Yup, not upgrading my 5800X3D. I took a chance on upgrading from the 5600X to 5800X3D in the same year, but god damn Im glad I did. This thing is gonna go the distance
5800X3D will be more than fine for a few years, specially if you're gaming at 1440p max settings or higher, my 5800X3D won't go anywhere until DDR6 arrives, not worth the DDR5 platform overhaul for just a few extra frames.
I updated my system to 7800X3D from 5800X3D because some games use fewer cores and require more frequency. However, I got a good deal on the CPU in Microcenter, getting it for 225.58 as part of the bundle. (MB and RAM, which I choose myself)
What a mess. This whole issue of multiple CCDs needing fresh scheduler installs and granular BIOS settings etc. is enough to make me just avoid it all together. Intel is on its knees and AMD had the chance to make a killing blow, but instead they drop their axe on their own foot.
I really wanted to upgrade from my AM4 system this year, but from what I've seen and what I do, being able to save about 10 minutes a week just isn't worth it.
Cant relate, ever since i first got a 12700K like 2-3 years ago i kinda assumed i wouldnt need an upgrade for atleast another 5-6 years and so far ive been right. Any GPU id get that would be substantially faster than my 4070 Ti SHOULD be a 4K gpu anyways and prob around as fast as a 4090 so im fine bottleneck wise. That said i sure as hell dont plan to move from 1440p to 4K anytime soon
Same lol. Went from a 8700k and 1070 to a 7800x3d and 7900xtx. Never been so pleased with a computer after a year. Literally zero blue screens since I built it, same can't be said for all my intel cpus.
After checking the Zen5 reviews, and estimating when the new 3D chips will release, at what performance level, and at what price, I bought a 7800X3D for my planned AM5 gaming build.
@@midniteoyl8913probably cause a lot if zen users are still using 3000 series since it's fine for a lot of usage or gaming at 1440p, but they start thinking of updating their CPU (I know I am tempted to replace my 3600 with a 5700x)
Honestly, I wouldn't even bother including intel's 13th and 14th i9 CPUs in benchmarks. Their performance comes at a TDP level that evidently isn't stable. By including them, you're giving credibility to what is effectively defective chips.
"The Ryzen 9 9950X was 33% faster than the Intel Core i9 14900K performance overall and even the Ryzen 9 9900X was 18% faster than the Core i9 14900K. For those still on AM4, the Ryzen 9 9950X was delivering 1.87x the performance of the Ryzen 9 5950X processor. These are some great gains found with the Ryzen 9 9900 series." -Phoronix
And the 5800X3D still stands tall. I love it. I took a chance on upgrading to it but now I see I am going to be well served for a long, long time until I upgrade.
Once you own any of these processors for any amount of time, your focus switches from throwing away as much performance as you need to to struggle to get the system to be stable and never randomly crash on you, or never wake from sleep. All those settings in BIOS become a nightmare trying to find which one of them maybe you can change down (or up) to struggle to achieve the holy grail... a rock solid stable system that works like it should. When you have 16 cores, literally performance on the top end doesn't matter any more. Your software can't use all of it anyway. Your video editor will never max out every core. The thread schedulers just aren't that good... it's a hit or miss situation. What does matter though is losing all your open work because your system didn't resume from sleep, or just randomly blue screened from an ndis or critical structure error. And that's a real world real owner perspective, not a snow job from one of a dozen tech benchmarking video channels.
I like to test these things out myself, grabbing my 9950X on Saturday. Looking forward to testing it out; I mainly use my PC for programming, but I'm sure I'll have no issues playing the games I enjoy.
my 7800x3d cost me $200 w/ the bundle upgrade I got from micro center. CPU, MOBO, RAM>New CPU in refrence to cost per frame. COST per frame is 96 cents!!!! Gotta love new CPUs, making it easier to upgrade from an eight year old system
The video is very detailed but I didn't understand one thing. The question of consumption and temperatures. The 7xxx generation (not 3d) had obvious issues with temperatures. Whatever heatsink you put on they were always at 95 degrees. How do these behave? If one wanted to make a workstation (particularly for blenders) how should one dissipate it and what should one expect? Above all, would it be manageable with air? Maybe with a peerless assassin?
