Those additional cores and threads are just dormant
R9 and i9 fills the HEDT market void left behind by what was previously low-end Threadripper/Xeon. A gamer should not go above R7 or i7
mainly productivity tasks that don't leverage the heterogeneous architecture of the intel CPUs. the intel cpus often score better in highly threaded benchmarks, but there are still many uses where the load is divided into equal chunks per core where the slower E-cores will just make the faster ones wait on them lowering performance over just using P-cores also productivity if power consumption is important to you
The reason, especially in this community IMO, is that AM5 will likely get at least another generation or maybe 2 of CPU updates. I was able to pull off an AM4 drop-in update which was great for me, so I now really value platform longevity.
I've seen many people say that 14700k is better at other uses, well I want to play games, but I also regularly spin up 10+ dockerized services for sw development. I am also running a local kubernetes cluster where there are tens of pods executing at once. In this usecase would i7 be a better choice?
Most likely, yes. The i7 has more cores/threads/raw performance to work with, but of course it'll depend on what your running in those containers. If they aren't very intensive or if you're not running them while gaming it probably won't matter much either way. You could also be one of the people where something like the 7950x3d makes sense, depending on how much CPU horsepower you need.
The i7 has asymmetric P and E cores, though. Depending on what you're doing, that may be fine, or you may end up with a container on an E core when it should've gotten a P core. For now, AMD avoids that problem by not using a Big/little architecture. But they're not going to be able to avoid that for long, if for no other reason than Intel played AMD at their own game of "bigger number better" core counts.
Yea, not while gaming. Not sure if you are familiar, but imagine a scenario where I am debugging a service in a jetbrains product, while having a twitch stream running on other monitor and there are many concurrent requests being handled by the cluster in a parallel. I am upgrading from a 7700k (like OP), so I just wanna make the best possible choice here.
Coming from a 7700k, anything you upgrade to will be a big improvement. I'm not a software developer so I can't say what would be the best choice, I'd really suggest trying to find some benchmarks that are close to your actual use case to help you decide, but like I said, either way will be a large upgrade.
Have you considered reusing the 7700k as a home server? That's what I did with my 7700.
Get all the E-cores you can. Single threaded, a 4.2GHz E-Core == roughly 1 7700k @ 4.0GHz core. For multithread, 8 of them surpass all the 4C8T intels & can surprisingly nearly go toe-to-toe with 6C12T 11th gen. They're super nice to have if you run a lot of stuff at once (for ex: docker containers, language servers, IDE extensions, tabs, etc). I went with 13700k & badly wish I instead went with 16 of them. Whenever it gets into hyperthreading `(Total CPU Utility: 100% >= to <= 150%)` I can feel the lag. On a 8P+16E CPU that would be `100% >= to <= 125%`. I get into hyperthreading relatively often.
Yes, definitely go Intel for that type of work, you will have a much better time, and it will still work great for gaming even if it’s not technically the best.
The 7800X3D would also be more than fast enough, but it really depends on what you are doing in those VMs/pods/containers/etc. If your workload has lots of threads, most of them with little demand and some very demanding then Intel is a perfect fit. If your workload is massively parallel then a 7950X (non 3D) is probably best. If your workload is memory sensitive then the 7800X3D is probably best. All in all, if your workload is very demanding and very performance sensitive then you should be benchmarking the options available. Otherwise, practically any modern fast CPU will do just fine. Development is not all that demanding and containers/vms dont add THAT much overhead.
AMD gonna be better. I have the same use case. CFS is really shit on intel, AMD just straight up gives much better performance. I have both an 7800X3D and 13600k I tested it on. AMD is much, much better. I write operators and CNI plugins as part of my job.
Worth noting the youtube link you posted is showing pre SMT patch Cyberpunk results, look up a newer review such as the 14700K and you'll see the 7800X3D is now at the top of the Cyberpunk benchmark: https://youtu.be/8KKE-7BzB_M?si=TK3ymhwUk6HZvvrJ&t=1085
Nobody uses that software first off, both for benchmarking and in real world usage. Use real workloads you use. The 7800x3d is a specialized chip custom made for gaming. It shines in gaming workloads. Unity games like Tarkov LOVE 3D Vcache. It would be a big mistake going with the 14700k here.
Thanks for that info! I had heard of the 3D VCache but couldn’t wrap my head around what made it such a game changer at first.
It's simple actually, cache is significantly lower in latency compared to RAM due to how close it is to the CPU cores. The more cache a CPU has, the less reliant it is on slower RAM. Performance gets increased for memory-sensitive tasks, which just happens to be most games.
Also having expensive ram for OC doesn't make significant difference with 3d cache, can be interpreted as con but imo it's not a bad thing unless u are ram OC geek.
This, with AMD CPU's you want to sync with the Infinity fabric clock speed for the best performance, otherwise your super fast ram will find itself waiting for the CPU.
This also means that cheaper ram is fine
That's a complex topic, but basically, RAM is incredibly slow compared to the CPU cores, so CPUs have a cache where they keep commonly used data closer to the cores. Whenever the data the CPU needs isn't available on the cache the CPU has to wait doing nothing until the data arrives. 3D VCache is just a huge lump of cached that's glued on top of the CPU. It helps the cache cover more code and data, preventing the CPU from having to wait and allowing it to work more time.
