AMD Says Ryzen 9000 Series Won't Beat 7000X3D Series at Gaming

[Godrilla]

Ι wasn't being sarcastic. For sure I'd buy a 9700X over 7800x 3d.

And I didn't only mention the 7800X3D. Good talks.
update if you are going for gaming crown why not just wait for the 9800X3D launching rumored in 9/24?

A win is a win. If an Intel chip isn't even a part of the conversation, it doesn't even matter which AMD chip you're willing to spend money on as long as there is one.

It is pretty sad. Unfortunately we are again at a stagnation period for once was a decade of quad cores is now a decade of 8 cores cpus. Yep Amd is winning and the consumer is as well. Unfortunately if Intel keeps losing then the consumers will start losing too. One thing is for sure AMD has a clear disconnect with their marketing team. When the other 2 have the crown they are less humble. AMD has probably never competed with itself like they now. Hence last gen CPUs are all over the place in terms of pricing. ( Good for the consumer).

 

[AusWolf]

I'm OK with "non-3D" CPUs. Runs cooler, price is balanced. It's the same AMD "know-how" like HBM GPUS VEGA, remember that BS?

Actually, the 7800X3D runs cooler than the 7700X. I know because I have both.

 

[Godrilla]

Actually, the 7800X3D runs cooler than the 7700X. I know because I have both.

Yeah I had the 7700x at 5.65 ghz all core oc and changed it for the 7800-x3d for an itx no throttling build. This thing is a must for small form factor builds.

 

[photonboy]

In summary, for GAMING:
R7-9800X <R7-7800X3D <R7-9800X3D

Every one of these CPU's has its own pros and cons. Price. Gaming vs non-gaming, etc.

Also, the R7-9800X3D vs R7-9800X might not scale as well as the R7-7800X3D vs the R7-7800X. We'll have to see. Even when fully CPU bottlenecked, if the R7-9800X is more efficient at certain tasks there may be LESS capability to throw more cache at a program to see the uplift. No idea. And it will vary by the task.

 

[Godrilla]

In summary, for GAMING:
R7-9800X <R7-7800X3D <R7-9800X3D

Every one of these CPU's has its own pros and cons. Price. Gaming vs non-gaming, etc.

Also, the R7-9800X3D vs R7-9800X might not scale as well as the R7-7800X3D vs the R7-7800X. We'll have to see. Even when fully CPU bottlenecked, if the R7-9800X is more efficient at certain tasks there may be LESS capability to throw more cache at a program to see the uplift. No idea. And it will vary by the task.

9700x* but you might need expensive ram kits just to be competitive. Like with intel.

 

[A_macholl]

are there games that are still cpu limited with anything zen4 or intel 12gen++

Satisfactory - not even a third of my factory completed and i7 12gen gave up

Dont know is there any CPU which can handle my build I hope future will bring more than a 20-30% performance raise on each generation

Because AI is the dotcom boom of the 2020s, and everyone wants a piece of the pie. So they have to put useless NPUs everywhere because it gives investors a hard-on.

I wish someone would find it a good use beyond running chatbots 150% faster, right now there's no point in it being universal. Maybe in five years when it will be in every CPU, someone will write a botnet that leverages millions of home users NPUs to run Skynet. Kyle Reese was supposed to be sent back in time from 2029 in the original Terminator, so we still have five years for that to happen.

Imagine, you want to get V-sync(144Hz) in 4K on ULTRA with RT on max without frame generators and resolution scaling(there are games where scaling create a lot of visual noises).
There is no card which could handle it. 5090 and later 6090 wont be able to do that( maybe 8090).

You could combine for ex. 3x4090 but there are no drivers to do that for that game(for ex. Minecraft )

But then you have AI.

You will say only:

"Please make use of my hardware"

and AI will will write those drivers for you.

 

[Godrilla]

Just in case you wanted a mobile part I mean desktop cpu with stagnating performance AMD has you covered in the name of efficiency.

AMD explains why Ryzen 9000 with 8 cores doesn't need higher TDP but lower - VideoCardz.com

Ryzen 9000 brings more performance without increasing power, gaming experience very close to X3D series In a recent interview with Tom’s Hardware, AMD talked about the upcoming Ryzen 9000 series, scheduled for release next month. A very popular topic that was discussed extensively later was the...

videocardz.com

 

[blkspade]

Satisfactory - not even a third of my factory completed and i7 12gen gave up

View attachment 351200


Dont know is there any CPU which can handle my build I hope future will bring more than a 20-30% performance raise on each generation





Imagine, you want to get V-sync(144Hz) in 4K on ULTRA with RT on max without frame generators and resolution scaling(there are games where scaling create a lot of visual noises).
There is no card which could handle it. 5090 and later 6090 wont be able to do that( maybe 8090).

You could combine for ex. 3x4090 but there are no drivers to do that for that game(for ex. Minecraft )

But then you have AI.

You will say only:

"Please make use of my hardware"

and AI will will write those drivers for you.

In order for a 12700 to be maxed, or displayed as such, I'm guessing that you have the E-cores disabled. I wouldn't have imagined that game could max out 8 cores, but if so then a X3D CPU is what you need. The 7800X3D is gonna outperform it in that game, and a 7950x3D doesn't anywhere near close to full utilization.

 

[Suspecto]

Why is this a surprise to people? The 5800X3D was also faster than the 7700X at gaming.

Wait for the 9800X3D, duh!

No, it wasn't. Even a 7600 non X is faster than a 5800x3D. 5800x3D is a slow turd slightly faster than an Intel i5 12thgen.

 

[OneMoar]

and this required a article why?

what is this statetheobviouspowerup

 

[Chrispy_]

No, it wasn't. Even a 7600 non X is faster than a 5800x3D. 5800x3D is a slow turd slightly faster than an Intel i5 12thgen.

Pick your game.
Zen4 is faster sometimes, slower sometimes.

If you look at several reviews, the multi-game average has a 5800X3D in a dead tie with the 7700X, which is faster than the 7600X, and that's NOW with improvements to memory speeds and better availability of fast DDR5. When the 7700X launched, it was a lot more expensive and not really any faster. If you played the wrong games it could even be quite a lot slower. If you want 500fps in CS:GO, then the 7600X/7700X were winners. In the more CPU-demanding titles the extra cache always paid off.

I'm not suggesting people should buy a 5800X3D over a 7700X now, that's not what this thread is about and if you think that then you're in the wrong thread.

 

[529th]

Well that blows my confidence in upgrading from a 5800X3D system. Even with a 7900XTX it might be better to just wait for a 5090, and just deal with the manageable 99% fps'

 

[Wasteland]

I guess you could call the 5800x3d a "slow turd" if you're looking at productivity performance relative to current gen CPUs, but it was never meant to compete in productivity workloads. In gaming the 5800x3d is still very competitive--on par with Intel 13th/14th gen on DDR4 platforms, and trading blows with vanilla Zen 4 (which uses DDR5). All of this, from a CPU that can run on motherboards that launched 8 years ago. It smokes the i5-12400, winning by a significant margin even when the i5 is on DDR5.

If I had a 5800x3d, I wouldn't consider a CPU upgrade any time soon.

 

[wheresmycar]

No, it wasn't. Even a 7600 non X is faster than a 5800x3D. 5800x3D is a slow turd slightly faster than an Intel i5 12thgen.

slow turds? Zen 3 and 12th Gen offer insanely good performance for gaming as well as various other workloads. Thats incl. non-X3D Zen 3 and Intels 12th Gen non-K SKUs. Anything above this range is just a little more performance on top, nothing indispensable.

As for the 5800X3D vs 7600/7700X, its a trade-blow fest. The 5800X3D is seen to beat both of these Zen 4 SKUs in some titles, especially CPU-bound games. Far from turd'atory unless you're shitting gold.

