AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D

[Hattu]

Great review, as usually. Thanks. Not just gaming, but lots of other apps as well.

Power consumption vs performance seems to be good.

Too bad I can't afford a new computer atm.

 

[dgianstefani]

Easy enough to delid with the right tool, so fixing the temps shouldn't be too hard.

Otherwise you may as well just stick with cheap cooling because your expensive setup won't make much difference.

I'd be interested to see direct die results under custom water, since both CCDs are same height.

 

[clopezi]

For everyone arguing with the weird power doesn’t matter posters, these guys have already purchased an Intel processor and are trying to justify their purchasing decision and company allegience.

For everyone else that use these reviews to help them build or upgrade and are not holding out hope that a company will reward them based on their loyalty, these X3D CPUs are exactly what many of us want. Lowest power, among highest gaming response at many resolutions, great efficiency, etc. Price becomes the final deciding factor which is based on your disposable income or the needs of your job if this is a work PC as well.

13900KF on Amazon.com: 568$
7950X3D: 700$ + mandatory DDR5

I can use a 13900KF at full, 4 hours at day, for 5 years, to reach the 132$ difference. I've to use 13900KF for more than 10 years to justify the price difference between them.

You can buy whatever you want, but the power consumption on a high end computer it's almost nothing to his retail pricing.

Both are excelents processors, but Intel it's cheapest and better on applications, almost a tie on games. You choose.

 

[Frick]

If you care about power you aren’t an enthusiast.

Up to a point anyway. Double the power draw for what is essentially a meaningless performance difference has always been silly. Double the power draw for 10-20%? Fine. But for <1%? Nah, that means one of the competitors have real problems.

 

[Nostras]

13900KF on Amazon.com: 568$
7950X3D: 700$ + mandatory DDR5

I can use a 13900KF at full, 4 hours at day, for 5 years, to reach the 132$ difference. I've to use 13900KF for more than 10 years to justify the price difference between them.

You can buy whatever you want, but the power consumption on a high end computer it's almost nothing to his retail pricing.

Both are excelents processors, but Intel it's cheapest and better on applications, almost a tie on games. You choose.

I pay 40 cents per kWh, I assure you this will break even a lot faster than you think.
And to compare the 13900KF against the 7950X3D and saying it needs "mandatory DDR5" is dumb, no sane person will kneecap the 13900KF with DDR4, we can already see that DDR4 vs DDR5 matters in games.

De 13900 has a reason to exist, but singling out DDR5 vs DDR4 or downplaying power consumption is not it. You get it for a no-compromises solution that will always perform at least very good and has the single-core performance crown.

 

[IntelSnowflake]

Can't believe this is the company that produced FX9590 too.
Now it works oppositely...
Intel now just puts more power consumption to reach the same performance as AMD.

 

[dirtyferret]

it really beats me why they're delaying the release of the 7800x3d tho; for the vast majority of all users that's the by far most compelling part

which is why they are delaying it, for those who can't wait they can pay extra for the Ryzen 9 7950X3D

 

[Daven]

13900KF on Amazon.com: 568$
7950X3D: 700$ + mandatory DDR5

I can use a 13900KF at full, 4 hours at day, for 5 years, to reach the 132$ difference. I've to use 13900KF for more than 10 years to justify the price difference between them.

You can buy whatever you want, but the power consumption on a high end computer it's almost nothing to his retail pricing.

Both are excelents processors, but Intel it's cheapest and better on applications, almost a tie on games. You choose.

I’m having a hard time with the constant goal post moving. Either AMD supported memory is too low and you really need DDR5 6400 and higher to get ‘true’ performance or AMD is too expensive because you can pair Intel with cheap DDR4 3600 or lower. My head is spinning.

Oh and since power doesn’t matter apparently , you can buy the best CPU, the 13900KS, for $750 for 3% more performance at quadruple the power which totally justifies the asking price. /sarcasm

 

[Athlon2K15]

page title says 4090 but charts say 3080 which is it?

 

[JustBenching]

For everyone arguing with the weird power doesn’t matter posters, these guys have already purchased an Intel processor and are trying to justify their purchasing decision and company allegience.

Νοbody says they don't matter. I said they don't matter when it comes to cooler purchase. Any 30-50€ air cooler is perfectly fine for gaming. That's ALL that was said.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Impressive part especially from a power consumption perspective..... I still feel it's let down by the price this should at best be $50-75 more than the 13900K..... Guessing this is just a place holder price to milk early adopters.

 

[AnotherReader]

page title says 4090 but charts say 3080 which is it?

The "Test Setup" section includes the video card used for the tests: a 4090.

 

[Super Firm Tofu]

which is why they are delaying it, for those who can't wait they can pay extra for the Ryzen 9 7950X3D

I'd say it's 50% taking advantage of those that can't/won't wait, and 50% another month of production to attempt to have enough to sell. Supply is still an AMD weakness.

 

[GhostRyder]

Very nice review, I am impressed with the chip especially considering this is the first outing using two separate dies (1 with cache and one without). It still has some work to do but I mean it works actually better than I was expecting. I will be more curious on the other two strictly because I don't see a crazy need for the top end one on my end and also how they update the system to be better in at detecting the correct applications.

 

[chowow]

5800X3D comparable would a been nice

 

[AnotherReader]

Very nice review, I am impressed with the chip especially considering this is the first outing using two separate dies (1 with cache and one without). It still has some work to do but I mean it works actually better than I was expecting.

Yes, this doesn't share the pitfalls of the 5800X3D. Thanks to the fast CCD, it has the same single threaded performance as the 7950X and the multithreaded performance is pretty close too.

 

[BorisDG]

Disappointing CPU. Where it performs better is just like 2%.

 

[Pumper]

It seems to me that the biggest problem with this setup is all the software hoops you have to jump in order to get the CPU working properly.

 

[gffermari]

Still I don’t see a use case for this cpu.
It’s not for gamers, it’s not for professionals although it tops the charts on both worlds.

They should have released a 7800X3D and a 7950X3D with 3D cache on both chiplets and make intels a funeral.

A real 7950X3D with that amount of cache would be a dream for science applications.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

I pay 40 cents per kWh, I assure you this will break even a lot faster than you think.
And to compare the 13900KF against the 7950X3D and saying it needs "mandatory DDR5" is dumb, no sane person will kneecap the 13900KF with DDR4, we can already see that DDR4 vs DDR5 matters in games.

De 13900 has a reason to exist, but singling out DDR5 vs DDR4 or downplaying power consumption is not it. You get it for a no-compromises solution that will always perform at least very good and has the single-core performance crown.

At $.40 per kWh, the price difference would cover 330 kWh of electricity. That's 330,000 watts.

In the multithreading test, AMD hit 140 watts, intel 276. That's a difference of 136 watts. That is 2426 hours of operation. At 4 hours a day, 365 days a year, it would take you 606 days of operation, or 1.6 years, to break even.

Now, fi you are going off of the application tests, AMD pulls 79 watts, intel 169. Difference of 90 watts. 3667 hours of operation. At 4 hours per day, 917 days, 2..5 YEARS, to break even.

If breaking even after two and a half YEARS on $132 in electricity is a major concern for you, you are not in the market for $500+ CPUs in the first place. The "muh power bill" arguments simply put, do NOT work out. You're fretting over the cost of gas while browsing ferraris.

 

[Dr. Dro]

I'm quite interested in its real world performance. I just do not trust that scheduler driver.

Other than that, it's a worthy competitor to Raptor Lake. This is what we want, both companies having products on equal footing to spur innovation.

The 13900KS may still be better in general, especially paired with faster RAM, but it also consumes a ton of power.

If only AMD could fix their endless firmware bugs, memory training, etc... Devote some real engineering hours to AGESA. I left Ryzen behind because of these problems.

 

[kapone32]

For all the people caught on FPS numbers vs the 13990K and waxing on about higher FPS meet the point that is not in this review but Kit Guru's. The 1% lows blow any CPU before them out of the water. Since I am a Gamer I look forward to late Game 20 vs 20 stack Armies x4 with 7000 units a side in a Battle with no time limit, with maxed out spells for the wizards, Dragon's breath for your Dragons and Artillery flashes and Damages. The reason I got an X3D chip is because it runs that scenario like a champ with no slow downs. Now we have the new chips. I will continue to laugh at people quoting max FPS numbers when my 1% lows will be the speed of my Monitor's refresh rate @ 144hz.

 

[zmeul]

I'm on page 5 of the review: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d/5.html
AMD have lost their fucking marbles

 

[mb194dc]

Less than 5% difference with a 5800x3D at 4k and that with a 4090.

With anything lower the difference will be even less.

 

[jayjr1105]

This is just nuts