In recent times, two has been a superb quantity for AMD. Extra particularly—the second era of its CPU architectures. What the corporate begins within the first gen, it pushes ahead in some substantial means within the subsequent spherical. We noticed this throughout the firm’s comeback on desktop, after which its surge ahead on laptops. Now Workforce Pink’s doing the identical with its revolutionary 3D V-Cache choices.
The Ryzen 7 5800X3D, AMD’s first 3D V-Cache processor, launched final summer season. Layered with extra L3 cache, it was a gaming monster, however restricted to the one 8-core providing. When AMD’s personal Ryzen 7000 collection chips and Intel’s spectacular Thirteenth-generation Raptor Lake components launched final fall, the 5800X3D nonetheless held its personal towards them in video games, however lagged considerably in workstation duties that lean closely on extra cores.
Now AMD has launched 3D V-Cache variations of its trendy Ryzen 7000 CPUs, increasing to a few totally different SKUs: the 8-core $449 Ryzen 7 7800X3D (launching April 6), 12-core $599 Ryzen 9 7900X3D, and the flagship $699 Ryzen 9 7950X3D we’re testing at present. (The Ryzen 9 7900X3D and 7950X3D chips launch on February 28.) And since their announcement, everybody’s wished to know: Is the 16-core, 32-thread 7950X3D the gaming monster we had been anticipating? The reply is sure…however a certified sure.
You may learn extra technical particulars about these CPUs in our write-up about their preliminary reveal (plus watch our interview with AMD at CES about them), however we’re right here to spill the main points of our hands-on time with the flagship half. The deep dives are in our YouTube movies, which cowl the complete gamut of our benchmarks—together with net browser and Microsoft Workplace efficiency—however for the most important takeaways, learn on.
The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D affords ample gaming and productiveness firepower alike.
This chip is unquestionably good in video games
If the 7950X3D is your first publicity to a processor with AMD’s 3D V-Cache, you would possibly look at a benchmark like Cinebench R23 and assume it’s inferior to Intel’s flagship Core i9-13900K and Core i9-13900KS. However whereas Cinebench R23 is likely one of the normal exams used to find out CPU efficiency, it doesn’t inform the entire story.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Simply this one benchmark isn’t sufficient details about this chip. It wouldn’t be about any processor, however with different components we’ve reviewed, you might have generally seen the massive bars in Cinebench (and different exams that isolate CPU efficiency) line up with the gaming outcomes. That’s not the case right here. Actually, even the person recreation benchmarks don’t point out a basic pattern, both. Not in isolation—you actually need to see all of the gaming take a look at leads to mixture.
For instance, take Watch Canine Legion. On Extremely at 1080p, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D affords a 28 % uplift in efficiency in comparison with the usual 7950X. The bounce up in World Battle Z is equally spectacular at 29 %. This lead holds towards the 13900KS and 13900K, too. In Watch Canine Legion, the 7950X3D posted a 23 % enhance over the quicker 13900KS and 25 % over the usual 13900K. In the meantime, in World Battle Z, it’s virtually a 27 % bounce in comparison with the 13900KS and 26 % versus the 13900K.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
However on the flip facet, in Metro Exodus, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D drags relative to the 13900K, with a drop of virtually 15 % in efficiency. And in Cyberpunk 2077, it simply holds its personal towards the 13900K and KS, however nonetheless trails the vanilla non-3D Ryzen 9 7590X half by about 4 %.
Does this imply the 7950X3D is a failure? Heck no, take a look at the frames it places out. Even in Metro Exodus, you get 142fps on Excessive at 1080p. Fiddle with settings a bit of and you’ll simply get above 144fps should you’re driving a better refresh-rate monitor.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Total, in 7 of the 14 video games we benchmarked, you’ll get a lift of 8 % or extra in efficiency in comparison with the 7950X, and virtually 10 % or extra in comparison with the 13900K. But it surely additionally loses in six video games to the 13900K—with a number of of them very clear losses. So that you’ll have to take inventory of what sort of video games you play (and at which resolutions), in addition to your required body charges when evaluating if this chip is best for you.
