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
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.
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.
141 Comments on AMD Says Ryzen 9000 Series Won't Beat 7000X3D Series at Gaming
R7-9800X <R7-7800X3D <R7-9800X3D
Every one of these CPU's has its own pros and cons. Price. Gaming vs non-gaming, etc.
Also, the R7-9800X3D vs R7-9800X might not scale as well as the R7-7800X3D vs the R7-7800X. We'll have to see. Even when fully CPU bottlenecked, if the R7-9800X is more efficient at certain tasks there may be LESS capability to throw more cache at a program to see the uplift. No idea. And it will vary by the task.
Dont know is there any CPU which can handle my build :) I hope future will bring more than a 20-30% performance raise on each generationImagine, you want to get V-sync(144Hz) in 4K on ULTRA with RT on max without frame generators and resolution scaling(there are games where scaling create a lot of visual noises).
There is no card which could handle it. 5090 and later 6090 wont be able to do that( maybe 8090).
You could combine for ex. 3x4090 but there are no drivers to do that for that game(for ex. Minecraft :) )
But then you have AI.
You will say only:
"Please make use of my hardware"
and AI will will write those drivers for you.
videocardz.com/newz/amd-explains-why-ryzen-9000-with-8-cores-doesnt-need-higher-tdp-but-lower
what is this statetheobviouspowerup
Zen4 is faster sometimes, slower sometimes.
If you look at several reviews, the multi-game average has a 5800X3D in a dead tie with the 7700X, which is faster than the 7600X, and that's NOW with improvements to memory speeds and better availability of fast DDR5. When the 7700X launched, it was a lot more expensive and not really any faster. If you played the wrong games it could even be quite a lot slower. If you want 500fps in CS:GO, then the 7600X/7700X were winners. In the more CPU-demanding titles the extra cache always paid off.
I'm not suggesting people should buy a 5800X3D over a 7700X now, that's not what this thread is about and if you think that then you're in the wrong thread.
If I had a 5800x3d, I wouldn't consider a CPU upgrade any time soon.
As for the 5800X3D vs 7600/7700X, its a trade-blow fest. The 5800X3D is seen to beat both of these Zen 4 SKUs in some titles, especially CPU-bound games. Far from turd'atory unless you're shitting gold.
5800x3D is slower than a 7600 non X and no amount of cope will change that.
It is slower than AMD budget cpu.
No, it doesn't trade any blows with 12900k, 7700X, 7700 non X 7600X, it is consistently slower.
It is closer to a 5800x than to a 13900k performance-wise.
Perception vs reality.
The 5800x3d remains basically the fastest gaming CPU using DDR4. Is it worth buying today, if you're starting from scratch? Probably not, but the chip is still quite competitive. You've done your argument great harm by wildly overstating it.
Sounds kind of like the speculation of Ryzen 9 5900XT. Where there's no more gaming performance, but has more multithread performance. More like what Ryzen 7 3700X was 4 years ago.
Even with the DDR5 advantage, 7600/7600X/7700X are all within margin of error with the 5800X3D which makes them pointless given the additional platform cost.
Just like CIV can take ages to process everything in late game.
but those will always bring computers to their knees more powerful ones will buckle a bit later
www.techspot.com/articles-info/2592/bench/1080p-p.webp
So not so "consistently slower".
What will the 9700x vs 7800X3D have as advantage? ipc from 13 to 15% advantage clock speeds at 9% advantage and memory from similar memory to slightly better ( nothing like going from 3600mh ddr4 to dd5 6 ghz ).
Plus AMD is nudering Zen5 with lower TDP at 65 watts.
And no, 12900k on DDR4 is not losing substantially, the difference between DDR4 and DDR5 in early benchmarks was under 1% between DDR4 and DDR5, when reviewed by this site. And later, when tested with a 13900k, it was 1-5% depending of the frequency of DDR5, because we have now way faster modules than when 12900k was introduced.Team A beats team B 14 times and manages to get some huge wins too, totally annihilating a team B with a score 10:0.
Team B manages to beat team A 6 times in the series but it is mostly close calls and nothing spectacular.
Who is consistently better in the series?
I can't believe I argue about this.53 games, 31 won by 7600x, 5 of them had 0 difference. 7 wins for 7600x with marging higher than 15%, 5800x3D 0 wins with higher margin than 15%.
If you take trading blows literally, even as long you lose 98:2, you traded blows too. You got hit 98 times, and traded 2.
Consistently doesn't mean always within this context and it is obvious to anyone familiar with benchmarking and in general that it covers a trend/ pattern/. If someone is told by their boss that they had consistently failed to arrive on time or finish their work, it doesn't mean they are late every day etc.
Also, nobody plays "average game", so one should always look at individual game scores and decide which CPU is best for the games that bear weight in one's interest. For example, a CPU can be a winner in CS2, but I don't care because I don't play competitive games.
Also, the 5800X3D is the last upgrade on an old platform, while the 7600 is the cheapest entry to a new platform, which are totally different use cases, so any comparison between them is irrelevant, imo. I mean, the 58X3D is clearly the better choice if you're on AM4, while investing into a new platform is the better choice if you're not.