AMD Ryzen 7800X3D vs. 7900X3D vs. 7950X3D

Photo of author

By Calvin S. Nelson

We lastly bought round to testing the Ryzen 9 7900X3D, which was launched just a little over a 12 months in the past, so the timing feels proper . All kidding apart, this was by no means a CPU we have been excited by as a result of at $600, it merely did not make sense. Even with out reviewing it, we already knew all we wanted to know given our expertise with the 7800X3D and 7950X3D. Frankly, on the time, we had extra attention-grabbing merchandise to cowl, however one 12 months later and that is now not the case, so let’s do it.

Previously at $600, you have been higher off shopping for the 7950X3D for $700. That mere 17% worth improve gave you 33% extra cores, and extra crucially for gaming, you bought an additional two 3D V-Cache enabled cores. Alternatively, if gaming was the main focus, then the 7800X3D for $450 was not solely rather a lot cheaper but additionally assured to ship higher gaming efficiency because it packed eight 3D V-Cache enabled cores, whereas the 7900X3D is proscribed to only six.

With current pricing modifications, issues have modified in a reasonably huge means. The 7800X3D can now be had for as little as $370, and the 7950X3D $580, which is close to sufficient to a 20% low cost on each elements. However these aren’t the largest reductions; the 7900X3D has seen 35% slashed off its worth, dropping it to only $390, making it a mere $20 greater than the 7800X3D.

That is having many potential Ryzen patrons rethink the 7900X3D. The one downside is there’s little or no benchmark knowledge on-line as this half by no means had a assessment program. So, we went and bought one, after which threw our battery of gaming benchmarks at it, to see the way it compares towards the 7950X3D and 7800X3D, but additionally the remainder of the Ryzen 7000 collection.

For testing, we’re utilizing the Gigabyte X670E Aorus Grasp motherboard operating the newest F22 BIOS, and for the reminiscence, now we have a 32GB DDR5-6000 CL30 equipment. For the GPU, we’re in fact utilizing the GeForce RTX 4090 because it’s the very best software for measuring the gaming efficiency of CPUs, and this implies we’ll even be testing at 1080p.

For those who’re questioning why reviewers check this fashion and also you’d wish to study extra, now we have an explainer that covers that. Now let’s get into the info…


First up is Baldur’s Gate 3, which has been a wonderful title for the X3D chips. The 7800X3D, for instance, is 52% quicker than the 7700X on this sport. Nevertheless, whereas the non-3D V-Cache elements are fairly related by way of efficiency, the quicker X3D variants present extra variance within the outcomes. The 7800X3D and 7950X3D delivered related efficiency, however the 7900X3D was barely slower, trailing by a 7% margin.

It is because it has fewer 3D V-Cache enabled cores, simply six reasonably than eight, and the sport is configured to solely run on the 3D V-Cache enabled cores. Out of curiosity, we disabled the non-3D V-Cache CCD on the 7900X3D, creating what could be a 7600X3D if such an element existed, and doing so additional diminished efficiency, presumably as a result of the second CCD was getting used to deal with background duties, or actually something not associated to Baldur’s Gate 3. Even so, a 7600X3D would nonetheless be virtually 30% quicker than the 7950X on this sport.

Transferring on to Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty, we begin to see some examples of why it is tough to foretell the efficiency of those processors. The twin CCD design of the 7950X3D prices it some efficiency right here, because the 7800X3D is as much as 6% quicker. Nevertheless, decreasing the 3D V-Cache core depend to 6 additional reduces efficiency, as right here the 7900X3D was good for 171 fps, making it 12% slower than the 7800X3D. But when we disable the second CCD on the 7900X3D, successfully making a 7600X3D, efficiency really improves by 6%, as we’re now not paying a penalty for cross-CCD communication, and people further slower cores aren’t helpful on this title.

Primarily, for optimum efficiency, you need eight 3D V-Cache enabled cores, and ideally, you need all of them throughout the identical core complicated as a result of scheduling not being excellent.

Subsequent, now we have Hogwarts Legacy, the place efficiency does enhance with further cores, albeit not considerably. Nevertheless, we’re seeing higher efficiency with the 7900X3D and 7950X3D over the 7800X3D, for instance, and the simulated 7600X3D is slower once more. We additionally noticed related efficiency traits with the non-3D V-Cache fashions. The 7900X3D was 4% quicker than the 7800X3D on this sport, so not an enormous margin, however that is the primary instance the place the 12-core half is quicker for gaming.