 

[Deleted member 229121]

^ That. The 5800X3D trades blows with 7600X-7700X and is between 12900K and 13900K (gaming).

 

[Suspecto]

http://imgur.com/MpU1mTW

5800x3D is slower than a 7600 non X and no amount of cope will change that.

It is slower than AMD budget cpu.

No, it doesn't trade any blows with 12900k, 7700X, 7700 non X 7600X, it is consistently slower.


It is closer to a 5800x than to a 13900k performance-wise.

Perception vs reality.

 

[Wasteland]

http://imgur.com/MpU1mTW

5800x3D is slower than a 7600 non X and no amount of cope will change that.

It is slower than AMD budget cpu.

No, it doesn't trade any blows with 12900k, 7700X, 7700 non X 7600X, it is consistently slower.


It is closer to a 5800x than to a 13900k performance-wise.

Perception vs reality.

The differences on that chart are a lot smaller than you seem to think they are. 79.8% for the 12900k vs 79.6% for the 5800x3d means that the 12900k is (79.8/79.6)-1 = 0.2% faster. This is with W1zz's testing scheme, which gives the 12900k DDR5. Take that away and suddenly the 12900k is losing, substantially. Same principle holds for all the other Intel comparisons. The 7700X is listed at 84.1%, which gives it a whopping 5.6% advantage ((84.1/79.6)-1=0.056) over the 5800x3d in that particular review's benchmark suite. Big deal. The 5800x (non-3d) isn't even in the pictured screenshot of the chart.

The 5800x3d remains basically the fastest gaming CPU using DDR4. Is it worth buying today, if you're starting from scratch? Probably not, but the chip is still quite competitive. You've done your argument great harm by wildly overstating it.

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

"The new "Zen 5" chips, such as the Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 9 9950X, will come close to the gaming performance of the 7800X3D and 7950X3D, but won't quite beat it. The new processors, however, will offer significant generational performance uplifts in productivity workloads, particularly multithreaded workloads"

Sounds kind of like the speculation of Ryzen 9 5900XT. Where there's no more gaming performance, but has more multithread performance. More like what Ryzen 7 3700X was 4 years ago.

 

[Chrispy_]

The differences on that chart are a lot smaller than you seem to think they are. 79.8% for the 12900k vs 79.6% for the 5800x3d means that the 12900k is (79.8/79.6)-1 = 0.2% faster. This is with W1zz's testing scheme, which gives the 12900k DDR5. Take that away and suddenly the 12900k is losing, substantially. Same principle holds for all the other Intel comparisons. The 7700X is listed at 84.1%, which gives it a whopping 5.6% advantage ((84.1/79.6)-1=0.056) over the 5800x3d in that particular review's benchmark suite. Big deal. The 5800x (non-3d) isn't even in the pictured screenshot of the chart.

The 5800x3d remains basically the fastest gaming CPU using DDR4. Is it worth buying today, if you're starting from scratch? Probably not, but the chip is still quite competitive. You've done your argument great harm by wildly overstating it.

Exactly. If you are going to spend more money on a DDR5 platform for gaming, why on earth are you buying anything other than a 7800X3D?
Even with the DDR5 advantage, 7600/7600X/7700X are all within margin of error with the 5800X3D which makes them pointless given the additional platform cost.

 

[kondamin]

Satisfactory - not even a third of my factory completed and i7 12gen gave up

View attachment 351200


Dont know is there any CPU which can handle my build I hope future will bring more than a 20-30% performance raise on each generation

Yeah, that game could probably use up an entire numa node in big builds but i doubt it's necessary to enjoy the game
Just like CIV can take ages to process everything in late game.

but those will always bring computers to their knees more powerful ones will buckle a bit later

 

[wheresmycar]

No, it doesn't trade any blows with 12900k, 7700X, 7700 non X 7600X, it is consistently slower.

53 individual game comparison (5800X3D vs 7600X)... trading BLOWS!

https://www.techspot.com/articles-info/2592/bench/1080p-p.webp

So not so "consistently slower".