Additional studying: The perfect CPUs for gaming
It holds up in heavy multi-threaded workloads, too
Many individuals come into benchmarks on the lookout for shutouts—an entire sweep on the leaderboards for a processor to qualify nearly as good.
Like in video games, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D doesn’t ship an uncontested win in multi-threaded efficiency. You may very well be upset should you had been anticipating higher parity between the X and X3D components in comparison with the Ryzen 5000 period. If you happen to take a look at manufacturing benchmarks like Cinebench R23 and Handbrake, you’ll see the 7950X3D lag equally behind its X counterpart as with the 5800X3D and the 5800X. The delta isn’t monumental, however amongst flagship CPUs, even small variations stand out.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
This repeat of historical past doesn’t drop the Ryzen 9 7950X3D to trash tier, although. Arguably, the extra necessary match-up is the 7950X3D towards the 13900K and the 13900K. These two chips carrying much more mindshare, given their reputations for top-notch gaming and multi-threaded efficiency.
In heavy workloads, the 7950X3D is ready to keep tempo with these two Workforce Blue choices. Not at all times—Cinebench R23 exhibits a spot in efficiency of a bit of over 10 %. However in V-Ray’s ray-tracing benchmark and Blender’s rendering exams, the 7950X3D both edges out the 13900K and KS or pulls even.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
In order with gaming, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D’s utility in manufacturing work will rely upon what packages you employ most.
Intel nonetheless dominates for manufacturing work
Sadly for AMD, Adobe’s Artistic Suite is a set of apps many individuals use, particularly these curious about an enormous, beefy CPU with many cores. And whereas few (if any) anticipated the Ryzen 9 7950X3D to ship numbers that its 7950X sibling didn’t, its decrease efficiency is tangible. In PugetBench’s Adobe Premiere Professional Commonplace Run benchmark, it’s a 30 % drop in efficiency should you swap from a 13900K or KS to the 7950X3D.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
In PugetBench’s Adobe Photoshop take a look at, the distinction isn’t practically so eye-watering; you’re taking a look at drop of virtually 9 %. It shrinks even additional in Lightroom, with a roughly 3 % hole.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Given its advertising and marketing because the “ultimate processor for gaming,” AMD isn’t pushing this chip as a productiveness champion, however the 7950X3D goes to be a tough promote to heavy Premiere customers. A processor that chews by means of your every day workload equally in addition to it spits out tons of frames throughout off-hours appears to be like much more interesting while you’re spending $1,000 to $1,300 together with a high-end AM5 motherboard. You get that with Intel, not AMD’s newest.
Die hopping is each easy and complex
However, lovers could have ample motive to take the 7950X3D out for a spin—simply to see for themselves how the uneven stacking of L3 cache performs out in the actual world.
(Much less-flush tech nerds could also be questioning who spends over $1K simply to tinker with new know-how. Sure, it’s completely a factor.)
Each the 7950X3D and the 7900X3D are twin die chips, with one die layered with extra L3 cache and the second die tuned to run at larger frequencies. At their announcement, it was assumed that the stacked die would deal with gaming, whereas the opposite would deal with background duties and something that benefited from bursts of quicker clock velocity.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
In follow, the system will default to operating packages on the non-stacked die—except Home windows (through the Xbox Sport Bar) detects a recreation. Then that program and others get shunted over to the stacked die; the working system will park the second die’s cores. The second die stays seen to the OS the entire time. AMD says that should you want extra threads than out there on the stacked die, then Home windows will convey the non-stacked die again into service, albeit with some misplaced of clock velocity on that die.
Need to run a non-gaming software on the stacked cache die? You may manually mark it as a recreation utilizing the Xbox Sport Bar. We really did that with Cinebench R23, to be able to roughly see the distinction in efficiency on the stacked die versus the non-stacked die.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Whereas these outcomes are a contact odd—notice the efficiency will increase within the center—it’s clear general that AMD’s technique of dealing with the swap between its two dies is just not analogous to Intel’s flipping between its efficiency and effectivity cores. It’s additionally extra obvious that the asymmetrical design helps hold efficiency larger, given the drop in clock speeds when duties prolong throughout each dies.