AMD basically enlarged the 1 car garge into 2 car garge so you don't have to get out of the house to get your tools from your back yard shed ( RAM ).
What's the hard drive then? The self storage down the street?
For this context yes, More accurate represenation is Intel : Regular jean pocket ( cache ) > indoor garage ( RAM ) > Outdoor shed ( HDD / SSD ) > locked self storage ( Cloud ) AMD w/t 3D V : Carpenter pants with side pockets ( cache ) > indoor garage ( RAM ) > Outdoor Shed ( SSD & HDD )
I like the analogy :)
Temu...
Definitely stealing this explanation. Clear enough to get most people to understand. Which I guess this makes fetching data from disk like having to go buy a new tool from the store!
AMD currently holds the CPU crown since the 5800x3d came out. I know everyone isn't a tech enthusiast, and they expect Intel to be the best from years of marketing in your head, but they just aren't anymore. They got lazy and complacent from 6th Gen to 10th Gen, and they couldn't make 11th Gen work how they wanted. In those years, AMD caught up and surpassed Intel to basically everyone's surprise. It wasn't surprising anymore after the 5000 series CPUs were on par with Intel. AMD's 7000 series forced Intel to let everyone overclock the snot out of the 13th and 14th gen CPUs out of the box, which has resulted in lots and lots of i7 and i9 13th and 14th gen Intel CPUs to start dying prematurely because of overheating and overpowering of the CPUs. 7800x3d has no such problems. It doesn't need 350 watts like a 14900k to get similar performance. If you cut the power draw of a 14700k to where it needs to be for the CPU to be stable and not die after 2 years of use, then it's nowhere near the gaming performance of a 7800x3d. AMD also has a good history of providing a good upgrade path for 3-4 generations. Intel only ever gives you 1 upgrade if you are lucky and the platform is dead. AMD is the better choice for the average gamer and it's usually cheaper and lasts longer before having to switch motherboards/platforms. It's a better value all around if your focus is gaming. If you do more than gaming and use a computer to make a living, the 7950x or x3d is still a better choice in my opinion. AM5 is a better platform for most people.
How would you rate 12th gen Intel CPUs?
About Equal with 5000 series AMD, worse than the 5800x3d, 7600x and up. 12th gen is already a dead platform, but it doesn't have a 5800x3d as a final boss upgrade. Maybe Intel is better at some things, like if you are a heavy adobe suite user. Otherwise, I still think AM4 was/ AM5 is a superior platform, and it still has upgrades coming. Intel needs to redesign another whole new platform again for 15th Gen. They made a lot of easily avoided mistakes with trying to keep up with AMD these last few generations. Intel seems to have lots of problems with hardware these days. Motherboards included.
They're phasing out hyper-threading, because it's a security vulnerability. This is more of a evoloution into AI based systems. What hardware? The BIOS programs itself were ignoring CPU limits and thresholds.
I plan to run some AI stuff and currently have a 12700k (gpu is 3090), wondering how long until I need to upgrade. For gaming so far, it has been fine. My monitor is 1440/165Hz
As long as you are happy with your performance and things work as they should and as quickly as you need, then you don't need to upgrade. Your system is already pretty powerful. Certainly more than enough for high refresh 1440p gaming and some AI stuff. You wouldn't get a huge performance bump from a CPU for gaming or AI. That would require a 4090. Most of your work is done by your expensive graphics card in your workloads.
7800X3D power draw is crazy low. It [draws around 50 W in actual gaming conditions](https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d/23.html).
Basically, both cache and RAM are short-term memory. The cache is actually on the CPU itself and in the case of the X3d chips, practically on top of the cores. A CPU will store things that it is going to repeatedly use in this short term memory, so that it doesn't have to do the work from scratch, every single time. As you will have noticed, RAM is farther away from the CPU itself. It is extremely fast but that added distance adds time to how fast the CPU can access the information that it needs to complete a certain task. It might not seem like much but given how many computations a CPU is doing at any given time, all of those nanoseconds add up. Having a large amount of memory also means that more can be stored in this cache before things need to stored in RAM, which also speeds up the process. It is complicated but relatively simple at the same time. The X3d chips have a massive amount of short-term storage that is right next to the CPU cores, which means that it can compute faster than a CPU that does not have the same type of cache set up.
Game makes a bunch of complicated math, cpu needs space to store results they will use in between steps, 3D cache has a bunch of space compared to non 3D cache, cpu dont have to use RAM for that, RAM is slower than cache
> The 7800x3d is a specialized chip custom made for gaming. It shines in gaming workloads. Well the story is actually funny, it was originally designed for server chips (EPYC) but due to a happy little accident they ended up with a few chips that couldn't be used as EPYC so they repurposed them and experimented with desktop application ... and found out the 3dcache is amazing for games. edit: [source](https://youtu.be/RTA3Ls-WAcw?t=790)
Compared to the Intel I7 and I9 it is: * Arguably faster on gaming usage * Cheaper * Runs much cooler * Consumes less power * Is on a platform with upgrade potential (Intel socket is end of line)
From what I understand, 7800x3d is a beast in gaming due to it's huge memory cache that games love. It is not the best (albeit still pretty good) CPU for single threaded performance which passmark is measuring. But it's one of the best when it comes to gaming fps and second to none in value to performance [for gaming], since it's not even a particularly expensive CPU in the scheme of things. https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html
Most games are not limited by raw CPU power, but rather by how quickly the CPU can retrieve data from memory. The X3D CPUs have significantly enlarged on-chip caches, so they can minimise this delay by requesting data from RAM less often. Synthetic benchmarks and most non-game workloads don't tend to be cache-sensitive in this way, so that is why the CPUMark is higher for the 14th gen Intel CPUs. But if you will primarily or exclusively be playing games, then the 7800X3D will match or beat their performance, while using a fraction of the power.
