Friday, September 27th 2024

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D and 9900X3D to Feature 3D V-cache on Both CCD Chiplets

Earlier this week, we got rumors that AMD is rushing in the Ryzen 7 9800X3D 8-core/16-thread "Zen 5" processor with 3D V-cache for a late-October debut. The 9800X3D succeeds the popular 7800X3D, and AMD probably hopes it will have a competitive gaming processor in time for Intel's Core Ultra 2-series "Arrow Lake-S" launch. In the previous article, it was reported that the higher core-count 9000X3D series processor models, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D and Ryzen 9 9900X3D, would arrive some time in Q1 2025, because it was reported that the chips have certain "new features" compared to their predecessors, the 7950X3D and 7900X3D. At the time, we even explored the possibility of AMD giving both 8-core CCDs on the processor 3D V-cache. Turns out, this is where things are headed.

A new report by Benchlife.info claims that the higher core-count 9950X3D and 9900X3D will implement 3D V-cache on both CCD chiplets, giving these processors an impressive 192 MB of L3 cache (96 MB per CCD), and 208 MB or 204 MB of "total cache" (L2+L3). The report also says that AMD is planning a Ryzen 5 9600X3D chip, its second attempt at taking on Intel's Core i5 lineup, following its very recent release of the Ryzen 5 7600X3D, which ended up 1-3% short of the Core i5-14600K in gaming workloads. There's no word on whether the 9600X3D will launch in October alongside the 9800X3D, or in Q1-2025 with the Ryzen 9 9000X3D series.
Documentation indicates that the max 3DVCache is still 64 MB, for a total of 96 MB L3 per CCD.
The introduction of 3D V-cache on both CCDs of the 9950X3D and 9900X3D could be interesting, as both chiplets will be capable of gaming workloads at a uniform performance level. On the 7950X3D and 7900X3D, OS scheduler-level QoS logic ensure gaming workloads are scheduled to the CCD with the 3D V-cache, while multithreaded productivity workloads are allowed to spread across both CCDs.
Source: Benchlife.info
Add your own comment

131 Comments on AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D and 9900X3D to Feature 3D V-cache on Both CCD Chiplets

#126
chrcoluk
InVasManiThe wider the frequency gap the less consistent OS feels and behaves in terms of P cores and E cores. I'm sure it's true of individual P cores as well. Consistency matters you can't have crazy amplitude differences and expect smoother consistency.
My comment is in reference to just p-cores. Windows will over load the 2 cores at 5.4ghz, and the 5.3ghz cores get much less load in thread heavy software. Down clocking so all cores are at 5.3ghz fixes it completely.

AMD has a much easier fix though, I think there is a bios option that disables preferred core scheduling. With these new chips I would then (if AMD dont do this automatically) just make sure games have an affinity configured to use one CCD so will always hit cache.
Posted on Reply
#127
b1lancer2059
napataI wonder how much it'll add to the price.
Probably either $549.99 or $599.99
Posted on Reply
#128
DirtyDan
tfdsafAMD needs to lower prices on the new 9000 series CPU's, period. They are just not value oriented enough and are way too expensive for what they bring to the table compared to AMD's own 7000 series and the Intel 13k series. Intel is offering 14 cores for as cheap as $300, while AMD are stuck with 6 cores at those prices, its absurd.

The 9600x is $280 for 6 cores and barely 3-4% improvement in gaming over the 7600x, around 9% improvement in multithreading, while Intel's 14600 offers 14 cores for $260. Its around 15% faster over the 9600x in multithreaded apps and offers similar gaming performance.

Thing is the 9600x should cost $230 at most, with the 7600x starting at $200 and the 7600 vanilla at $180. The 9700x trades blows with the 14600k in terms of gaming, but falls short in multithreading, while being $70 dollars more.
damned if you do, damned if you dont it seems for AMD. Countless years of them having higher cores and less performance and everybody complained that cores cant make up the difference compared to Intel. Fast forward to today and it seems performance cant make up the difference to core count. Get on Intel and tell them the higher core count cant make up the difference....
Posted on Reply
#129
FoulOnWhite
DirtyDandamned if you do, damned if you dont it seems for AMD. Countless years of them having higher cores and less performance and everybody complained that cores cant make up the difference compared to Intel. Fast forward to today and it seems performance cant make up the difference to core count. Get on Intel and tell them the higher core count cant make up the difference....
Core count can't make a difference to X3D. AMD have won with X3D, who wants the non X3D chips now, that's why scalpers can get so much for them.
Posted on Reply
#130
Zach_01
FoulOnWhiteCore count can't make a difference to X3D. AMD have won with X3D, who wants the non X3D chips now, that's why scalpers can get so much for them.
Scalpers will price as high as people are willing to pay.
Do those people lack PCs already? Is their life depend on the new gaming CPU?
Some people are impatient, some don’t care about money and others are both.

And because of them everyone else gets foked

I don’t blame the sellers. At the end demand is what drives a free market…
Posted on Reply
#131
Hankieroseman
Zach_01Scalpers will price as high as people are willing to pay.
Do those people lack PCs already? Is their life depend on the new gaming CPU?
Some people are impatient, some don’t care about money and others are both.

And because of them everyone else gets foked

I don’t blame the sellers. At the end demand is what drives a free market…
It's why I got the 9800X3D when it was available at the retail price. The goal was 9950X3D but I'll wait for the test results now.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 28th, 2024 06:57 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts