7800X3D vs 7950X3D

[smoothnobody]

i've read the reviews. i've read reddit. still having a hard time making this decision. cost is not a factor. i want the best. which makes me want the 7950. the biggest factor for me was power consumption cause most places like gamers nexus show 7950 almost 2x power consumption. but thats for multi core loads. tech power up was the only place that i saw testing gaming power consumption and the difference was 6 watts. the 5.0 vs 5.7 clock speeds is a pretty big gap. i know only 5.25 for the gaming CCD but that 5.7 sounds nice for all the other daily driving i do with my computer. i'm only seeing two concerns with the 7950. windows scheduler sending the work to the appropriate CCD. and latency. scheduling will improve with time so seems like a non issue. but not sure what the latency issue is.

[filpo]

2 minutes ago, smoothnobody said:

i've read the reviews. i've read reddit. still having a hard time making this decision. cost is not a factor. i want the best. which makes me want the 7950. the biggest factor for me was power consumption cause most places like gamers nexus show 7950 almost 2x power consumption. but thats for multi core loads. tech power up was the only place that i saw testing gaming power consumption and the difference was 6 watts. the 5.0 vs 5.7 clock speeds is a pretty big gap. i know only 5.25 for the gaming CCD but that 5.7 sounds nice for all the other daily driving i do with my computer. i'm only seeing two concerns with the 7950. windows scheduler sending the work to the appropriate CCD. and latency. i'm not sure if these are the same issue though.

Are you also doing video editing/overall productivity? If so then get the 7950X3D. If your doing mostly gaming (and some light productivity) then get the 7800X3D

[smoothnobody]

5 minutes ago, filpo said:

Are you also doing video editing/overall productivity? If so then get the 7950X3D. If your doing mostly gaming (and some light productivity) then get the 7800X3D

nope. i know this is good advice from a value/cost perspective. but value/cost is not part of my considerations.

 

with that in mind, why buy 8 core 5.0 when i can buy 16 core 5.7? power consumption was my only answer and that seems to be a non issue.

[filpo]

2 minutes ago, smoothnobody said:

not at all. i know this is good advice from a value/cost perspective. but cost is not part of my considerations at all. with that in mind, why buy 8 core 5.0 when i can buy 16 core 5.7?

the reason is that it is much better for gaming

 

And the reason its better for gaming is because since it has less cores, the stacked 3D V Cache is only on one CCD around all the cores so all the cores have the fastest access to the cache and the other cores don't have to wait for it to fetch data

 

This vid explains it well 

 

[smoothnobody]

13 minutes ago, filpo said:

the reason is that it is much better for gaming

 

And the reason its better for gaming is because since it has less cores, the stacked 3D V Cache is only on one CCD around all the cores so all the cores have the fastest access to the cache and the other cores don't have to wait for it to fetch data

 

This vid explains it well 

 

i saw that, but isn't this "advantage" completely related to scheduling? i hear this added latency is only a concern when the non v-cache CCD wakes up during gaming. as scheduling improves, the second CCD is more likely to remain parked when gaming. 

 

 

[SorryBella]

5 minutes ago, smoothnobody said:

as scheduling improves

Even when they do, AMDs wont reach intel's in efficiency because while the latter enjoys an onboard hardware scheduler in the form of Thread Director, AMD solution is software and chipset based.

 

7800X3D is the only one that make sense in the line unless if youre sure and very sure that your workload is very heavy on L2 and L3 cache on the CPU. If not and you need a productivity king in price/performance, get 13700K.

[filpo]

6 minutes ago, smoothnobody said:

i saw that, but isn't this "advantage" completely related to scheduling?

yes it is. The point is that it doesn't need to wait for the other CCD to complete its F-D-E cycles as it doesn't have the 3D V cache

6 minutes ago, smoothnobody said:

i hear this added latency is only a concern when the non v-cache CCD wakes up during gaming. as scheduling improves, the second CCD is more and more likely to remain parked when gaming.

Yes but it still uses those extra cores while gaming so it still has to 'wait' for it 

 

Hope that makes sense. I was slightly confused at even what I said lol

[WereCat]

16 minutes ago, smoothnobody said:

nope. i know this is good advice from a value/cost perspective. but value/cost is not part of my considerations.

 

with that in mind, why buy 8 core 5.0 when i can buy 16 core 5.7? power consumption was my only answer and that seems to be a non issue.

The 5.7GHz boost will be rarely used in games as the 3DCache has priority almost always so the boost on 7950X3D is quite irrelevant for gaming

[smoothnobody]

2 minutes ago, filpo said:

Yes but it still uses those extra cores while gaming so it still has to 'wait' for it 

this is the first time i am hearing this. are you sure? i heard the parked CCD basically means turned off / asleep and the only way it's active during gaming is if you are running a shit ton of programs in the background.

[filpo]

1 minute ago, smoothnobody said:

only way it's active during gaming is if you are running a shit ton of programs in the background.

No it will only be 'off' or 'sleeping' If you actively disable it in the BIOS (which Harware Unboxed did to simulate the 7800X3D) You could do that if you need the extra cores but when you do that and you have to use those cores you'll have to go back into bios and turn the ccd back on again

[smoothnobody]

4 minutes ago, WereCat said:

The 5.7GHz boost will be rarely used in games as the 3DCache has priority almost always so the boost on 7950X3D is quite irrelevant for gaming

right, but 5.7 is better for all the other daily driving stuff i do with my computer. boot time. game install time. launching programs. file transfers. etc.

[Alex Atkin UK]

4 minutes ago, smoothnobody said:

this is the first time i am hearing this. are you sure? i heard the parked CCD basically means turned off / asleep and the only way it's active during gaming is if you are running a shit ton of programs in the background.

As I understand it, that entirely depends on if a given game has a profile, handled by Xbox Game Bar (of all things).

 

Its basically always going to be an issue as not all games are likely to have a profile to steer the core usage.

 

1 minute ago, smoothnobody said:

right, but 5.7 is better for all the other daily driving stuff i do with my computer. boot time. game install time. launching programs. file transfers. etc.

I highly doubt you would notice any difference, none of those tasks are going to stress the CPU that much you need the extra speed.  I mean my Steam Deck can download games at 800Mbit!

[smoothnobody]

6 minutes ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

I highly doubt you would notice any difference

agreed, just like people won't notice the difference between 120hz and 144hz or the difference between 30 CL and 32 CL.

 

we won't notice the difference, but the computer will.

[Alex Atkin UK]

1 minute ago, smoothnobody said:

agreed, just like most people won't notice the difference between 120hz and 144hz or the difference between 30 CL and 32CL. we won't notice the difference, but the computer will.

But you're assuming the scheduling will every be perfect, which I think is highly unlikely.

Why risk issues when all the reviews recommend the 7800X3D for gaming?

[smoothnobody]

1 minute ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

But you're assuming the scheduling will every be perfect, which I think is highly unlikely.

Why risk issues when all the reviews recommend the 7800X3D for gaming?

i don't think anything will ever be perfect. but i do believe in time the scheduling issues with "certain" games will be an exception not the rule.

 

i've been on 8 core for years. i want the bump. even though i know i don't need it. much like how people don't need a 4090. it's still nice to have.

[Alex Atkin UK]

13 minutes ago, smoothnobody said:

i don't think anything will ever be perfect. but i do believe in time the scheduling issues with "certain" games will be an exception not the rule.

 

i've been on 8 core for years. i want the bump. even though i know i don't need it. much like how people don't need a 4090. it's still nice to have.

Big difference though, as a 4090 wont sometimes perform worse in some games, like the 7950X3D does.

Plus a 7950X3D needs a fresh Windows install to function properly, and moving to a none mixed chiplet CPU in the future will need another reinstall of Windows to remove the sheduler.  That's just a PITA.

All I can say is I plan to get the 7800X3D once all the blowing up issues have been addressed.

[sprinteroz]

To be honest i don't see the big deal in the extra 64 MB of cache memory, its already a large L3 cache in the 7950x that's what I brought as I did not see the big advantage in the 3d to me as its all hype with a lot of dead CPU's from to much power by overclocking the ram.

 

A thing to note is: They do not recommend you overclock the ram with the 3d chipset, so really you are stuck with 4800 mhz ram if you want to keep your warranty on your CPU and motherboard.

 

I would look at the 2nd gen of this 3D concept once the kinks are ironed out.

