gamers nexus "best cpu's of 2023" -AMD killing it

[Space Lynx]

I upgraded from a 5800X to a 7800X3D. I use it for gaming and not much else that requires huge grunt. It's given a massive increase in fps, as well as a stable fps, and the power draw is so low the fan is never audible. Mind you, I have a good fan. I notice the speed differernce in some applications, where software editor packages would hang, they don't, as the 7800X3D is a heap faster.

It's certainly not the best for productivity, but AMD sell it as a good all rounder (which it is) and an excellent gaming chip (which it definitely is).

I'm pretty sure this is just a troll thread, I wouldn't waste your time.

 

[P4-630]

P4-630 all the way!!

 

[Space Lynx]

P4-630 all the way!!

bah, ecore junkies have joined the thread, I'm out

haha jk mate

 

[kapone32]

I had a 5800x3D and enjoyed Gaming on it. I got a 7900X3D and love Gaming on it. You should see the turn time in TWWH3 on PCIe 5.0

 

[JustBenching]

I cant even begin to compare a 7700K to a 7800X3D.

But I have nothing to add so I am out.

Why not? The 7700k had a much bigger lead in gaming than the 3d had and was also the fastest in ST workloads. The 3d only has a very slight lead in gaming, and loses by a lot to both MT and ST performance, while also launching at almost a 50% higher msrp.

 

[the54thvoid]

Why not? The 7700k had a much bigger lead in gaming than the 3d had and was also the fastest in ST workloads. The 3d only has a very slight lead in gaming, and loses by a lot to both MT and ST performance, while also launching at almost a 50% higher msrp.

Wait? What?

You say this:

Why not? The 7700k had a much bigger lead in gaming than the 3d

then straight away say:

The 3d only has a very slight lead in gaming

Dude, you're out.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Since intel is a lot larger company than amd it allows them to take lower prices thus trolling amd every chance they get plus releases wise intel puts out almost three to 1 of amd's so yeah intel has always been trolling amd it's either performance or price point so there is nothing new going on.
But using price as a reason to claim intel is a winner is just silly bottom line amd x3d got intel butthurt

 

[Arco]

This is great, AyyyMD also allows for drop-in upgrades. Aside from a few hiccups. Cough, B350, and X370. It makes it awesome to upgrade a family PC later down the line with less cost.

I'm all for gaming chips like the 7800X3D, Most people who play games only need that. It is pretty much defacto in gaming performance while still being competent in other areas.

The next few years are going to be exciting for sure. I'm rooting for both of them.

 

[Todestrieb]

I was not in the market when the 7700K is around, so I can't really comment on that.
If it is meant for 7700X, sure, there are some production workloads that 7700X beats 7800X3D, but completely ignoring the gaming side of CPU is not going to win any argument for "best overall" CPU.

I have re-watched specifically that portion of the video (it's wording is almost the same as the article anyway), and here's my quick summary of it:
- 7800X3D, the "best overall", is excellent in gaming (of course it is), good enough for production workload with some pleasant surprises (Photoshop), and excellent in efficiency
- 13600K and 14600K, the "most balanced" (the category is more sided to production and price, comparatively), is good enough in gaming workload, good enough for production workload (significantly better than 7800X3D), with significant price advantage over 7800X3D

7800X3D is going to be better for gamers with low-to-none production workloads to worry about, while 13600K is a better choice for budget-minded users and/or users prioritizing production workloads (at that kind of price point).

With all that going on, the best "jab" I can throw at GN is "well, that's some confusing category". And if GN put the "best overall" award to 13600K and I'm forced to give a reaction, I will say "mildly disagree but I can see the point".
Similar if I suddenly got robbed and have to be very budget minded (looking at 7800X3D). What the potentially angry gamer viewer base think is another thing.

But, then, disagreeing pricing is one thing. Treating the 7800X3D like it's horrible as a pile of turd is too much.

And, for the sake of trying to stop some of the flames, GN did give the "most balanced" award to 13600K for better production performance and value.