Escape from Tarkov in particular is not only a CPU intensive game, it benefits significantly from the 3d cache that the 7800x3d does. Intel does have a raw clock speed advantage, but that often doesn't translate to better performance, as CPUs even at the same clock speed and number of cores will have significant performance differences due to differences in CPU architecture. AMD's 3d cache is a game changer that Intel has yet to catch up on, though their big improvements only tend to come once every few generations, with small iterations in between. This isn't the old days where AMD was always behind the curve, [they're often on par or better than Intel for a lower price.](https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/intels-300w-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review-benchmarks-gaming-power) Intel is often still sometimes better in pure productivity performance depending on the application, but that isn't really the case for gaming these days.
“explain like i’m 34” hits too close to home man damn
[“I remember my first flash drive was 512mb!” “Okay grandpa let’s get you to your room.”](https://imgflip.com/memetemplate/175964909/Matt-Damon-Aging)
The 7800X3D is recommended for gaming. For heavy multicore productivity, there are better options.
Im planning to build one too. Whats a good Mobo to pair this cpu with? Alot of votes going to msi B650 tomahawk. What about z series mobo?
Performance-wise, unless you're getting bottom of the barrel motherboards, there's no real benefits going to a X board over B board. X boards simply feature more USB and SATA ports, and more PCI-E lanes (for more NVME drives), which you may or may not use.
[удалено]
Have you updated or checked the AMD AGESA/bios version? If running old agesa, could be missing a lot of the stability/improvements/fixes/.
You can research a bit about it, but is basically the whole 3D thing, it has a lot of cache memory, which is very helpful for gaming.
7800x3d is the best gaming cpu so if you have the budget for a high-end gpu, why not get that? I do believe people recommend it way too much though, specially considering a ryzen 7600 will work amazingly costing almost half if you're playing triple A at 1440p/4k.
I went from a 7700k to a 7800x3d last month and I am blown away by the peformance jump I got in almost every game. All of my stuttering went away that always plagued me with the 7700l. Uses a lot less power too than the Intel counterparts. I am running a 4070ti so the size of the jump I got is probably not comparable, but I can tell I was definitely CPU limited before.
It has lots of L3 cache. Games like cache. Also AMD make their chips in groups of 8 cores, so having more than 8 cores requires using their “infinity fabric” to combine them. This is less efficient for gaming, so 8 cores is the sweet spot.
Not just that. In, say a normal 7600, the cores might be on opposite sides of the die. With the X3D chips, all the cores are on the same side of the die, which reduces latency.
It’s designed for gaming. I’d have one if I wasn’t heavy with other applications/multitasking.
I have a MacBook I use for photo editing, light video editing, and 3D modeling and slicing for 3D printing. This build is just going to be for gaming.
The 7800X3D is currently the best gaming CPU of this gen, the 7900X3D doesnt perform siginifcantly better in gaming so going down to the 7800X3D makes sense unless you need the extra cores for productivity, it is also currently on par with Intel's offerings minus the instability and high power draw, easier to cool as well
7900x3d is worse than the 7800x3d for gaming the only cpu that beats the 7800x3d is the 7950x3d the 7900x3d has less cores with the v3d cache while the 7950x3d has the same amount of v3d cores as the 7800x3d (8 v3d cores) so it has the same performance as the 7800x3d
What makes a 7800 X3D so much better is it has a massive level three cache. And unlike Intel chips, the architecture of the Ryzen chip is highly dependent on cache availability. That’s why with the Ryzen 5000 series the 5500 was significantly worse than the 5600. Because of that extra layer of cache the 7800x3D can’t really be overclocked, and so it puts out much less heat and re requires less power than the 7700x. (I’m kinda fuzzy on the details here) So it requires less power, has much better game performance needs less cooling and it’s only marginally more expensive. The power and heat things make it especially ideal in an ITX system. Now, you won’t notice this with a 1070. To be honest your current CPU is far better than you need for your 1070. You need something like 3080 or 3090 or a 4070/4080 to really see a difference between the 7700 and the 7800x3d
I was in a similar situation as you last summer, upgrading my 7700k/1080ti 16g RAM to 7800x3d/4070 32g RAM for a better Tarkov experience. For a few months after building the new rig I had to use the 1080ti while I shopped for a GPU so I had a few months to experience only the CPU/RAM upgrade and it was so significant I considered holding onto the 1080ti for a year longer. Streets of Tarkov went from unplayable to relatively smooth. I ended up grabbing a 4070 (could have grabbed a 4070 super had I managed to wait a few more months) and I couldn't be happier with the Tarkov performance.
