Monday, February 20th 2023
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D Runs First Benchmarks
AMD's upcoming Ryzen 9 7950X3D processor will bring 16 cores and 32 threads along with 16 MB of L2 cache and 128 MB of L3 cache for 144 MB of 3D V-cache present on the package. Today, we get to see it in action for the first time in benchmarks like Blender for 3D content creation and Geekbench 5 for synthetic benchmarks, where we get to compare the scores to the already existing models. In Blender, the new AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 558.59 points, while the regular Ryzen 9 7950X scores 590.28 points. This represents a 5.4% regression from the original model; however, we are yet to see how other content creation benchmarks suit the new CPU.
For Geekbench 5 synthetics, the upcoming Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 2,157 points in the single-core score and 21,841 points in the multi-core score. The regular Ryzen 9 7950X can reach around 2246 points for single-core and 25,275 points for multi-core score, which is relatively faster than the new cache-enhanced Ryzen 9 7950X3D design. Of course, some of these benchmark results show that the 4.2 GHz base frequency of Ryzen 9 7950X3D plays a significant role in the overall performance comparison, given that the regular Ryzen 9 7950X is set to a 4.5 GHz base clock. Both designs share the same 5.7 GHz boost speed, so we have yet to see more benchmarks showing other differences induced by larger cache sizes.
Source:
via Tom's Hardware
For Geekbench 5 synthetics, the upcoming Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 2,157 points in the single-core score and 21,841 points in the multi-core score. The regular Ryzen 9 7950X can reach around 2246 points for single-core and 25,275 points for multi-core score, which is relatively faster than the new cache-enhanced Ryzen 9 7950X3D design. Of course, some of these benchmark results show that the 4.2 GHz base frequency of Ryzen 9 7950X3D plays a significant role in the overall performance comparison, given that the regular Ryzen 9 7950X is set to a 4.5 GHz base clock. Both designs share the same 5.7 GHz boost speed, so we have yet to see more benchmarks showing other differences induced by larger cache sizes.
76 Comments on AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D Runs First Benchmarks
I have a 5800X3D and in Cinebench R23 it's score is in the high 14xxx (nearly 15xxx) - my 5800X would get scores into the low 16xxx.
But in games (especially world of warcraft) the FPS gain was big, like, 30-60fps depending on situation/scenario.
You can also say it is a bad preforming CPU that cost more except in games that benafit the extra cache.
There is a very limited market that will pay the extra $ upon the allready extra $$ that ZEN4 demend.
Next CPU will likely be a 7950X3D... why? Because that's what I want.
I too have a 5800X and (also) mainly play World of WarCraft ... What you mentioned here is very important to me, as I was reluctant to upgrade to a 5800X3D
From your experience as a 5800X3D owner/user, what are it's other pros and cons (regarding Gaming / Productivity / etc)?
Thanks
7800X3D will probably beat 13900KS in most CPU bound games, while costing half and using much less watts
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X, ASUS B650E-F ROG Strix Gaming WiFi, G.Skill Flare X5 Series 32GB DDR5-6000 Kit, Computer Build Combo
Original Price$857.96
Save $257.97
$599.99
Cheers!
Now AMD comes with X3D chips that will probably win many gaming benchmarks and because we have the non X3D chips in the market and we know what those chips can do with unlocked TDP, people try to find flaws to paint a negative image to those X3D chips. Intel using E cores might translate to like, 50+% degradation in multi core performance, but no, we should start a revolution because X3D chips will be 10% slower in the game of... Cinebench.
These chips are what people where asking from AMD. To integrate X3D cache to hi end models, and not just the 8 core model. AMD did it and now the only thing we have to do is wait and see if that extra cache and benchmark results in games can justify those prices.
7950X TDP: 170W/230W
7950X3D TDP: 120W/162W(rumored)
If you can keep it cool, giving the 7950X3D an extra 50-70w should cause a good performance bump and perform better than the 7950X at the same power.
The 7800X3D will be really interesting. Having that power going to a single CCD should let it PBO a little higher, the temperatures might be lower if they're not using leaky dies for the 7800X, and there won't be any scheduler issues. Pair that with the on average slightly better 1%/0.1% lows the 7700X has over the dual CCD counterparts, and it's shaping up to be a pretty solid gaming chip, especially when you feed it more power.
AVX-512 support has me wondering how these 3D chips will perform in RPCS3.
There were speculations that two CCD Ryzen 7000 X3D chips won't have any penalty due to 3D cache - since they could boost as high as normally with non-3D cache CCD for applications that don't use bigger cache, and use 3D cache CCD primarily for games and utilities that do use it. But I can't see Microsoft Windows scheduler doing that.
As it is, non-3D cache chips will still be better for majority of non-gaming applications. Which means the only 3D cache chip that really makes sense is 7800X3D.
I did say I wasn't going to justify it; you'll have to do the reading yourself because only then will you learn the magnitude of how terrible it is.