Comparing a workstation CPU with a gaming CPU is never fair. It'll also take many generations by the time we'll have a gaming CPU that'll match the Threadripper 7970X.
@@LORENZOCOLALONGO Yes but one is a consumer CPU while the other is a professional CPU. 3970X MSRP = $2,000 9950X MSRP = $650 Of course a professional CPU that costs $2,000 is gonna be generations ahead of it's consumer CPU counterpart.
Unless you have a 4090 or like to play at 1080p id say the 7950x looks like a solid choice for cost/performance in all things. Otherwise hard to beat the 12700k for budget banger
i think the 7800x3d is also good for mixed use....if you dont do content creation and sometimes just make video from you vacation is still ok...if you want to stream just use the igpu on it....
It's still the 7800X3D for "mixed" use. A very small number of consumers will convince themselves they needed the 79xx SKUs, but they'll definitely be in the comments surely defending that inane choice.
If the purpose is gaming, the 9800X3D or even 9950X3D may be interesting, since this time, power consumption is down a bit. (And temperature has previously been a limiting factor for the X3D chips). The 9950X is a budget alternative to a Threadripper.
@@haakoflo The temps will still be a limiting factor. It will allways be. It's just that the limit is set lower, because AMD shifted the temp sensor. The power draw is not down at all. It's just that the 9000 series is set at a 7000 series ECO mode out of the box (Do the 9000 series even have a optional ECO mode?). I bet the power draw of the 9000X3D would be about the same as the 7000X3D.
@@Audiosan79 The 9700 performs about the same at ~90W as the 7700 at ~145W in games. The 7800X3D is basically a downclocked version of the 7700X, taken down by ~400MHz to achieve about 90W. The 9700 on the other, doesn't need to be downclocked to reach this performance.
@@haakoflo The 7700 also performs about the same at 88W. Or a 7700X set to ECO mode also performs about the same, at 88W. So i would not expect anything amazing from a 9800X3D compered to the 7800X3D.
Those are single CCDs X3D CPUs in Paul's benchmark (8c/16t)...core parking only helps dual CCDs chips with X3D or not (12c/24t or 16c/32t). Because one of the CCDs is always the fastest for gaming. Higher frequence in case of a non X3D CPU, and more cache in case of a X3D one.
I have a 5950x and was curious if the uplift on the 9950x was enough to justify buying a new M/B RAM & CPU give the cost I think I'll wait for the gen after 9950x
Thank you Paul for testing with MSFS 2020. It's what I play and not a lot testers do that title. They all test those run around and fight shit games which I'm not into.
G'day Paul,just want to check that the correct 96mb for cache for Ryzen 7 7800x3d?i am thinking upgrading to it ,but on specs on australian pc retailer specs say 104mb.cheers
What's wrong with a 10% increase? Also why is ANYONE upgrading one generation of CPU these days? Don't forget there are actual sensible people looking to upgrade from a CPU older than one generation.
@@zombizombi These must be the benchmarks addict. But frankly, it's worrisome for company to release a product that barely beats previous gen. Remember Rocket lake?
@@alrizo1115 I don't remember anything mate because I haven't been keeping track. I'm looking to upgrade from a 6700K :D I don't usually keep track unless I'm upgrading so just refreshing my knowledge. But yeah I think there are a lot of gamers/rich people/overclockers who like to upgrade every single generation. If I were on the 7000 series I definitely wouldn't be upgrading. Probably makes more sense for me to go to the 7000 series than the 9000 but the slightly lower temps and slightly better performance might still be worth the premium... I just don't think the opinions of people who are jumping up generation by generation tell the whole story. Who are AMD currently competing with anyway? I was going to go with a 14700 / 14900 but that's not going to happen now, with them eating themselves and all.
@@zombizombi AMDs competing with Intel for x86 processor. Then there's also the M3 and Snapdragon X elite for ARM based processors. I'd say for the current price, you definitely should go ryzen 7000. This current gen is a waste until it goes down in price But if you can wait for x3D and arrowlake, before pulling the trigger, that's better.