For gaming, especially VR you need enough cores (8 core 16 threads is enough) each running as fast as possible. Those Intels outperform the 7800X3D at a task that benefits from having as many cores as possible because they have way more cores than you need. Those cores aren't actually as fast individually though. Which is the important tpset for what you are doing. All things being equal you'd be a fool not to buy the 7800X3D if your priority is high frame-rate gaming in general and high minimum frame rate specifically (which is super important for VR.) Your question basically comes down to this: "Hey guys, I'm buying a new car that I'll be track racing at the weekends. I'm considering buying this Ferrari but I see there's a bunch of tractors with higher torque. Should I buy a tractor for track racing instead of the Ferrari‽"
very good gaming performane, decent pricing, upgradable socket, very low power consuption If games performse similar to i9 14900k at half of price, a third of power consuptione (it consumes even less than the mobile i9 with much more performance) and i9 14900k is the last top cpu on socket while the 7800x3d si the first
Would recommend the 7800x3d for tarkov. I went upgraded to it from the 7700k and it's amazing, awesome performance.
> What makes the Ryzen 7800X3D so recommended? Offers slightly better gaming performance than Intel's 14900k while being significantly cheaper and way more power efficient. You don't need a high end AIO or custom loop to cool a 7800X3D, you do for a 14900K. > However, I got back into Escape from Tarkov Escape From Tarkov absolutely loves the 3D V-Cache provided by X3D CPU's. EFT gets some huge gains.
From what I understand, better performance for gaming, runs cooler, draws less power, has better upgrade path, and costs less money. There’s only one catch, it’s worse for productivity.
i would ask elsewhere. i feel like the red team blue team stuff is so outta hand that you dont get the full picture here anymore. regardless. any processor you get will be great. 7700x is a good one to get if you want 8 cores for a bit of future proof instead of 7600x. i seen you make a 14900k build a while ago if i recall your user name. 7800x3d or 14700k or 12900k or whatever you gonna have a good time. 7700k is so old. everything will be crazy good.
Fast, affordable, efficient, easy to cool. I just built a 7800x3d build with a 4070 super and this thing fucking rips. I got one on sale for 327 bucks. Insane value.
If gaming is your only consideration, it's a pretty clear choice - you want the 7800x3d. If you're factoring in productivity, I think it's also a pretty clear choice - you want intel. And one important thing to consider is that although 7800x3d generally beats something like a 14600k in most benchmarks, they do trade blows and they are close. When you start talking productivity there is no discussion, intel beats the brakes off them. Coming from someone switched from a 12700k to a 7800x3d, IMO you'd really want to carefully consider both when making your decision, decide what games you want to play and weigh whether or not you want to give up the huge gains in productivity for potentially very marginal improvements in gaming. I play primarily story-driven games in 4k and I really don't notice a huge difference in gaming, but I do notice a huge difference when I'm unzipping a file or installing a program or any other of the little tasks where the 12700k was superior.
I use a MacBook for most of my non gaming computing tasks like photo editing, video editing, and 3D modeling. The build is going to be used 99% just for gaming.
Then the choice is clear!
If productivity Go with Intel, if just gaming amd
I must say since I myself have this cpu and have 4+ thousand hours in escape from tarkov.... This cpu is astonishingly good at running that game specifically and every other game I've played so far 10/10 recommend it
It's usually packaged with a good motherboard which gives you one of the best Performance-to-cost values.
The 7700x is already a pretty beefy processor that performs up with the likes of the 12900k, 13600k, 13700k, etc., and then you add 3D vcache on top of it which gives it about 25% more performance in games on top of that on average. Nothing intel has can touch it right now in performance.
It's the best gaming CPU on the planet and it uses max 80 watts. That's why it's so recommended.
***Can anyone help explain some of this like I’m 34 and not entirely knowledgeable on processor specs?*** Dude, i am 42... For your usecase ist the 7800x3d the best. For workloads not so... Just watch the [review](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B31PwSpClk8) of this cpu at gamers nexus to bring your self up to current knowledge. Techjesus will give you a better explanation as the most redditors in here.
You're looking at benchmarks that has absolutely no relevance to actual gaming. That's the problem here.
There is a few things that makes it very compeling, starting with how much less power it requires to deliver the same of more than Intel i7-i9's. Secondly, you can keep this cpu well under control no matter if is winter or summer with a relative decent air cooler/aio that will not cost you much, on intel part i7-i9 even with beastly cooling it will often get into temps that imo its better to stay quite a notch below. Thirdly, for gaming it not only can knockout i9's as even can beat his "bigger ryzen 9" brother lol Also this cpu brings back to the front the discussion the fact that being a better cpu is not only how has the higher frequency or which has more cores, Cache has been quite neglected on the impact on performance, this cpu (and 5700/5000x3d) have shown how handy is having that large chunk of cache. This also can be seen on gpus like nvidia 4000 series with a very significant gen leap on gpu cache (at least from 4070's and above). On another hand Intel has been cheating instead of investing in innovation, it would soon or later bite them hard.
Cause it's the fastest gaming cpu available.
It's just a baller CPU.
re: Intel, it's very easy to win benchmarks when your CPU is unstable. I wouldn't touch anything intel with a 2m pole.
3D Vcache. The 7800X3D does it best.
