[TechPowerUp] AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Review - The Best Gaming Processor
Posted by Noble00_@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 55 comments
Posted by Noble00_@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 55 comments
URNape2@reddit
I was waiting all year for Arrow Lake, but now that it's been shown to be a disappointment I was thinking of going with the 9800X3D. But now I see there may be a 16 core 9950X3D coming down the pipe? I haven't built a PC in like 10 years, so whatever I go with will be a huge upgrade but.. You think it would be worth it to wait for the 9950X3D?
Berengal@reddit
If you're on a 10 year old CPU right now I feel very confident in saying you couldn't tell the difference between a 9800X3D and a 9950X3D.
URNape2@reddit
Oh no doubt. Just wondering whether it's worth it to be on the bleeding edge for the first time ever. Especially if it's only a matter of a couple hundred bucks' difference and a few months.
Sundrowner@reddit
I am in the same situation. I built my PC back in 2014 and already thinking that for me any upgrade would feel the same to me, and I have like at least 5 years of games to catch up on that any decent PC will run. And since I am in no hurry I will just look out for any good deal, too bad that somehow the 7800x3d price exploded
Noble00_@reddit (OP)
Well, it all comes down to what you do with your computer. Are your workloads needing more cores? Or do you just want to upgrade to the latest and greatest, especially since you said it's been 10 years? If its either of those two things just wait, if not just go buy a 9800X3D before it's in low supply/scalped. If you want to be frugal, the 7800X3D is still just fine, especially with sales coming towards the end of this year.
URNape2@reddit
Yeah I definitely don't need the power, seeing as I'm still gaming on an i5-3570. But for the first time in my life I'm financially comfortable and can afford to splurge a bit. AM5 is going to be around for a while though, yeah? So maybe if I get the best mobo I can, and then rock the 7800X3D for a while, I can maybe slap in a new processor a couple years down the line? Thanks for the feedback btw! Super excited to be building a new rig after so long.
Noble00_@reddit (OP)
While AMD has official stated 2026+, they weren't specific like if Zen 6 will be on AM5. For example, even though AM4 is still supported today, they are all mostly rebrands of Zen 3. But tbh, I wouldn't worry too much about it especially if you're the type to upgrade every 2-3 generations. You may know this already but, buyers remorse is a big thing in this community where you can really get stuck in the weeds if you read pc hardware news. Buy it and be happy with what you got and don't be too disheartened if something new comes down the line.
URNape2@reddit
For sure, there's always gonna be something new coming. Thanks for the input!
Kashinoda@reddit
4.27% faster at 1080p
7.87% faster at 720p
Nothing to write home about.
ClearTacos@reddit
Because TPU needs to update their testing methodology. Their Hogwarts Legacy, Alan Wake 2 and more tests are clearly limited by the GPU.
It's more like 10-15% difference in most other reviews, while also now being able to match non X3D part in non gaming workloads, even with 9700X set to "105W" TDP, as you can see here
https://www.computerbase.de/artikel/prozessoren/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-test.90151/seite-3#abschnitt_multicoreleistung
WizzardTPU@reddit
Honest question. Is the goal to show maximum gains or realistic expectations? Some games are highly GPU bound, some don't benefit from 3DV at all because their working set is too big
Strazdas1@reddit
The goal is to find a scene that maximizes the CPU load. Yes, you should also test games that have working set that exeeds the cache to show the limitations of extra cache. Instead you chose to test a scene that is GPU bound with CPU doing only a tiny drawcallforwarding job which does not really test a CPU.
CatsAndCapybaras@reddit
The goal should be to show max gains (make sure the test is CPU bound). Not doing so wouldn't be a CPU test and would be pointless.
timorous1234567890@reddit
Sure some games are highly GPU bound so put them in a GPU review.
Would you test the 5090 with Factorio? Of course not.
ClearTacos@reddit
I see the conundrum of testing theoretical max uplift vs more practical/realistic scenarios for the buyer, but as a product review I think the focus should be on the first one.
Ultimately, you're testing a single configuration in a handful of games - a specific part of their world even. It can't capture all the truly realistic scenarios people might use the CPU in. It can't cover strategy and simulation games, that may sell millions of copies outside the AAA spotlight. It completely falls apart when a new halo GPU releases, like the 5090 in a couple of months.
Even as far as realistic scenarios go - in Hogwarts Legacy, there are areas where 7800X3D struggles to push over ~80fps. Sure, in many games, you might be GPU bound for the most part, but the CPU is relied upon in the areas where it tends to matters the most - heavy combat, busy hubs where you spend a fair bit of time, or a better CPU might simply smooth out FPS dips and stutters/frametime spikes that make the experience a lot better, even if the difference is small in avg FPS.
DZCreeper@reddit
IMO, maximum gains. GPU performance scales much faster than CPU performance, CPU reviews that avoid GPU bottlenecks will still be relevant in a year or two.
broken917@reddit
Hogwarts is very good for cpu reviews, the problem is TPUs customs scene. They got 350 fps+ there. Meanwhile i got 100 in the city, with a 7800X3D. Its the scene, that is the problem. Middle of nowhere on the map, it will be gpu limited. In the castle, or city, it eats any cpu alive.
Strazdas1@reddit
thats because TPU does not actually play the games and thus does not pick the scenes that are good for testing. Theres a reason a lot of testing scenes are discovered by the likes of Digital Foundry because they play the games themselves.
ClearTacos@reddit
Yeah I know, Hogwarts or better yet Hogsmeade are very demanding on the CPU, with RT especially.
OGigachaod@reddit
8% at 720p LOL what a joke.
TopdeckIsSkill@reddit
Any reason to go to the the 9800x3d instead of the 5700x3d? Seems like that for 220€ upgrade only my cpu (3600) is a no brainer.
The upgrade to 5700x3d would be 220€+60€ 32GB of RAM
The upgrade to 9700x3d would be 500€+200€ motherboard+120€ RAM
I'll use it mostly for 4k gaming on my tv so the difference between the two are not that big
Strazdas1@reddit
DDR5.
misteryk@reddit
The reason is if you already have AM4 you just need a CPU to upgrade to 5700x3d and you need new mobo and ram to upgrade to 9800x3d which makes it way more expensive. If you're not on AM4 already it's better to go for AM5 unless you're getting budget 2nd hand AM4
TopdeckIsSkill@reddit
Yes, I have a msi b450 tomahowk max :)
jassco2@reddit
Plenty. It gets you more than halfway there for a great price. A whole new platform is a waste unless you want that extra 30% which only show up if you have a high end gpu. I doubt many will notice that anyway, Vcache gets you most of the way. Skip to AM6 and new console cycle in 2026-2028.
john1106@reddit
what about those who want to upgrade to 5090? i don think 5800x3d will bottleneck the gpu especially when playing at 4k resolution or higher
jassco2@reddit
Depends on the game. Some have shown to be even at 4k. A few people have shown even a 7800x3d bottlenecks. If you have 5090 money you should be probably be doing a build. 4090 is probably max I’d run on that also given the pci restrictions on a 450 board. 550 is ok. I still say wait until next console gen.
john1106@reddit
i have b550 motherboard and it has pcie 4x16. Don pcie will be nottlenecking 5090. And 5090 shud have enough headroom for me to use DLDSR which might help to alleviate cpu bottleneck
mb194dc@reddit
At 4k, no reason to go am5 at all
CatsAndCapybaras@reddit
Depends on what games you play and how eager you are to spend money on performance. Are you thinking about an upgrade because you are running into performance issues?
TopdeckIsSkill@reddit
I'm playing on 4k with integer scaling. I would definitely like to have better performance and everything
HTwoN@reddit
I was downvoted to hell when I said 9800X3D would consume 150W in full MT…
Noble00_@reddit (OP)
People genuinely don't seem to realize the reason why the 7800X3D was "efficient" was due to 1st gen v-cache being thermally and voltage limited compared to the regular 7700X. So of course, it can't sustain high clocks in in heavy workloads or boost as high in lighter ones
HappyReza@reddit
Which meant that it was closer to the peak of its efficiency curve, so it was actually more efficient.
raydialseeker@reddit
You can just limit the 9800x3d to the same wastage of you prefer the efficiency
HappyReza@reddit
Which meant that it was closer to the peak of its efficiency curve, so it was actually more efficient.
slither378962@reddit
Numbers out of thin air are rightly downvoted. Stopped clocks are right twice a day.
HTwoN@reddit
I actually had basis for that number. But whatever, I forgive you.
picogrampulse@reddit
The usual chicanery with the slow ram for Intel. 6000 C36 🤣.