Intels nova lake is going to be wild seeing how intel is still competitive against the 3d chips. Nova lake will have all the cache too to make it an even match which will make intel much faster. Am5’s last generation is going to have to pull some serious stuff off.
I feel like Ryzen 9000 does hold it's own, the 9950x is a beast at multi threads tasks and in gaming and lightly threaded tasks the 9000 series hold their own and aren't slower than previous gen while using much less power and A LOT faster in some compute tasks. I feel like for gaming 9000x3d us going to be the real deal.
After seeing all these confusing results for the 9000 series, I'm glad my 12400F runs buttery smooth and handles everything I need it to with zero trouble. Absolute goat cpu.
Could you please bench the 9950x @230W in cpumark11 ? This bench scores generally simulate performance of my workload very well across cpu's and myself and most people I know would run these tasks in a stable oc'ed mode. Just to have an idea how much bigger the jump gets by feeding it a bit more.
Thanks for including the 5800x3d in benchmarks, im still wanting to upgrade to a used one of those killer gaming chips...it's just too good though, there are very few 2nd hand available yet.
In my opinion the 13700k is the best all around CPU out of all of these. It can game, it can do productivity, it's always near the top in the most recent benchmarking charts. It has the AV1 codec. Doesn't run as hot as the i9s. And most importantly, you can find them open box for $250 or less. Nothing can beat that, sorry.
Paul, is the power plan in your Windows 11 test set to Balanced or High Performance? I ask because I constantly hit the temp throttling when I put it to High Performance. On the other hand, the Balanced plan gave much better results-less throttle and lower idle temps.
Dual Cache - Thats the way how it has to be! ah no... i mean it should be Triple Cache, 3x access, 3x capacity. Soon ram face some problems, DDR6 can do it for a while but... AMD know.. dual channel wont do it long. Quad-channel and Octa-channel for ram are needed. Quad-channel for 16 core and 8 core with iGPU and Octa-channel for 16 core with iGPU.
There's already a barrier that they have to overcome with it using a dual cache l3 system. Adding increased density via a triple cache could negate the benefits of it. Due to the latency increase
The biggest thing they need to upgrade first is the interconnect and fabric... It is way behind and is where a lot of the latency is coming from for dual CCDs. Not to mention the I/O die is also lagging behind at this point.
What would be a good upgrade from a 3600 x to a high-end CPU I'm looking for the best performance without wasting money in the process Should I stick with the 7000 series?
Doesn't make much sense because AMD was right and it wasn't them bullshitting about the windows update they were on increased performance massively. It did also increase performance on every cpu going back to 5000 series as well. I saw a slight bump on my 5800x3d. I plan on upgrading to the AM5 platform and getting a 9950x. Need to extra cores because I have a pretty heavy workload. I have a lot running and I like to game as well. Being that the x3D versions are rumored to not come out until CES 25 I'll just upgrade to the x3d version later and sell this to make some money back.
For me it seems that 9000 series is where AMD doing some adjustments on their gpu to cover up workload gaps they had compared to Intel CPU's, as they have enough of advantage in other things, so ghry went to improve efficiency a bit more and improve places where they were weaker
Maybe not for people who just upgraded but definitely a upgrade for anyone hanging onto Ryzen 1 or 2... but seeing as Lv1 Wendell's review was far more thorough AND there was a SIGNIFICANT performance boost in Linux on their Linux focused channel (Because it seems only Wendell has pointed out anything about windows task scheduler, not even GN), Zen 5 definitely feels like a new Ryzen 1... a new beginning and a solid basis for some extreme gains in the future. I'll stick with my 5800 non-x (because I frankly want my motherboard to not assplode from using a X3D processor, gonna make it last almost a decade like my previous AMD build), but Zen 6 will probably we better.
My excitement is gone. With such a low uplift 7700X to 9700X why are you excited about the 9800X3D. It will have too limit power due to the 3D cache so won't be a huge uplift in performance to the 7800X3D ??? What am I missing??