 

[Sithaer]

And then here I am comfortably daily driving a 12100F since 2022 february or so. 'at the time AMD had nothing in that price range for me and I needed a CPU with a good single thread performance/IPC for some of the games I was playing'
Still plays everything I'm interested in playing and in new games its actually my GPU thats getting murdered in the first place.

I don't play competitive games tho nor use a high refresh rate monitor so that helps ofc.
In Starfield for example after the latest patch it can do about 60-70 fps in Atlantis on Medium settings with fairly stable frame times. 'at that point my GPU also becomes the limiting factor'

I did consider an upgrade but eh, until I actually need it for something I wont. '13400F maybe or some other locked i5'

 

[freeagent]

And then here I am comfortably daily driving a 12100F since 2022 february or so. 'at the time AMD had nothing in that price range for me

That is exactly why I went with Zen 3 when I did. Intel had nothing but 9th and 10th gen. Its a bit long in the tooth now when you look at benchmarks, but it still feels pretty good.

 

[inquisitor1]

That is exactly why I went with Zen 3 when I did. Intel had nothing but 9th and 10th gen. Its a bit long in the tooth now when you look at benchmarks, but it still feels pretty good.

do you video edit with your 5900x? what programs do you use? considering the 7800x3d for davinci resolve and gaming. for $350 bucks its not a bad deal vs 5900x 5950x or anything am5. im still considering a 3900x /3950x if it can even do 4k video editing multicam

 

[freeagent]

do you video edit with your 5900x? what programs do you use? considering the 7800x3d for davinci resolve and gaming. for $350 bucks its not a bad deal vs 5900x 5950x or anything am5. im still considering a 3900x /3950x if it can even do 4k video editing multicam

I’m just in it for the speed

 

[phanbuey]

That is exactly why I went with Zen 3 when I did. Intel had nothing but 9th and 10th gen. Its a bit long in the tooth now when you look at benchmarks, but it still feels pretty good.

Yeah the only problem was the 5800x was going for like $500 at one point during the minepocalypse and shortage when the 10850K was around $400-$350.

Then there was basically a year where 12th gen was prancing around like a happy pony during Zen3.

What this review doesn't mention is that Zen 4 were not great buys until like June/July of 2023... and even then - it really crushed it towards Sept/October.

OG Zen 4 pricing was a $450 7700x into a $300 motherboard with a $200 min ram kit.

Basically if it wasn't for the 7800x3d, Zen 4 would still be a tough sell. That's why the 7800x3d won every award -- it IS zen 4.

 

[Ferather]

Intel deserve to be shot down, given the amount of illegal activity (monopoly) they put out. AMD sued Intel a few times, and it took a while for a court to decide HT is not Intel only tech, and all CPU manufactures can use similar tech. Intel have a bad rep in my books.

 

[AVATARAT]

It's still 8core ccds, so big meh. I'm wating for 12core ccds with 3d cache and then I may jump to amd, assuming they also do something with that power draw on light loads.

I can see your point.
I know what can offer delidded 14900k@6GHz + 8200MT/s + heavily clocked RTX 4090.
But.
Only for the price of all manipulation on 14900k, you will get mobo+ram+7800x3D for 85-90% of its gaming performance.
Is 14900k better in all multi/single/etc - yes.
Does everyone need it? No.
Most people will get a 7800x3D and better video card because their budget is thin.
And because of that the 7800x3D is overall better - because of its lower price/perf ratio.
If you have enough money/time to tweak/wish - Intel is your choice.
But overall most people do not want it, they just want to put a CPU in mobo and turn on their computers, you can't blame them for that

 

[jesdals]

Well I still feel that neither Intel nor AMD has managed to handle DDR5 properly and are waiting for a refresh or new platform from either. E.g. the faulty sockets with both LGA 1700 and AM5 haveing to use 3 party tools to leverage the mounting issues is a big no for me.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Yep took a long time before amd 5k series dropped in price
If it had I wouldn't for bothered with 10900k I did have some fun though, still do real, 10 core gaming chip 5.3 pretty good for back then what can I say I was impetuous it's what intel counts on really

 

[Ferather]

@jesdals, I am guessing its still the case CPU's still cant handle all the data rate DDR5 can put out, which is mega (or giga) transfers and not a normal measurement.
I am still using DDR4 and an older x570, and many times reading-watching reviews about 3200 vs 3600, cant see it changing much with DDR5.

Edit: In addition, if a CPU can only do X transfers, and still below the full rate of the DDR5 put in, a lower latency should be the only improvement (in theory).

 

[A Computer Guy]

If they can bake X3D into their "production" chips, and not just gaming chips, I would be interested in that. But as it stands right now, I don't think I will buy another X3D chip. I think a CPU should be good at everything, not strong in one area, and mediocre in another. Just looking at my 58X3D. Cool chip, but has its drawbacks.

At least AMD made the naming somewhat innocuous with X3D. If they called it super hyper ultra gaming cache I think some people may have blown a fuse.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Yeah the only problem was the 5800x was going for like $500 at one point during the minepocalypse and shortage when the 10850K was around $400-$350.

Then there was basically a year where 12th gen was prancing around like a happy pony during Zen3.

It's still the case on the low end. For any budget build a 12th gen core i5 is going to annihilate AMD simply because motherboard costs are obscene and AMD sees no reason to introduce a sub $300 AM5 CPU.

Aside from reusing DDR4, my media PC went intel because I got an i5 12400f on sale for $150. AMD's cheapest AM5 chip was $300.

What this review doesn't mention is that Zen 4 were not great buys until like June/July of 2023... and even then - it really crushed it towards Sept/October.

OG Zen 4 pricing was a $450 7700x into a $300 motherboard with a $200 min ram kit.

Basically if it wasn't for the 7800x3d, Zen 4 would still be a tough sell. That's why the 7800x3d won basically every award -- it IS zen 4.

The 7800x3d is one of the GOATs, and on amazon its going for $350 now. If I didnt have a 5800x3d already I'd be tempted to upgrade.

 

[Dr. Dro]

This thread seems to be more focused on "AMD is winning!!!" than the individual characteristics of either CPU?

For the first time ever, we have CPUs with brute performance (Intel's Raptor Lake chips), and CPUs with finesse (AMD's Ryzen X3D), and either approach is valid in my eyes. They'll both game hard, work hard, and take turns taking the crown - that's why they're affordable and not $1000+ each like they used to be when the Core i7 Extreme was the undisputed king.

The i9-14900K and the "14th gen" chips are the lamest thing Intel has ever come up with, but it's a move to save face: the company had no chips to release in 2023. None. This would reflect exceptionally poorly to shareholders which is the sole reason why these exist - they are unchanged vs. 13th gen counterparts, no physical changes whatsoever, no new stepping, they use the same CPUID, microcode, etc. - awarding them the disappointment thing is, IMHO, more than justified. Intel should have called these i5-13650K, i7-13750K and i9-13950K - no one would bat an eye, and they'd get the same coverage here, without the bitter disappointment of a fake generation and the stupidity of gating their APO artificially behind the 14700K and 14900K (it's so blatantly artificial that the app intentionally doesn't boot on my 13900KS - with an APO compatible motherboard and BIOS).

The new SKU with 12 E-cores (i7-14700K), makes the i7 segment more attractive (although not enough to sway people from a 7800X3D IMHO), however, you may find an arguably superior i9-13900KF with the 16 E-cores anyway for a similar price if you don't need the integrated graphics. It's just a complete and total failure by Intel's part, and it's not because the products are bad, it's because marketing is trying trying to sell existing products as something new and consumers are having none of it.

That said, having undisputed kings is undesirable. It's why Nvidia charges so much for their graphics cards (and AMD somehow screws up even when they have good hardware due to their laughably bad, feature incomplete, unoriginal and unstable graphics drivers) and why Intel charged so much for their CPUs before.

