AMD Ryzen 9 9950X

[A Computer Guy]

@W1zzard by any chance could you whip out 5950x comparison vs. 9950x like the chart below? Thanks.

I don't think a 16 core inter platform CPU upgrade makes much sense but AM4 to AM5 would be a path for a lot of 16 core owners.

 

[Zubasa]

These cpus really just seem like wastes of sand. What apps are using avx-512 to really benefit from this architecture ?

Apart from PS3 / Switch emulators, Unreal Engine 5 comes to mind.
I am not entirely sure which version of UE was the first added support, but UE5.3 specificly mentions it.
Unreal Engine 5.3 Release Notes | Unreal Engine 5.3 Documentation | Epic Developer Community (epicgames.com)

Also Tim Sweeney was rather excited for it AVX-512 back in 2017. Him being the Boss of Epic, I assume it is useful for UE devs.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/910186303731494920

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/910189773310058496

 

[W1zzard]

What's up with the fact that none of the reviewers had AIDA results

Like at the start of this page?

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X Review - The New Flagship

With 16 cores and 32 threads, the Ryzen 9 9950X, powered by AMD’s Zen 5 architecture, is the fastest desktop processor we've ever tested. In our review, it breezed through application workloads and delivered high FPS rates in gaming. But at $650, it doesn’t come cheap.

www.techpowerup.com

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X Review - The New Flagship

With 16 cores and 32 threads, the Ryzen 9 9950X, powered by AMD’s Zen 5 architecture, is the fastest desktop processor we've ever tested. In our review, it breezed through application workloads and delivered high FPS rates in gaming. But at $650, it doesn’t come cheap.

www.techpowerup.com

Can somebody enlighten me on why the energy efficiency on higher clocks (OC) translates to better efficiency than stock?
I don't care about gaming performance as long as this CPU can serve my work, but is it worth the 135EUR difference (compared to 7950X3D)?

Lower voltage and actually the clocks are lower than stock in some cases, because stock boosts higher

@W1zzard by any chance could you whip out 5950x comparison vs. 9950x like the chart below? Thanks.

I don't think a 16 core inter platform CPU upgrade makes much sense but AM4 to AM5 would be a path for a lot of 16 core owners.

View attachment 359092

I am not entirely sure which version of UE was the first added support, but UE5.3 specificly mentions it.
Unreal Engine 5.3 Release Notes | Unreal Engine 5.3 Documentation | Epic Developer Community (epicgames.com)

This is a switch that game developers and set to target _their_ code to a certain minimum CPU architecture. It doesn't mean that Unreal Editor itself or their tooling is universally optimized for AVX512.

 

[A Computer Guy]

Like at the start of this page?

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X Review - The New Flagship

With 16 cores and 32 threads, the Ryzen 9 9950X, powered by AMD’s Zen 5 architecture, is the fastest desktop processor we've ever tested. In our review, it breezed through application workloads and delivered high FPS rates in gaming. But at $650, it doesn’t come cheap.

www.techpowerup.com

Lower voltage and actually the clocks are lower than stock in some cases, because stock boosts higher

Although you're probably too busy for this I'm curious to understand how turning off core parking and CPPC preferred cores effects performance. In the early days of 3800x/3950x I turned off CPPC to get around some early issues (some problem with the scheduler I think) and that had mitigated some issues before UEFI/driver/windows updates fixed the issue. I would expect a small knock on peak performance but all core performance to see more full utilization across all cores.

 

[Zubasa]

This is a switch that game developers and set to target _their_ code to a certain minimum CPU architecture. It doesn't mean that Unreal Editor itself or their tooling is universally optimized for AVX512.

On top of my head, I think it is the Chaos Physics engine that could be compiled to use AVX-512.

 

[W1zzard]

On top of my head, I think it is the Chaos Physics engine that could be compiled to use AVX-512.

No

MinCpuArchX64 (MinimumCpuArchitectureX64): Direct the compiler to generate AVX instructions wherever SSE or AVX intrinsics are used, on the x64 platforms that support it. Note that by enabling this you are changing the minspec for the PC platform, and the resultant executable will crash on machines without AVX support.

This looks pretty similar to what MSVC has with /arch https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/build/reference/arch-x86?view=msvc-170&redirectedfrom=MSDN

 

[A Computer Guy]

View attachment 359094

I think you pulled the wrong one by mistake... 5950x vs. 9950x

 

[W1zzard]

I think you pulled the wrong one by mistake... 5950x vs. 9950x

whoops

 

[Pumper]

If there was a 9950X3D with 2x 3D dies and it performed marginally better than the 7800X3D in gaming while having 7950X or better multithread performance, then that's plenty for me. That would be a processor that I'd sit on for a good while. I'll take the multithread hit if it means that I don't have to screw around with core priority drama. But that probably won't happen, so I'll be looking for what AMD and Intel do in 2025 to see if they have anything worth moving from a 7800X3D.

