AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D Runs First Benchmarks

[AleksandarK]

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.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[katzi]

X3D chips being slower in benchmarks like that isn't news...

I have a 5800X3D and in Cinebench R23 it's score is in the high 14xxx (nearly 15xxx) - my 5800X would get scores into the low 16xxx.
But in games (especially world of warcraft) the FPS gain was big, like, 30-60fps depending on situation/scenario.

 

[Dirt Chip]

So basicly good only for those games that benafit the extra cache.
You can also say it is a bad preforming CPU that cost more except in games that benafit the extra cache.
There is a very limited market that will pay the extra $ upon the allready extra $$ that ZEN4 demend.

 

[ratirt]

I wonder how much memory tuning affects the new CPUs. Regular 7000 series Zen chips gain really decent FPS boost with memory sensitive games.

 

[beedoo]

All I know right now is all modern CPUs are fast. My TR2950X and 5930K CPU's (which are due upgrades) are still fast plenty enough to play games well, and the former has no problems running multiple VMs. Both of these get destroyed by just about any 7000 series or 13000 series chips in games and productivity.

 

[kurta999]

All I know right now is all modern CPUs are fast. My TR2950X and 5930K CPU's (which are due upgrades) are still fast plenty enough to play games well, and the former has no problems running multiple VMs. Both of these get destroyed by just about any 7000 series or 13000 series chips in games and productivity.

That's the reason why it is not worth getting TR, even the used ones for productivity - only if you need more PCI-E lanes and Quad Channel memory support. I hope that AMD will also mix their ZenxC cores with Zen cores and we can see even more MT thread boost at consumer level

 

[beedoo]

That's the reason why it is not worth getting TR, even the used ones for productivity - only if you need more PCI-E lanes and Quad Channel memory support. I hope that AMD will also mix their ZenxC cores with Zen cores and we can see even more MT thread boost at consumer level

I hear you; but I'd never buy a 2nd hand CPU for anything more than novelty factor, like the couple of $30 Xeons I picked up a couple of years ago. I'm much more likely to buy an expensive CPU than a best $/fps one.

Next CPU will likely be a 7950X3D... why? Because that's what I want.

 

[spnidel]

what...? a cpu with lower clocks and higher cache performs worse in tasks that depend less on cache and more on frequency? omg, no way...

 

[zo0lykas]

I wonder how much memory tuning affects the new CPUs. Regular 7000 series Zen chips gain really decent FPS boost with memory sensitive games.

Nothing, you can look video was posted last week with different timings and different speed.

 

[kapone32]

Well 7900X3D will be mine and it will make me happy vs my 5800X3D. 4 more cores, a bump in clock speed and more Vcache will be my mitigating factors.

 

[GhostRyder]

I guess what I will be more curious about at least on the top two chips will be if some updates to how the CPU is used will close the gap. Because from what I understand, only one die is 3D cache while the other has similar boost clocks so depending on the load it should be able to perform better at least in single thread.

 

[DeathAdder]

X3D chips being slower in benchmarks like that isn't news...

I have a 5800X3D and in Cinebench R23 it's score is in the high 14xxx (nearly 15xxx) - my 5800X would get scores into the low 16xxx.
But in games (especially world of warcraft) the FPS gain was big, like, 30-60fps depending on situation/scenario.

@m2geek ,
I too have a 5800X and (also) mainly play World of WarCraft ... What you mentioned here is very important to me, as I was reluctant to upgrade to a 5800X3D
From your experience as a 5800X3D owner/user, what are it's other pros and cons (regarding Gaming / Productivity / etc)?
Thanks

 

[las]

So basicly good only for those games that benafit the extra cache.
You can also say it is a bad preforming CPU that cost more except in games that benafit the extra cache.
There is a very limited market that will pay the extra $ upon the allready extra $$ that ZEN4 demend.

X3D chips are literally made for gamers, 5800X3D beats every other AM4 chip in gaming, and most games will benefit from that cache

7800X3D will probably beat 13900KS in most CPU bound games, while costing half and using much less watts

 

[stimpy88]

AMD really should stop cache starving their CPU's. This plastered over the top cache die is a hindrance to performance and thermals. They should just give the CPU the cache it needs on the die, and eat the slightly larger die size.

 

[Godrilla]

For reference microcenter has a sale now for the price of one 7900x 3d you can get

AMD Ryzen 9 7900X, ASUS B650E-F ROG Strix Gaming WiFi, G.Skill Flare X5 Series 32GB DDR5-6000 Kit, Computer Build Combo
Original Price$857.96
Save $257.97
$599.99

Cheers!

