Wednesday, June 12th 2024

AMD Says Ryzen 9000 Series Won't Beat 7000X3D Series at Gaming

AMD's upcoming Ryzen 9000 "Granite Ridge" desktop processors based on the "Zen 5" microarchitecture won't beat the Ryzen 7000X3D series at gaming workloads, said Donny Woligroski, the company's senior technical marketing manager, in an interview with Tom's Hardware. The new "Zen 5" chips, such as the Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 9 9950X, will come close to the gaming performance of the 7800X3D and 7950X3D, but won't quite beat it. The new processors, however, will offer significant generational performance uplifts in productivity workloads, particularly multithreaded workloads that use vector extensions such as VNNI and AVX512. The Ryzen 7 7800X3D remains the fastest gaming desktop processor you can buy, it edges out even Intel's Core i9-14900KS, in our testing.

Given this, we expect the gaming performance of processors like the Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 9 9950X to end up closer to those of the Intel Core i9-13900K or i9-14900K. Gamers with a 7000X3D series chip or even a 14th Gen Core i7 or Core i9 chip don't have much to look forward to. AMD confirmed that it's already working on a Ryzen 9000X3D series—that's "Zen 5" with 3D V-cache technology, and is sounds confident of holding on to the title of having the fastest gaming processors. This doesn't seem implausible.
Intel, in its recent "Lunar Lake" architecture reveal, went deep into the nuts and bolts of its "Lion Cove" P-core, where it claimed that the core posts a 14% IPC increase over the "Redwood Cove" P-core powering "Meteor Lake," which in turn has similar IPC to the "Raptor Cove" P-core powering the current 14th Gen Core processors. Intel intends to use "Lion Cove" P-cores in even its Core Ultra "Arrow Lake-S" desktop processors. Given that 3D V-cache gave "Zen 4" a 20-25% boost in gaming performance, a similar performance boost to "Zen 5" could make the 9000X3D series competitive with "Arrow Lake-S," if Intel's claims of a 14% IPC gain for the "Lion Cove" P-core holds up. That said, AMD in its interview stated that 3D V-cache may not add the kind of gaming performance gains to "Zen 5" that it did to "Zen 4."

AMD is building the "Zen 5" 8-core CCD on the 4 nm foundry process, which is expected to have the TSV foundation for stacked 3D V-cache memory, but there's an ace up AMD's sleeve. AMD hasn't ruled out the possibility of "Zen 5" having an expandable dedicated L2 cache. To a question by Tom's Hardware on whether the L2 cache is expandable on "Zen 5," AMD replied "Absolutely, if you get to finer-grain 3D interconnect. So we're at 9-micron through silicon via (TSV) pitches today. As you go down to, you know, 6-, 3-, 2- micron and even lower, the level of partitioning can become much finer-grained," It's important to note here, that this is not a confirmation on AMD's part. AMD didn't define the specific pitch required for an L2 cache.

If true, what this means is that in the 9000X3D series, the company could give the CCD a larger 3D V-cache chiplet, which not just expands the on-die L3 cache from 32 MB to 96 MB, but also increases the sizes of the dedicated L2 caches of each core. The "Zen 5" microarchitecture sees each core get 1 MB of dedicated L2 cache, which the new 3D V-cache chiplet could expand.

The L2 cache operates at a higher data-rate than the shared L3 cache, and uses a faster SRAM physical media. The next-gen 3D V-cache chiplet could hence feature two distinct kinds of SRAM—the 64 MB L3 SRAM that expands the on-die 32 MB L3 SRAM; and eight L2 cache SRAM units to expand each of the eight on-die L2 caches.

The L2 cache is expected to play a major role in gaming performance for next-gen processors, and Intel has significantly expanded it for "Lion Cove" P-cores with both "Lunar Lake" and the upcoming "Arrow Lake." On "Lunar Lake," the four P-cores each have a 2.5 MB of dedicated L2 cache. On "Arrow Lake," the same P-core is expected to get 3 MB of dedicated L2 cache. So AMD probably understands the importance of fattening not just the L3 cache, but also the L2.