Since AMD is treating the base 9950X as the 7950X3D with the gamebar nonsense, there's 0% chance of them putting more cache on both CCDs for 9950X3D. What would be the point, when they'll still require you to park half the cores in gaming, and apps don't benefit from the extra cache?

 

[Minus Infinity]

I mean the nonX3Ds


Missing the point... and the purpose of these chiplets. Its improvements never meant for desktops.
AMD probably do not care a bit about AVX performance on desktops. Apps have been stripped from AVX a while ago... (BTW, why that happened?)
Its current CPUs have really good performance for productivity that don't need much better I/O, at least its not that important... And the issue of low bandwidth, high latency that affects mostly gaming has been solved with the X3D parts. After 2 generations of X3D parts on both existing platforms (AM4/5) we took a good taste and now every(?) gamer sleeps and wakes with the X3D on mind.
On the EPYC market will thrive and for gaming there is the extra cache. Only this gen the nonX3D versions are taking the hit and "falling" for the team red and its "cause"...

Do I start to sound like a broken record?

Well don't sell them as desktop chips. That is why we have Epyc. If they can't design a cpu optimised for normal desktop applications and games, then abandon the market.

 

[R0H1T]

What do you mean can't design? It's not up to AMD for applications/game utilizing 16c properly!

 

[A Computer Guy]

whoops

View attachment 359096

First I just want to thank you for all the hard work you put into making these reviews.

I'm a little miffed at AMD about how virtualization shows no significant improvement for 9950x. This leads me to have questions about how some of the benchmarks indicated in yellow that I have marked below compare when compartmentalized within virtualization. For the past many years now I've ended up doing all my work within virtualized workstations. I can defiantly say more cores are more better. I think it would really valuable to understand how these benchmarks respond within virtualization to give a clearer picture how well these CPU's respond with virtualization. Honestly I can't tell if we are getting a clear picture. I've been looking forward to 9950x but the idea of near zero virtualization gain kind of puts a dead stop on the idea it's worth the upgrade at all - at least for me anyway.

Well don't sell them as desktop chips. That is why we have Epyc. If they can't design a cpu optimised for normal desktop applications and games, then abandon the market.

A problem it seems is AM5 Epyc possibly won't make it onto consumer boards. For example Asrock Taichi + Epyc looks like a no go at least no indication it will happen at all and PRO cpu's are still OEM. And the other problem with AM5 is the limited PCIe lanes so you get a server board with already limited I/O and limited PCIe lanes = limited expansion slots. Threadripper is 2x to 3x more expensive at least just to get more lanes but typically already comes with better I/O so not worth it at lower core counts if your not going to also have huge memory and huge storage. By the time you turn around it's 6x more expensive just to get the last gen Threadripper that the newer much lower cost Ryzen runs around at the same core count. AMD could fill a huge middle ground in-between Ryzen and Threadripper but for some reason won't.

 

[AVATARAT]

Since AMD is treating the base 9950X as the 7950X3D with the gamebar nonsense, there's 0% chance of them putting more cache on both CCDs for 9950X3D. What would be the point, when they'll still require you to park half the cores in gaming, and apps don't benefit from the extra cache?

Because of the Cross CCD latency.
CCD1 can't take benefit of CCD2's cache, it doesn't work that way, each chiplet has its own cache and doesn't share it.
For gaming it is therefore almost pointless to use a dual CCD CPU without x3D cache, as you can see in the FPS results.

 

[Launcestonian]

Why run 6000 MT/S for Zen 5 when TPU made this claim back in July 1, where 6400 MT/S is the "sweet spot" for Zen 5 with 1:1?
There's no way Zen 4 shares the exact same IMC as Zen 5 does now if this fact holds credit. The Zen architecture with DDR5 is very sensitive to performance hits if RAM is not tuned properly. Combine that with 1:1 & high but stable FLCK - it would be performing better than what this review & the previous reviews for 9600X + 9700X have reported.

 

[Garrus]

Thank you for the Switch emulation benchmarks in particular. I love playing Switch games on my PC. Could we have benchmarks for a different game than Mario Kart? Zelda Tears of the Kingdom for example?

 

[Quicks]

AMD forgot how to make good products? There 7000 series GPU's suck and now the 9000 series CPU's. I don't have much hope for AMD next 8000 series GPU's after all of this. Let's see if Intel can fix their crap products and make competition good again.

 

[Noyand]

What do you mean can't design? It's not up to AMD for applications/game utilizing 16c properly!

In that case, it's not an MT problem... in server-related tasks, the uplift from zen 4 to zen 5 is bigger than for 3D rendering. Even for apps that are optimized for MT, you don't lose much if you choose to save a buck an get a 7950x instead. There are even a few cases like game dev for Unreal engine where the 7950x is faster.

zen is a server architecture first, the first iterations worked out pretty well as a desktop CPU as well, but now we see that the arch improvement might not always translate into big gains for the average consumer.

And according to GN, (and AMD themselves, they pretty much ask reviewers to enable it...with a few days late) core parking is pretty much mandatory for the 9950x and 9900x if your workstation double down as a gamestation. You can lose double digits performance otherwise. Not the end of the world, but incovenient for a consumer CPU.

 

[Chrispy_]

Holy hell, that V-Ray performance jump just made all the Threadrippers in our renderfarm look like relics.

 

[R0H1T]

In that case, it's not an MT problem... in server-related tasks, the uplift from zen 4 to zen 5 is bigger than for 3D rendering. Even for apps that are optimized for MT, you don't lose much if you choose to save a buck an get a 7950x instead. There are even a few cases like game dev for Unreal engine where the 7950x is faster.

zen is a server architecture first, the first iterations worked out pretty well as a desktop CPU as well, but now we see that the arch improvement might not always translate into big gains for the average consumer.

And according to GN, (and AMD themselves, they pretty much ask reviewers to enable it...with a few days late) core parking is pretty much mandatory for the 9950x and 9900x if your workstation double down as a gamestation. You can lose double digits performance otherwise. Not the end of the world, but incovenient for a consumer CPU.
View attachment 359101

Yes that's definitely a Windows problem!

It's not necessarily mandatory per se but with active cores you're losing some headroom for programs especially games which don't utilize more than 8c cores. It also eats up part of your TDP budget which can be used to boost 2c(4c?) higher momentarily.

 

[BoggledBeagle]

So it was not a typo on the heatspreader after all, It was AMD desperately trying to improve work distribution between the two CCDs. I wonder if they failed or if the before state was even worse and they managed to improve it somehow...

 

[W1zzard]

Why run 6000 MT/S for Zen 5 when TPU made this claim back in July 1, where 6400 MT/S is the "sweet spot" for Zen 5 with 1:1?
There's no way Zen 4 shares the exact same IMC as Zen 5 does now if this fact holds credit. The Zen architecture with DDR5 is very sensitive to performance hits if RAM is not tuned properly. Combine that with 1:1 & high but stable FLCK - it would be performing better than what this review & the previous reviews for 9600X + 9700X have reported.

Zen 5 shares the EXACT same IMC as Zen 4, it's the same physical piece of silicon. There's some software changes though that have only a minor effect.

I couldn't even get 6000 stable at stock on my 9900X. What do you suggest how to proceed with the review if 6400 is the comparison baseline? I suspect that at least half my AM5 CPUs will not run 6400 1:1

This is from the AMD Ryzen 9000 reviewer's guide

Thank you for the Switch emulation benchmarks in particular. I love playing Switch games on my PC. Could we have benchmarks for a different game than Mario Kart? Zelda Tears of the Kingdom for example?

Inded, I'm planning to switch to Zelda for the next rebench. Will probably hve to play a substantial part of the game though, to find a decent scene

 

[Dr. Dro]

Dual X3D (3D cache on both CCDs) might even exacerbate the latency issues because on top of the inter-CCD latencies, you potentially get inter-3D-cache latencies as well.
The scheduling on multi CCD is a complex affair already. Adding another layer by distributing the cache is likely to do more harm than good. If a core on CCD1 needs some data from the 3D cache of CCD2, well, Houston we have a problem .

Not really, no. We know the answer to this already - it's nothing out of the ordinary. EPYC goes up to 8 X3D CCDs in one package already, and have for a number of years now, if you got a cool beans $8800+ to part with

https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/server/epyc/7003-series/amd-epyc-7773x.html

AMD Milan-X Delivers AMD EPYC Caches to the GB-era

AMD Milan-X ushers in the GB-era of server chip caches with up to 0.75GB of L3 cache per chip or 1.5GB in a system. We get to test hands-on.

www.servethehome.com

Then buy a 9800X3D. Dual CCD 3D vcache is just going to take performance hits jumping cores through the fabric. Games will see little to no advantage being limited by current console thread counts where the vcache does it’s heavy lifting.

It would literally provide no benefit.

See above. CPUs are not only for gaming. The "it would literally provide no benefit" is just an excuse that sounds pleasant to the ears of /r/AMD regulars. They don't want to sell you such a product if they can help it, because they can charge so much more for a dual X3D processor in the server market.

 

[chrcoluk]

Seems an oddball, there is some tests where this chip clearly outperforms both the 7950X and 14900k, but its not consistent giving it the overall lower improvement,

 

[Vincero]

And so the plot thickens a little bit more:

Description: Windows Bug Found, Hurts Ryzen Gaming Performance

 

[chrcoluk]

Zen 5 shares the EXACT same IMC as Zen 4, it's the same physical piece of silicon. There's some software changes though that have only a minor effect.

I couldn't even get 6000 stable at stock on my 9900X. What do you suggest how to proceed with the review if 6400 is the comparison baseline? I suspect that at least half my AM5 CPUs will not run 6400 1:1

This is from the AMD Ryzen 9000 reviewer's guide
View attachment 359106


Inded, I'm planning to switch to Zelda for the next rebench. Will probably hve to play a substantial part of the game though, to find a decent scene

You did the right thing in my view, if 6400 isnt stable, then you dont bench at 6400.