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
Add your own comment

76 Comments on AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D Runs First Benchmarks

#76
AnotherReader
Avro ArrowThat you would say that the utility of 3D cache in the 6-core R5-7600X is no different than the utility in the 16-core R9-7950X means that you really don't have much understanding of PC tech, how it's used and what is good for what. I honestly can't take you seriously after these words.
I've tried to argue constructively, but you have resorted to name calling. I'll still continue to address your points in good faith: my age has nothing to do with anything, but I've been a PC user since the 1980s. You said in post # 68
The R9-7900X3D will be a real dumpster fire because it's going to have only six cores in its 3D-imbued CCX and will therefore perform in games like an R5-7600X3D would.
I only pointed out that if the 7900X3D is bad, then the 7600X3D is equally bad. For the record, I don't agree with your statement; I think a 7600X3D would be a good alternative, but I suspect AMD wanted more money for the 3D cache equipped processors and therefore, didn't opt for a 7600X3D. Besides, a 7600X3D would likely be as expensive as the regular 7700X. I share your opinion that it would have been a popular offering for gamers. It may still hurt them.
Avro ArrowYou think that the odd win of no more than 10% is "domination"? I have seen nothing in any of these tests that say "This APU is worth $100 more than the R9-7950X" and neither have you, you just don't realise it.
You're misinformed: the V-cache is good for more than just gaming. Let's look at a tool commonly used in computational fluid dynamics:



You're blinded by your dislike of this product: this large cache benefits more applications than just gaming. Another example is this step in the processing of radio telescope images.



Of course, not all of the workloads that benefit from the large cache benefit to the same degree. Here's another example from the radio telescope image processing:



To conclude, it all comes down to your workload. If your application benefits more from higher frequencies, then the 7950X or the 13900k might be the better option. On the other hand, if it has a working set larger than the caches of most consumer chips, then the 7950X3D might just be what you're looking for.

On a lighter note, my user name isn't Diefenbaker_1959. Let's drop the hatchet.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 23rd, 2024 09:17 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts