AMD Confirms Ryzen 9 7950X3D and 7900X3D Feature 3DV Cache on Only One of the Two Chiplets

[Space Lynx]

You have no clue as to how these things work.

I agree with you, it was just a random thought.

 

[AusWolf]

It's clear that there are technical limitations to making them boost with the increased voltage requirements. Performance is all that matters.

Even with the limited boost on the 7800X3D and 5800X3D, they have world class performance for gaming. Now, you literally can have your cake and eat it too.

Thread management will be an issue if Windows thinks that the highest boosting cores are the best.

Windows doesn't decide which cores are the best. That information is baked into the CPU. Windows only uses that information to send priority tasks to those threads.

 

[Space Lynx]

Windows doesn't decide which cores are the best. That information is baked into the CPU. Windows only uses that information to send priority tasks to those threads.

I think 1usmus did develop a software program that will show you which cores are best though, I can't remember its been awhile.

 

[AusWolf]

I think 1usmus did develop a software program that will show you which cores are best though, I can't remember its been awhile.

Even HWinfo does that. Or loading up a Cinebench R23 single threaded test, and looking at Task Manager while doing it.

Edit: Here, my CPU's preferred cores are #8 and #2.

 

[Gica]

Nice to see only 120W default TDP.

Seriously?
So:
7700X3D 120W (8 cores, lower boost frequencies)
7950X3D 120W (16 cores, higher boost frequencies)
In the real world, they will consume more than the 7700X and 7950X, respectively

 

[HD64G]

Seriously?
So:
7700X3D 120W (8 cores, lower boost frequencies)
7950X3D 120W (16 cores, higher boost frequencies)
In the real world, they will consume more than the 7700X and 7950X, respectively

So, for you 230W (170W TDP) is higher than 165W (120W TDP)?

 

[Gica]

Are your glasses good? How do you think that 7700X3D (8 cores) and 7950X3D (16 cores) will have the same power consumption?
The entire 7000X3D range is marked with 120W Default TDP, but we will see the real consumption in the reviews.

As for 7000X versus 7000X3D, the consumption of that extracache is added to the total consumption.
So, the X3D variants:
1. They will consume more than the X variants.
2. They will consume the same or less, in which case the frequencies will be lower than in the X versions, with the performance penalty that the 5800X3D also suffered in front of the 5800X, with the exception of games.

 

[Pumper]

Are your glasses good? How do you think that 7700X3D (8 cores) and 7950X3D (16 cores) will have the same power consumption?

Why not? 5000 series sure did:

 

[Godrilla]

Why not? 5000 series sure did:

If both chiplets require more power to boost higher at 14% and 12% respectively for R9 cpus then that might explain the lower tdp from power saving from the 3d chached chiplet. Also is improving stepping still a thing?

Update the base clocks are also significantly lower at 11% to 6% respectively.

 

[DemonicRyzen666]

If both chiplets require more power to boost higher at 14% and 12% respectively for R9 cpus then that might explain the lower tdp from power saving from the 3d chached chiplet. Also is improving stepping still a thing?

Update the base clocks are also significantly lower at 11% to 6% respectively.

What I read was AMD said they didn't need the 400mhz, to match current zen 4 chips. This also second gereration of vcache, so it probaby can reach higher clocks & voltages. Except with the second CCD not having 3D Vcache, they have to be able to be in sync when all threads are loaded. There for all this complaining about lower clock speed /tdp is pointless. The vcache die would out pace the non vcache die with higher clocks.

 

[Gica]

Why not? 5000 series sure did:

I repeat: do you really think that the 7800X3D will have the same consumption as the 7950X3D?
Regarding the 7950X/7950X3D consumption, the answer was readily available: the X3D is clocked at 4.2 GHz base, 300MHz less. This is the only way to maintain the same consumption as the X counterpart. All will follow the trajectory of 5800X3D: increased performance in gaming with penalty in other software.