 

[Super Firm Tofu]

53 individual game comparison (5800X3D vs 7600X)... trading BLOWS!

https://www.techspot.com/articles-info/2592/bench/1080p-p.webp

So not so "consistently slower".

from the article you posted your graph from:

 

[Godrilla]

53 individual game comparison (5800X3D vs 7600X)... trading BLOWS!

https://www.techspot.com/articles-info/2592/bench/1080p-p.webp

So not so "consistently slower".

Plus the 7600x has a 13% IPC advantage, 17% clock advantage and wait for it 6000 ddr5 ram kits cl30 vs ddr4 3600 mhz ram kits cl 14 on the 5800X3D.
What will the 9700x vs 7800X3D have as advantage? ipc from 13 to 15% advantage clock speeds at 9% advantage and memory from similar memory to slightly better ( nothing like going from 3600mh ddr4 to dd5 6 ghz ).
Plus AMD is nudering Zen5 with lower TDP at 65 watts.

 

[Suspecto]

The differences on that chart are a lot smaller than you seem to think they are. 79.8% for the 12900k vs 79.6% for the 5800x3d means that the 12900k is (79.8/79.6)-1 = 0.2% faster. This is with W1zz's testing scheme, which gives the 12900k DDR5. Take that away and suddenly the 12900k is losing, substantially. Same principle holds for all the other Intel comparisons. The 7700X is listed at 84.1%, which gives it a whopping 5.6% advantage ((84.1/79.6)-1=0.056) over the 5800x3d in that particular review's benchmark suite. Big deal. The 5800x (non-3d) isn't even in the pictured screenshot of the chart.

The 5800x3d remains basically the fastest gaming CPU using DDR4. Is it worth buying today, if you're starting from scratch? Probably not, but the chip is still quite competitive. You've done your argument great harm by wildly overstating it.

5800x3D sits at 79,6% and 12900k sits at 83,4 %, the value you assigned to a 12900k is for a 12700k.

And no, 12900k on DDR4 is not losing substantially, the difference between DDR4 and DDR5 in early benchmarks was under 1% between DDR4 and DDR5, when reviewed by this site. And later, when tested with a 13900k, it was 1-5% depending of the frequency of DDR5, because we have now way faster modules than when 12900k was introduced.

from the article you posted your graph from:

View attachment 351387

Team A beats team B 14 times and manages to get some huge wins too, totally annihilating a team B with a score 10:0.

Team B manages to beat team A 6 times in the series but it is mostly close calls and nothing spectacular.


Who is consistently better in the series?


I can't believe I argue about this.

53 individual game comparison (5800X3D vs 7600X)... trading BLOWS!

https://www.techspot.com/articles-info/2592/bench/1080p-p.webp

So not so "consistently slower".

53 games, 31 won by 7600x, 5 of them had 0 difference. 7 wins for 7600x with marging higher than 15%, 5800x3D 0 wins with higher margin than 15%.

If you take trading blows literally, even as long you lose 98:2, you traded blows too. You got hit 98 times, and traded 2.


Consistently doesn't mean always within this context and it is obvious to anyone familiar with benchmarking and in general that it covers a trend/ pattern/. If someone is told by their boss that they had consistently failed to arrive on time or finish their work, it doesn't mean they are late every day etc.

 

[AusWolf]

from the article you posted your graph from:

View attachment 351387

That just says to me that which CPU is better depends on how you look at it, and there is no right or wrong choice.

Also, nobody plays "average game", so one should always look at individual game scores and decide which CPU is best for the games that bear weight in one's interest. For example, a CPU can be a winner in CS2, but I don't care because I don't play competitive games.

Also, the 5800X3D is the last upgrade on an old platform, while the 7600 is the cheapest entry to a new platform, which are totally different use cases, so any comparison between them is irrelevant, imo. I mean, the 58X3D is clearly the better choice if you're on AM4, while investing into a new platform is the better choice if you're not.