The Star Wars Jedi: Survivor outcomes are attention-grabbing, as right here the 7800X3D and 7950X3D delivered related efficiency, with the 7950X3D simply 3% quicker when evaluating the common body price. Nevertheless, the 7800X3D was nonetheless 11% quicker than the 7900X3D, as the sport advantages from having eight 3D V-Cache enabled cores. This efficiency deficit wasn’t as pronounced with the slower non-3D V-Cache CPUs.

Assetto Corsa Competizione (ACC) is a sport that does not make the most of core-heavy CPUs properly, however it does profit from improved cache efficiency, and we see that with the X3D chips. Once more, the 7800X3D and 7950X3D are very related by way of efficiency, and whereas the 7900X3D is not far off the mark, it did slip just a little, coming in 4% slower than the 7800X3D. Apparently, if we disable the second CCD on the 7900X3D, once more making a 7600X3D, efficiency does fall away, which was surprising on this title.

Spider-Man Remastered sees little in the way in which of a efficiency profit with the X3D chips, although we’re utilizing ray tracing right here, which does restrict the efficiency of the RTX 4090. Nevertheless, we’re nonetheless sometimes taking a look at over 150 fps.

The 7900X3D is similar to the 7800X3D and 7950X3D, and we observe that disabling the second non-3D V-Cache enabled CCD ends in a decline in efficiency, notably within the 1% lows.

A Plague Story: Requiem was an odd case that brought on quite a lot of complications, leading to a number of clear Home windows installations in an effort to repair the 7900X3D’s efficiency. Testing confirmed the 7900X3D massively underperforming, to a level that does not actually make sense for a number of causes. Firstly, twin CCDs do not seem like a difficulty right here, because the 7950X3D matched the 7800X3D, but additionally having simply six cores with entry to the 3D V-Cache would not appear to be an issue, as disabling the second CCD on the 7900X3D resulted in fairly nice efficiency with the simulated 7600X3D.

Nevertheless, it will get much more complicated as we see related margins with the non-3D V-Cache elements, notably the 7900X, which is weaker than anticipated, trailing even the 7600X, although this time the 7700X was quicker than the 7950X, indicating a twin CCD challenge.

The Murderer’s Creed Mirage outcomes are simple. With the X3D elements, having eight cores with entry to the bigger L3 buffer ends in round a ten% efficiency enhance. Then, with out the 3D V-Cache, all Zen 4 elements cap efficiency at round 175-176 fps no matter core depend or configuration.

An analogous story unfolds when testing with Watch Canine: Legion. Having an extra two cores with entry to the 3D V-Cache boosts efficiency by round 15%. So, in the event you’re planning to buy an X3D processor for optimum gaming efficiency, ideally, you desire a mannequin packing eight cores per CCD.

Hitman 3 presents some intriguing outcomes for us. First, this sport would not considerably profit from the extra L3 cache; the 7800X3D, for instance, is simply 10% quicker than the usual 7700X. We observe that the sport can run at round 230 fps with six Zen 4 cores and round 240 fps with eight cores, or 260 fps in the event you add within the 3D V-Cache. Nevertheless, with simply six 3D V-Cache enabled cores, efficiency is capped at 245 fps. However in the event you think about scheduling points, as is the case with the 7900X3D, efficiency drops to what we see with the usual 7600X, so the outcomes are various right here.

The Counter-Strike 2 outcomes are additionally fairly stunning, principally as a result of there’s a noticeable efficiency uplift from the 7600X and 7700X to the twin CCD 7900X and 7950X. It appears as if scheduling is working exceptionally properly right here, with the sport operating on one CCD whereas background duties are operating on the second, considerably like how APO enhances Intel’s P and E-core design.

We see an analogous impact with the X3D elements, although right here the simulated 7600X3D is a bit slower than the 7800X3D, because the 8-core enabled 3D V-Cache half is ready to attain new heights. Nonetheless, the 7900X3D remains to be quicker once more, albeit by a small margin.