The rumor mill is abuzz with reports of AMD bringing in the Ryzen 9000X3D series within 2024, with some sources pointing to a Q4-2024 debut, which should time them alongside Intel's launch of the Core Ultra "Arrow Lake-S" desktop processors.
Source: Tom's Hardware
Add your own comment

141 Comments on AMD Says Ryzen 9000 Series Won't Beat 7000X3D Series at Gaming

#51
ARF
A Computer GuyDarn, this foils my upgrade plan. Guess I'll have to stick to my power efficient 5950x for awhile longer.
Well, a 65-watt 8-core / 16-thread Ryzen 7 9700X or a undervolted 12-core / 24-thread Ryzen 9 9900X won't be bad choices, especially that AM5 is now a settled platform, so the bugs are less, maybe it's good to try it...
Posted on Reply
#52
AusWolf
ARFWell, a 65-watt 8-core / 16-thread Ryzen 7 9700X or a undervolted 12-core / 24-thread Ryzen 9 9900X won't be bad choices, especially that AM5 is now a settled platform, so the bugs are less, maybe it's good to try it...
Sure. :) But they're pointless if you're already on Zen 4.
Posted on Reply
#53
A Computer Guy
ARFWell, a 65-watt 8-core / 16-thread Ryzen 7 9700X or a undervolted 12-core / 24-thread Ryzen 9 9900X won't be bad choices, especially that AM5 is now a settled platform, so the bugs are less, maybe it's good to try it...
I saw something on reddit (yea I know :slap: ) awhile ago that someone adjusted the power of their 7950x to 5950x levels without too much loss in performance.
(edit) I found the link community.amd.com/t5/pc-building/the-real-performance-difference-between-the-7950x-and-5950x/m-p/563342
Posted on Reply
#54
blkspade
ymdhisBecause AI is the dotcom boom of the 2020s, and everyone wants a piece of the pie. So they have to put useless NPUs everywhere because it gives investors a hard-on.

I wish someone would find it a good use beyond running chatbots 150% faster, right now there's no point in it being universal. Maybe in five years when it will be in every CPU, someone will write a botnet that leverages millions of home users NPUs to run Skynet. Kyle Reese was supposed to be sent back in time from 2029 in the original Terminator, so we still have five years for that to happen.
NPUs are actually ubiquitous just not in PC. They are in Apple silicon, and high-end mobile devices from Samsung and Google and Qualcomm. That's the reason for the push, to not have the PC be wildly inefficient or grossly expensive to handle the same kind of tasks.
Posted on Reply
#55
ARF
AusWolfSure. :) But they're pointless if you're already on Zen 4.
Of course, the best is to wait the 16-core CCD with Zen 6... :sleep:
Posted on Reply
#56
Solaris17
Super Dainty Moderator
OnasiOh no, not the gaming performance. All the hordes of 4090 owners are in shambles.
There's atleast a dozen of us!
Posted on Reply
#57
AusWolf
A Computer GuyI saw something on reddit (yea I know :slap: ) awhile ago that someone adjusted the power of their 7950x to 5950x levels without too much loss in performance.
Zen 4 reacts very well (that is: not a lot) to lack of proper cooling (thermal limit) or a modified PPT. :)
Posted on Reply
#58
Godrilla
The 7800X3D is selling as low as $320 @ microcenter before 10% membership discount. AMD'S marketing team bigger number better!
Posted on Reply
#59
phubar
EvrsrAMD had a pretty nice die size economy by not having full AVX512 units in Zen 4, though one can argue it was also previously the case.
The actual CPU die size itself is pretty small these days and the FPU is a minority of that die size. Here is Zen4 for comparison:
www.techpowerup.com/img/WuHAyr6QC7Ch2JCm.jpg

Going to full AVX512 isn't a big deal from a die size perspective. The bigger issue will be feeding that FPU because its going to be incredibly bandwidth intensive to do so at 5Ghz+ and maintaining full clock speed without heat throttling. It can easily gobble up most of the bandwidth available and starve the rest of the core if they also didn't greatly pump up L1 and L2 cache bandwidth.

I think they've said it'll have up to double the L1, L2, and decoder bandwidth vs Zen4 so it appears they've addressed that issue too.
BwazeWasn't there a plan to eventually bring the X3D cache to all Zen CPUs?
No.

Its way waaaaaay to expensive and AMD isn't able to buy enough wafers from TSMC to pull it off.

What they're doing is releasing their new cores first and then doing X3D updates later when they've got available dies and as a sort've product line refresh. There were big lag times between the new core intro and the X3D variants for Zen3 and 4 but for Zen5 they're rumored to be doing things faster and might have X3D versions out before the end of the year.
Posted on Reply
#60
wheresmycar
AusWolfWhy all this pessimism? Did you guys seriously think the 9000-series was aimed at 7000-series owners? :laugh:

When are we all gonna grow out of the late '90s attitude of expecting huge leaps of performance and functionality from single generational upgrades? :kookoo:
I second that... for most of us, or gamers, buying into 7000 it would be more interesting to see whats on offer at the end of the AM5 support cycle.
Posted on Reply
#61
Luisds
Vayra86'Buy our 7800X3Ds and don't wait for the next best thing', is what they're saying.
7950X is not better than 5800X3D in game。
9950X will meet same problem
Posted on Reply
#62
Jism
beedooI was being facetious.