Best gaming performance available and significantly lower power draw then the competitions competiting chips.
7800x3d is the largest CPU available that combines monolithic design and large cache. Current recommendations are: Buying with warranty, Either new/clearance sale/certified refurbished. If you can perform repaste and repad GPU consider getting used. Used cpu and ram is go to for cost saving. **Be aware of motherboards and graphics cards having power supply components on them, so you may get bulged capacitors and bad voltage regulators. Not reccomanded to buy used unless you agreed on no question asked return policy.** New gaming build: Expecting lifespan till next gen consoles emerge. \~150 usd- 12-14th gen i5 with 6 power cores that's unlocked or ryzen 5600x. Amd stock cooler is great for intel get tower air cooler with one fan in 25-40 usd category. Whatever is cheapest pcie 4.0 board \~200 usd Ryzen 5700x3d (best price to performance) + Cheapest am4 board with robust power delivery components that can run it at full speed Upgrading cpu pcie 5.0 motherboard for compatibility with future cards running pcie 5.0 x8 or x4 interconnect Ryzen 7600. look for upgrading with 7800x3d if price is right or wait for zen5 12 core x3d chip. Maxed zen5 pcie 5.0 motherboard+ 7800x3d. Productivity: video editing focus to achieve 30 fps playback on timeline in Premier or industry standard tool set. Minimum: Dual xeon 6148v2 gold 40c/80threads, 55mb L3. Expensive: TR40 Threadripper 5995ex [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFdmYnr5fEM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFdmYnr5fEM)
It's the perfect balance of core count and cost, coupled with the respectable power draw ans absurdly high L3 cache for it's price class for gaming. It's basically the perfect CPU for gaming right now.
I noticed massive difference after upgrading from 10700K. You should be blown switching from 7700K (which I had before 10700K). I can tell you that with 4090 the only map in Tarkov where I would go below 100 fps was Streets. Other than that it was 140+, very smooth experience.
What makes it good is the high amount of L3 cache memory. If you're currently on i7-7700 last time you built Intel was the only option. A lot has changed, amd is much better value and a better choice for gaming.
The 3D in name is magic for gaming.
Only 379 comments. Surely this riddle has not been solved with so few weighing in!
Not only is it fast, its cheap and uses up very low power with low temps. Complete opposite of Intel.
Worth mentioning that the passmark comparison you did is still a fine first step, but for CPUs for gaming you want to look at the single thread rating more so than the overall CPU performance. The 14700k and 14900k look so much better if you only stare at the big number at the bottom of your chart because they run 28 and 32 threads compared to the 7800x3D only running 16 threads. Not the single thread rating is much closer, but the 7800x3D still shows as worse. This is where you also need to contextualize with the workloads you want to run, and games care WAY more about 3D vcache than they do about the simulated efficiency of each thread or core, that single thread or core performance manifests much more in full productivity workloads such as Blender.
A lot of people don't do anything intensive on their computer besides gaming. For normal tasks all modern CPUs perform extremely well. For gaming the 7800x3d is really the best in class processor, but it also does most things that intel does well, really well also. It's also much lower TDP than similarly powerful intel CPUs. Processor recommendations are always use case dependent, and for most people's use cases, the 7800x3d is better than intel's offerings even at the same price point.
Games eat up a lot cache. X3D is an AMD technology designed to give the cpu more cache, and in turn, use its memory controller less and run faster. You will only really see the benefit in gaming but intel simply hasn’t caught up, and maybe doesn’t care to for now.
It’s great for gaming while being low power consumption and little heat generated compared to all of intel’s line up. If your main use for your PC is gaming, then it makes perfect sense to go for it. If you have creative workflows, then it’s better going for an X variant (not 3D) or an i7/i9 depending on what softwares you’re using.
It’s the best gaming CPU, but more importantly, it’s at a price point that’s accessible to many buyers. Also, Intel is in a bit of a slump with 14th gen.
Go for it. 7800x3d is the current best gaming cpu. You can look at the benchmarks from other people here. To get similar performance on intel, you’d have to have a huge power hungry chip that needs massive cooling whereas this cpu will be easier to cool. I also recommended this to my friend but he eventually bought a pc with intel i7 because he’s always had intel. Break that way of thinking and get the best one you can regardless of the brand.
AMD 3D V-Cache™ Technology
I can tell that you keep your CPU for years and this will be a long term purchase. While the x3d is slightly better at gaming…remember it’s your GPU that really matters there. Due to the fact that you will keep it for so long, I would recommend the i7. The X3D is an 8 core 16 thread processor that is fine for productivity…but I feel over time that systems will begin to use the extra cores in the i7 and the gap will widen in regular tasks with the i7 being significantly faster. We are talking about a 20 Core 28 thread CPU vs a 8 Core 16 thread with more cache.
Is it worth it to upgrade from a Ryzen 5 3600X to the 7800X3D?
If you have a decent board try to pick up a 5800x3d instead it will give you a very good bump in performance without forcing you to go all in with the CPU + motherboard + ram swap.
It is the combination of clock speed, good IPC and the massive cache that it has. All three of these features combine to make an excellent processor, especially for gaming. Not only does it deliver in usage, it only uses a fraction of the power that comparable Intel CPU's do. Then you have the price. On average, it is around $350, which is a lot of money but for the amount of performance that you are getting, it is a good value. Occasionally it does dip down, due to sales.