SmashStrider@reddit
that's base ram, it's perfectly reasonable to test with that. DDR5-8000 doesn't improve Arrow Lake performance by a large amount unless you use CUDIMM.
milkasaurs@reddit
Thank you for the 4k benchmark reviews. Not sure why more people don't do that.
Flynny123@reddit
God. Spare a thought for Kamala supporting Intel fans today. Must be a hard day.
Flynny123@reddit
The downvotes are telling me this was too soon 🥲
Noble00_@reddit (OP)
Nothing to surprising here which is good. Of course, with little to no penalty to the 2nd gen v-cache, we aren't thermally limited so the CPU will push further than the 7800X3D in power consumption.
In (47) applications avg:
6.3% faster than 9700X with 44.3% increase in power consumption
17.5% faster than 7800X3D with 83.3% increase in power consumption
In (13) gaming avg (720p):
19% faster than 9700X with 8.5% decrease in power consumption
7.9% faster than 7800X3D with 41.3% increase in power consumption
Also, what's interesting TPU notes is a stable 5.22 GHZ across all cores. All manual OC doesn't seem worth it but some tuning with PBO and CO seems fine. Buy it and it just works, no tinkering for hidden performance.
All in all, I think future potential 9900X3D and 9950X3D is something to look forward to. You are getting best of both worlds. I don't see why both CCDs can't have v-cache as it is much better this time around, and the user experience would be much better not having to deal with scheduling woes at all. This said, I still am on the fence with how much more performance can be had with more cache simply due to how games scale across threads and IIRC the issue of "latency" as AMD engineers have explained dual v-cache CCDs had a penalty, although that was then and it may have changed now.
Reactor-Licker@reddit
Zen 5 uses the same Infinity Fabric and IOD as Zen 4. If latency was an issue then, it still is today.
Noble00_@reddit (OP)
Sorry, I meant "latency" akin to inter-core latency between two CCDs and the possibility that having v-cache on both CCDs is unnecessary and not memory subsystem latency. Rewatching the video with AMD engineers on the scrapped 5950X3D they didn't explicitly say "latency" was the issue which is what I thought I remembered from the video. What they did state was you wouldn't get greater gaming performance because you want to be "cache resident". While you have 2x the v-cache, you wouldn't get the benefits because the other half of the v-cache is across the CCD, and when gaming you mostly want to stay on one CCD due to that latency (which the scheduler already tries to do with dual CCD Ryzens dependent on the game).
Antonis_32@reddit
TLDR:
Pros:
Fastest gaming processor in the world
Application performance massively improved over 7800X3D
Good energy efficiency
Easy to keep cool
Overclocking unlocked
Runs on existing Socket AM5 motherboards
Integrated GPU
Full-speed AVX-512 support
No risk of E-Cores complicating software compatibility
ECC support (depending on motherboard)
Cons:
High price
Lower application performance than similarly priced alternatives
Higher gaming power consumption than 7800X3D
Doubled productivity power consumption
No NPU for AI acceleration
Juan52@reddit
That last one isn’t a con, that’s a requirement for me.
tangosmango@reddit
Any reason to upgrade now from a 7700x? I was initially holding to upgrade to the 5090 and the 9900x3D or 9950x3D.
I'm running AW3423DWx3 so I'm not sure if the 9800x3D will even benefit me all that much.
belgarionx@reddit
What am I getting wrong? It's more expensive and slower than 9900x?
djent_in_my_tent@reddit
Whew they juiced that thing to hell, that’s a lot of power for 8 cores and they tanked efficiency. Of course you could restore efficiency with an underclock if desired.
And at 4K… no difference at all compared to my 5800x3d. At this rate I’m gonna keep this cpu longer than I did my 970… which is still in use in a secondary PC lol
Deanorep@reddit
I'm in the same boat. I have a 5800x3d and 4090 and can see keeping this setup for years.
throwawayerectpenis@reddit
On average it uses less power than 5800x3d when gaming (if I remember it correctly from Hardware Canucks review)
broken917@reddit
Still the same shitty Hogwarts scene.
SmashStrider@reddit
After an year of bad releases on desktop from both sides, it looks like X3D really did outdo all our expectations. I was personally expecting a 5-10% performance increase, but in a lot of cases it's more.
Although I personally wouldn't buy the 9800X3D as someone who doesn't just play games I would EASILY recommend it to anyone who wants a high end gaming PC.