The wanting it’s: You may’t anticipate to, say, run a recreation off the stacked die whereas streaming through OBS on the non-stacked die. Not but, anyway. That is the state of affairs at launch. AMD may (and certain will) proceed to refine how duties are assigned. Within the meantime, should you’re itching for extra handbook management, you may go into the BIOS of your motherboard and alter the precedence order for the dies—e.g., “frequency” as an alternative of “cache,” or going again to the default of permitting AMD’s driver to resolve.
PCWorld
It delivers top-notch energy effectivity
Energy consumption is never the hill that remark wars are waged. However even should you’re an individual operating tons of incandescent bulbs in your house with out batting an eye fixed, the 7950X3D’s energy effectivity remains to be noteworthy. Regardless of its high-performance, it hits the juice comparatively gentle, undercutting the 7950X, 13900K, and 13900KS by a considerable margin.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Throughout our Cinebench R23 multi-core take a look at, the 7950X3D’s complete system energy draw dropped common wattage use by about 31 % in comparison with the 13900K, and 36 % versus the greedier 13900KS. It additionally slips underneath the 7950X by virtually 7 %. For the single-core benchmark, the chasm narrows to a far slimmer hole, however the 7950X3D stays the victor. The shocking loser: the 7950X, which we lauded at launch for energy effectivity in comparison with Intel’s Twelfth-generation Core i9-12900K.
Gordon Mah Ung / PCWorld
Many individuals don’t purchase CPUs for his or her energy effectivity—in all probability flagship chips least of all. If you happen to want excessive efficiency, then you definately’re shopping for excessive efficiency. Nonetheless, this represents a cool technical enchancment, and for individuals in areas with excessive spikes in utility charges, it might be a partial issue when selecting parts.
So, must you purchase the Ryzen 9 7950X3D?
AMD has positively improved on its high 3D V-Cache providing—your video games can get a hefty enhance from the combo of an extra-fat L3 cache and barely higher single-core efficiency than the usual 7950X. And in comparison with the 5800X3D, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D’s efficiency is extra even throughout the board.
However the important thing phrase is “can.” That enhance will depend on which video games you play. The 7950X3D lacks dominance as a gaming chip. Common apps efficiency varies, too. The Ryzen 9 7950X3D would be the proper CPU for somebody—however you’ll have to first assessment what you propose to do with it. It’s not an all-around winner.
So potential patrons ought to ask themselves: Is world-class gaming efficiency your first precedence? Are you able to stand barely slower efficiency in closely multithreaded purposes and duties? Is vitality effectivity necessary to you? And do you’ve gotten the cash to spend on that in comparison with a 7950X or 13900K?
Willis Lai / Foundry
As a result of whereas spending extra $500 on a processor seemingly means cash’s much less of a difficulty, at launch, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D prices about $100 to $125 greater than the 7950X. Road costs for the usual X half have drifted down. Likewise, the Intel Core i9-13900K goes for the same quantity, regardless of the looming menace of value hikes.
However even should you notice that one other chip fits your wants higher, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D remains to be extremely thrilling. AMD could not have come out the gate with an Intel-crushing entry, however spherical two for the corporate has traditionally been nonetheless a part of constructing section. It makes progress—and went from its eight-core, sixteen thread 5800X3D on a single die to now packing 3D V-Cache onto its higher-end dual-die components.
The third era is when AMD bulldozes—in each optimistic sense of that phrase. Ryzen 5000 on desktop completely crushed, and Ryzen 6000 in laptops cemented AMD as an choice value consideration. So the third set within the match may put the corporate again on high. For now, the $699 Ryzen 9 7950X3D affords ample gaming and productiveness firepower alike to the proper particular person.