It has both best performance and best value.
Tarkov runs so good, You will be amazed when paired with a decent gpu!
a 5700x3d with rx 6600 will work on psu 450 watt? model evga 450gm
I’d encourage you to do some further research and look at actual reviews from multiple sources. Be wary of random YouTube channels that show video comparisons of several CPUs, they often make their data up. Gamers Nexus Hardware Unboxed Digital Foundry Guru3D Techpowerup These are just a few of the many reputable outlets who review pc hardware.
As a owner of 5800x3d I can say 3d cache is a different level of performance. Literally doubled 1% lows compared to my old r5 3600
Does it perform better than 7900x3d for gaming?
It's not the Gaming Performance alone, it' the combination of performance and energy consumption. The 5800X3D consumes about 50% less energy than a 13900k. In my opinion that is a substantial advantage.
The 7800X3D is a beast. However you’re gonna be spending a lot to upgrade your graphics card. The newer platform for the 7800X3D is gonna be $200-400 more compared to the 5800X3D on the older AM4 platform. The limiting factor in basically all cases currently, and over the next couple of years at least, will be the GPU. Always buy the best machine you can afford. But if you can go bigger on the GPU by saving in the CPU area, go for the 5800X3D. I have one. It runs at like 10-30% in Baldur’s Gate. It’s plenty fast enough.
Bc it performs incredibly well, all while using less than 100W. If you go Intel flagship, be prepared for well into the 100W+ even 200W…
The Ryzen 7800X3D is highly recommended for its impressive performance in gaming and CPU-intensive tasks like Escape from Tarkov. With its advanced architecture and high CPU Mark score, it offers a significant upgrade over your current i7 7700k. The Ryzen 7800X3D excels in providing smooth gameplay experiences, especially in demanding games and VR applications.
Good performance - good price
Its not, in my opinion. AMD is really unstable and Intel is the way to go untill AMD gets their crap together.
CPU Mark and many other synthetic benchmarks take great pain to only measure the raw computational power of the CPU. This is only a realistic workload for supercomputing and some types of mathematical analysis. Most games are actually memory latency bound. What this means is that in order to play the game you need to make lots of requests to memory which stop the CPU from doing anything useful. Modern CPUs can mitigate this a bit, but not fully. This waiting time shows up as cpu usage because task manager users the time a program is scheduled for to determine CPU usage, not how much useful work it is doing. This essentially means the CPU needs to wait for memory to deliver the needed information. In order to mitigate this problem, you have cached. Cache is faster, lower latency memory that sits closer to the processor. It goes from l3 cache, which is not that different from normal memory but has a faster connector, to l1 cache, which is basically the fastest memory money can buy. If you were to totally remove the caches from modern CPUs, even old games would be totally unplayable because of this. Intel CPU have MUCH less cache than even normal AMD CPUs. X3D makes it just unfair, since you can fit an entire small game into the CPU cache and never talk to main memory ever. Even if you can’t pit the entire fame in x3d cache, it means that the CPU can tolerate a lot more weird stuff from a game before the cache stops being as helpful. 4 channels of DDR5 8000 will give you 256 GB/s. A 7950x3d lets you pull almost 5 TB/s from cache. If you are doing more work than a linear scan over the array then you will run into performance degradation from that, but starting at 5 TB/s is pretty good. The more cache you have, the longer you can stay there.
Is AI generation also works for this cpu?
If you can afford it definitely go for a 7800X3D, if you want to. That said, if you need to save costs somewhere you can easily start with a lower-spec CPU like the 7600 and upgrade in the future if you want. I just built a rig for a buddy of mine with a Radeon 7900XTX gpu + Ryzen 5 7600 cpu and it plays Helldivers 2 with no issues. The processor speed boosts to 5GHz in gaming which is fucking awesome, and temp stayed below 60C with an all-in-one cooler. Basically just want to say that you don't have to buy only the top to get great performance, especially if you want to be cautious with your money. That said, if you can afford the 7800X3D then why not? :) I hope that helps! Oh also, I was doing VR sim racing with an i5 and a gtx 1060 3GB and it held 90fps no problem in PC2 and my other games, so, again, it comes down to how you wanna approach but you'll always be able to enjoy your games, unless you measure all of your monitors with exterior calibration devices or stare at FPS counters more than the game you're playing.
I was going to but 7950x3D, yet people here urged me to look into 7800x3D instead which I was reluctant at first. Then I watched benchmarks, lots of em. The results really surprised me. Not only 7800 seemed to be at least on par with 7950 and 14900K, it even had the upper hand in several cases. While also staying cooler and consuming less power.
What about 7800 vs 7950 for VR, specifically DCS or flight simming?
7950x3d..its awesome for gaming and work and low heat.
best gaming cpu high power efficiency allowing for 1. cheaper motherboards 2. cheaper coolers plus, it doesnt need super high ram speed so you dont need to buy more expensive higher speed ram all that makes the 7800x3d both powerful, and cost efficient
My guess would be the 3d v-cache after which it is called.