 

[spnidel]

I don't think it will work like that at all.

why not? most games are cache-heavy, and there are plenty of tasks that can't be parallelized and depend on serial performance
if task B depends on the result of task A, with task B running on a ccd with 3d cache, and task A runs on the ccd without 3d cache, then you'll get worse performance than if it was the other way around (provided task B takes more time to do than task A)

if there are enough threads and the scheduler isn't dumb, then sure you wouldn't notice a thing, but I would be surprised if, for example, a 7600x3d performed better than a 7900x3d (or if locking game threads to the ccd which does have the 3d cache) since there would be no potential for improper thread assignment

I think 7900x3d and 7950x3d will be a case of "more fps than 7900x, with extra performance to be had if you limit games to use the 3d cache ccd only"

 

[HD64G]

I repeat: do you really think that the 7800X3D will have the same consumption as the 7950X3D?
Regarding the 7950X/7950X3D consumption, the answer was readily available: the X3D is clocked at 4.2 GHz base, 300MHz less. This is the only way to maintain the same consumption as the X counterpart. All will follow the trajectory of 5800X3D: increased performance in gaming with penalty in other software.

The X3D variants will for sure consume less power. No question about. It is now long proven that Zen4 doesn't lose more than 5% performance even with more than 30% lower power limits. So, it was an easy task for AMD to do that.

why not? most games are cache-heavy, and there are plenty of tasks that can't be parallelized and depend on serial performance
if task B depends on the result of task A, with task B running on a ccd with 3d cache, and task A runs on the ccd without 3d cache, then you'll get worse performance than if it was the other way around (provided task B takes more time to do than task A)

if there are enough threads and the scheduler isn't dumb, then sure you wouldn't notice a thing, but I would be surprised if, for example, a 7600x3d performed better than a 7900x3d (or if locking game threads to the ccd which does have the 3d cache) since there would be no potential for improper thread assignment

I think the 7900x3d will be a case of "more fps than 7900x, with extra performance to be had if you limit games to use the 3d cache ccd only"

No need for those tricks. The 3D cache is seen as a part of the whole L3 cache and will be used as that.

 

[spnidel]

No need for those tricks. The 3D cache is seen as a part of the whole L3 cache and will be used as that.

3d cache on ccd1 will be used by ccd2 as well? that screams extra latency when the ccd without the 3d cache decides it needs to use it
probably a miniscule amount of latency, but I really wouldn't be surprised if locking games to use the 3d cache ccd would yield better performance than using both

at the very least it sounds like a better idea than what intel is doing with their p+e cores anyway

 

[HD64G]

3d cache on ccd1 will be used by ccd2 as well? that screams extra latency when the ccd without the 3d cache decides it needs to use it
probably a miniscule amount of latency, but I really wouldn't be surprised if locking games to use the 3d cache ccd would yield better performance than using both

at the very least it sounds like a better idea than what intel is doing with their p+e cores anyway

A few more cycles in L3 cache latency was never the problem for performance. L3 size will help much more. 5800X3D showed that clearly in all games that are memory sensitive. RAM latency was always the main limit in speed.

 

[TechLurker]

I recall AMD mentioning they weren't quite done with AM4 yet after the 5800X3D release; that they might still backport X3D over for 5600X, 5700X, 5900X and 5950X. I wonder if they might still do so in the near-future (maybe after the live results of X3D 7900X3D and 7950X3D are out in the wild), or if they've decided to really leave AM4 behind for good.

At this point, it'd just be low-hanging fruit, and could make use of bad bins of X3D-capped CCDs intended for the 5800X3D for "5600X3D" and "5700X3D", and conversely, if bins are already very good, use the best for 5950X3D and second best for 5900X3D. It wouldn't be much different than AMD having also used some Zen+ or Zen2 CCDs for refreshed 1#00 and 2#00 Ryzens that they were originally still producing in small batches for the budget market (which was a minor but welcome surprise when it was known), and it'd be a nice bone to toss towards the AM4 crowd.

 

[Gica]

The X3D variants will for sure consume less power. No question about. It is now long proven that Zen4 doesn't lose more than 5% performance even with more than 30% lower power limits. So, it was an easy task for AMD to do that.

7950X: 4.5GHz base clock
7950X3D: 4.2GHz base clock
It will lose like the 5800X3D lost. It does not matter how much. The price matters and if it will bring you something extra in gaming. I doubt it will be worth it if you don't have a top video card.