Lastly, now we have Name of Responsibility: Trendy Warfare III, and these outcomes are in all probability essentially the most simple to elucidate that we have seen. In brief, the sport advantages from having extra cores with the twin CCD design, and this appears to be because of the scheduling working properly. Once more, the sport runs on one CCD with every thing else taken care of by the opposite, giving the 12 and 16 core elements a bonus, whether or not with or with out the 3D V-Cache.

In abstract, the 7900X3D performs properly right here, delivering a small 4% enhance over the 7800X3D, although it was additionally simply 5% quicker than the usual 7900X.

Common Efficiency

Now, this is a have a look at the 12-game common, and the outcomes are just about as anticipated. The 3D V-Cache considerably enhances gaming efficiency, working greatest when eight cores can entry the bigger L3 buffer, as is the case for the 7800X3D and 7950X3D.

The 7900X3D is not practically as sturdy by way of peak gaming efficiency, regardless of total efficiency nonetheless being superb. In any case, the 7800X3D and 7950X3D have been solely round 7% quicker on common, although they do seem far more spectacular when in comparison with the non-3D fashions.

For instance, the 7800X3D was 24% quicker than the 7700X, whereas the 7900X3D was 17% quicker than the 7900X. So, there’s nonetheless a notable uplift, however not as substantial as one might need anticipated.

What We Realized

So there you have got it, the outcomes total aren’t terribly stunning. It is smart that the 7900X3D is not as potent because the 7800X3D and 7950X3D for gaming. With simply six cores capable of entry the 3D V-Cache, efficiency total was nonetheless glorious. Nevertheless, there is definitely a efficiency penalty, and whereas not huge, for these of you primarily gaming, the 7800X3D makes far more sense.

Frankly, we have by no means been that eager on the 7950X3D. Actually, each CCDs ought to have been armed with 3D V-Cache; that will have been a game-changer. However it could possibly nonetheless be each bit as quick because the 7800X3D, although in some situations, you might need to deal with the scheduling points manually with a program resembling Course of Lasso.

The 7900X3D nonetheless has the identical scheduling points because the 7950X3D, no less than in some video games, with the added drawback of the six-core penalty. So once more, whereas efficiency total is great, it is not with out its quirks.

The twin CCD X3D chips have been at all times a bit odd with simply one of many CCDs that includes 3D V-Cache, and sometimes talking, the bigger L3 cache is most helpful for bettering CPU-limited gaming efficiency. Although we’re positive there are software workloads on the market that additionally profit from extra L3, we simply have not come throughout them, and admittedly, productiveness testing is not the main focus of what commonly we do right here.

The purpose is, essentially the most optimum Zen 4 processor for gaming is the 7800X3D. It ensures most efficiency in all video games, no less than relative to different Zen 4 processors. There are definitely examples the place the 12 and 16 core fashions are quicker, however with a heavy reliance on AMD’s software program scheduling, they seem to be a bit in every single place.

This makes the 7950X3D and 7900X3D area of interest merchandise, as they actually solely make sense for people who find themselves critical about gaming on their productiveness workstations. Nevertheless, with the 7900X3D priced at simply $390 proper now – the identical worth because the 7900X – you clearly would not purchase the non-3D mannequin. Furthermore, the 7950X prices $550 proper now, and that is a 40% worth hike for a 33% improve in core depend. Then, in order for you the 7950X3D, it is virtually 50% greater than the 7900X3D.

So whereas we might usually counsel avoiding the 7900X3D, it is a critically attention-grabbing half at $390. We’re simply undecided who we would suggest it to. In case your focus is gaming, then the 7800X3D will not be solely quicker but additionally cheaper, so for gaming, get that, and also you additionally keep away from the twin CCD scheduling complications.

The 7900X3D makes essentially the most sense for productiveness purposes the place you are unlikely to learn from the 3D V-Cache. However with the usual mannequin additionally priced at $390, you are getting the large L3 cache without cost, so why not? It truly is AMD’s greatest worth Zen 4 based mostly productiveness CPU proper now.

Procuring Shortcuts:
  • AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D on Amazon
  • Intel Core i9-14900K on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D on Amazon
  • Intel Core i7-14700K on Amazon
  • Intel Core i5-14600K on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 9 7950X on Amazon

Leave a Comment