AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Linux Performance: Zen 5 With 3D V-Cache

[creative]

My R7 5800X is still bopping around just fine, just replaced it's fan with a Noctua Chromax NF-A12x25. I have still yet to see a big enough IPC uplift on AM5 for me to go "Oh I must have that now!" Never was that impressed with X3D to actually dump cash into one and I game a lot. Recently replaced my RTX 3070 with a RTX 4070 Ti Super, now that was an actual upgrade ROFL, 70% noticeable performance uplift.

I tend to think that the R7 5800X OG is AMD's i7 2600K moment. I know DDR5 is better and all around so is AM5 but it just doesn't look like a meaningful enough upgrade just yet.

I mean what are we actually looking at even 30% at best overall for gaming and general desktop usage? Don't even get me started with the X3D stuff, let me just get rid of some meaningless settings in games that don't make a visually meaningful increase in visual fidelity and boom there's my X3D performance!

I want more actual performance before I drop that cash! People are just stupid, "Just look at the graphs and fps, I must have it!"

Now if a person hasn't built a system for while, and I'm talking for the past 7 years? Yes, jump to AM5. If your on something like a 2600X or less and on AM4 there are plenty of very cheap yet good CPU's you can get a solid uplift from. Anything that's Zen3.

Of course if you have money to burn and love building new systems than that's honestly good a reason as any, but in reallity your not gaining much.

[DumbFsck]

I mean what are we actually looking at even 30% at best overall for gaming and general desktop usage? Don't even get me started with the X3D stuff, let me just get rid of some meaningless settings in games that don't make a visually meaningful increase in visual fidelity and boom there's my X3D performance!

I agree with everything else you said but this.

This is exactly the point in getting an upgrade, not having to set those settings down or off.

AM4 is a platform I still recommend to people because of x3d CPUs, as a 5"7/8"00x3d just won't bottleneck any GPU, while other CPUs might.

Agree with you about DDR, also other features like PCIe lanes or chipset networking or whatever. If you need it, great, go am5 and get some option that fits your use case. If you're only gaming... AM4 is where it's at for basically every pricepoint.




Just like when nvidia had issues killing their 1080ti. People simply had no reason to upgrade. The venerable 2500k was the same for intel, and then the 7700 (I think).

[creative]

I agree with everything else you said but this.

This is exactly the point in getting an upgrade, not having to set those settings down or off.

AM4 is a platform I still recommend to people because of x3d CPUs, as a 5"7/8"00x3d just won't bottleneck any GPU, while other CPUs might.

Agree with you about DDR, also other features like PCIe lanes or chipset networking or whatever. If you need it, great, go am5 and get some option that fits your use case. If you're only gaming... AM4 is where it's at for basically every pricepoint.




Just like when nvidia had issues killing their 1080ti. People simply had no reason to upgrade. The venerable 2500k was the same for intel, and then the 7700 (I think).

The 9800x3D is actually pretty impressive, but I'm just not enthused just yet. Me being the dork I am may end up with a 9800x3d setup within a year. Who knows. Nvidia's product segmentation is really really bad. Lets be honest the RTX 4070 TI Super is a 4080 and the 4080 Super is the 4080 Ti. The vanilla 4070 is the 4060, etc. I actually don't blame people for buying this stuff. I'm kind of a punk sometimes.

In terms of bottleneck, really interesting subject. On one hand I think it's kind of silly on the other there is absolutely merit to it. One thing is for sure a much newer CPU is gowing to drive a much older GPU way harder than when the CPU's came out during the time period that GPU came out. Good instance of this is people buying Dell Optiplex's with something like a 12th gen i5 12400 'good chip' and slapping a GTX 1650 in it and going to town with a massive amount of games on steam @1080p. When the 1650 was released it couldn't be driven anywhere near as hard as it is now.

As far as having to turn things down? Some of the games out there have 4090 owners turning things down, I'm not joking. Bad games not being optimized much. Good example of this are the Dead Space remake and Silent Hill 2 remake. Silent Hill 2 will make a 4080 seem within the
margin of error of a 4070 Ti Super 'seen the side by side benchmark, it blew my mind', I'm not joking. Of course in a bunch of other games there is a clear line of demarcation between those GPU's but it's not massive but in certain situations I'm pretty sure the 4080 is definitely worth having over the other. Thing is with me is I already have this 4070 Ti Super setup and just don't want to deal with anymore of it, I have a job to go to. Count my loses I guess, still a nice card.

[yump]

Michael FYI the comma in "Ryzen 7 9800X3D - New DRAM, X870E" makes it impossible to hide that result on openbenchmarking.org. I was not able to make work by quoting with %22 or escaping with %5C.

[Michael]

Michael FYI the comma in "Ryzen 7 9800X3D - New DRAM, X870E" makes it impossible to hide that result on openbenchmarking.org. I was not able to make work by quoting with %22 or escaping with %5C.

Yeah it's been on my TODO list to investigate where the escaping is going awry or what but alas only so much time in a day...