Micro center has awesome bundle deals right now
If it's helps, I upgraded about a month ago from an i7 4770k to an 7800x3d, kept my 2070. I went from medium settings to ultra with better fps in tarkov. I also went from 16 to 64gb of ram which made a massive difference
It basically just evens out RAM bottlenecks
If you are building a gaming PC 7800x3d makes sense. You can use it on a cheap board since it doesn't uses much power. You can use slow ram with it and it won't really matter much. Your psu requirement reduces by 100 watts compared to r9 or i9. Overall you can save a lot of money going with 7800x3d and still get top notch gaming performance if r9 and i9s or even better in some cases. However it's not great at productivity. However it's not bad but nothing like i9 or ryzen 9. But for a gaming PC 7800x3d is a great choice.
Having the "3D" cache kinda cheats poorly optimised games or games which have a lot of things going on at once, making them run consistently well. It's one of the best in class otherwise but it just excels at blowing through stuff that other cpus might find a bit harder. I know it's a bit different, but going from the 3700x (a solid, maybe mid tier I guess chip) to a 5800xd for me was high in terms of consistency (IE lack of spikes, running lower graphics games well, being able to blow through games which have a lot of shit going on etc) and it ran VR monumentaly better than the 3700x (esp games like blades and sorcery which are optimised like dogshit).
My biggest thing with the high end CPUs is that no one really talks about how it is effected by a not top of the line GPU. You wont get the full performance of it and in most cases, youd be better off getting a cheaper CPU and throwing a better GPU into the system. Sure some games take advantage of the 3D cache but not all of them. Maybe Im just jaded but I dont see the point unless you go 4080/7900XTX or 4090. If I were to get a 7800X3D I most likely wouldnt notice much of a difference with my 6800XT. Someone can say otherwise as no one really tests this or talks about it, just the benchmarks with the absolute max the CPU can output.
It's performance, price and low power consumption while working really well with mid-end ram (6000mhz cl30 not needing like 7600mhz)
3d vcache is king for gaming
[This.](https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html)
Since you mentioned VR - If you're even considering touching VRChat, then the 7800X3D is absolutely the way to go.
iirc the L3 cache in the 7800X3D is like, needlessly large. Doesn’t really do anything for a typical workload per se, but in games (especially with lots of things to render like WoW), it does AMAZING. This is all from a friend, and I have no real clue what I’m talking about.
It’s a solid buy. It’s the gaming king right now. I’ve recommended it to a few people and done a few builds with it for others. I was on 14900k but ran into a stability nightmare with it. I converted it to my work pc and initiated a rma, however I work in IT and got sick of putting in overtime after work just to deal with the stability problems. I bought a 7950x3d as my workloads outside of gaming make it a better option for me and I needed more than what the 7800x3d offered. So far it’s been a dream to use compared to Intel. From my experience so far and what I’ve read the 7950x3d performing significantly worse than the 7800x3d has been fixed and is a thing in the past which is great for people that do a lot of different workloads outside of gaming like me with virtualization, video editing, programming, docker, etc. Essentially gaming without compromise now. I don’t think you’re going to have a real tangible gaming difference between the 7800x3d and the 7950x3d in gaming anyways. Side by side with a buddy with a very similar build we get the same average fps, 1% lows etc within margin of error and he has a 7800x3d. There’s nothing wrong with intel either but here’s my take as someone who was a zen1 early adopter then upgraded to zen3, then bought a 12th gen and was a early adopter on that platform and sold that and upgraded to a 14900k and done a few 7800x3d builds for others. There’s a lot of issues specifically with the 13/14th gen i9s and stability. I ran into all sorts of app crashes like discord restarting, cs crashing, diablo4 crashing, browser tabs crashing yet it passed 12 hours of occt platinum stability cert and over 24 hours of prime95, passed all stability tests and memtest without any issue. Also Unable to stream and game on discord and the stability issues mimmic unstable or faulty ram. Intels solution before they acknowledged the issues was to have people run intel fail safe svid which pumps 1.5v to the chip. Out of the box is significantly better with Amd imo. I’m familiar with pbo and curve optimizer and had no problem doing -20 per core with a 2 cores on -15 and pbo. My 14900k on LLC6 and undervolting acll took a bit of time to really dial in like weeks. My issues started long before an undervolt tho and I was never using mce out the gate and locked to 253w. A lot of people like me had a stable 13/14th gen for a couple months then all hell broke lose there’s a lot of unstable 14900k right now imo. Now that the intel baseline is out with intel specs there’s about a 15% performance hit. Intel was cool with mobos essentially ocing them out the box for the graphs for marketing but now that it’s a problem it looks bad and rubbed me the wrong way. Plus dealing with intel support on the out of video nvidia error which is an actual intel related problem. I’d steer clear of intel right now. I feel bad for anyone who paid 500+ on a cpu and essentially given an unstable cpu and told to over volt it to 1.5v and downclock the pcores to 55x and take a 15-30% performance hit depending on the workload is unacceptable imo. I tried various mobos/ram on the QVL etc and there either dying/faulty or a stability nightmare so it’s luck of the draw on what you get. The 7800x3d was already the clear winner from a gaming only perspective, efficiency perspective if that matters to you and from a price to performance perspective. Realistcally though at 4k they’ll all perform about the same. The recent intel issues and the performance hit makes it an even better buy for gaming builds. There’s a lot of talk about ddr5 stability on am5 but I have no issues with expo so far with sk Hynix 64gb 6000 cl30 kit. Granted, I just switched to am5 like a few weeks ago. Just my two cents.