It is vital for AMD to regain the crown in gaming. We are talking about some frames, impossible to detect in real life but with an impact in business. For the customer, hmmm, advertising, the soul of commerce.

 

[Makaveli]

I recall AMD mentioning they weren't quite done with AM4 yet after the 5800X3D release; that they might still backport X3D over for 5600X, 5700X, 5900X and 5950X. I wonder if they might still do so in the near-future (maybe after the live results of X3D 7900X3D and 7950X3D are out in the wild), or if they've decided to really leave AM4 behind for good.

At this point, it'd just be low-hanging fruit, and could make use of bad bins of X3D-capped CCDs intended for the 5800X3D for "5600X3D" and "5700X3D", and conversely, if bins are already very good, use the best for 5950X3D and second best for 5900X3D. It wouldn't be much different than AMD having also used some Zen+ or Zen2 CCDs for refreshed 1#00 and 2#00 Ryzens that they were originally still producing in small batches for the budget market (which was a minor but welcome surprise when it was known), and it'd be a nice bone to toss towards the AM4 crowd.

Everyone that is on am4 has this glimmer of hope but I don't see it happening. Once motherboard prices drop on AM5 and DDR5 memory prices settle that is the path forward not wasting silicon on AM4.

 

[Wirko]

Everyone that is on am4 has this glimmer of hope but I don't see it happening. Once motherboard prices drop on AM5 and DDR5 memory prices settle that is the path forward not waiting silicon on AM4.

This. AMD's strategy is clear enough by now: old gen for low end. I expect to see more AM4 chips but only at the low end. The 5300G maybe, which exists but never reached retail.

 

[HD64G]

7950X: 4.5GHz base clock
7950X3D: 4.2GHz base clock
It will lose like the 5800X3D lost. It does not matter how much. The price matters and if it will bring you something extra in gaming. I doubt it will be worth it if you don't have a top video card.

It is vital for AMD to regain the crown in gaming. We are talking about some frames, impossible to detect in real life but with an impact in business. For the customer, hmmm, advertising, the soul of commerce.

You did change the subject from the power draw to the performance when you lost the argument about the former. Dialogue is futile when this sneaky tactic is used.

 

[Gica]

Can you fight though?
Which part is unclear to you? I can help you. Unlike you, who made a fix for me, I will also use arguments.

 

[NeatOman]

I wonder if it's going to be two 6 core CCX's and one with 3D cache or one 8 core CCX with 3D cache and one 4 core CCX. My guess is 8 core 3D cache + 4 core

 

[Godrilla]

I wonder if it's going to be two 6 core CCX's and one with 3D cache or one 8 core CCX with 3D cache and one 4 core CCX. My guess is 8 core 3D cache + 4 core

Either way that would mean they would have 4 core parts for zen4 incoming or 6core 3d cache also possible. If we extrapolate the 6 core 7600x vs 7700x performance there is no significant difference in performance in gaming currently. Very good point. I originally thought it was 2x 6 cores parts with disabled core from maybe poorer yields.

Update the Tjmax was lowered by 6 degrees to 89* C

AMD Ryzen 7000X3D CPUs can be distinguished by a new box, lower Tjmax temperature confirmed - VideoCardz.com

AMD Ryzen 7000X3D series have a new box design, lack of OC support and lower max operating temperature AMD has updated its webpages with full specs of the Ryzen 7000X3D CPUs. The three of the upcoming Ryzen 7000X3D CPUs will come in a new box design. The so-called PIB (Processor in Box) package...

videocardz.com

 

[Gica]

I did not find any review of 5800X3D that demonstrates the usefulness of these processors in tandem with entry-midrange video cards.
Something like: 5800X versus 5800X3D with:
3050, 3060 ... 3070 and/or 6500XT, 6600 ... 6700XT
How much does the X3D version add to these weaker video cards and IF IT'S WORTH IT (higher price, lower performance in many applications).

 

[spnidel]

I did not find any review of 4090 that demonstrates the usefulness of these graphics cards in tandem with entry-midrange processors.
Something like: 4090 versus 4080 with:
intel pentium 4
How much does the 4090 version add to these weaker processors and IF IT'S WORTH IT (higher price, lower performance in many applications).