 

This is my new build https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/61365654

 

[Somerandomtechyboi]

What is your usecase and what programs do you have that actually benifit from the 3d cache?

 

you can overclock the 3d cache ccd with a mobo that supports asynchronous eclk, cheaper ones are the b650e aorus master, taichi, and x670e-a/f which i assume you would have picked one of those already and not a shitty expensive board that doesnt have async eclk

 

The issue then becomes heat because the extra cache on x3d cpus is a heat insulator, add the garbage ihs ontop and youve got an overheating mess, there is direct die but you really need a flat cooler otherwise bad contact and youll get even worse performance than just liquid metal -> ihs -> liquid metal (think buildzoid has some vids like this)

 

i would personally just cover the smds in something waterproof and glue on an acrylic block onto the cpu and let water run directly over the die but i assume you dont care about getting into oc stuff and getting the best of the best considering money is not an issue and i bet you can just have someone build a phase change cooler for you

 

 

just assume any of the extreme measures thrown out for now even if money is not an issue cause most ppl are too lazy to dig into that, you wont get as far as on a normal 7700 in terms of overclocking an x3d, skatterbencher has made a vid on 7800x3d oc and i see in one of the comment threads that he is hitting thermal limits at a mere 1.05v so maybe youll only hit a mere 5ghz allcore whereas a 7700 can hit 5.4-5.5 allcore and if you do a dynamic overclock you can problably hit 5.7-5.8 on lighter workloads so thats a pretty big clockspeed gap, the 7700 will outrun even the overclocked 7800x3d in anything that doesnt care about the extra cache, but when that extra cache is needed the 7800x3d outruns the 7700 despite the clockspeed gap, especially in games like factorio cause apparently its so optimized its bottlenecked by cpu cache

 

If you would like the best of both worlds have someone build a phase change loop for you, an ac unit works as a pretty good base maybe even abit overkill but you dont have to run at full tilt considering power draw is only gonna be like 90w, you just need it to hit really cold temps to cool the cpu and be able to get the cooling to the cores through sheer temperature diff, youll need to run subzero cause i doubt sub ambient will be enough so youll have to insulate the board and socket like the extreme overclockers but this allows you to hit the clockspeeds of a 7700 but with all the extra cache of a 7800x3d giving you the best of both worlds with the cons being annoying to move around and setup alongside powerbills, although i dont know if anyones tested subzero on a 7800x3d so may wanna wait for that, or you can just go ahead and score some free hwbot points since the current record is a mere 5.6ghz

[WereCat]

7 hours ago, smoothnobody said:

right, but 5.7 is better for all the other daily driving stuff i do with my computer. boot time. game install time. launching programs. file transfers. etc.

That highly depends on so many factors that it's barely worth even considering this if your main goal is gaming.

[Alex Atkin UK]

8 hours ago, sprinteroz said:

To be honest i don't see the big deal in the extra 64 MB of cache memory, its already a large L3 cache in the 7950x that's what I brought as I did not see the big advantage in the 3d to me as its all hype with a lot of dead CPU's from to much power by overclocking the ram.

 

A thing to note is: They do not recommend you overclock the ram with the 3d chipset, so really you are stuck with 4800 mhz ram if you want to keep your warranty on your CPU and motherboard.

 

I would look at the 2nd gen of this 3D concept once the kinks are ironed out.

 

This is my new build https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/61365654

 

The point is you don't NEED the RAM to be as fast as a bigger cache means less cache misses, the CPU gets to remain busy more rather than waiting for things to be moved from system RAM.  With any CPU the goal is to have everything it needs to do the current work in cache, the closest the better.

 

Saying you don't understand the "big deal" in this extra cache shows a clear lack of understanding of how CPUs work.  Also very bizarre given its been proven in games to dramatically reduce stutters due to maintaining a more consistent frame rate.

 

Same with GPUs, the reason NVIDIA gets away with dramatically cutting bus widths on some cards is largely down to what they do with the cache.

[smoothnobody]

i hear i can manually direct processes to a specific CCD in the bios, through windows, or with process lasso. i hear people talking about using the bios to direct all processes to the CCD with the higher clocks then manually assigning games to the Vcache CCD. does this not eliminate the concerns about the wrong CCD being used and additional latency? since some games don't benefit from the Vcache this also gives you the option to direct them to the higher clocked CCD.