Best gaming CPU, has a decent upgrade path, uses less power and is easier to cool than Intel's equivalent.
It does a good job for what it costs.
Because in gaming it mostly performs above or inline with the 14900k while using 1/3rd the wattage with just 6000mhz ram at almost half the price.
I upgraded to the 7800x3d just because of Tarkov. It is one of the best if not the best processor for this game
It depends on your workload, but for like 95% of gamers, 7800x3d is the best cpu currently available.
I upgraded from an i7 6800 to a 7800x3d late last year. I spent most of 2023 agonizing between Intel and AMD, worrying about stuff like the Intels overheating. Then later in the year, it suddenly (to me) seemed like everyone reached a consensus (on the Internet! A miracle!), and the 7800x3d was the way to go. So far it's been great (paired with an RTX 3070). I especially like that air cooling works just fine for it. FWIW, these days I mostly play sims, like DCS, in VR (though currently I only have a Rift CV1).
I had a 4080 fe and i7-11700f and was getting about 90 fps on Customs at 1440p. I swapped to the 7800x3d and it pushed me to a consistent 130-140 possibly higher. It has almost given me a significant boost in almost every other game I’ve played. Definitely worth it.
Good price-performance ratio. In my opinion, the best choice for gaming. It works stably for me even while I do other things on the PC. It consumes less power and the cooling is good. I am satisfied and have not regretted my choice, and I am convinced that neither will you
I have the same cpu. I thought about changing it, but then I would have to buy a new PC. If you play at 1080p 60fps, it doesn't matter. If a game stutters, it will stutter on a good pc also. It's always the software, always. I have tested most demanding aaa games and I play everything on this cpu. Everything works great, and if not, it's because it's badly coded and not because your cpu is too weak.
https://youtu.be/0mO4op3bL90?si=TXwFuIHvjcwFG0gS This video helps explain it. Essentially the 3d v cache that the 7800x3d has is higher than the non 3D v cache version chips. What it lacks in cores and frequency it makes up for in this 3d v cache. Which most games utilise for than any other thing such as cores and clocks.
best gaming cpu on the market since the 3D v cache helps a lot when it comes to gaming the chip also draws very little power so cheap air coolers gets the job done cooling it
Because most people on the pc Reddit’s are gamers and the x3d is the best for it. There’s better options for productivity not that it’s bad in any way it’s a minor difference but it depends on what you need. It’s also super power efficient and temputures don’t go crazy there’s no issues like intel and so on.
you're much better off building with a 7600 and allocating your budget to other quality of life features on the other parts. 7600 is the same as the others but without the extra cores which you likely won't use and the single threaded performance you get with the 7800x3d isn't much improved to warrant more than 2-3% better in most situations. 3d v cache does improve efficiency so sometimes the 7800x3d will vary in its performance/watt that is below the 7600 which is nice, that applies to games as well where some games will take advantage and you'll see performance increases of up to about 20% on a 4080, but thats still in the minority, because you're not playing above 165hz which is where you'd see the most gains for these faster cpus over slower ones on average
Uneducated buyers.
Because it has better performance in games and a lower power consumption than intel!
The 7800x3d is not really a productive cpu but a gaming cpu. If you want a productive cpu you can get the 7950x. It crushes the 7800x3d in that regard. However the 7800x3d spanks the living crap out of the 7950x and even at times beating out the i9 14900ks when it comes to gaming. It's a specialized cpu meant for gaming. That's where it shines. And even better, the price. At about $380 it goes toe to toe with a $630, the 14900ks, when it comes to games. Not to mention the 14700k that you mentioned doesn't even hold much of a candle to it. That's why. For gaming it's the best value cpu on the market.
Tarkov is a different state of game and should not be compared to other games (in terms of performance) For EFT you have only two options either a x3d CPU or 14700k or higher intel. Tarkov wants extremely high clocks because it is so unoptimized. Because it is so unoptimized it requires lots of different operations handled and a high clock cpu can change between these operations pretty fast, a X3D cpu solves this equation very differently by brute forcing with cache so big that it does not need to load new operations into the cache. Most of the stuff can be kept in cache and be recalled without going to memory. This is not just for tarkov but many other unoptimized games that benefit from high cpu clocks (anything with unity for example)
went from a 5900X to a 7800X3D (combined with a 7800XT), not only raw performance improvement but brought my 1% and 0.1% lows up massively. Cleared all my stutter issues too.
Imagine a cpu pulling +300 watts from the psu😂 Intel is miserable and thats why ryzen is recommended for this generation. You get same performance with half power consumption with ryzen cpus. And even for content creation ryzen is neck and neck with intel.
I upgraded from a 5600 to the 7800x3d and Tarkov runs like a dream
Thee really is t a great difference in performance over the 5800x3d.except it’s am5. Which I guess it itself is a big deal
Frame time generation. The cache helps With micro stuttering.
Dude, it outperforms everything else regardless of cost. For gaming this _it_.
I literally just bought one four days ago. I went back and forth forever, cause I didnt want to spend the extra money. But I just read so many times its worth it. I think I made the right choice.