 

[kapone32]

This thread seems to be more focused on "AMD is winning!!!" than the individual characteristics of either CPU?

For the first time ever, we have CPUs with brute performance (Intel's Raptor Lake chips), and CPUs with finesse (AMD's Ryzen X3D), and either approach is valid in my eyes. They'll both game hard, work hard, and take turns taking the crown - that's why they're affordable and not $1000+ each like they used to be when the Core i7 Extreme was the undisputed king.

The i9-14900K and the "14th gen" chips are the lamest thing Intel has ever come up with, but it's a move to save face: the company had no chips to release in 2023. None. This would reflect exceptionally poorly to shareholders which is the sole reason why these exist - they are unchanged vs. 13th gen counterparts, no physical changes whatsoever, no new stepping, they use the same CPUID, microcode, etc. - awarding them the disappointment thing is, IMHO, more than justified. Intel should have called these i5-13650K, i7-13750K and i9-13950K - no one would bat an eye, and they'd get the same coverage here, without the bitter disappointment of a fake generation and the stupidity of gating their APO artificially behind the 14700K and 14900K (it's so blatantly artificial that the app intentionally doesn't boot on my 13900KS - with an APO compatible motherboard and BIOS).

That said, having undisputed kings is undesirable. It's why Nvidia charges so much for their graphics cards (and AMD somehow screws up even when they have good hardware due to their laughably bad, feature incomplete, unoriginal and unstable graphics drivers) and why Intel charged so much for their CPUs before.

This was good until you said AMD GPU drivers are unstable. The biggest issue with AMD drivers when 6000 and below owners complained about no MONTHLY updates for their cards. The narrative is what makes Nvidia seem popular but we should see some reality on the 7th when all those people that bought AMD GPUs and CPUs during Black Friday play Avatar.

 

[Dr. Dro]

This was good until you said AMD GPU drivers are unstable. The biggest issue with AMD drivers when 6000 and below owners complained about no MONTHLY updates for their cards. The narrative is what makes Nvidia seem popular but we should see some reality on the 7th when all those people that bought AMD GPUs and CPUs during Black Friday play Avatar.

This isn't the thread for that, but in my defense, it's because they are! And their support is absolutely terrible! Right now they're completely aimless and misguided, trying to copy over Nvidia features with no regard for stability whatsoever - just look for that Anti Lag+ kerfuffle, Radeon VII getting axed in its 4th year, Vega-based APUs sharing in the same fate despite being in active production, it's time we stop pretending that their graphics drivers aren't complete garbage and the only reason why something like the 7900 XTX isn't a resounding success of a product. They're more or less heading the right way, but right now? Their compute frameworks such as HIP or ROCm are in basically an embryo stage compared to CUDA, gaming features are behind, etc. - stability wise, RDNA 2 seems to more or less work, anything other than that is currently a no man's land right now. Either because AMD can't afford to maintain it, or because they haven't been able to get the job done at the same time.

I mean, I've had HDMI audio driver BSODs with my Ryzen 5600H, man. Like, the AMD HDMI audio simply caused my laptop to go on a boot loop because it'd BSOD the second the audio driver loaded. How can you screw an audio driver for a mass market APU? They did that. Come on, man... sure they "fix" it after a couple of months, but that's precisely the problem, it shouldn't happen to begin with.

 

[authorized]

- 13600K and 14600K, the "most balanced" (the category is more sided to production and price, comparatively), is good enough in gaming workload, good enough for production workload (significantly better than 7800X3D), with significant price advantage over 7800X3D

7800X3D is going to be better for gamers with low-to-none production workloads to worry about, while 13600K is a better choice for budget-minded users and/or users prioritizing production workloads (at that kind of price point).

The difference in price between 7800X3D and 14600K is 12% in here. It's not nothing, sure, but I wouldn't call 14600K a "budget option" in this comparison, and 7800 can offer a performance advantage of 12% or more in various games (though of course it depends on many factors).