Wednesday, March 23rd 2022
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D Geekbenched, About 9% Faster Than 5800X
Someone with access to an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D processor sample posted some of the first Geekbench 5 performance numbers for the chip, where it ends up 9% faster than the Ryzen 7 5800X, on average. AMD claimed that the 5800X3D is "the world's fastest gaming processor," with the 3D Vertical Cache (3D V-cache) technology offering gaming performance uplifts over the 5800X akin to a new generation, despite being based on the same "Zen 3" microarchitecture, and lower clock speeds. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D is shown posting scores of 1633 points 1T and 11250 points nT in one run; and 1637/11198 points in the other; when paired with 32 GB of dual-channel DDR4-3200 memory.
These are 9% faster than a typical 5800X score on this benchmark. AMD's own gaming performance claims see the 5800X3D score a performance uplift above 20% over the 5800X, closing the gap with the Intel Core i9-12900K. The 3D V-cache technology debuted earlier this week with the EPYC "Milan-X" processors, where the additional cache provides huge performance gains for applications with large data-sets. AMD isn't boasting too much about the multi-threaded productivity performance of the 5800X3D because this is ultimately an 8-core/16-thread processor that's bound to lose to the Ryzen 9 5900X/5950X, and the i9-12900K, on account of its lower core-count.
Source:
Wccftech
These are 9% faster than a typical 5800X score on this benchmark. AMD's own gaming performance claims see the 5800X3D score a performance uplift above 20% over the 5800X, closing the gap with the Intel Core i9-12900K. The 3D V-cache technology debuted earlier this week with the EPYC "Milan-X" processors, where the additional cache provides huge performance gains for applications with large data-sets. AMD isn't boasting too much about the multi-threaded productivity performance of the 5800X3D because this is ultimately an 8-core/16-thread processor that's bound to lose to the Ryzen 9 5900X/5950X, and the i9-12900K, on account of its lower core-count.
105 Comments on AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D Geekbenched, About 9% Faster Than 5800X
AMD Eng Sample: <OPN> followed by processor type, characteristics, whether it is unlocked or not, etc.
To the best of my knowledge, unlike Intel they do not ship out to any partners late ES or qualification sample processors with a final CPUID designation programmed into them and even then, programs like CPU-Z and Geekbench would be able to detect they are engineering samples in the event that any would ship with final designation, because they would have the ES bit set.
I don't find it very surprising that many applications simply do not show marked improvements over the regular 5800X, they share a common architecture and topology, after all. Geekbench was one of those I expected the highest improvements, though, since it has quite a few subtests that would highly benefit from the cache - it seems there is one subtest that it seems to be at least 15% ahead of the 5800X though.
Asking "Why not just Zen 4" shows ignorance on how fabrication-reliant technology works. First off, this CPU is not made on the same process as Zen 4, so it doesn't cut into Zen 4 production at all. Other reasons Zen 4 can't be pushed forward: Lack of TSMC capacity, Adequate supply of chipsets for motherboards, Adequate supply of DDR5. There's more, but I hope you get the picture.
Or, if I would use your vocabulary:
"And why, for God's sake, would you think that GB would reflect the performance of X3D as good as it does on Alder?"
Yeah, a bit childish. I'd say we're eve now. :) There's no reason to believe that the X3D would be slower in gaming, it's not very likely. (Well and neither is 20 % faster or whatever AMD said)
If you think you can make such a prognosis for X3D out of GB I'd say you're in a minority here. Just because GB was right about Alder it doesn't mean that GB is right every time, and it's especially not expected in such an odd product like X3D.
Now if Raptor Lake, or Raphael, would have a lower single GB score, that would surprise me.
It's not just me. In case you haven't read the source: The hardware improvements of X3D are nothing like the improvements of Alder. Maybe we should compare it to Broadwell S instead? Seems more fitting to me, even though it wasn't extra L3.
It was about the same as the 4790K in both GB tests but always faster in games (except for C6) with an average of 19 % in low settings and resolutions, even though the latter runs up to 700 MHz faster.
In other words, neither single GB 4 or 5 could predict gaming performance from the extra cache back then.
In the end I blame Gbench, it's the same story every time. It should be banned from unreleased CPU's lol... Why don't you just read some background info instead of chasing higher model numbers? We've heard your Zen4 chanting for ages now. Oh and give me a sad face while you're at it.
9% "Faster" while having lower speed clocks, shows there's plenty of oppertunity in these chips.
That might be a down fall to seeing this chip can not be oc'ed so default is all she can do good or bad.
But, i think as long as you have a board with a external BCLK generator you still should be able to increase max boost clocks.
Some higher end board manufactures may give more options for sure :cool:
Also uncleweb for throttlestop too :D
Like I said, go check out that EPYC review on Phoronix. In the server space, this kind of thing is making improvements far larger than a 9% gain. It does make me wonder how well more cache would scale.
Thought it was user benchmark sucks, this one geek bench is just no where on any benchmark forum except this "rumor" news thread :confused:
It's such a useless benchmark!
The 7800X may kick ass when it arrives, but latest info says it's been pushed back to holiday season, so end of Q4. If you can wait another 9 months then you're fine, but until then the 5800X provides some competition to Alder Lake.
In gaming ?
You might be dreaming :D