[sprinteroz]

15 hours ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

The point is you don't NEED the RAM to be as fast as a bigger cache means less cache misses, the CPU gets to remain busy more rather than waiting for things to be moved from system RAM.  With any CPU the goal is to have everything it needs to do the current work in cache, the closest the better.

 

Saying you don't understand the "big deal" in this extra cache shows a clear lack of understanding of how CPUs work.  Also very bizarre given its been proven in games to dramatically reduce stutters due to maintaining a more consistent frame rate.

 

Same with GPUs, the reason NVIDIA gets away with dramatically cutting bus widths on some cards is largely down to what they do with the cache.

Its pointless to me as I'm no longer a big gamer, I might play a game once a year now and then but I preferer chess, 4 player chess, 5D chess with time travel, so the frame rate means nothing to me, also the very few extra frames you might get with a 3D chip is not going to make me a better player at the end of the day. 

 

I would rather have the choice of overclocking instead of being stuck with a chip that will always be standard due to voltage limitations. I use my computers for CAD I use it for drawing up my inventions as its not a gaming rig, but in saying that,  you can see from my benchmark in the link https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/61365654 my system is fast as I need it to be because there are no games out there at the moment that will max this system out even with my ram at 4800 mhz stock, but when things get more intensive, I have the choice and opportunity to overclock my system if I wish or upgrade to a newer chip.

 

So I still do not see how the limitations of the 3D chip, weight up the worth with its extra 64mb in cache. Like I also said earlier I might look at the 2nd gen of the 3D chip but at the moment its not worth me playing with, as this motherboard will be upgradable with new CPU's for a long time to come.

[Alex Atkin UK]

1 hour ago, sprinteroz said:

Its pointless to me as I'm no longer a big gamer, I might play a game once a year now and then but I preferer chess, 4 player chess, 5D chess with time travel, so the frame rate means nothing to me, also the very few extra frames you might get with a 3D chip is not going to make me a better player at the end of the day.

Its not "a few extra frames", its less random lurches/stutters down to half the frame rate due to cache misses delaying the frame.  Frame times are important in ALL gaming, I play exactly ZERO competitive games but a sudden drop of 20fps is extremely distracting as even VRR/G-SYNC wont hide that.

 

You're no longer a big gamer, which basically means you have no horse in this race and your opinion is meaningless given were specifically talking about the benefits of the CPU FOR gamers.  I mean if were talking "a few frames", that's what the 7950X3D might get you for games that want more clock than cache, but they seem few and far between and yes, its not worth it compared to the 7800X3D unless those are your primary games.

[sprinteroz]

1 hour ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

Its not "a few extra frames", its less random lurches/stutters down to half the frame rate due to cache misses delaying the frame.  Frame times are important in ALL gaming, I play exactly ZERO competitive games but a sudden drop of 20fps is extremely distracting as even VRR/G-SYNC wont hide that.

 

You're no longer a big gamer, which basically means you have no horse in this race and your opinion is meaningless given were specifically talking about the benefits of the CPU FOR gamers.  I mean if were talking "a few frames", that's what the 7950X3D might get you for games that want more clock than cache, but they seem few and far between and yes, its not worth it compared to the 7800X3D unless those are your primary games.

lol its just a CPU just because I no long game dose not mean anything. When I was younger I use to buy into this hype, had 20 computers and servers gamming many different games hosting LAN party's as well, but the funny thing is by the end of the day, you will see no real difference in performance to the non 3D chip sets, without a benchmark tool.

 

So again its all hype because by the end of year intel will have the intel ultra 5,7,9 Meteor Lake tile based CPU and they will have L4 cache so you are for ever chancing your tale trying to be on top, as there will always be something better out in a little bit, that will crush the 64MB extra cache.

 

The 3D chip will make a good laptop CPU where the BIOS is limited in function and you have no overclocking need, or you could just buy a cheap board that will run the chip as you will not need overclocking function in BIOS for a 3D chip.

 

Any way this is getting off topic, I just gave my personal view on the 3d chip, not to start a (mines bigger then yours competition) Take my view as a grain of salt and do with it as you please, but my view still stands.

 

I will not reply to future quotes, so this topic can stay on course of 7800X3D vs 7950X3D Thank you.