Isn't supposed that the last 9 9950x to be the Top/Premium and overall better then previous/low cost procesors they made?😅 I suppose i will wait for a 9950x3d ...if it comes out
7950X / 9950X = Faster for multithreaded workloads. ie, 3D rendering, video editing, code compilation. Adequate for gaming but the 7800X3D / 9800X3D will outperform them. 7800X3D / 9800X3D (when released) = Slower for multithreaded workloads but outperform the 7950X / 9950X in gaming. If you lean more towards workstation type tasks, you might want to consider the 7950X if on a budget and the 9950X for even more performance / better thermals that come at a more premium cost. If you lean more towards gaming and you're on a budget consider the 7800X3D or wait to see what the 9800X3D brings for a more premium price. With you saying you don't game much you probably are going to want the 7950X or 9950X. Obviously you can still game on these but the focus leans heavily towards non-game workloads. If by 'every day' tasks you don't mean something more intensive like video editing, 3d rendering code compilation then the 7800X3D and 9800X3D will still be the right choice for you. This is the case where maybe you use your PC to browse the web and for work and occasionally play modern games.
@@JynxedKoma never wanted a 7800x3d I waited for the x3d chips to come out before I built my newest build. Once I seen the x3d didn’t perform as well in productivity I purchased the 7950x
Will the x870 chipset allow higher memory clocks?or is it all dependent on the CPU. I'm interested to see if the revised chipsets will let Zen5 CPU's shine
i think AMD has to release X3D variaents relatlively quickly if they want people to talk more about the productivity/gaming. The gaming on non x3d is beyond useless when a 5800X3D can keep up with your current gen CPU. To me it looks like the 9800X3D will be 1-2% if any.....better than 7800X3D...honestly i feel like it will be a tie lol
Interesting - I can't see buying anything from the 9000 series either but not due to pricing or gaming performance The stability issues noted in various 9000 series CPU reviews are troubling and I can't see buying one for any critical use when the 7950x is almost as fast and far more stable. Really the same as preferring a 12900k to a 14900k if you can't afford random glitches cropping up a couple of months after you buy a PC.
wow that 14900k is steamy. It must not be running at the appropriate 253W profile because I'm pretty sure at that profile temps should be in the 60s to 80s, not thermal throttling.
No, across an aggregate of productivity testing, it still goes to the 7950X. No one actually using these CPUs for any business use should so easily discount the price premium of the 9950X compared to the 7950X, not so clever try though.
@@drewnewbyDepends. On Linux there is a clear performance jump from 7950x to 9950x. Over 300+ different Phoronix tests show an average increase of 17.5%. The 9900x is performing 21% better than previous gen there
@cedriccappelle I've seen those results, and am familiar with what is in the PTS. Linux specific tests are fine, but lets be honest here, that's not covering prod. AMD is going to have a really bad year if the increase is only on Linux specific testing, giving the Linux market share for consumer / business end users.
@@drewnewby They may have to lower prices sooner than usual. It's possible some microcode updates and perhaps updates to windows scheduler, which frankly needs to be better overall.
@@drewnewby Indeed it's a big problem. Still, the results on Linux are telling me that there is a significant upgrade from gen 4 to gen 5, and it's out of AMD's control that Windows sucks. I would expect Windows updates to fix these issues, or minimise them at least. This just shows how difficult it is to judge hardware. For windows, Zen 5 does seem to such for now indeed
Amd did what Intel done with 14th Gen..A refresh of the previous gen. Not worth getting the 9000 series. Only 9800X3D might be the only one worth looking at, and even that might not have significant uplift. AMD really fumbled this series
Level 1 tech did do benchmarks and saw great uplifts with the 9000 series, on Linux (upto 20% in productivity), so it seems that it might not be AMD that sucks, but Windows.
AMD will be shooting themselves in the feet, if the 9950X3D has Core Parking just like the 9950X. Also it appears AMD wants to sell more 7800X3D's than ever before, because all these Zen 5 mistakes AMD is making, makes the 7800X3D more and more desirable for the majority of consumers.