 

[john_]

We are in an era where Intel have taken over the market by selling higher number of cores, with most of them usually being E cores. For many 24 cores are 24 cores. They close their eyes on the fact that 16 of those are E cores. And never, I mean NEVER ask themselves "What if we had 24 P cores? What difference in performance we would have witnessed?".
Now AMD comes with X3D chips that will probably win many gaming benchmarks and because we have the non X3D chips in the market and we know what those chips can do with unlocked TDP, people try to find flaws to paint a negative image to those X3D chips. Intel using E cores might translate to like, 50+% degradation in multi core performance, but no, we should start a revolution because X3D chips will be 10% slower in the game of... Cinebench.

These chips are what people where asking from AMD. To integrate X3D cache to hi end models, and not just the 8 core model. AMD did it and now the only thing we have to do is wait and see if that extra cache and benchmark results in games can justify those prices.

 

[Warrior24_7]

For Intel it’s clocks over cores! The 13900K is THE BEST CPU on the market today. It’s funny how this article only tested the creativity benchmarks and not gaming benchmarks which matter to the vast majority of PC gamers.

 

[Airisom]

Keep this in mind:

7950X TDP: 170W/230W
7950X3D TDP: 120W/162W(rumored)

If you can keep it cool, giving the 7950X3D an extra 50-70w should cause a good performance bump and perform better than the 7950X at the same power.

The 7800X3D will be really interesting. Having that power going to a single CCD should let it PBO a little higher, the temperatures might be lower if they're not using leaky dies for the 7800X, and there won't be any scheduler issues. Pair that with the on average slightly better 1%/0.1% lows the 7700X has over the dual CCD counterparts, and it's shaping up to be a pretty solid gaming chip, especially when you feed it more power.

AVX-512 support has me wondering how these 3D chips will perform in RPCS3.

 

[Chrispy_]

Geekbench is worthless, and if I have to justify that statement to you then you're not worth the bother of explaining it.

 

[Bwaze]

X3D chips being slower in benchmarks like that isn't news...

I have a 5800X3D and in Cinebench R23 it's score is in the high 14xxx (nearly 15xxx) - my 5800X would get scores into the low 16xxx.
But in games (especially world of warcraft) the FPS gain was big, like, 30-60fps depending on situation/scenario.

It is news, or it will be - with wider variety of benchmarks.

There were speculations that two CCD Ryzen 7000 X3D chips won't have any penalty due to 3D cache - since they could boost as high as normally with non-3D cache CCD for applications that don't use bigger cache, and use 3D cache CCD primarily for games and utilities that do use it. But I can't see Microsoft Windows scheduler doing that.

As it is, non-3D cache chips will still be better for majority of non-gaming applications. Which means the only 3D cache chip that really makes sense is 7800X3D.

 

[kapone32]

For Intel it’s clocks over cores! The 13900K is THE BEST CPU on the market today. It’s funny how this article only tested the creativity benchmarks and not gaming benchmarks which matter to the vast majority of PC gamers.

Do you know what an NDA is? If you want some anecdotal data that belies what you are saying there was a video posted by Jay 2 Cents about his new home PC and guess what he picked for that? We don't know but I am sure it is an x3D chip. Just think of a 5800X3D with more cores, greater clock speed and increased cache. I have not even started talking about how SAM is great for X3D chips and I don't expect that to change for the lesser with the new chips. As someone that owns a 5800X3D the 7900XT convinced me that my 4K screen will be dropping frames as my refresh rate is only 144Hz when the 7900X3D becomes the driver for my hobby. I work on a PC all day doing different tasks. Blowing up some tanks in a huge Fire fight in Just Cause 4 is a nice stress relief.

 

[Warrior24_7]

Geekbench is worthless, and if I have to justify that statement to you then you're not worth the bother of explaining it.

Why?

 

[Godrilla]

It is news, or it will be - with wider variety of benchmarks.

There were speculations that two CCD Ryzen 7000 X3D chips won't have any penalty due to 3D cache - since they could boost as high as normally with non-3D cache CCD for applications that don't use bigger cache, and use 3D cache CCD primarily for games and utilities that do use it. But I can't see Microsoft Windows scheduler doing that.

As it is, non-3D cache chips will still be better for majority of non-gaming applications. Which means the only 3D cache chip that really makes sense is 7800X3D.

A lot of people are trying to through their uncouncius bais justify professionals that " casually game" pay hundreds of dollars more than non 3d cpus because the non 3d cpus will all of a sudden become bad at " casual gaming " keep the hype train alive so that AMD can make off like a bandit in terms of pricing going forward Nvidia style!

 

[Chrispy_]

Why?

Google it. There are numerous major reasons why it's worthless and each of those reasons is enough to make it awful for measuring or comparing x86 CPUs.
I did say I wasn't going to justify it; you'll have to do the reading yourself because only then will you learn the magnitude of how terrible it is.

 

[robert3892]

The only benchmarks that matter with these types of processors is gaming. These CPUs are engineered to excel in that area.