The 2950X is a 16 core Threadripper, which will be absolutely decimated by a 16 core 9950X.
Exactly. It's based on pinnacle ridge which is 2700X and so. The 5800X alone is 50% faster in pretty much everything. The 9x00 series will provide a rough 60 to 70% even compared to pinnacle ridge.
Posted on Reply
#63
AusWolf
Luisds7950X is not better than 5800X3D in game。
9950X will meet same problem
How is it a problem? The x800X3D and x950X CPUs are made for entirely different use cases.
Posted on Reply
#64
fevgatos
I'd still pick a 9700x over the 7800x 3d without a moments hesitation, the same way I'd pick a 7700x over a 5800x 3d. Overall faster products.
Posted on Reply
#65
Knight47
Amd is killing it with the new cpu's. 5800XT beating 13600k/14600k and 9700X beating 13900k/14900k.
Posted on Reply
#66
fevgatos
Knight47Amd is killing it with the new cpu's. 5800XT beating 13600k/14600k and 9700X beating 13900k/14900k.
Is that a serious post or...?
Posted on Reply
#67
Knight47
fevgatosIs that a serious post or...?
5800XT is up to 12% faster compared to 13600kf.

So yeah, Amd is seriously killing it.
Posted on Reply
#69
londiste
Knight475800XT is up to 12% faster compared to 13600kf.

So yeah, Amd is seriously killing it.
Are the results on this slide also tested with a RX6600? :)
Posted on Reply
#70
fevgatos
londisteAre the results on this slide also tested with a RX6600? :)
Yes
Posted on Reply
#71
AleXXX666
GuckyHow much faster is a 7800X3D compared to a 7700X? 20%? 25%?
How much faster is the 9700X compared to a 7700X? 16%?
There you have it. A 7800X3D is faster in gaming compared to a 9700X....

We won't know for sure until TPU has one in their hands and tested it.
I'm OK with "non-3D" CPUs. Runs cooler, price is balanced. :D It's the same AMD "know-how" like HBM GPUS VEGA, remember that BS?:roll:
Posted on Reply
#72
Godrilla
fevgatosI'd still pick a 9700x over the 7800x 3d without a moments hesitation, the same way I'd pick a 7700x over a 5800x 3d. Overall faster products.
Sarcasm aside Ryzen is the worst value at launch. Would someone pay almost 25% more for similar performance when gaming at 720p?
Hey if you want production cpu Newegg has the 7950X for $420 now. Who would pay $399 for a 9700x? The 7950X will probably shyte on the 9900x as well.
Posted on Reply
#73
fevgatos
GodrillaSarcasm aside Ryzen is the worst value at launch. Would someone pay almost 25% more for similar performance when gaming at 720p?
Hey if you want production cpu Newegg has the 7950X for $420 now. Who would pay $399 for a 9700x? The 7950X will probably shyte on the 9900x as well.
Ι wasn't being sarcastic. For sure I'd buy a 9700X over 7800x 3d.
Posted on Reply
#74
blkspade
GodrillaSarcasm aside Ryzen is the worst value at launch. Would someone pay almost 25% more for similar performance when gaming at 720p?
Hey if you want production cpu Newegg has the 7950X for $420 now. Who would pay $399 for a 9700x? The 7950X will probably shyte on the 9900x as well.
A win is a win. If an Intel chip isn't even a part of the conversation, it doesn't even matter which AMD chip you're willing to spend money on as long as there is one.
Posted on Reply
#75
Godrilla
fevgatosΙ wasn't being sarcastic. For sure I'd buy a 9700X over 7800x 3d.
And I didn't only mention the 7800X3D. Good talks.
update if you are going for gaming crown why not just wait for the 9800X3D launching rumored in 9/24?
blkspadeA win is a win. If an Intel chip isn't even a part of the conversation, it doesn't even matter which AMD chip you're willing to spend money on as long as there is one.
It is pretty sad. Unfortunately we are again at a stagnation period for once was a decade of quad cores is now a decade of 8 cores cpus. Yep Amd is winning and the consumer is as well. Unfortunately if Intel keeps losing then the consumers will start losing too. One thing is for sure AMD has a clear disconnect with their marketing team. When the other 2 have the crown they are less humble. AMD has probably never competed with itself like they now. Hence last gen CPUs are all over the place in terms of pricing. ( Good for the consumer).
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jul 15th, 2024 23:01 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts