Nvidia's DGX Spark and its GB10 SoC have set the template for what a purpose-built local AI developer sandbox should be. The combination of a standardized hardware platform with robust first-party software support and thorough documentation lets those curious about local AI get up and running faster than buying a bare-metal box and building everything up from scratch, especially in the rapidly evolving AI space.

AMD's Ryzen AI Max+ 395, aka Strix Halo, SoC, is the best x86 spoiler for GB10 so far. It has the same 128GB of unified memory, a powerful 16C/32T Zen 5 CPU, and a Radeon 8060S integrated GPU with 2560 RDNA 3.5 stream processors. It also has an AMD XDNA 2 NPU for those who want to experiment with that accelerator in addition to the general-purpose Radeon GPU. And it can run Windows and Windows apps natively, whereas GB10 boxes are Linux-only for now.

AMD's partners have been building around this hardware for about a year and a half, and it's a well-known quantity at this point. But once you have that hardware in hand, setting it up for AI workloads involves digging through scattered GitHub pages, Reddit threads, and AMD official documentation to get all the software pieces lined up right for the best performance and compatibility.

AMD is trying to change all that today with the launch of the Ryzen AI Halo, a first-party, turn-key Strix Halo mini-PC that puts local AI first. This system can be had with Windows or Linux, and at least in the Linux form we're testing today, it comes preloaded with the full AMD ROCm software stack and an assortment of applications you need to immediately start generating tokens with your preferred model.

And on the support side, AMD has taken a page directly out of Nvidia’s book and cooked up an entire set of its own playbooks that cover various local AI applications and usage scenarios with the AI Halo (and Strix Halo systems more generally) to serve as a springboard for local AI explorers.

The grand tour

The AI Halo comes wrapped in a plastic shell with a subtly color-shifting finish. It's got a large light bar ringing its front and sides that indicates system status. White means it's awake, while a pulsing blue indicates that it's asleep, assuming you allow it to suspend at all. Red indicates a fault. If you find the LED strip distracting, you can just turn it off using the preinstalled AI Developer Center app.

The AI Halo has air intakes on its top and sides, and AMD cautions that you shouldn't block any of these intakes. If you're running by the book, that means this system is less flexible than it could be for space-constrained or multi-node home lab setups, where turning the unit on its side would allow for valuable space savings.

Enterprising community members will likely design and share 3D-printed spacers and risers to get around these limitations, but for a device that is presumably meant to be used in home labs and production environments, the lack of flexibility in orientation is a small but annoying oversight.

Around back, the AI Halo has the same trio of USB Type-C ports you'll find on Nvidia GB10 boxes, plus one more for power input with the included 240W brick. The port closest to the power plug runs at “USB 3.2” speeds, while ports 3 and 4 are higher-speed USB 4. These ports are all DisplayPort Alt Mode compatible, or you can use the HDMI 2.1 port for display output if you prefer.

For wired networking, the AI Halo offers a 10 Gigabit Ethernet port. That’s certainly fast, and AMD has written a clustering playbook for multiple AI Halos using that interface, but it’s in a whole other league compared to the 200Gbps ConnectX-7 NIC on the DGX Spark and its ilk.

We didn't want to strip our AI Halo all the way down to its guts, but each of the four rubber feet on the bottom of the system is secured with a pair of tiny magnets, and they conceal the four screws you presumably need to remove to get further inside.

Here’s a quick look at this system’s specs:

Amid the ongoing RAMpocalypse and NANDpocalyse, no Ryzen AI Max+ 395 system with 128GB of RAM and a large SSD is cheap, assuming you can find a 128GB config in stock anywhere.

Even against that backdrop, the $3999 price tag for the AI Halo that we’re testing today is a pricey proposition. That sticker puts it at the low end of Nvidia GB10 systems like the Asus Ascent GX10 (albeit in its 1TB config).

Our past testing of Strix Halo versus GB10 for local AI workloads has decisively put Nvidia’s platform on top, so this is a potentially awkward place for the AI Halo to land. Let’s dig in and find out if anything has changed.

• MORE: Best Graphics Cards
• MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
• MORE: All Graphics Content

I was hoping to expand both the set of inference engines and AI models tested for this review, but I quickly ran into issues. The Ryzen AI Halo ships with a version of vLLM pre-installed, but it wasn't compatible with Qwen 3.6-35B-A3B when I tried to launch it, so I fell back to the old reliable llama.cpp.

We tested three models using llama.cpp: Qwen 3.6-35B-A3B, a relatively lightweight mixture-of-experts model that's been extremely popular of late, Google's Gemma 4 12B, another recent and relatively lightweight but dense model that activates all of its parameters per token, and gpt-oss-120B, a larger mixture-of-experts model that's been available for quite some time now. We used Unsloth's GGUF versions of these models in their Q4_K_M quantizations.

This time around, we're using llama-benchy as our benchmark harness. llama-benchy lets us get llama-bench-like performance results out of any model runner that can present us with an OpenAI-compatible endpoint, not just llama.cpp. That’s quite handy for comparing performance across inference engines.

First up, we'll look at latency and throughput performance with Qwen 3.6-35B-A3B:

And with the dense Gemma 4 12B:

And finally, with gpt-oss-120B:

At least with llama.cpp, the AI Halo's relative performance in single-user LLM serving versus GB10 isn't any different than what we saw several months ago when we took the Corsair AI Workstation 300 through its paces. While its tokens-per-second throughput is fine, albeit still slower than the Dell Pro Max GB10, its time-to-first-token latency falls far behind GB10 as context length grows.

In a real-world scenario where llama.cpp can use (and is configured to use) its prompt caching features, these differences might not be as pronounced, but it's still important to note this worst-case behavior, especially for long-running coding workflows where context lengths can quickly grow.

Overall, the Ryzen AI Halo doesn't work any magic for Strix Halo inference performance compared to other implementations of this platform we've tested. While its tokens-per-second throughput is acceptable, its time-to-first-token latency can quickly rise to non-interactive levels with long contexts.

At the extremes of our testing, waiting two to four minutes for a model to start responding might be disruptive to an interactive workload like a coding assistant, even if the rate at which tokens flow is tolerable once they do start rolling.

I also ran the same check-in on ComfyUI image generation performance using the same basic Flux.2 Klein test we ran back in February, as well, and the same gulf that we saw in time-to-completion for ComfyUI work remains now. The GB10 GPU's larger shader complement chews through image generation far quicker than the Radeon 8086S.

Finally, we checked in on CPU performance with Geekbench 6. The AI Halo’s 16-core, 32-thread Zen 5 CPU holds an edge on the GB10’s 20-core Arm CPU complex in both single-threaded and multi-threaded performance, so tasks like code compilation could potentially be faster on the AI Halo. But that victory shouldn’t cause us to lose sight of the GB10’s all-around better AI performance.

Thermal performance and noise levels

We didn't want to tear down our Ryzen AI Halo to reveal its cooling system, but as we discussed at the beginning of this review, the system has vents on its front, top, and sides to allow for plenty of airflow, and you can see a decently sized copper heatsink through its rear vents.

Logging system temperatures on Linux is more difficult than it is on Windows, but we didn't see CPU or GPU temperatures higher than the mid-50 °C range when running the AI Halo through our typical workloads. All that suggests that this box is more than up to the task of cooling the chip inside.

As for noise, the Ryzen AI Halo runs its twin blower fans audibly even at idle, so it's always adding some amount of noise to a room. And under a ComfyUI generative workload, it gets significantly louder than the Dell Pro Max GB10 box we're using to represent that platform.

The noise signature of those fans is also a bit less refined than those in the GB10 boxes I’ve used. They have a notable high-pitched whine that's difficult to acclimate to when the system is placed on a desktop, whereas the GB10 systems I've used all just sound like moving air and are easy to ignore.

• MORE: Best Graphics Cards
• MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
• MORE: All Graphics Content

Given its performance deficit versus Nvidia's GB10 platform, the next question for the AI Halo is whether AMD's included software and library of documentation adds substantial value versus other Strix Halo boxes that ship with nothing more than an OS.

I started my exploration of AMD's preinstalled software and playbooks with Lemonade, a heavily AMD-backed and AMD-optimized sort of software Swiss army knife for AI inference that makes it easy to play with a range of models, inference engines, and modalities, all in one unified interface.

While I didn't dig too deep into its capabilities, I was able to quickly combine Qwen 3.6-35B-A3B with the llama.cpp backed and start chatting with it, all with performance similar to what we saw in our directed testing with llama.cpp. This is the kind of smooth, straightforward experience that you want from a product like this. But Lemonade is available for a wide range of AMD systems, not just AI Halo, so you don’t have to buy one of these boxes if you want to try it out.

Other included apps have a few more wrinkles. When you first boot the Linux AI Halo we tested, the system launches a centralized management interface called the Ryzen AI Developer Center (AIDC for short) that aims to put key system information, settings, and software updates in one easy-to-access spot.

The AIDC app exposes some handy settings that Strix Halo users will want at their fingertips. Most notably, it lets you adjust how much of the AI Halo's 128GB memory pool is split between the CPU and GPU graphically instead of through the command line.

While we didn't have time to test their impact on performance, you can also select from three power profiles to balance noise, power consumption, and performance. And if the built-in LED light bar on this box is annoying you for any reason, you can turn it off through this interface.

Outside of those functions, the AI Developer Center has some good ideas that don't feel fully baked. For example, model management is one of the most common tasks when I'm setting up or mucking around on a local AI box. The AIDC app will show you what models you have downloaded across the system for use with AMD's pre-installed apps. But you can't open or otherwise reveal their containing folders so that you can add to or manage the data within them directly.

That's a pain, because if you do want to extend the usefulness of preinstalled apps like ComfyUI by adding new models in support of different workflows, that task is harder than it should be. As far as I can tell, the preinstalled ComfyUI lives in a Podman container (presumably for ease of updating), so its traditional directory structure (which would normally end up under /home//) is obscured.

ComfyUI can be configured to look for additional model directories beyond its defaults using a separate .yaml file. But with AMD’s configuration, those directories live in /var/cache/, which on the AI Halo’s Debian image is owned by root, not the user, so you can't just drop new models into those alternate directories at will without some chmod work that I didn't want to mess with for fear of breaking something.

And this directory location isn't documented in the related ComfyUI playbook that AMD provides (but is discussed in the overall user guide for the system).

AMD says the preinstalled software and models on the AI Halo are only meant to support its playbooks, and that users are free to go about installing and configuring the same apps to their own taste. But to me, the next logical step for learning after running through those playbooks is extending the functionality of those workflows, and if the process for doing so is neither straightforward nor transferable to the natively installed version of the application, then is the knowledge being conferred even useful?

For another example of some minor documentation hassles, the preinstalled version of vLLM on this system has a launch script that provides a lightweight wrapper that presents status information and checks the health of the vLLM instance. AMD encourages running different models with vLLM by changing the model string in this script, but the path to it is again not documented anywhere in the accompanying playbook. So I had to go digging. I eventually found it in /usr/bin/ by dumb luck, but this is the kind of very basic information that documentation exists to chronicle.

AMD also provides a direct competitor to the useful Nvidia Sync remote access app called AMD Sync. Sync allows you to connect to the AI Halo using SSH, and you can get versions of it for Windows and Linux alike (but not for macOS, so far, an option that Nvidia supports.)

The basic idea of AMD Sync is that you can run workloads that need the resources of the AI Halo on that system while working remotely on your preferred device. For just a couple examples, you can get a terminal session, run a remote instance of VS Code, or work in JupyterLab, all powered by the AI Halo. Check out AMD’s playbook for more examples of what Sync can do.

Overall, the pre-installed software on the AI Halo will get you started if you have no prior local AI experience and are working from AMD's playbooks to learn the basics, but I feel like the configuration decisions that AMD made to include those apps could be more flexible and better documented.

From the playbooks I tried, I also think AMD could stand to have a few more rounds of QA to ensure that these docs fully cover everything beginners need to know in order to get the most out of the platform.

• MORE: Best Graphics Cards
• MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
• MORE: All Graphics Content

AMD's Ryzen AI Halo is the company's attempt to put forth a complete, turn-key, first-party hardware and software package for AI developers, backed by direct software support and an extensive library of documentation for running local AI tasks on the Strix Halo platform. This effort unsurprisingly resembles the hardware, software, and documentation ecosystem that Nvidia has built around the DGX Spark.

Despite those lofty goals, the included software configuration on the AI Halo doesn't necessarily put the best foot forward for this platform yet. On the upside, the included Lemonade local AI sandbox, which is the focus of a lot of AMD optimization for local AI workflows, is easy enough to get started with, has a polished user interface, and performs well. Of all the beginner-friendly experiences on this box, Lemonade is perhaps the most polished. And the AMD Sync application gives you handy remote access to this system’s processing power from anywhere you can tunnel into it.

We also appreciate the handy AI Developer Center hub for its one-stop system management options, but we wish it allowed us to dig into tasks like managing local models. AMD's configuration choices for preinstalled apps like ComfyUI also made it harder for us to work with them as shipped versus simply downloading and installing them ourselves.

So even if you are truly starting from zero local AI knowledge and need a completely on-rails experience, you're likely to find yourself chafing at AMD's configuration choices sooner or later. And while the provided playbooks are broadly useful, they're sometimes missing key information, like folder paths, that makes deeper exploration of the concepts within difficult.

In any event, you don't need an AI Halo to access AMD's playbooks, so if you're curious about the quality of this documentation, you can review it independently before you buy - or use it with any other compatible Strix Halo box.

All this is important because the AI Halo is a significant investment. At a list price of $3999, the AI Halo is about 16% cheaper than the DGX Spark as of this writing. AMD touts this lower price as a cost-per-token advantage, and that might be appealing for the well-heeled hobbyist or enthusiast who just wants to play in a local AI sandbox.

But if you're a developer for whom time and tokens are money, you can get into an Asus Ascent GX10 GB10 system with a 1TB SSD and 128GB of RAM for the same $3999 as the AI Halo. And even the $4700-ish price tag of a DGX Spark with its 4TB SSD will pay for itself in fairly short order simply because it keeps you waiting less.

Especially if you're trying to learn the ropes of local AI work, the quality of Nvidia's accompanying documentation and the breadth of its application support is still better than what AMD has shown so far for the AI Halo, so you’re more likely to have a smooth ride.

All told, our verdict for the AI Halo is mixed. This is certainly the most turn-key Strix Halo box available for local AI work, and if you’re all-in on the AMD AI ecosystem, want a direct line from AMD for software support and documentation, highly value the ability to boot both Windows and Linux, potentially need to play with AMD's XDNA 2 NPU, and don't mind lower performance than a DGX Spark in exchange for all of those options, then maybe the AI Halo is for you.

But there's no two ways about it: this box is still generally slower and less agile as an AI development platform than a GB10 system, and until AMD is ready to ship a next-gen SoC in the architectural shape of Strix Halo with RDNA 4 graphics or some other future GPU IP, that value proposition looks like it’s going to be very difficult to shift.

• MORE: Best Graphics Cards
• MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
• MORE: All Graphics Content

AMD has submitted Linux kernel patches including support for its new low-power CPU cores that will likely emerge in its future heterogeneous processors. The new patch clearly distinguishes between high-performance cores, efficiency cores, and low-power cores, so it is safe to say that AMD's upcoming CPU platforms will use three types of cores, with the low-power one serving light workloads, reports Phoronix.

AMD's heterogeneous processors identify CPU types using CPUID Function 0x80000026 (Extended CPU Topology), as EBX bits [31:28] carry the core classification. Up until recently, AMD only classified its cores as Performance and Efficiency, while the latest patch adds Low-Power cores. The patch enables Linux to distinguish between Performance, Efficiency, and Low-Power cores efficiently, and the latter are also correctly supported by AMD's performance management.

According to AMD engineer Vishal Badole, these cores are designed specifically for background and idle tasks where reducing energy consumption is more important than offering high performance.

In recent years, both AMD and Intel released heterogeneous processors featuring both high-performance and energy-efficient types of cores in a bid to wed performance and low power consumption. With its latest CPU platforms, Intel introduced its low-power cores located in the SoC tile to offload light tasks and prolong the battery life of laptops. As it turns out, AMD is going the same route. Although AMD uses two different core types, the underlying architecture is the same. It offers a "dense" core offering that's optimized for space, while Intel uses entirely different microarchitectures.

Beyond the description of the Linux patch, AMD disclosed little about the low-power cores. The company only described them as being optimized for the lowest possible power consumption during background processing and idle operation, but did not reveal how they differ architecturally from today's dense Zen 5c cores. In addition, the kernel patches introduce no new scheduling policies or optimization logic beyond identifying the additional CPU category.

AMD also did not reveal whether these cores are based on the Zen 5, Zen 6, or other future microarchitecture. It should indeed be noted that AMD has traditionally preferred to use the same microarchitecture within one CPU, albeit with different optimizations when it comes to die size (or rather floorplan) and clocks. Such an approach greatly simplifies software development and performance management, but at the cost of higher power consumption compared to what a simplified microarchitecture would have offered.

There's bittersweet news from the shore of the open-source Zluda project, a long-running effort to create a CUDA emulator for AMD GPUs. The project's latest blog post for version 6 shows off the fresh 32-bit PhysX support and improved Windows support. Additionally, there are a number of PyTorch-driven fixes. Unfortunately, the project has again lost commercial funding, and it's now back to being a hobby for developer Andrez Janik.

Zluda 6's 32-bit PhysX support is still in a pre-alpha stage, but the results are promising. Janik showed off multiple cloth and deformation demos running at speed, and even a screenshot showing a 3x performance uplift of 2010's Mafia II running with PhysX effects turned on. Given the pre-alpha nature, Janik notes that "fluid simulations can be glitchy, and the current method of loading ZLUDA into Steam games is poor." One of his goals is to have better support for Windows, and v6 includes a refreshed zluda.exe loader that now loads required performance libraries automatically.

Last but by no means least, Zluda v6 includes a host of PyTorch-driven enhancements, composed of compiler fixes and improvements to performance libraries. As a silver lining of sorts, Janik notes that since there's now no funding, the priorities for the project have shifted to things "[he] finds the most entertaining," justifying the addition of PhysX and the revamped Windows loader.

The project was initially started in 2020 to get CUDA running on Intel hardware, but has since then turned to AMD cards. After being abandoned in 2021, it was brought back from the dead around 2022 thanks to AMD pulling out the checkbook to make it happen — presumably because one of the main obstacles (if not the primary one) is that most all the AI software ecosystem revolves around Nvidia's GPUs.

Unfortunately, AMD also cut the funding to Zluda in 2024, and in August even forced Janik to rebuild the code the company paid for. He thankfully found an undisclosed sponsor in late 2024; likely an AI company to whom the translation layer would be valuable, letting them run CUDA AI workloads on Instinct cards. Said funding is now sadly gone once again, and Janik says Zluda is back to being a "weekend project."

For end users, it's nice to have a fully open-source drop-in replacement for CUDA binaries. As for large-scale conversion for AI usage, though, there are a number of alternative projects that look to accomplish the same end results via different means. These include AMD's HIP source code porting, Spectral Compute's Scale, and MooreThreads' Musify toolkit, to name a few.

With widespread disappointment regarding the availability and pricing of Valve’s Steam Machine, influencers and creators have been mixing up ‘alternatives’ of various shapes and sizes. However, we think the Terk Box v1.1 looks like the closest alternative yet in design and spirit. The work, as spotted by Hackaday, appears to be a collaboration between Jacob Terkelsen, an ex-Tom's Hardware contributor currently working for AMD, and a 3D printing and SFF PCs enthusiast who goes by the handle of 3DCatt.

If you are a 3D printer owner, you can grab the source files for the Terk Box v1.1 direct from Printables.com. There you will find a parts list, which details the various screws, riser cables, and numerous other parts you will need. The .STL source files are all there, too, of course, under a Creative Commons license.

Specific component brands don’t seem to be suggested by the makers, which is probably due to the set of standards embraced by the various PC parts makers. However, we do note in the user comments some people may have had a hard time fitting their GPU. 3DCatt says the max length that will fit is “about 180mm long.” That isn’t all, though, as the recommended PCIe riser cable wasn’t long enough for some, depending on the GPU model. AMD’s Terkelsen chipped in that the build was suitable for his RTX 5060 LP graphics card, but he requested more room for a front 140mm case fan, among a few other tweaks.

The current revision of the Terk Box measures 167 x 168 x 225mm. That may be close enough to the official machine (152 x 162 x 156mm) to justify the extra effort of doing this instead of finding an off-the-peg compact Mini ITX case. Some of the compromises with the Terk Box v1.1 appear to be the fussiness with GPU choice we mentioned above, and the less-than-ideal positioning of the CPU socket in relation to the PSU. However, both 3DCatt and Terkelsen have hinted at refinements on the way to v1.2.

Since they have already strayed from the cubic confines of Valve’s actual Steam Machine, I feel they shouldn’t feel too shackled to the design they currently have. I’ll be watching further developments with interest.

In summary, this is a design much closer in stature and spirit to the original Valve effort, but it is definitely a work in progress. With the various component constraints, the DIY price for this won’t be the most compelling, either. Readers who are 3D printing and PC DIY aficionados, and we must have a few of those, might be able to contribute to the project with suggestions, tweaks, and remixes.

AMD has brought back its gaming champion from four years ago. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D has been revived in 2026 to breathe new life into the AM4 platform. The Zen 3-based CPU was the best CPU for gaming of its time, thanks to the first-generation 3D V-Cache technology. Since then, however, the competition in our CPU benchmark hierarchy has become more fierce.

Today's competition is Intel’s Core i7-14700K, based on the Raptor Lake Refresh architecture. At the time the Ryzen 7 5800X3D released, Intel’s 12th-gen Alder Lake CPUs were its main competition. Here, we revisit the comparison with Intel’s newer Core i7-14700K, which is available around the same price of $350.

The focus of this faceoff is to determine which CPU is the superior all-around chip. We will put the two CPUs through a series of tests spanning different categories to ultimately determine which CPU you should buy for your system.

This faceoff breaks down how two CPUs compare to each other in a head-to-head battle. If you'd like to read more about either processor, as well as see our full suite of tests, make sure to read our AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D re-review and Core i7-14700K faceoff.

Features and Specifications: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs Intel Core i7-14700K

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D was first launched in April 2022 as a part of the Vermeer desktop CPU family. It is based on the Zen 3 architecture and built on TSMC’s 7nm production process. The CPU features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a TDP of 105W and a PPT of 142W. It has a base clock of 3.4 GHz and can boost up to 4.5 GHz.

The 5800X3D only supports DDR4 memory at a rated speed of 3200 MT/s over a dual-channel interface. It is compatible with the AM4 socket, with support for 300-series, 400-series, and 500-series AMD chipsets (though check support with your specific motherboard). It also supports 20 lanes of PCIe Gen 4. However, the 5800X3D does not have integrated graphics.

On a more positive note, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D was the first CPU to employ the new 3D V-Cache technology. As a result of stacking the cache vertically on the die, the 5800X3D has a total L3 cache of 96 MB. Of this pool, 64 MB is part of the 3D V-Cache stack. Core overclocking is disabled on the Ryzen 7 5800X3D due to its 3D V-Cache layout; DRAM overclocking still remains available.

Its competitor, Intel’s Core i7-14700K, uses a vastly different layout. It features the Raptor Lake Refresh architecture, which is a refined version of the 13th-generation Raptor Lake base architecture. The Core i7-14700K was launched in October 2023 and was built on a 10nm production process (Intel 7).

Intel’s 14th-generation CPUs use a hybrid core layout with performance-focused “P-cores” and more efficient “E-cores.” The 14700K also follows this structure, featuring 8 P-cores and 12 E-cores, for a total of 20 cores. In the 14700K, Hyper-Threading is only available on the P-cores, so the CPU has a total of 28 threads. The chip can boost the P-cores up to 5.6 GHz, while the E-core boost clock is 4.3 GHz.

Interestingly, the Core i7-14700K supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory at 3200 MT/s and 5600 MT/s, respectively. The CPU is compatible with the LGA 1700 socket featured in the 600-series and 700-series Intel motherboards. There is also support for 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes and 4 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

The Core i7-14700K has a TDP of 125W, with a higher PL2 limit of 253W. Integrated graphics are also offered in the 14700K in the form of UHD Graphics 770. There is 33MB of shared L3 cache on the chip. Perhaps more importantly, the Core i7-14700K is fully unlocked for overclocking, which is a big advantage over its competitor for today, though that requires a Z-series motherboard.

Zooming out a bit, it is clear that the Core i7-14700K is vastly superior to the Ryzen 7 5800X3D on paper. It is a newer CPU, so it has a better feature set, including PCIe Gen 5 and DDR5 support. It offers more cores, a higher boost clock, integrated graphics, and an unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

⭐Winner: Intel Core i7-14700K

Nothing is decided on paper alone, but the Core i7-14700K offers much better specs, newer features, and even has overclocking support. It takes this round quite easily.

Gaming Benchmarks and Performance: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs Intel Core i7-14700K

AMD claims to have “re-engineered” the Ryzen 7 5800X3D for its 2026 re-release, so we have tested it again, along with a whole bunch of worthy competitors, including the 14700K. We chose the 1080p resolution for our 16-game test suite in order to maximize the performance differences between the various CPUs. The graphics card used was the GeForce RTX 5090 to keep potential GPU bottlenecks to a minimum. Let’s get into the results.

Starting off with our 16-game FPS geomean at 1080p, the Core i7-14700K dominates the Ryzen 7 5800X3D with an average result of 166.7 FPS across our tested games, compared to the 145.6 FPS result of the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. That is a 14.5% difference in favor of the 14700K in our performance geomean. In 1% lows, the 14700K leads the Ryzen 7 5800X3D by 20% on average, putting out 114 FPS against the Ryzen’s 95.

However, there is another side to this benchmark table. The Core i7-14700K supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, so we tested it in both configurations. With DDR4-3200 memory, the 14700K’s advantage vanishes, and instead the Ryzen 7 5800X3D leads by 1.04%, or just 1.5 FPS. The 1% lows are in favor of 14700K by only 3 FPS (3.15%), which is astonishingly close.

When the Intel CPU is paired with DDR5 memory, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D’s cache advantage seems to be struggling against the Core i7-14700K’s raw core count and higher boost clock (along with far faster memory speeds). Looking at individual titles, we see a similar pattern with the Core i7-14700K holding a consistent lead over the 5800X3D.

In 007 First Light, the 14700K paired with DDR5 memory has a 25.7% lead on average over the 5800X3D. That lead shrinks to 21.5% in Crimson Desert, and the difference is 13.7% in favor of the 14700K in Cyberpunk 2077. Interestingly, the Core i7-14700K leads the entire pack in Flight Simulator 24, establishing a 26.6% lead over the 5800X3D in this title. The DDR5-equipped 14700K also leads the 5800X3D in Spider-Man 2, Starfield, The Last of Us Part One, Baldur’s Gate 3, and Counter-Strike 2.

However, when the Core i7-14700K is paired with DDR4-3200 memory, the picture changes completely. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D leads the i7-14700K with DDR4 memory in Baldur’s Gate 3 by 11.7%. In Crimson Desert, the lead is 3.2% for the 5800X3D, and 2.6% in Cyberpunk 2077. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D sits between the DDR5 and DDR4 versions of the 14700K in a few other titles, including Counter-Strike 2 and DOOM: The Dark Ages.

There are also some titles in which the Ryzen 7 5800X3D leads both the DDR4 and DDR5-equipped versions of the Core i7-14700K. In F1 2024, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D leads the DDR5 14700K by 5.6%, and the DDR4 14700K by 13.7% on average. The same pattern can be seen in Final Fantasy XIV, with a 6.6% lead over the 14700K using DDR5 memory, and in Minecraft RT, with a 18.5% lead over the 14700K using DDR4 memory.

It is certainly all over the place when you put both configurations of the 14700K into the mix, but the two behave more like separate CPUs. The long and short of it is that the 14700K with DDR5 memory provides the best gaming performance on average, followed by the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. The DDR4-equipped 14700K is ever-so-slightly slower than the 5800X3D, but it really just depends on the game you’re playing.

During our testing, the Core i7-14700K averaged 4.93 GHz with DDR5 memory and 4.88 GHz with DDR4 memory. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D could only manage 4.34 GHz, but it sipped only 77.5 watts during our gaming tests. The 14700K DDR5 averaged 132.4 watts, while the DDR4-equipped 14700K averaged a whopping 155.1 watts during gaming. This is why the 14700K with DDR4 reached an average temperature of 80 °C, compared to 62 °C for the 14700K with DDR5 and 59 °C for the 5800X3D.

In addition to running the coolest, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is also the most efficient CPU of the bunch. The 5800X3D had an FPS-per-watt output of 1.88, compared to 1.26 for the Core i7-14700K with DDR5 memory, and just 0.93 for the DDR4 version. It is amazing how much the Core i7-14700K suffers when paired with DDR4 memory.

Lower overall performance also hurts the value proposition of the DDR4-equipped 14700K, as it puts out just 0.39 FPS-per-dollar, compared to the 0.45 of the DDR5-equipped 14700K. Astonishingly, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D falls between the two 14700K versions, delivering 0.42 FPS per dollar. This makes the Core i7-14700K the value king, but only if you pair it with DDR5 memory. I suspect that will be tricky in the current market.

⭐Winner: Tie

While the Ryzen 7 5800X3D does slightly pull away from the DDR4-equipped 14700K, both of these setups get demolished by the 14700K when it is paired with DDR5 memory. We're calling this round a tie considering the massive price disparity between DDR4 and DDR5 memory right now.

Productivity Benchmarks and Performance: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs Intel Core i7-14700K

Productivity performance spans single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, so we tested the CPUs across a range of benchmarks covering both categories. Just like in our gaming tests, we tested the 14700K with both DDR5 and DDR4 memory, since it does impact the performance significantly.

Intel’s hybrid architecture has historically been quite strong at multi-threaded workloads due to E-cores, and that pattern appears here too. In our multi-threaded performance ranking geomean, the Core i7-14700K scores 492 points, a massive lead of 116.7% over the Ryzen 7 5800X3D that could only manage 227 points on average. Even when the Core i7-14700K is paired with DDR4 memory, it has a 105% higher average score than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D.

The superior core count of the 14700K is proving to be the difference maker in this category. In the Cinebench 2024 multi-core test, the 14700K with DDR5 memory is a whopping 126.6% faster than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. Even the DDR4-equipped 14700K secures a 107% lead over the 5800X3D in Cinebench. The lead for the 14700K is about 137% in POV-Ray, and it shrinks to 135% when using DDR4 memory.

Blender tests were also favorable for the 14700K, but we didn’t see a big difference between DDR4 and DDR5 systems in these benchmarks. In Junkshop, the DDR5-equipped 14700K leads the 5800X3D by 116.4%; in Monster, by 116.6%; and in Classroom, by 118.3%. The DDR4 variant follows closely behind, by 1 or 2 percentage points.

The memory generation again comes into play when we look at HandBrake x265 10-bit encoding, with the DDR5-14700K leading the 5800X3D by 90.5%, while the DDR4-14700K manages a 82% lead. The gap is even larger in x264 encoding, with the DDR5 variant gaining a 105% lead over the 5800X3D, while the DDR4 variant can only manage a 63% lead.

That still makes the Core i7-14700K far better than the 5800X3D in productivity workloads, regardless of the memory generation. However, we still have single-threaded results to look at. Our single-threaded performance ranking geomean puts the Core i7-14700K 36.6% faster on average than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. Interestingly, there is no difference in single-threaded performance between the DDR5 and DDR4 variants of the 14700K.

The same trend is seen in individual benchmarks as well. The 14700K is about 25% faster than the 5800X3D in Lame’s audio encoding test, and the DDR4 variant is in the same ballpark as well. Curiously, the DDR4-equipped 14700K is slightly faster than the DDR5-14700K in Cinebench 2024 and also outperforms the 5800X3D by 36.6%. Safe to say, the RAM difference doesn’t really come into play in these tests.

Overall, though, the winner is quite clear. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D is a gaming-oriented chip with only 8 cores and 16 threads, so it is no match for the 20-core 14700K in productivity workloads. Whether you go for DDR4 or DDR5 is your decision, but the productivity champion of this faceoff is the Core i7-14700K.

⭐Winner: Intel Core i7-14700K

With an average lead of 116% over the Ryzen 7 5800X3D in multi-threaded tasks, the Core i7-14700K sweeps the productivity round quite easily.

Overclocking: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs Intel Core i7-14700K

Overclocking has never been a strong suit of AMD Ryzen processors; however, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D doesn’t support core overclocking at all. AMD cited the 3D V-Cache technology as the reason the 5800X3D can’t be overclocked, and they were right to assume so.

Due to the vertically-stacked cache, heat transfer from the CPU die to the heatspreader was a real issue. An overclocked 5800X3D would have sipped more power and produced more heat. Therefore, an efficient heat-transfer system was needed but could not be developed in time for the first-generation V-Cache product.

AMD has since reinstated overclocking support for Ryzen 9000 series X3D CPUs by flipping the cache layout, so it no longer hinders heat transfer. However, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D’s core multiplier still remains locked, but you can still tune the DRAM and Infinity Fabric clocks.

The Core i7-14700K, on the other hand, is tailor-made for overclocking. Being a K-series SKU, the 14700K comes with an unlocked multiplier and all the Intel bells and whistles for overclocking. It can reach 6.1 - 6.2 GHz on individual cores with proper cooling, and users can expect a 5.6 - 5.8 GHz all-core overclock on most setups.

Its overclocking toolkit features traditional multiplier adjustments, voltage controls, and established BIOS interfaces that most enthusiasts are already familiar with. The Core i7-14700K also has a significant amount of power headroom to play with, although temperatures become a concern as soon as the power consumption ramps up.

By all overclocking metrics, the Core i7-14700K is the superior CPU for tinkerers. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D can’t be manually tuned, at least not in the traditional sense, and therefore doesn’t really stand a chance in this round.

⭐Winner: Intel Core i7-14700K

The 14700K is the real deal when it comes to overclocking support. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D is locked and therefore can’t be overclocked, so Intel sweeps this round.

Power Consumption and Efficiency: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs Intel Core i7-14700K

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D has a base TDP of 105W and a PPT of 142W. Intel’s is much higher, with the 14700K clocking in at 125W TDP and a PL2 limit of 253 watts. However, TDP numbers don’t give us a good idea of real-world power consumption, so we ran our own detailed tests.

First, at idle, the 5800X3D consumed only 5 watts, while the 14700K consumed 27 watts. In an active-idle situation, such as YouTube playback, the Core i7-14700K consumed 28 watts with DDR5 memory and a concerning 39 watts with DDR4 memory. The 5800X3D, on the other hand, sipped only 9 watts, making it anywhere from 67% - 76% more efficient than the 14700K.

Moving on to all-core workloads, in our y-cruncher multi-threaded AVX power test, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D consumes 119 watts, while the Core i7-14700K clocks in at a staggering 335 watts, a 181.5% higher figure. Even the Core i7-14700K with DDR4 memory consumed 307 watts, which is still a 158% increase over the 5800X3D’s power consumption.

In Linpack, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is again more reserved, with the 14700K consuming 168.6% more power than the Ryzen. The DDR4 setup was not much better, with a 137.2% higher power consumption than the 5800X3D in this test. The gap widens even more in Cinebench 2024’s multi-core render and our Blender tests, which show the 14700K consuming anywhere from 250% to 285% higher power than the 5800X3D.

In our encoding tests, the situation remains pretty much the same. In Handbrake x264, the DDR5-14700K consumed 242% more power than the 5800X3D, while the DDR4-14700K consumed nearly 200% more. Similar numbers were seen in Handbrake x265 and SVT_AV1 encoding, with the 5800X3D being the clear winner.

We even looked at single-threaded workloads to determine the power consumption of those tasks. In y-cruncher’s single-threaded AVX power test, we saw the 14700K consume 157% more power when paired with DDR5 memory, and 132% more when using DDR4 memory. Safe to say, the Intel CPU does not fare any better in these workloads either.

To determine the efficiency, we calculated the watts-per-FPS number in Handbrake x265. The 5800X3D was 43.4% more efficient than the 14700K with DDR5 RAM, and about 41% more efficient in this task than the 14700K with DDR4 memory. The pattern can again be seen in Cinebench 2024’s efficiency test, where we look at points-per-watt. The 5700X3D is anywhere from 62% to 68% more efficient than the 14700K in this task.

We can also visualize the efficiency differences using our handy scatter plots. In the Linkpack power efficiency plot, the 5800X3D is towards the bottom left of the chart, while the 14700K is more towards the top. This means that the 14700K uses substantially more energy to deliver marginally higher performance than the 5800X3D. Ideally, you want to be towards the bottom right of this graph.

So, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D consumes much less power in both single-threaded and multi-threaded productivity workloads, and as we saw in our gaming tests, it runs cooler as well. The Core i7-14700K has a distinct performance advantage in all-core workloads, but the power consumption ramps up quickly once it gets going. Still, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is the clear winner in this round.

⭐Winner: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D consumes between 150% and 300% less power than the Core i7-14700K in all-core workloads, making it the definitive winner in this round.

Pricing: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs Intel Core i7-14700K

The pricing situation is a bit of a wildcard in this comparison, since these are not exactly “new” CPUs. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D was recently re-released at $350, which is $100 lower than its 2022 price tag. The Core i7-14700K is currently priced at $370 at the time of writing, which makes the 5800X3D $20 cheaper in a direct comparison.

However, comparing the two CPUs is more than just comparing their sticker price. We must also look at the platform costs of the two CPUs. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D uses the fan-favorite AM4 socket, which has a whole heap of chipsets in all price brackets. You can pair the Ryzen 7 5800X3D with a mid-range B550 or a high-end X570 motherboard, but older 400-series motherboards are also compatible, depending on the board.

As far as the price goes, B550 motherboards can be purchased for $80 - $180, while higher-end X570 motherboards range from $150 - $300. Some premium models can even go beyond $400, but those are not really needed for our CPU since it doesn’t support overclocking. A nice mid-tier B550 or X570 motherboard will be more than enough for our needs.

Memory is where the price difference really grows. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D only supports DDR4 memory, so it is relatively safe from the ongoing DRAM crisis. A nice 32GB DDR4-3200 kit can run you about $140 - $160, which is definitely higher than DDR4 prices of the past, but nothing compared to current DDR5 rates. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D also needs an aftermarket cooler since it doesn’t come with one, and that can cost you about $100 - $150 too.

For the Core i7-14700K, you have the option of either a DDR4 or a DDR5 motherboard. Even then, you still have to choose between a 600-series or a 700-series chipset. For the sake of this comparison, let’s go with a Z790 motherboard since the 14700K is unlocked and we want those overclocking capabilities. A basic Z790 motherboard can be found around the $150 mark, but we would want to go with something that has decent VRMs. That can cost around $200-$250 at current prices.

Of course, as evidenced in our benchmarks, DDR5 memory is the best way to maximize the 14700K's performance. Due to the RAMpocalypse, DDR5 memory is ridiculously expensive, and a 32GB DDR5-6000 kit can cost between $390 - $550 at the time of writing. Going with DDR4 would require a motherboard swap, but it would save you between $300 and $350 on the system based on these two components alone.

For cooling, the 14700K requires special consideration, as we have the option to overclock. Even a stock 14700K sips more power and produces more heat than a 5800X3D, but if you plan to overclock, the thermals can get out of hand pretty quick. You’ll ideally use a solid 360mm AiO liquid cooler for the 14700K, which can add about $100 - $150 to the cost of your build.

Another factor to consider when determining the value of a CPU is the longevity of its platform. AMD’s AM4 platform has been going strong for a decade, and AMD has continued to support it through updates and releases such as the 5800X3D. However, it would be hard to see AMD releasing more CPUs for the AM4 platform going forward.

On the other hand, Intel’s LGA 1700 socket was already semi-retired, but new reports suggest that Intel will bring this platform back in early 2027. New “Raptor Lake Next” CPUs will reportedly be available on the same socket and the same motherboards, so there is certainly a better upgrade path on Intel’s side.

When we put everything together, the Core i7-14700K is a bit hard to recommend from a value perspective. The motherboards for the 14700K are more expensive on average, and if you want to maximize its performance, you will have to take a massive hit to your wallet with DDR5 memory. Moreover, it is more expensive to cool, too. Its platform looks more future-proof in light of recent rumors, but that can’t guarantee it a win in this round.

⭐Winner: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D

The 5800X3D is cheaper to get up and running, since you only need an affordable B550 motherboard and some DDR4 memory to get started. The 14700K can be cheap, but that requires you to leave serious performance on the table and go with a DDR4 setup.

Bottom Line: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs Intel Core i7-14700K

After a grueling 6-round back-and-forth, we finally have our winner. The Intel Core i7-14700K is the superior CPU of the two. Now, it is not as black-and-white as the 4-3 score might suggest, but the 14700K is still the winner of this faceoff.

The Core i7-14700K delivers better gaming performance on average than the 5800X3D. Sure, there are some titles that favor AMD’s 3D V-Cache, but those wins were not as frequent. However, AMD’s 5800X3D has a better chance if the 14700K is limited by DDR4 memory.

Intel’s 14700K is also vastly superior in productivity and has support for manual overclocking. AMD’s main selling point for the 5800X3D in 2026 is its low price, both upfront and in terms of platform costs. It is also an easier CPU to maintain since it runs cooler and consumes less power.

Interestingly, the choice also depends heavily on your memory generation of choice. It is better to save a few bucks and go with a 5800X3D if you plan to stay on DDR4 for now. However, if you are willing to make the (difficult) jump to DDR5, the 14700K is the clear choice.

Potential buyers who want to stick to gaming should still prioritize a Ryzen 7 5800X3D over a Core i7-14700K with DDR5 memory. On the other hand, if you regularly run any type of productivity workload, the 14700K blows the Ryzen out of the water.

⭐ Winner: Intel Core i7-14700K

Nonetheless, the overall winner of our faceoff is Intel’s Core i7-14700K.

Check Out More CPU Faceoffs

• Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
• Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs AMD Ryzen 7 9700X
• AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D vs AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D
• Intel Core i7-14700K vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265K
• AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 vs Ryzen 9 9950X3D

AMD answered the demands of gamers and re-released the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, though not without compromise. Although the return of Zen 3 X3D has been a good idea for months, given the limited time we saw those chips on the market, this re-release comes with a surprisingly high price, considering the silicon and how it compares to the best CPUs for gaming.

Price is the biggest issue for the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. AMD shaved $100 off the original MSRP for the 10th Anniversary Edition re-release, but that puts it in very competitive waters, even considering current RAM prices. The CPU is flanked on one side by the Core i7-14700K that also supports DDR4 memory, and on the other by the Ryzen 5 7600X3D, which offers superior gaming performance and a lower price to offset the cost of a DDR5 platform.

The chip mainly appeals to those who already have an AM4 motherboard and memory to go with it, and who were unfortunate enough to miss the small window when you could buy the Ryzen 7 5800X3D a few years ago. In that situation, just about any price is a deal compared to the competition.

Otherwise, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is about $70 to $100 too expensive, and even that lower price would be questionable if DDR5 prices weren’t out of control. Although the chip has earned its legendary status among gamers, revisiting it in 2026 shows clearly that it maxes out what DDR4 platforms are capable of in games, and it falls far too short of the DDR4 competition in applications.

The island of AM4 users stranded without a clear upgrade path will love the 5800X3D re-release. But the chip is not nearly as impressive as it once was if you have to buy a motherboard and/or RAM alongside your CPU, however.

Some notes on this re-review

We don’t normally re-review products here at Tom’s Hardware, much less update existing reviews outside of some extraordinary circumstance. We will follow up reviews with additional coverage as needed, but our reviews are as much buying advice at the time they’re written as they are historical context years down the road. Reviews exist in the context in which they’re written.

That’s important because, especially with PC hardware, some good products can become worse over time and bad products can become good over time. Even in this past generation, AMD had several stumbles with Zen 5, which it addressed post-launch through a combination of firmware updates and exposing additional settings in the BIOS. Intel had some major regressions in performance with Arrow Lake, which it partially addressed after release with Core 200S Boost.

These products are better now than they were at launch, but it’s still important to know that they had issues at launch. That’s the function of our reviews. They’re a snapshot of how a particular component performs and compares to the rest of the market at a certain point in time. Our list of the best CPUs for gaming and CPU benchmark hierarchy pagesare where you’ll find the consistent updates on which chips are best at any given time.

That preamble is to say that this re-review of the Ryzen 7 5800X3D does not replace our original review, which is why this is a separate piece of content and not merely an update. We’re re-reviewing the chip because AMD is re-releasing it, and we need to compare the chip to the current market it exists in.

That market includes high memory prices, which is a driving force behind the re-release of the Ryzen 7 5800X3D in the first place. We’re paying especially close attention to memory in this review, both in terms of price and performance. However, we’ve also brought some price-competitive DDR5 chips into the mix, including some of AMD’s own CPUs.

Finally, we’re reviewing the original Ryzen 7 5800X3D here. AMD says that the new 10th Anniversary Edition should be identical to the original model, but it’s using a slightly different bonding process, which could have a minor impact on power and thermals, in particular. We’ll be getting a 10th Anniversary Edition into the lab in order to find out, but we don’t expect major performance differences between the original and re-release versions.

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D specifications and pricing

It’s difficult to evaluate the specs of the Ryzen 7 5800X3D given the current market, so this is a refresher of what the processor offers and how it compares to some of the current options featured in our test suite. It’s an eight-core / 16-thread chip sporting AMD’s Zen 3 architecture, and it boosts up to 4.5 GHz, with a base clock of 3.4 GHz.

The chip is fabricated on TSMC’s 7nm FinFET process, with GlobalFoundries stepping in to fab the I/O die on its 12nm process. Of course, the main draw of the CPU is the 64MB chunk of SRAM that’s bonded to the compute die, giving the processor access to a total of 96MB of L3 cache.

In recent years, we’ve seen both AMD and Intel increase cache sizes broadly, not just on X3D CPUs. For instance, the Ryzen 7 9700X has the same 32MB of on-board L3 that we can see all the way back to Zen 3, but it has double the L2 cache. Intel has traditionally split L2 and L3 more evenly, and we’ve seen an increase in both with Arrow Lake and Arrow Lake Refresh.

Still, the huge boost in L3 helps a lot here. It comes with some thermal trade-offs, however. Although the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is a very efficient CPU, it also has careful power management. The SRAM sits on top of the compute die, insulating the cores from the IHS. This thermal design means the Ryzen 7 5800X3D has relatively low peak clock speeds out of the box, and it doesn’t officially support AMD’s Precision Boost Overdrive.

AMD has addressed that issue in newer X3D chips, riding the efficiency of Zen 4 with the Ryzen 7 7800X3D and moving to a new bonding process that situates the SRAM below the compute die with the Ryzen 7 9800X3D.

• MORE: Best CPU for gaming
• MORE: CPU Benchmark Hierarchy
• MORE: Intel vs AMD
• MORE: How to Overclock a CPU

Although the Ryzen 7 5800X3D was a revelation when it first released, it’s important to remember that it wasn’t leagues faster than Intel’s competing Alder Lake chips, at least not on the level of the 30%+ delta we see today with Arrow Lake and the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. The pedigree that 3D V-Cache has built comes in part from the newer X3D chips, and that’s clear when looking back at the Ryzen 7 5800X3D.

Even more clear is the split between DDR4 and DDR5. Now that we have Raptor Lake (and Refresh) as a comparison point, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D positions itself as the peak of what DDR4 platforms are capable of in games. It’s marginally faster than the Core i7-13700K and Core i7-14700K with DDR4 memory, 17% ahead of the Core i7-12700K with DDR4, and even 4.5% ahead of the Core i7-12700K with DDR5.

This wall that you can see, around 145 fps in our geomean, directly translates into a handful of the games we tested. Especially among the newer titles in our suite, simply moving to DDR5 memory results in more than a 31% increase in performance on the same CPU. That led to a handful of situations where both Raptor Lake CPUs perform worse than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D with DDR4, but offer double-digit improvements with DDR5.

Based on our RAM price tracker, a 32GB kit of DDR5-6000 runs between $400 and $450 currently, while a 32GB kit of DDR4-3200 will run you between $200 and $250. There are plenty of exceptions, for better and worse, but we’re going to call the price difference between DDR4 and DDR5, right now, about $200.

Establishing that number is important because of one CPU: AMD’s own Ryzen 5 7600X3D. It’s on the AM5 platform and requires DDR5, but it’s also $230, $120 less than what AMD is re-releasing the Ryzen 7 5800X3D at. Assuming our lowest RAM prices, that means the Ryzen 5 7600X3D is around 14% more expensive than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D when memory is brought into the price. But the Ryzen 5 7600X3D is also 18% more performant.

That’s the biggest hurdle standing in the way of the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. Even if you already have DDR4 memory, the Ryzen 5 7600X3D and 16GB of DDR5-6000 is only around $80 more expensive, and much more performant. Plus, it gets you on an AM5 platform, setting up cheaper future upgrades (AMD says AM5 will receive support through at least 2029).

In Intel’s camp, the two Raptor Lake chips with DDR4 run up against a similar wall as the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, but offer around a 15% jump with DDR5. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D still makes sense if you already have an AM4 board. However, if you have to buy a motherboard, the Raptor Lake chips offer similar gaming performance with DDR4 and much better application performance, which we’ll get to next.

Elsewhere, there aren’t a lot of surprises. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D is as efficient as ever, drawing just 77.5W on average in our testing. AMD has pushed efficiency even further now, but it’s remarkable to see the Ryzen 7 5800X3D offering similar performance as the Core i7-14700K with DDR4, while consuming half the power.

We also have our value geomean here, which is deceptive. Obviously the price of memory is a huge influence here, not only on total platform cost, but also on performance. The value geomean here just represents a true CPU-to-CPU comparison of value, devoid of RAM context.

007 First Light Benchmarks

The first game in our suite is the newest, which is 007 First Light. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D surprisingly struggles in this title, which is strange given how well IO Interactive’s previous title, Hitman 3, took to 3D V-Cache CPUs. Still, the Raptor Lake chips are ahead here, even with DDR4, and they claim top slots with DDR5.

Baldur’s Gate 3 Benchmarks

Baldur’s Gate 3 favors X3D chips, which is clear based on the fact that the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is just a touch behind the much newer Ryzen 7 9700X. The 5800X3D is also around 11% faster than the Raptor Lake chips with DDR4 memory. However, the Raptor Lake chips with DDR5 are about 20% faster than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, while the Ryzen 5 7600X3D is around 35% faster.

Crimson Desert Benchmarks

In Crimson Desert, the 5800X3D outpaces the Raptor Lake competition by a few frames, but this game clearly favors faster memory. It also scales oddly well on Raptor Lake chips, as evidenced by the fact that the Core i7-14700K outclasses the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus.

Counter-Strike 2 Benchmarks

Counter-Strike 2 is more competitive, with only the Ryzen 7 7800X3D offering a clear lead above the rest of the pack. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D is marginally ahead of the Raptor Lake chips with DDR4 here, and even moving to DDR5 doesn’t offer a significant improvement.

Cyberpunk 2077 Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077 is another clear example of the memory divide that’s growing between DDR4 and DDR5. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D tops the DDR4 rankings by a few frames, but moving to DDR5 on Raptor Lake offers roughly a 15% performance jump.

Doom: The Dark Ages Benchmarks

When we brought up a 31% gap in DDR4 and DDR5 performance earlier, we were referring to Doom: The Dark Ages. This is a fairly recent game that’s clearly designed with DDR5 in mind. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D does surprisingly well, though, offering a 10.8% jump over the Raptor Lake competition with DDR4.

F1 24 Benchmarks

F1 2024 slants heavily toward AMD processors, and it’s a game that scales well with 3D V-Cache. Here, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is around 5% faster than the Core i7-14700K with DDR5, and 13% faster with DDR4. The Ryzen 5 7600X3D spoils the fun a bit, though, offering a solid 10% jump over the 5800X3D.

Far Cry 6 Benchmarks

Final Fantasy XIV Benchmarks

Final Fantasy XIV scales well with X3D chips, with the three 3D V-Cache CPUs in our test pool topping the rankings. The 5800X3D takes a clear backseat to the DDR5 CPUs, but it still manages a solid 6.6% improvement over the Core i7-14700K with DDR5 and a 16% jump with DDR4.

Flight Simulator 2024 Benchmarks

Flight Simulator 24 leans back toward Intel, with the 5800X3D only managing to outclass the Core i7-12700K with DDR4. In this game, the Ryzen 5 7600X3D is around 18% faster, while the Core i7-14700K is 11% faster, even with DDR4.

Hogwarts Legacy Benchmarks

We can see a similar situation in Hogwarts Legacy, with the Core i7-14700K paired with DDR4 outpacing the Ryzen 7 5800X3D by about 12%. The Ryzen 5 7600X3D, meanwhile, is more than 20% ahead, while the Core i7-14700K with DDR5 marks a 25% lead.

Marvel Rivals Benchmarks

Marvel Rivals is an Unreal Engine 5 game, and it’s mostly bound by the GPU, which explains the stair-step pattern you can see in our data. We can see a clear divide between DDR4 and DDR5 platforms here, with even the Ryzen 5 7600X offering superior performance.

Minecraft RTX Benchmarks

Intel struggles in Minecraft, while X3D chips run away with performance. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D ends up in the middle of the pack, offering a clear buff of around 18% over the Raptor Lake competition but falling short of even AMD’s weaker DDR5 options.

Spider-Man 2 Benchmarks

Starfield Benchmarks

The Last of Us Part One Benchmarks

• MORE: Best CPU for gaming
• MORE: CPU Benchmark Hierarchy
• MORE: Intel vs AMD
• MORE: How to Overclock a CPU

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D was a weak CPU for productivity when it was released, and it hasn’t aged particularly well since then on that front. The clock speed is limited compared to non-X3D Zen 3 chips. Add to that the limitations of DDR4 platforms more broadly in non-gaming applications, and it's clear the 5800X3D was never destined for high marks here.

Even compared to the Ryzen 5 7600X3D, the 5800X3D is only 4.6% faster, which is bad considering the latter CPU has access to 33% more threads. Intel’s hybrid architecture boosts core counts, allowing Team Blue to dominate the top of our multithreaded performance rankings.

The CPU to call out here is the Core i7-14700K, particularly paired with DDR4 memory. It’s more than twice as fast as the 5800X3D in our multithreaded geomean, while offering similar gaming performance. Again, we can see this dilemma for the 5800X3D, where the 14700K is a better all-around CPU with DDR4, while the Ryzen 5 7600X3D is a superior DDR5 CPU for not much more money (even considering the price of DDR5).

Turning to single-threaded performance, the playing field levels out, short of the 5800X3D, which even loses out to the Ryzen 7 5700X due to its limited clock speed (the 5700X boosts 100 MHz higher).

Rendering Benchmarks

Rendering apps factor heavily in our overall multithreaded geomean, so the individual results here largely mirror what you can see in the geomean above. In Cinebench 2024, the Core i7-14700K with DDR4 still offers more than double the performance of the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, and it pushes higher with DDR5. We can see a similar situation in the newer Cinebench 2026.

Single-core results are especially weak considering the Ryzen 7 5800X3D’s limited boost potential. DDR5 isn’t much of a factor here. Although we can see some scaling on the Raptor Lake platforms when moving to DDR5, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is limited in rendering apps, even by DDR4 standards.

Blender shows similar disparities, with the six-core Ryzen 5 7600X3D largely matching the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, despite sporting a 33% reduction in thread count.

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D is a gaming CPU, pure and simple, so we never expected any miracles here. However, the Ryzen 5 7600X3D is offering comparable performance on a DDR5 platform for less money, while shooting ahead in games. And the Core i7-14700K offers much better productivity performance and comparable gaming performance, even when paired with DDR4.

Encoding Benchmarks

Encoding is similarly a major factor in our geomean, though with a more even split between lightly- and heavily-threaded workloads. Starting with the latter, Handbrake is an all-out workload for any consumer CPU that leans on high core counts, power limits, and clock speeds. With an x265 10-bit encode, even the Core i7-12700K with DDR4 is 39% ahead of the 5800X3D, while the Core i7-14700K with DDR4 shoots ahead, scoring 82% lead. AV1 and X264 show similar gaps.

The LAME audio encoder provides a closer look at single-threaded encoding workloads, and once again, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D struggles. It was the worst performer in the test pool running a standard LAME encode, and the gap between it and the more performant options in our test pool only grows in the extended run.

Creator App Benchmarks

Perhaps the biggest area of crosstalk with gaming is creator applications. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D is a bit more impressive here compared to our rendering and encoding workloads, often matching the Core i7-12700K with DDR4 memory. Still, it ends up at the bottom of our rankings, with newer Raptor Lake and DDR5 CPUs offering better performance.

Photoshop is an app that leans toward AMD chips, though that’s mainly with newer Zen 5 chips. For the 5800X3D, the Core i7-14700K offers a 10% performance jump with DDR4. Things are a bit more competitive in Premiere Pro, with the limitation of DDR4 platforms becoming abundantly clear in our data.

Outside of the Adobe suite, we have DaVinci Resolve, which isn’t as lopsided as Photoshop with recent AMD CPUs. Here, even DDR4 Raptor Lake options are near the top of the chart. The 5800X3D secures a minor win over the 7600X3D and 5700X, but not by a meaningful margin.

Finally, After Effects offers a look at VFX performance. AMD’s 5800X3D especially struggles here, with the Core i7-12700K with DDR4 offering a 13% boost in overall performance. With DDR5, that lead jumps to 22.9%.

Web and Office Benchmarks

In lighter web and office workloads, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D still struggles. Most basic productivity and web applications are lightly-threaded, so it makes sense to see the 5800X3D would fall below the marks we can see in creator apps. Across all of the workloads here, the 5800X3D is either at the bottom of the pile or just narrowly outclasses the 5700X.

That doesn’t mean you’ll run into major performance issues. The workloads here are relatively light, and they’re suitable for far weaker CPUs than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. We’re mainly looking at general application performance for browsers and lightly-threaded apps here, which is an area where the 5800X3D struggles.

Chess Engines, Compilation, Compression, AVX, and Other Benchmarks

Finally, we have a range of benchmarks examining code compilation, chess engines, database workloads, and far more. The 5800X3D is a gaming CPU, and these workloads are highly targeted at specific applications. There are some workloads where the 5800X3D shines, such as the ebizzy web server test, SQLite database test, and Linpack. However, it mostly lands at the bottom of the pile when looking at workloads more broadly.

We’ve certainly seen a benefit from a larger L3 cache for specialized workloads (see our Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 review for more), but that’s not the draw here. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D is weak in most productivity apps, so unless you plan on running a server and somehow gaming on the same machine, I wouldn’t weigh these results too heavily.

• MORE: Best CPU for gaming
• MORE: CPU Benchmark Hierarchy
• MORE: Intel vs AMD
• MORE: How to Overclock a CPU

AMD’s X3D CPUs are known for their efficiency, and although those efficiency gains mainly show up with the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, the 5800X3D is no slouch. Power is carefully limited on the chip, with it peaking at just 119W in our y-cruncher test. In the same test, the Core i7-14700K drew 335W.

Y-cruncher leverages AVX instructions, pushing the Ryzen 7 5800X3D to consume more power compared to the 7800X3D. In an all-out, non-AVX workload like Cinebench 2024, the two CPUs are in lockstep. Again, we can see the Raptor Lake competition dancing with 300W across configurations.

Blender and Handbrake tell a similar story, but efficiency is what’s important here, given how broad the performance window is for the chips in our test pool (particularly in applications). The 5800X3D is much more efficient than the 13700K and 14700K. The margins are also narrower than raw power consumption.

The efficiency picture is clearer with a scatterplot, where we can see a clear separation between the AMD and Intel chips in our test pool. Short of the Core Ultra 270K Plus, there’s a compromise. AMD’s options are much less performant but consume far less power, while Intel's options are generally the opposite.

One upside of the 5800X3D, in particular, is its low idle power consumption. With Zen 4 and Zen 5, we saw a massive increase in power consumption in both idle and active idle (YouTube playback) scenarios. With both the Zen 3 chips in our test pool, we can see a return to single-digit power draw under idle circumstances.

Test Setup

We try to minimize the differences between our test platforms to keep our results consistent, which is especially important here given that we used so many different platforms. Even with big differences, we used the same OS image that’s specifically tailored for testing and frozen to avoid updates skewing our results as we test.

In addition to standardising our OS, we standardise our BIOS settings. We test with XMP/EXPO enabled on memory kits that we’ve validated for stability on the platforms we use. We also disable VBS in the BIOS and turn on ReBAR.

Modern AMD and Intel CPUs come with sophisticated boosting algorithms, but they aren’t always covered by warranty. AMD doesn’t cover PBO, for instance, and Intel doesn’t warranty the “Extreme” power profile that’s common on motherboards. Because of the lack of warranty coverage, we test with PBO disabled and Intel’s power profile set at its default settings.

• MORE: Best CPU for gaming
• MORE: CPU Benchmark Hierarchy
• MORE: Intel vs AMD
• MORE: How to Overclock a CPU

At $350, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D really only makes sense if you already have an AM4 motherboard and DDR4 memory to go along with it. That’s not a small audience, especially considering the relatively short time the original Ryzen 7 5800X3D was available on the market. But if you need to buy a motherboard and/or memory for your upgrade, there are better options at this price.

The 5800X3D re-release is a victim of poor pricing. The chip taps out DDR4 platforms in gaming performance, but we’re closing in on half a decade with mainstream DDR5 platforms, and we’ve seen much more powerful CPUs in that time. And yet, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D’s price hasn’t moved significantly away from its original $450 MSRP.

If RAM prices weren’t out of control, a $350 price tag on the Ryzen 7 5800X3D would look insane given the current options around that price. As I’m writing this, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is on sale for less than $350. And even considering current RAM prices, the Core i7-14700K and Ryzen 5 7600X3D are compelling alternatives.

On the productivity front, the Core i7-14700K is a clear winner, even with DDR4 memory. There are some titles where the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is faster than the Core i7-14700K is when paired with DDR4. But overall, they offer similar gaming performance. Especially now that AMD has turned its attention to AM5, the Core i7-14700K is a better all-around option if you don’t already have an AM4 motherboard.

Although AMD almost always comes out on top with platform longevity, Intel is surprisingly ahead in that regard in the Ryzen 7 5800X3D versus Core i7-14700K matchup. Intel is reportedly set to launch Raptor Lake Next on the LGA 1700 socket next year, though I suspect any performance benefits that come along with it will require an upgrade to DDR5.

On the gaming front, the Ryzen 5 7600X3D does a lot of work. It requires DDR5, but that’s partially offset by the fact that it’s $120 cheaper than the 5800X3D. Factoring in RAM or not, spending a bit more on the Ryzen 5 7600X3D not only nets you much higher performance in games, it also gives you an AM5 platform that you can easily upgrade in the future.

That doesn’t discredit the island that AM4 users are currently on. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D left the market fairly quickly, and given the popularity of AM4, it stands to reason that there’s a large group of people for whom the 5800X3D is a significant upgrade. For that group, it’s the CPU of legend you’ve heard so much about. But if you’re planning on buying a motherboard and/or RAM with your new CPU, shop around a bit more.

• MORE: Best CPU for gaming
• MORE: CPU Benchmark Hierarchy
• MORE: Intel vs AMD
• MORE: How to Overclock a CPU

Asus has started rolling out beta BIOS updates that restore Transparent Secure Memory Encryption (TSME) support to several AM5 motherboards, making it one of the first board vendors to implement AMD’s promised fix after the company was criticized for quietly removing the feature from non-Pro Ryzen CPUs.

According to VideoCardz, the beta BIOS files — which cover several ROG Crosshair, ROG Strix, TUF Gaming, and ProArt boards based on AMD’s X870, B850, and X670 chipsets — were reportedly shared through the ASUS ROG forum by overclocker SAFEDISK and include support for “GNR Transparent Secure Memory Encryption,” with GNR referring to Granite Ridge, AMD’s Ryzen 9000 desktop CPU family.

The BIOS updates are based on AGESA ComboAM5 PI 1.3.0.1b Patch A and appear to restore TSME support for non-Pro Ryzen 9000 processors earlier than AMD’s previously stated July timeline. X870 boards mostly move to BIOS 2401; B850 boards move to BIOS 1686; and X670 boards move to BIOS 3901 or 3886, depending on the model.

AMD officially confirmed to Tom's Hardware last week that it will reinstate memory encryption on Ryzen 9000 CPUs via a BIOS update, following “valuable community feedback.” AMD users had strongly expressed disapproval after the company silently removed TSME support from Non-Pro CPUs. TSME is a security feature that protects CPUs against physical exploits by encrypting the data stored in memory, making it unusable to physical attackers.

A user discovered that the feature was no longer available on his Ryzen 7 9700X system, even though it was enabled in the BIOS. Further testing involving MSI showed that consumer Ryzen chips could report TSME support under older firmware, but not after a newer AGESA update, while Ryzen Pro processors continued to support it. After countless reactions, AMD moved to fix the issue, setting July as the timeline for reinstating the feature via a BIOS update.

The Asus update now suggests the fix is beginning to arrive earlier than AMD’s July timeline, positioning the company as one of the first board makers to package the reinstatement into actual motherboard firmware. However, this is not yet the broad, stable rollout most users will be waiting for. The files are beta BIOS releases shared through the ASUS ROG forum, so users who specifically need TSME may want to track them closely, while anyone running a production or stability-critical system should probably wait for final BIOS builds.

China's LineShine supercomputer has taken the top spot on the 67th-edition TOP500 list, posting 2.198 exaflops on the High Performance Linpack benchmark and pushing the AMD-powered El Capitan into second place by more than 20%. The system, installed at the National Supercomputing Centre in Shenzhen (NSCS) and built by the Shenzhen Cloud Computing Center, used no GPUs or accelerators of any kind, and reached the figure with 13,789,440 cores of domestically designed silicon, the first machine on the list to clear two exaflops of double-precision performance on CPUs alone. It’s also the first China-based system to lead the TOP500 since Sunway TaihuLight in 2017.

The fact that a sanctioned country has managed to build an exascale flagship without a single Western accelerator is one thing, but what’s more telling is that China has decided to put it on the list. For years, its fastest machines have stayed off the rankings entirely, and the decision to submit a chart-topper now is a deliberate change of posture.

A domestic stack from core to OS

LineShine is built on what NSCS calls the LingKun platform. Each of its 20,480 compute nodes carries two LX2 processors, Armv9-based parts with 304 cores running at 1.55 GHz, organized as eight clusters of 38 cores. Every core includes Arm's Scalable Vector Extension and Scalable Matrix Extension units covering FP64, FP32, BF16, FP16, and INT8.

Each of those LX2s pairs 32 GB of on-package HBM rated at up to 4 TB/s with as much as 256 GB of off-package DDR5, an arrangement that’s closer to Fujitsu's A64FX in Japan's Fugaku than to a conventional server CPU. Nodes are tied together by the proprietary LingQi interconnect, and the machine runs the homegrown Kylin OS.

It’s not known who designs the LX2 — NSCS names no vendor — but Jon Peddie Research has attributed the chip to Huawei, and the project's pilot phase reportedly ran on Huawei Kunpeng servers. The fabrication node and foundry are likewise unconfirmed. SMIC's 7nm-class process is the obvious domestic candidate by elimination, given that EUV tooling and TSMC capacity are both off the table, but nobody has documented the part to date.

Not an AI crown

LineShine also took first on HPCG, the test that rewards memory- and communication-bound workloads closer to real scientific code, at 22.00 petaflops. But on HPL-MxP, the mixed-precision benchmark that approximates AI training math, it came in only fourth at 7.92 exaflops, a 3.6 times uplift over its FP64 score.

In other words, the accelerator-based machines it beat on Linpack pull far ahead the moment precision drops. Per the TOP500 announcement, El Capitan posts 16.7 exaflops on HPL-MxP, a 9.2 times jump over its standard result, with Aurora and Frontier showing similar multipliers. Reduced-precision throughput is exactly where GPUs and APUs separate from CPUs, and LineShine has nowhere to hide it.

We can see similar issues cropping up in terms of power. LineShine draws 42,220 kW and returns 52.07 gigaflops per watt on its Linpack run. That beats Intel’s Aurora comfortably but trails El Capitan's 60.94 gigaflops per watt, so LineShine produces more total FP64 output than the Livermore system while burning roughly 42% more power to do it.

It’s worth holding onto this distinction because the TOP500 ranking is decided on FP64 Linpack, the one regime where a wide, HBM-fed CPU can still go toe-to-toe with accelerators. LineShine is a genuine double-precision champion, but it’s not a world-leading AI training machine, and its fourth-place HPL-MxP result says so.

So, why did China submit it?

China stopped submitting its fastest systems to the TOP500 around 2021, after a run of entity-list additions hit Sunway's Wuxi center and Sugon. The community has long believed that the country operated exascale hardware well before this entry: the Sunway successor OceanLight and the NUDT-built Tianhe-3 both appeared via Gordon Bell Prize science papers without ever appearing on the list. TOP500 co-founder Jack Dongarra has said for years that Chinese researchers told him they weren’t permitted to submit, and that omissions were about avoiding U.S. attention rather than any lack of capability.

Last June's list, which AMD topped while Chinese HPC remained absent, was especially conspicuous, but putting LineShine forward now reverses that. It has been reported that the system was developed without public funding, which lowers the political exposure of disclosing it, and the all-domestic design means there’s no dependency on Western parts for Washington to choke off after the fact.

Addison Snell, chief executive of HPC analyst firm Intersect360 Research, told Reuters he wasn’t surprised by the performance but by the disclosure itself, noting the surprise was that China submitted the result and wanted recognition for it. Ultimately, submitting a number-one system that runs entirely on indigenous parts is a statement that the sanctions regime hasn’t closed the gap China cares about.

AMD still dominates

The top of the list might have changed hands, but the bulk of it hasn’t. The U.S. still dominates with three of the top five in El Capitan (1.809 exaflops), Frontier (1.353 exaflops), and Aurora (1.012 exaflops), and Germany's JUPITER Booster remains the first and only European exascale system at an even 1.000 exaflops.

AMD’s silicon underpins most of the accelerated field with the company, per its own blog, now powering 191 systems on the list, up 11% year over year, and 41% of this edition's new entries. It holds three top-10 slots — El Capitan, Frontier, and the newly deployed HPC7 at Italian energy firm Eni — and contributes more than 40% of combined top-10 Linpack performance. On efficiency, it powers 56% of the top 50 Green500 systems, and its first Instinct MI355X deployments, two Cambridge Zenith systems in the UK, entered at positions 67 and 68.

None of that is dented by LineShine, not least because the two aren’t competing for the same workload. AMD’s MI300A and MI355X parts are built for mixed-precision AI arithmetic, where LineShine places fourth, and the rest of the Western labs are optimizing for that, not FP64 leaderboard positions.

El Capitan, Frontier, and Aurora all post HPL-MxP scores several times their Linpack results, enabled by hardware that LineShine doesn’t have. So, while it’s true the TOP500 crown moved to Shenzen, it did so on a benchmark that Western labs are no longer chasing with their fastest machines.

Servers running x86 processors from AMD and Intel used to rule the market, both unit and money-wise, less than a decade ago, but fast forward to today, Arm-based machines command well over 45% of the server market, according to data released by IDC. While technically x86 machines still control 52% of the market in terms of revenue, the real winner is a different category altogether: GPU- and ASIC/FPGA-accelerated systems, which generated over 70% of the global server revenue in the first quarter of 2026.

Server market reaches $122.6 billion in a single quarter, Dell leads the game

IDC estimates that the global server market generated a record $122.6 billion in revenue in the first quarter of 2026, up 30.4% year-over-year, as spending on AI infrastructure remained particularly strong.

Sales of ODM Direct servers — custom machines ordered by hyperscalers that run merchant or custom silicon — accounted for 50.2% of the revenue (down from 64.1% in Q1 2025) and reached $61.53 billion, up modest 2.1% year-over-year*. By contrast, sales of standard servers from well-known brands grew at a much higher pace, which suggests that branded vendors such as Dell, HPE, Supermicro, and others won a larger portion of AI infrastructure deployments than they did a year earlier. That was probably made possible by accelerating enterprise AI deployment and sovereign AI projects, which tend to buy machines from branded vendors, as well as hyperscalers increasingly turning to well-known suppliers for AI hardware.

When it comes to vendor rankings, Dell remained the largest server supplier by revenue with a 16.5% share of the market after its revenue surged 244.1% year-over-year to $20.3 billion, which was driven by exceptionally strong AI server demand. Supermicro remained in second place with $9.3 billion in revenue and a growth of 128.9%.

Lenovo ranked third with $5.6 billion and 36.5% growth, while IEIT Systems (which is a part of the sanctioned Inspur Group) dropped to fourth after revenue declined 7.0% to $4.0 billion. HPE was No.5 with $3.7 billion in revenue, up 17.2%. Other vendors — from Asus to Atos and from ASRock Rack to Gigabyte — commanded 14.8% of the market with $18.11 billion in revenue, up from 13% and $12.21 billion in the same quarter a year ago.

Arm-based machines rapidly gain revenue share

As AI servers dominated the market in Q1 2026, systems with various types of accelerators accounted for over 70% of the revenue. However, the rise of Arm-powered machines is the elephant in the room that is hard to miss, as it represents a tectonic shift in the whole market, both to the Arm instruction set architecture (ISA) in general and custom-built Arm CPUs designed by hyperscalers.

Non-x86 platforms generated $58.7 billion in revenue, a 107.6% increase year-over-year, which lifted their share of the market to 47.9%. Most of the non-x86 systems are Arm-based AI machines (think Nvidia's NVL72) as well as systems running custom CPUs, AWS, Google, and Microsoft, just to name a few. Still, also keep in mind IBM Z mainframes and IBM Power Systems (including storage) that use CPUs featuring proprietary non-x86 and non-Arm ISAs and which still generate $1 billion or more in revenue. IDC claims that Arm-based machines accounted for more than 95% of non-x86 revenue, so it is safe to say that Arm-based machines commanded over 45% of server revenues in Q1 2026.

One of the reasons why Arm-based machines now command a huge chunk of the server market is because they are used inside such systems as Nvidia's NVL72 'Blackwell' that sell for up to $6.5 million per unit. Each NVL72 rack-scale solution carries 36 compute trays with two Blackwell GPUs and one Grace CPU per unit, so while unit-wise each we are only talking about 36 processors, dollar-wise one NVL72 machine is as expensive as 928 entry-level 1P server (for $7,000) for cloud or edge applications or 433 higher-end 2P servers (for $15,000) for cloud or virtualization applications.

Given the fact that Nvidia will continue bundling its own Arm-based Vera CPUs with NVL72 'Vera Rubin' machines that will be more expensive than their Blackwell ancestors, we will not be surprised that Arm-based machines will account for well over 50% of the server market revenue in the second half of this year or in 2027. Also, keep in mind that Nvidia plans to sell server racks featuring only Vera CPUs for agentic AI applications, which will further drive sales of Arm-based machines.

Accelerated servers: The real winner

Since AI servers dominate server sales, it is not surprising that sales of accelerated servers are increasing. Systems equipped with GPUs produced $68.9 billion in revenue during the quarter (up 24.8% compared to the same period a year earlier) and accounted for 56.2% of all server sales. Servers based on other accelerator types, including custom ASICs and FPGAs, expanded to $17.7 billion, up 122.1% YoY. As a result, accelerated servers earned $86.6 billion in Q1 2026, which is around 70.6% of all server revenue.

X86 servers remain unit volume champions, but suffer from shortages

In contrast, x86 server revenue declined 2.9% to $63.9 billion, though IDC attributes this weakness to supply limitations rather than deteriorating demand. The market research firm claims that the industry's primary constraint is no longer customer appetite for general-purpose servers, but rather the availability of key components, including CPUs, DRAM, NAND memory, and hard drives.

Without any doubt, x86 servers remain working horses for the industry. In fact, many of them use accelerators, including ASICs, FPGAs, and GPUs, as they are used for a wide range of workloads, including AI, supercomputing, simulations, encryption, video transcoding, and many more.

AMD and Intel shipped nearly 20 million EPYC and Xeon SP processors for data center systems in 2025, according to Dean McCarron, the head and principal analyst at Mercury Research. He believes Nvidia is on track to ship four million Grace and Vera CPUs this year, which is considerably lower compared to shipments of AMD and Intel. It is hard to estimate how many custom Arm-based CPUs are deployed by AWS, Alibaba, Google, and Microsoft, but it is safe to say that we are talking millions of CPUs here; otherwise, the companies would not be able to justify development and production of custom silicon.

From a volume perspective, x86 servers remain the most popular machines, and it will probably take some time before ARM can challenge x86 in mainstream general-purpose servers. Nonetheless, it is safe to say that Arm-based data center CPUs are catching up with x86 parts in terms of volumes.

Summary

The global server market hit a record $122.6 billion in the first quarter of 2026 as AI infrastructure spending continued. Accelerated systems powered by GPUs, custom ASICs, and FPGAs generated more than 70% of server revenue, while Arm-based platforms — including Nvidia's Grace Blackwell as well as custom CPUs from Arm, Google, and Microsoft — captured nearly half of the market.

Although x86 servers based on AMD EPYC and Intel Xeon processors remain dominant in shipment volumes, supply shortages of CPUs, memory, and storage components constrained revenue growth, which further enabled Arm-powered AI-optimized systems to gain share. But while at 20 million data center processors per year, x86 volumes are untouchable for Arm today, things may change in the coming years. Nvidia is on track to ship 4 million CPUs in 2026, and other developers of custom Arm-based CPUs are certainly not standing still.

*There is one significant difference with IDC's 'ODM Direct' classification. IDC classifies revenue according to which company invoices the customer, not necessarily who manufactures the hardware. As a result, while many AI servers are built by ODMs like Compal, Foxconn, or Quanta, they are sold under brands like Dell or HPE. As a result, while the latter get more business from enterprises or sovereign AI deployments, this does not mean that big ODMs are losing business; they are actually gaining it, as the appetites of hyperscalers like AWS, Google, Meta, or Microsoft are not going anywhere, just demand from new entrants emerges.

Mini PC specialist GMKtec recently launched the EVO-X3, heralding it as a “next-gen AI workstation,” with early access registration beginning tomorrow (Monday, June 22). The firm also took to social media this weekend to show that the successor to the GMKtec EVO-X2, which we reviewed in February, had earned AMD CEO Lisa Su’s signature of approval. This is not entirely surprising, as so did the X2. So, let’s take a closer look at the new GMKtec EVO-X3.

Actually, the tech specs of the EVO-X3 aren’t very different from its predecessor. We can say with certainty that its design has been thoroughly revamped, though. Look at the difference between the generations. This is a good thing, as most of our reviewers ‘Cons’ regarding the EVO-X2 were drawn from its design and build. Specifically we grumbled about the cheap-feeling case, tricky internal access, and fan noise. A smart redesign would have addressed all these points, but we’d have to get some hands-on time with the new revision to be sure it delivers more than a cosmetic change.

The new GMKtec EVO-X3 is again built around the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 'Strix Halo' processor. Interestingly, a switch to the Ryzen AI Max+ 495 'Gorgon Halo' must have been deemed counterproductive. Many tech enthusiasts were underwhelmed by the AMD Ryzen AI 400 series refresh, too. We also know there are two launch configurations, both with 128GB of LPDDR5X-8000 RAM, but one having a 2TB SSD, the other 4TB. The machine is advertised as featuring two M.2 2280 PCIe Gen4x4 slots for up to 8TB of SSD storage.

As hinted above, the big change between generations appears to be in the build. GMKtec now boasts of the “silent triple fan thermal system” which makes the whole unit somewhat like a triple fan graphics card in a steel wrapper. GMKtec says that “The system is engineered to balance performance, efficiency, and thermal stability, making it suitable for continuous professional workloads across AI and creative scenarios.”

For ports, we note the EVO-X3 packs in an OCuLink connector, USB4 for data, power delivery and video out, and HDMI 2.1 video out. Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4 are also on board. There are also a few USB-A ports, an Ethernet jack, and a headset jack.

Prices up, a lot

The GMKtec EVO-X2 launched at $1,499 as tested with 64GB RAM and 1TB SSD. Today, EVO-X2 machines with this configuration are currently being sold for $1,999 on Amazon.com. However, the GMKtec EVO-X3 entry price is far steeper, admittedly with more RAM and storage. It is advertising the 128GB RAM and 2TB SSD version at $3,600, and the 128GB RAM plus 4TB storage version at $3,849. Both of those are said to be pre-launch discounted prices. Signing up for the early access registration can get you an additional $20 off those marked-down prices.

GMKtec told us that the pre-launch is live tomorrow, with purchased units being sent out from July 6.

We've already heard quite a lot about AMD's next-generation EPYC processors, code-named Venice, and we've heard a fair bit about the consumer Zen 6 parts, too, particularly in their Olympic Ridge and Medusa Point guises. Now, thanks to Budapest-based low-level programming enthusiast InstLatX64 (@InstLatX64 on X), we now have the first confirmed details about AMD's Zen 6-based Threadripper CPUs, code-named Mustang Peak. There's no shockers here, and there's not a ton of information to work from, but we can still do some interesting speculation.

The key details that we actually have confirmed are this: Zen 6-based Threadripper parts are internally codenamed "Mustang Peak," and they're going to use Core Complex Dies (CCDs) built on a 2nm-class process at TSMC. We can infer that it's almost assuredly using the same CCDs as Olympic Ridge and Venice, but more on that in a bit. We know that it's going to be based on DDR5 memory and PCI Express 6.0, and likely because of the latter, it's going to require a new platform, known as "TR6."

InstLatX64 found this information in AMD's technical documentation portal, which we unfortunately don't have access to, though you can clearly see the front page of the document above. That's most of the story right there, but there are, nevertheless, some pretty interesting details we can deduce from this information.

For starters, the core counts. AMD's Zen 6 processors are expected to use "Powderhorn" CCDs that raise the core count per chiplet from 8 cores to twelve. This raises the max number of CPU cores on a desktop Ryzen processor from 16 to 24, and it increases the potential max number of cores on a Threadripper Pro CPU from 96 to a whopping 144 cores. Furthermore, we can speculate that clock rates will likely increase considerably, as Zen 6 is said to be a design that aims for clock rates "significantly above" 6 GHz.

A chip with 288 hot-clocked full-power CPU threads is likely to draw massive power, but it's absolutely going to want monstrous memory bandwidth. How do we feed the beast? Not with DDR6, as that standard isn't even finished yet, despite the fact that LPDDR6 is a go. It's possible AMD may be increasing the channel count from 8, as it's known that EPYC Venice is increasing memory channels from 12 on Turin to fully sixteen 64-bit channels (a 1024-bit memory bus). In combination with second-generation MRDIMMs, that's going to give Venice some 1.6 TB/second memory bandwidth.

Could AMD add MRDIMM support to Threadripper? It's certainly possible. Threadripper has always been derived from EPYC technology, and it doesn't seem a stretch to think that the rank-interleaving RAM could solve the memory bandwidth struggle that high-end Mustang Peak chips are going to slam into in massively multi-core workloads. After all, you're not going to reach 12.8 GT/s (the transfer rate of second-generation MRDIMMs) through regular old EXPO overclocking.

Besides that, PCI Express 6.0 will deliver up to 256 GB/second bidirectionally (128GB/second unidirectionally) on a by-sixteen link, which should probably suffice for nearly any sort of device you care to plug into one of these machines. I almost wrote "PCs," but with 144 CPU cores and PCI Express 6.0, we're hardly in "personal computer" territory anymore. Indeed, it's clear that Mustang Peak is going to be an absolute monster when it eventually arrives next year, likely in mid-to-late 2027.

We managed to grab pics of the newest upcoming server sockets from both AMD and Intel at Computex 2026. Both AMD and Intel are preparing to launch their next-generation server platforms that use all-new sockets, which enable new levels of performance, functionality, and power delivery.

AMD is a bit ahead with its SP7 platform in 2026, while Intel’s gargantuan 9324-pin socket will be used for Xeon ‘Diamond Rapids’ in 2027. While the platforms are entirely different, what makes them similar is the massive dimensions of CPU sockets and coolers.

AMD’s SP7 is the company’s next-generation socket that will support AMD’s 6^th Generation EPYC ‘Venice’ processors with up to 256 cores. The socket is huge and is rumored to support 16 DDR6 memory channels using 12.8 GT/s MRDIMMs as well as up to 96 PCIe 6.0 lanes (with the CXL protocol on top, though this is a processor, not a socket feature).

Based on information from Auras, the SP7 socket will be able to handle CPUs with a peak power consumption of up to 1,400W, so Auras and other companies are prepping liquid cooling solutions for these parts. In person, the socket is strikingly large, occupying most of my palm and overshadowing today’s server CPU packages.

Given the fact that the socket must support so many memory channels and PCIe lanes, it is not surprising that it is that large. Despite its enormous dimensions, the socket is still compact enough to enable dual-socket server designs, so AMD’s partners will be able to offer systems with up to 512 x86 cores as soon as its next-generation EPYC processors arrive later this year.

Meanwhile, for those systems that do not need so many cores and memory channels, AMD is prepping the SP8 platform that is set to offer fewer cores and DDR5 channels. Interestingly, Auras is working on water blocks for SP8 sockets as well, which means that the platform will still be quite mighty in terms of power consumption.

But while AMD’s SP7 is huge, Intel’s 9324-pin socket easily dwarfs it, as it is noticeably longer than the palm of my hand. The socket will work with Intel’s Xeon ‘Diamond Rapids’ processors with up to 192 cores, a 16-channel DDR5 memory subsystem supporting MRDIMMs, and PCIe Gen6 lanes.

Intel is yet to announce the processor base power of Diamond Rapids processors, though, since Auras is prepping water blocks for these CPUs, we're talking about circa 300W – 500W PBP and over 1 kW peak power consumption. Meanwhile, given that the socket is so massive, we would not be surprised if Intel’s 9324-pin socket will also support the Coral Rapids processors, presumably due in 2028 – 2029.

A Reddit user has demonstrated that SteamOS, Valve's Arch-based gaming operating system built around AMD silicon, can boot and run on an Intel Arc B580 discrete graphics card. Posting in the r/SteamOS subreddit as SaperPL, they documented the feat this week, pairing the Arc B580 with a Ryzen 5 5600 processor and getting Valve's full gaming-mode interface running on the card. The catch is that reaching that point took a Radeon card, a workaround for a broken installer, and a motherboard setting that nearly sank performance along the way.

The opening exists because recent SteamOS beta builds quietly widened hardware coverage. Valve's changelog for the beta cites improved compatibility with recent Intel and AMD platforms, language clearly aimed at the wave of Intel-powered handhelds rather than desktop Arc cards. However, because the underlying Linux graphics driver is shared, the same Mesa stack that targets Intel handheld chips also recognizes a desktop Arc GPU. SaperPL's system reported the card as Mesa Intel Arc B580 Graphics (BMG G21) on Mesa 26.1.2, running SteamOS 3.9.

Getting there was not exactly plug-and-play. According to the post, newer SteamOS images that supposedly already include Intel Arc support failed during setup. These images did not boot into the older live desktop-style installer with install, update, and recovery options. Instead, they started installing directly to the drive, then failed when the system tried to connect to the network and pull its first update. SaperPL says the same problem occurred even when testing with a Radeon RX 9060 XT, suggesting the issue was not limited to the Arc B580 itself.

The workaround was suitably PC-gaming messy. SaperPL installed an older “repair-main” SteamOS build using the Radeon card, pulled the required updates, and then swapped in the Intel Arc B580. After that, SteamOS booted on the Intel GPU and ran from the Main channel. The poster also noted that users without a spare Radeon card may be able to follow a Steam Community workaround to bypass the installer’s update failure directly, although that still leaves the process firmly in enthusiast territory.

The first performance results were mixed. SaperPL tested 14 games, including Cyberpunk 2077, Helldivers 2, Marvel’s Spider-Man: Miles Morales, Indiana Jones and the Great Circle, Toxic Commando, Hades, Rocket League, and others shown in the SteamOS library screenshot. The interface itself appeared to behave well, with the poster saying the Steam library and store navigation worked smoothly, even while downloads continued in the background. Gamescope also reportedly worked similarly to Radeon, apart from a VRR bug on FreeSync displays with HDR that caused occasional flickering.

Frame rates were another story. Indiana Jones and Toxic Commando were initially barely above 20 FPS at 1080p on the lowest settings, while Helldivers 2, Cyberpunk 2077, and Spider-Man: Miles Morales fell far below comparable Windows benchmark videos. The poster’s monitoring suggested the CPU was not the main problem, with the GPU often sitting around 80% to 90% usage while the Ryzen 5 5600 hovered between roughly 30% and 50%.

The biggest culprit turned out to be a familiar one for Intel Arc users: Resizable BAR. SaperPL later updated the post to say that ReBAR had been disabled on the Asus B450 Strix motherboard after a CPU change. Once enabled, Cyberpunk 2077 and Spider-Man appeared to perform as expected, while Indiana Jones and Toxic Commando improved significantly, though still not fully matching Windows reference results.

That detail matters because Intel Arc GPUs are unusually sensitive to Resizable BAR. Without it, the CPU cannot efficiently access the GPU’s full memory space, which can lead to severe performance drops. In this case, it made the difference between “SteamOS on Arc is broken” and “SteamOS on Arc is early, but actually running.” Even on Windows, leaving ReBAR off will severely impact Arc performance.

Commenters also pointed to another likely limitation: kernel support. Intel’s Arc drivers on Linux have improved considerably, but the newest performance work often depends on recent kernel and Mesa versions. If SteamOS’ Main channel is still behind the very latest Linux graphics stack, Arc performance may remain below what the same card can do under Windows or faster-moving Linux distributions.

For now, this is more proof of concept than a consumer-ready feature. Valve has not turned SteamOS into a general desktop gaming OS with clean support for every GPU, and the install path shown here is still too awkward for normal users. But the result is interesting. SteamOS running on an Intel Arc B580 suggests Valve's hardware net is widening, whether intentionally for desktop GPUs or indirectly through work on Intel-powered handhelds.

That could matter for future SteamOS machines. AMD remains the obvious fit for Valve’s gaming hardware today, but Intel has been pushing harder on Linux graphics support, and low-profile Arc cards could become attractive for small living-room builds if the driver stack matures.

AMD on Monday announced that it had acquired MEXT, a startup that developed a memory tiering technology that makes NAND flash memory appear as DRAM to the operating system, which enables operators of data centers to save money on DRAM. AMD expects the acquisition to help customers improve system efficiency, lower operating costs, and deploy large-scale workloads more quickly.

As AI models continue to expand and datasets grow larger, memory availability has become an increasingly important factor affecting overall system performance. In many cases, memory resources, not CPUs or GPUs, are becoming a performance bottleneck. Meanwhile, in many cases DRAM is used inefficiently.

MEXT addresses memory efficiency challenges with an AI-based memory tiering technology that moves infrequently accessed data from expensive DRAM to NAND storage, which costs orders of magnitude less per unit of capacity, and in a way that's transparent to applications. MEXT's Predictive Memory Engine continuously analyzes memory access patterns and uses AI models to anticipate which data stored in flash will be needed next. Those memory pages are proactively transferred back into DRAM before applications request them and enable software to access data as though it were in main memory, thus preserving performance levels.

By increasing the amount of usable memory available to applications, MEXT's technology aims to improve utilization of existing infrastructure and at the same time reduce needs for expensive DRAM. This approach can potentially lower total cost of ownership for cloud providers and enterprise customers and enable larger workloads to run on existing hardware. AMD believes that these capabilities can benefit both traditional data center applications and modern AI deployments, where access to large memory pools is often critical for efficiency and scalability.

AMD plans to incorporate MEXT's technology into its data center product portfolio and expand its capabilities to address memory-hungry AI workloads. The company already offers integrated solutions that combine processors, accelerators, networking technologies, and software, so MEXT's Predictive Memory Engine will complement the already broad portfolio.

As an added bonus to the technology itself, AMD gains a team with expertise in memory architectures, infrastructure software, and large-scale computing systems. Terms of the deal are unknown.

The MacBook Neo has been an astronomical hit for Apple, with both critics and consumers responding positively to the company's entry-level laptop. It changed the precedent for what a budget laptop could be, scaring Windows-reliant vendors, but one legacy chipmaker doesn't seem bothered. AMD has just released new marketing material that directly pits a Ryzen 200 series-equipped machine with the Neo, mocking the latter for not supporting 75% of top PC games.

"While 15 of the top 20 PC games do not run on Macbook Neo natively, AMD systems give you access to massive game libraries," said the company. Only 5 of those 20 titles will work on the Neo. Technically, you can use emulation software to still access more games, but AMD specifically covers that ground, too, and mentions "no workarounds required." It then points out how multiple storefronts enjoy universal compatibility with AMD devices.

For the comparison, AMD used HP's OmniBook X Flip powered by the Ryzen 5 220. That's not a new chip; it's a refresh of the company's Hawk Point lineup (8540U), and this SKU in particular features 2 full-fat Zen 4 cores and 4x Zen4c efficiency cores, for a total of 12 threads. It's paired with a Radeon 740M iGPU that's not exactly the most powerful by modern standards. It's the same integrated graphics found in the regular Ryzen Z1 APU, so it's about 2x less performant than the Z1 Extreme.

If you actually look at the reviews of this iGPU, it's a mixed bag. It can run older titles like GTA V at over 100 FPS at low settings, but it struggles with pretty much modern games. Hellblade 2 runs at 8 frames per second, while Alan Wake 2 hits about 11 frames on average. So yes, AMD runs 20 out of the 20 top games on PC, but a good chunk of them will not be smooth enough to be called playable on this specific chip. It's the x86 architecture and the Windows OS that are the real difference makers.

Everyone knows Apple Silicon is more than powerful enough, and the company's Metal API has modern features capable of real-time rendering. But there's simply not enough demand from the community and not a big push from Apple to pitch gaming as one of the platform's selling points. You can still emulate x86 code into Arm using Parallels, Crossover, or even Game Hub, but that's not native compatibility. Therefore, AMD is correct.

The company doesn't stop there; it also highlights how the OmniBook X Flip specifically has a 512GB SSD compared to the MacBook Neo's 256GB of storage. This laptop also features a touchscreen in a 2-in-1 form factor, versus the Neo, which has just a basic screen. Lastly, the port selection is more varied with AMD as well; there are 2x USB-C, 2x USB-A, and 1x HDMI ports on the HP machine, while you only get 2x USB-C on the Neo. And, of course, the Neo doesn't come with a Windows 11 license.

All that being said, the MacBook Neo is still an excellent laptop for the price. If gaming is imperative to you, Intel's Wildcat Lake laptops are also starting to penetrate this segment with similar pricing and impressive value propositions. If you're chasing that Arm efficiency, then Qualcomm's Snapdragon C-series chips also come with Windows, allowing you to at least bypass the OS difference. It's a great time to be in the market for budget laptops, but the simultaneous component crisis is still taming the full potential of this class.

AMD’s Radeon RX 9070 XT graphics card has finally penetrated the Steam Survey video card user-share table. The complete set of new-generation RDNA 4 graphics cards data from AMD is now nestled within the Steam gamer popularity tables, with the performance-leading RX 9070 XT highest placed at position 25. AMD took the wraps off the RX 9070 XT and regular RX 9070 at a special event in Feb 2025, with availability starting from March 2025. The RX 9060 XT was a Computex 2025 (~end of May) launch. So the charting of the family has been a long time coming.

Valve doesn’t publicly state a minimum share threshold for inclusion in the results table, but whatever formula lies behind it, the numbers must have climbed sufficiently by May 2026 for the complete Radeon RX 9000 family to now make the grade. Notably, with its newfound data, the RX 9070 XT's 1.35% share sits just a shade behind the RTX 5080, which has 1.52%.

Green Team context and AMD’s leading mystery GPU

Nvidia dominates the Steam GPUs chart, as you may expect. The current leader of the Steam GPUs pack is the time-tested Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 with a 4.02% share according to the newest survey. Positions two and three are the laptop (3.99%) and desktop (3.74%) versions of the RTX 4060, so some would call this Ada Lovelace GPU the real champion of champions.

Currently, the highest placed Red Team GPU is the nebulous ‘AMD Radeon Graphics’ at position 13 and 1.89% share. Some observers reckon this Steam entry impacts the tally of named models, as the Steam Client miscategorizes discrete models for some reason, perhaps due to some iGPU + GPU combos. There are also two other instances of ‘AMD Radeon(TM) Graphics’ in the table, muddying the waters.

At position 39, the RX 9060 XT has made its debut with a reported 0.72% share of Steam users gaming on this mid-ranger. The stats don’t differentiate between the 8GB and 16GB variants of this card.

We have to go all the way down to position 90 to see the Radeon RX 9070 non-XT graphics card. It has a user share of 0.18% according to the figures. For some reason, this efficiency king among GPUs has been present in the Steam Survey much longer than its brethren. We mentioned it popping up with just a 0.16% market share at the start of this year. The revised 0.18% figure doesn’t show spectacular growth, despite some of the praise heaped on this SKU. However, since the pricing of our current best-pick all-around enthusiast graphics card, the RX 9070 XT, can be so close, it’s probably not surprising that the non-XT is overshadowed.

AMD recently launched the RX 9070 GRE worldwide. This 12GB variant of the RX 9070 has been available for months in the Far East, but we aren’t surprised it hasn’t entered the Steam Survey yet (if it will ever make it).

AMD has denied a security researcher a $10,000 bug bounty despite the individual's work and cooperation with the company. Regulars at this pub might remember an article a while back about a security researcher who diagnosed a potential remote code execution (RCE) via a man-in-the-middle attack (MITM) in AMD's auto-updater software. Paul, the researcher, submitted a report at AMD's bug bounty program website, expecting both a fix and a payout for an RCE-class bug. The report was turned down as MITM attacks weren't covered by the program's policy. Nevertheless, Paul took down the blog post describing the situation due to AMD's request. It's now come back online, and the whole situation merits a facepalm or three.

First, the good news: the updater is now seemingly secured, and you if you download the latest version of AMD's software pack, you ought to get a fixed version. The road to this point has been far from smooth, though, and to this day, Paul seemingly never saw a dime for his efforts, a story that is becoming commonplace if Microsoft's issues with Nightmare-Eclipse are anything to go by. An RCE bug would otherwise be worth $10,000 if AMD fully acquiesced the significance of problem.

The updated post contains the full story, and it goes as follows: Back in February, when AMD asked Paul to bring down the blog post temporarily, the company said it would issue a standard CVE, fix the software, and attribute the findings to him, though a bounty payment was out of the question. Paul agreed (a decision he now regrets), though he asked what kind of timeline AMD would follow, suggesting the industry-standard 90-day window until he posted the public disclosure again.

AMD replied saying that it would "likely need a longer embargo, as additional tools beyond Ryzen Master appear[ed] to be impacted and [would] need releases." That was an interesting statement in several ways: first, it raises the question exactly why AMD would need so long to publish what was seemingly a one-character fix, replacing "http" with "https" in the code. Second, if the issue was bad enough to require so long to solve, then arguably Paul's work would merit some recompense. Third, as Paul pointed out, if this issue looked this pressing, why didn't it have a higher priority?

Nevertheless, he ended up agreeing on a 100-day window, and asked AMD the equivalent of "wassup?" before the clock ticked its last tock, only to be asked for extra time again, being told that "multiple tools are affected by [the bug]", and that "[AMD's] customers request additional time once [the fixes] are made available." Eventually, AMD reached out stating that a fix would be ready on June 9, totaling 124 days after the initial finding.

To its credit, AMD seemingly reengineered the download code in the autoupdater altogether, and Paul verified that the new version does indeed download drivers securely, though he remarks that the software only checks the validity of the downloaded file using the ancient CRC32 hash that isn't considered cryptographically secure anymore.

Here's where irony strikes, though: according to a Reddit user, the bug that Paul found seemingly wouldn't be triggered anyway, as the relevant section of the code wasn't being called to begin with, meaning the updater was broken. So AMD couldn't update the updater because the updating code couldn't update, necessitating a fresh download on behalf of users. Quis renovatores renovat indeed.

AMD has shared the first official benchmarks for its forthcoming EPYC 'Venice' CPUs, which will be the first chips to use the Zen 6 architecture. The flagship 256-core model hasn't been detailed in full, but AMD claims it offers 3.3 times the performance of the Nvidia Vera CPU in a rack-scale implementation with a fixed power budget of 100kW.

The constraints of this test completely change the framing of the results, so it's worth highlighting them first. AMD is looking at performance from the level of a rack, not an individual component on a single socket. AMD's results are modeled around a 100kW deployment, showing the performance across the rack rather than the performance on a single socket, or even a dual-socket system.

AMD did not, however, actually test all of these deployments. There's a lot of modeling going on here, which AMD details in its methodology paper that was published alongside the results. First, AMD estimated power based on the processor TDP and additional components, and it used that to calculate the number of nodes (2P system for each node) within a 100kW power budget. Then, it multiplied that number of nodes by single-node performance measured in a handful of benchmarks.

That's just the start of the stipulations. AMD doesn't have its hands on Vera, so the performance here is an estimate. AMD took benchmarks it had for Nvidia's Grace chip and multiplied them by a scaling factor of 1.63x based on Vera results published by Phoronix. AMD also says that its 256-core EPYC Venice results are derived from an estimated 1.7x scaling factor over the EPYC 9965, along with "internal testing."

AMD's methodology ends with this line: "[These results] are intended to provide directional comparison rather than direct measured rack benchmarks." As you can tell from the three paragraphs of stipulations above, that sentence carries a lot of weight on its shoulders. You can't simply scale the performance of a single "node" (a dual-socket system, in this case) up in a linear fashion. Interconnects, as well as thermal and power limitations, will become a factor as you scale up.

Regardless, AMD frames the results here around agentic AI, though the benchmarks it's using are focused on general-purpose data center tasks. The topline result is from SPEC CPU 2017, specifically looking at integer throughput. AMD used the following benchmarks, as well:

• Server-side Java based on SPECjbb 2015
• WRK Tool for load on an NGINX web server
• Redis-benchmark for in-memory workloads
• Memory caching with Memcached
• Database performance with TPROC-C on MySQL

These "results" are mostly a way for AMD to fire back at Nvidia after Phoronix published a list of results for Vera that were curated by Nvidia. AMD is laying the groundwork for its Advancing AI event next month, where we expect to hear more about Venice, Zen 6 more broadly, and AMD's enterprise roadmap in much greater detail.

It's tough times for PC enthusiasts, with some individual component prices having risen to astronomical highs. While we sit here waiting for the AI bubble to burst and pray the prices of our favorite PC parts come back down to more affordable prices, the alternative option for a new PC is to go the prebuilt route. Spotted at Walmart with a $500 discount is the Gigabyte Aorus Prime 5 desktop gaming PC, now listed at only $1,999, the cheapest we've seen this particular model. It's a good price for a gaming rig that includes a 16GB Nvidia RTX 5070 Ti graphics card, AMD Ryzen 7 9700X processor, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and a 2TB SSD for storage.

• Check out this deal at Walmart

When we compare the prebuilt to some of the prices of individual components, we can see more of the value of this Gigabyte Aorus deal. The RTX 5070 Ti GPU alone in this build cannot be found for less than $979 right now, accounting for almost half of the price of this desktop. 32GB of DDR5 RAM is also priced at $385 in the current market, and the 2TB SSD is worth at least $200. That's over $1,500 worth of parts before you've factored in the case, liquid cooling, motherboard, Windows 11, and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X, worth $304.

The RTX 5070 Ti in our review sits comfortably near the top of the charts in this latest generation of graphics cards. The results show a generational improvement in performance over the older 4070 Ti super, and not that far behind the more powerful and more expensive RTX 5080. The 5070 Ti crucially comes with 16GB of VRAM, making it more futureproof and giving it some longevity for gaming.

Try putting together a similar PC build yourself, and you will see straight away how good a deal this current $1,999 Gigabytre Aorus Prime 5 offer is. The gaming PC has liquid cooling, RGB, and plenty of RGB fans, plus a fairly sleek black case with a smoked tempered glass side panel. I'm not a fan of the "Team Up, Fight On." logo on the side panel, but that can be easily modified. You also get less hassle with warranties if something should go wrong. No need to troubleshoot individual parts, and liaise with retailers and manufacturers. The whole unit is under one umbrella. A much better experience if you're not comfortable with taking your PC apart.

If you're looking for more savings, check out our Best PC Hardware deals for a range of products, or dive deeper into our specialized SSD and Storage Deals, Hard Drive Deals, Gaming Monitor Deals, Graphics Card Deals, Gaming Chair, Best Wi-Fi Routers, Best Motherboard, or CPU Deals pages.

A lucky HVAC technician seems to have stumbled upon the PC of former AMD CEO Rory Read while at a customer's house. The client apparently ran a computer shop back in the day, so they had a bunch of unused equipment in the basement, which somehow included this PC. The case is doused in various signatures, including one from Dr. Lisa Su, accompanied by a message that reads "To Rory - All the Best from Team AMD."

I think i have Rory Read's (former CEO of AMD) PC from r/Amd

We looked at Dr. Lisa's signature on special edition Ryzen chips from a few years ago, and it matches the signature on the PC, but of course, there's no way to officially verify the authenticity. Looking at the case itself, it's a Xigmatek XEN6329 Mini-ITX chassis that currently goes for over $1,000 on the aftermarket. Moreover, the hardware inside looks quite dated, with the GPU likely being an ITX variant of the R9 285 from Sapphire.

That card came out in 2014, so it lines up with Read's tenure at AMD, and further suggests this computer was a parting gift from the higher-ups. For some reason, it was never used because it's completely dust-free and in new condition even after twelve years. The OP explained that the box still had all the packing materials intact and that the computer even came with a wrapped Windows 8.1 CD that was never touched.

Comment from r/Amd

The leading theory in the comments inferred that Read pawned off the PC at a computer shop, where it sat for years before being salvaged. Or perhaps it was sent for a repair, setup, or some maintenance before he decided to use it, although this seems less likely. Being a high-level executive, there's a chance he simply never looked for it again. Speaking of which, it's important to know the lore behind this PC's potential recipient to understand its value.

Rory Read was the head of AMD between 2011 and 2014, responsible for leading a course-correction that navigated the company through its darkest times. AMD had just suffered a disastrous launch in the form of its Bulldozer CPU architecture that fell flat against Intel's offerings, and the chipmaker had basically no stake in mobile computing during its biggest boom.

Read came in and secured partnerships with both Sony and Microsoft for their next-gen consoles — a partnership that still runs to this day. He also brought legendary chip architect Jim Keller back to AMD to work on the Zen architecture alongside Mike Clark. He then recruited Dr. Lisa Su in 2012 and personally mentored her to eventually take over the company, believing that an engineer needs to lead AMD long-term.

Read's job was only to stabilize the falling tower, stop the bleeding, if you will, and never to actually run the company long-term. He's known as a sort of turnaround specialist in the industry, having previously performed similar duties at IBM and Lenovo. In a way, he paved the way for AMD's incredible comeback, positioning the chipmaker perfectly for a resurgence under another competent leader.

Coming back to the PC itself, it includes signatures from other AMD executives of that era, such as Mark Papermaster, Rajan (Raj) Naik, Devinder Kumar, Colette LaForce, John Byrne, and Darrell Ford. That seems like way too much effort for someone trying to fake a collectible. Therefore, even though we can't be certain, this is one of the coolest pieces of PC industry memorabilia, one that shows the intersection between business and engineering.

AI-assisted coding (or vibe coding) has infiltrated Linux driver maintenance, with Linux developers now using LLMs to help maintain old drivers in the Linux kernel. Phoronix reports that GitHub Copilot was used to clean up code pertaining to vintage AMD R6000 Linux graphics drivers, helping keep the driver relevant for people still using these late 2000s-era GPUs.

Specifically, the R600 Gallium3D driver saw 59 commits by Gert Wollny, all aimed at cleaning up shader compiler code in the driver. The refactoring process was done with Copilot, with notes in each commit citing Copilot in auto mode being used to help build the code.

This method of driver maintenance will inevitably become a staple of Linux driver maintainers moving forward, as the world adopts AI over human programmers for writing the vast majority of code written today. The Linux community often only has a handful or a single person updating these older drivers, making AI a very incentivizing tool to compensate for a lack of manpower and help keep these older drivers alive. The R600 Linux driver is designed to run the AMD/ATI HD 2000 through HD 6000 series of graphics cards. The HD 2000 series debuted in 2007, and the HD 6000 debuted in 2010, making some of these graphics cards nearly 20 years old.

Rather than rejecting AI, Linus Torvalds has opted to embrace the adoption of AI and allow Linux developers to use AI, but only when appropriate. A new policy enforces proper tagging if Linux kernel developers use AI to assist in code creation. Critically, this system puts the blame for any buggy code on the person publishing kernel driver changes, requiring the person to test their work before publishing.

Despite the use of AI, Linux developers are, regardless, discussing branching off the R600 drivers into a legacy branch dubbed “Amber2”. This would free up the main Mesa codebase and prevent legacy drivers from accidentally breaking as new features are added to Mesa.

Next-gen gaming GPUs from both AMD and Nvidia are expected to be announced sometime next year, following the (roughly) biennial release cadence of these cards. Tweakers, a Dutch publication present at Computex 2026, asked a few manufacturers at the show about RDNA 5 and got varying responses. In general, the AIB partners suggested that we should see new GPUs about a year from now, but some thought hardware may not hit the shelves until late 2027 or early 2028.

One manufacturer said it expects next-gen AMD graphics cards in the second or third quarter of 2027, while another said it could be pushed outside 2027 entirely and into early 2028. But there's still a chance for a late 2027 release. Keep in mind that the announcement and actual launch differ; AMD could introduce RDNA 5 in late 2027, but the GPUs might actually make it to market in early 2028, for example.

AMD showed off RDNA 4 for the first time at CES 2025, while the initial models — RX 9070 and RX 9070 XT — didn't ship until March. RDNA 3 was a bit better in this regard with a November 2022 announcement and December 2022 launch period. RDNA 5 is rumored to be a major upgrade for Team Red with features like dual-issue execution in the works, so the company wouldn't want to deliver an undercooked product hastily.

Nvidia debuted the RTX 50 series at CES 2025 as well and current rumors point to Rubin-based gaming GPUs coming in late 2027, with the same early 2028 murmurs heard for the RTX 60 series as well. If true, both GPU makers would be closely aligned in their launch schedules, but it's simply too early to tell. The PC hardware industry is going through a turbulent time, and the volatility caused by the AI boom means that gaming GPUs are the least of these companies' concerns right now.

While we're here, Intel is still in the business of making gaming-focused GPUs. It just launched the new Arc G3 family for handheld consoles featuring Panther Lake silicon, but, unfortunately, the future for dedicated graphics cards is looking a bit dire. On the console side, Xbox Helix and Sony's PS6 are still expected to at least be announced next year as, by then, it will have been seven years since the current generation launched. These systems will also be powered by next-gen AMD silicon.

Valve released the Steam Hardware Survey for May 2026, revealing insight into PC gaming trends and patterns that define the industry. As always, we have data on how much RAM people have, what GPUs are the most popular, etc., but perhaps the most interesting bit of info is the CPU usage. AMD has now reached 46.06% share on Steam across all platforms, with almost 45% of Windows PCs using AMD processors.

The exact number for Windows is 44.97%, so we're counting that as 45% for AMD, while Intel is at 55.02% for the month of May. Compared to April, that's a 0.79% drop for the Blue Team, while also a 0.79% gain for the Red Team. Compared to the start of the year, in January, AMD only held 43.34% of the share while Intel accounted for 56.64%, so the patterns either way are being reinforced.

AMD keeps climbing the charts while Intel's lead is on a steady decline. It still has the biggest slice of the pie because of the sheer legacy left behind, and since AMD only became competitive in 2017. That was the year the first mainstream Ryzen chips came out and challenged Intel for the throne.

AMD planted the seeds of the Zen architecture during its darkest years, and that multi-year gamble has borne fruit to the point that the data now reflects it. To be clear, Intel is also very competitive these days, especially on the mobile front with Panther Lake and with the upcoming Nova Lake family set to take a true generational leap for desktop.

Most recently, the advent of 3D V-Cache has helped AMD secure the gaming segment with chips that consistently outperform other offerings. The company has released several X3D variants of its existing CPUs for both current and older generations, such as the newly announced 10th Anniversary Edition of the 5800X3D, the chip that started it all. On the other hand, we have the 9950X3D2 with extra cache stacked underneath both its 8-core CCDs for the first time in Ryzen history.

Funnily enough, AMD has also reached a similar 46% share of the server x86 CPU market thanks to its EPYC lineup, which is about to get refreshed with Venice this year and Verano in 2027. L

AMD's EXPO Ultra Low Latency program, announced at Computex 2026, aims to give users a one-click route to lower memory latencies than its existing EXPO profiles, but the company's initial announcement was light on details. To learn more about EXPO ULL, I stopped by G.Skill's Computex booth, where the company demonstrated four new kits that offer EXPO ULL support.

Memory latency directly affects how long the CPU has to wait in order to get data back from RAM, and so it has a major impact on CPU performance. But even as new DDR standards and ever-faster DIMMs have boosted memory bandwidth, DDR latency has improved at a much slower pace over time.

For some very high-level background, when selecting memory, PC builders will generally consider a given memory kit's speed and its CAS latency (CL). If you compare two CL30 memory kits, for example, the one with the higher clock rate will have a lower effective latency in nanoseconds (because CL30 expresses a number of clock cycles).

Knowing this, your first instinct for reducing latency might be to seek the highest-clocked memory you can find with the lowest CAS latency (like DDR5-8400 or even faster modules).

But on modern AMD platforms, it's not that simple. Reaching memory speeds higher than 6000 MT/s generally requires the use of a 1:2 multiplier mode between the clock of the integrated memory controller (the UCLK), which generally tops out around 3000 MHz, and the memory clock (MCLK). This 1:2 multiplier adds latency, and so it can counterintuitively reduce performance even as memory speeds climb above 6000 MT/s. (Remember that DDR memory moves bits at twice the clock rate, hence MT/s).

With this 1:2 multiplier active, by the time additional memory clock speed even begins to bring latency back down to where it would generally be in the 1:1 mode, you're looking at wildly expensive and exotic memory kits, and so most enthusiasts running Ryzen 7000 and Ryzen 9000 CPUs consider it desirable to choose memory that lets them run the UCLK and MCLK in 1:1 lockstep for the best balance of low latency and (relatively) low cost.

All that is why using memory faster than 6000 MT/s on AMD platforms is generally counterproductive for gaming performance. That's why modules in the range of DDR5-6000 CL30 are widely regarded as the overclocking "sweet spot" for Ryzen 7000 and Ryzen 9000 CPUs.

But that doesn't mean there isn't further room for improvement, as the introduction of EXPO ULL suggests.

G.Skill told me that until now, DRAM module makers were only permitted to change the four primary timings within EXPO (and XMP) profiles, leaving performance on the table. EXPO ULL affords memory makers more freedom to adjust the sub-timings within each of those four primary timings for even lower latencies, and to include those results in the memory's SPD.

Tweaking memory sub-timings on Ryzen platforms using community-made tools to determine the best potential settings used to be a fairly common practice for those seeking the best performance from their AMD systems, but Ryzen X3D processors and their massive slices of 3D V-Cache reduced those CPUs' sensitivity to those finer adjustments. It's become much more common to just get a DDR5-6000 CL30 kit, enable EXPO, and call it good.

But if you are focused on achieving the absolute lowest memory latency, EXPO ULL removes the need to perform the (tedious and tricky) process of determining those improved sub-timings by allowing memory makers to shoulder that work and include it as part of the one-click boost that EXPO provides.

For all that, EXPO ULL doesn't change the fundamental performance characteristics of X3D versus non-X3D CPUs, so while you can certainly pair an X3D chip with an EXPO ULL kit, G.Skill tells me that you're not going to see as large of a difference in performance from that pairing as you would with a non-X3D chip. That's why AMD is touting the performance gains of EXPO ULL with a Ryzen 7 9700X and not the Ryzen 7 9850X3D you might expect.

G.Skill also told me that EXPO ULL-ready memory requires stricter binning of individual memory chips during production, so it isn't just a software change that can be applied to existing modules. The company says the extra work involved in this stricter binning process means that modules supporting the feature are likely to be more expensive than kits that haven't undergone the same characterization.

Overall, then, EXPO ULL is likely to be a premium (and somewhat niche) addition to the EXPO program instead of a broad replacement for non-ULL EXPO profiles. Demanding gamers who need the lowest memory latency for the best performance in CPU-bound gaming scenarios will likely want an EXPO ULL kit regardless of the type of Ryzen CPU they're using. But we'll have to see just how much extra cash these kits demand in today's already eye-watering memory market and what benefit they have, if any, for AMD's massively popular X3D chips.

Several AMD partners are showing off the company’s next-generation Helios rack-scale solution running AMD’s EPYC ‘Venice’ processors and Instinct MI455X AI accelerators at Computex 2026 in Taipei, Taiwan. The units are set to become available later this year. There is one major catch, though: they all use UALink-over-Ethernet scale-up connectivity, which may limit their performance in certain workloads that depend on the connection performance. That said, Helios systems with ‘true’ UALink interconnects will also be available.

AMD’s Helios is the company's first rack-scale AI system, and is set to rival Nvidia’s NVL72 VR200 machines based on the next-generation Vera Rubin platform. Helios will rely on AMD’s 6th Generation EPYC Venice CPUs with up to 256 cores, pack 72 Instinct MI455X accelerators with a total of 31 TB of HBM4 memory, and 1400 TB/s of bandwidth. AMD estimates that its performance will be around 2900 FP4 dense PFLOPS, which puts the unit behind Nvidia's VR200 NVL72 system in terms of compute performance, but ahead of it with HBM4 memory capacity. This promises to provide Helios-based systems an advantage in memory-intensive workloads, such as when running large LLMs.

The AI accelerators are interconnected and make use of a UALink-over-Ethernet connection, which provides up to 260 TB/s aggregated scale-up bandwidth (in line with Nvidia’s NVL72 VR200). Helios will also feature Pensando Vulcano network interface cards (NICs), which are among the industry's first 800 GbE network cards that comply with the Ultra Ethernet specification and provide up to 43 TB/s of scale-out bandwidth.

However, the interconnection used on these Helios systems will vary. The machine supports both UALink and UALink-over-Ethernet, but the initial versions will use the latter, rather than the former. This is likely because UALink switches aren't finalized and are pending validation and qualification by AMD’s AI customers.

The biggest advantage of using UALink over Ethernet is that AMD can build Helios using an existing, widely supported ecosystem of validated and qualified components. Ethernet switching ASICs, cables, and other ingredients are already used by hyperscalers and cloud providers worldwide, which accelerates deployment.

But there is a major downside with using Ethernet, even with the UALink protocol on top: Ethernet was originally designed as a general-purpose networking technology; it was never designed to scale up AI accelerators.

As a result, communications may involve higher latency, more protocol overhead, and less deterministic performance than a dedicated scale-up fabric. For large AI training jobs that need all 72 Instinct MI455X accelerators to work in concert, communication efficiency is as important as compute performance. If the UALink-over-Ethernet interconnect cannot keep GPUs fed with data efficiently, some of the theoretical performance of the hardware may be lost in real-world deployments, even though on paper, Helios with UALink-over-Ethernet is as good as Nvidia’s NVL72 VR200 in scale-up bandwidth.

This begs the question of whether UALink will ever be widely used with Helios and whether UALink will ever be widely deployed using copper. Hyperscalers and other companies deploying high-end AI hardware at scale rarely upgrade their hardware.

While the Instinct MI455X certainly promises to be among the best hardware accelerators this year, Helios will likely only be rivalled by Nvidia’s NVL72 VR200. It will be outdated next year when AMD launches its Instinct MI500-series products. These units will be used in the company’s next-generation rack-scale offering, which promises to pack more AI GPUs, potentially requiring optical interconnects with UALink on top. As a result, Helios systems with true UALink interconnections over copper will be on the market for less than a year before those next-generation rack-scale solutions will hit the market.

Of course, nothing is stopping AMD from offering Helios with Instinct MI500-series accelerators and UALink interconnects over copper; however, the company hasn't confirmed the existence of such systems.

Regardless of your opinion of Nvidia’s RTX Spark, there’s no doubt that it’s the most consequential consumer announcement to come out of Computex 2026. Unlike Intel, which told Tom’s Hardware it’s handling the launch with “a healthy dose of paranoia,” AMD’s executives are confident that its Strix Halo and upcoming Gorgon Halo products will compete well with the N1X and N1 under the RTX Spark brand.

“I’m really excited that Nvidia has joined the game. You know, we were the only game in town for almost two years now, and the large local memory is becoming super critical in the agentic AI [workloads],” said AMD’s Rahul Tikoo, senior vice president and general manager of AMD’s client business. “I'm actually happy to see Nvidia join the race for these great products.”

AMD, of course, believes that Strix Halo and eventually Gorgon Halo are positioned well against RTX Spark devices. In a separate discussion, AMD’s Andrej Zdravkovic, chief software officer, said, “At this point in time… I mean, you’re just wrong if you don’t get a Strix Halo notebook,” when speaking on the choice of machine for developers. As the software lead at AMD, however, Zdravkovic is distanced from the hardware. Tikoo had more direct comments on the hardware comparison.

“I’m actually curious about what [Nvidia has] done, but when I look at their specs, their specs are 128 gigs of local memory. We’ve done it on Strix Halo. Their specs are a 20-core CPU. We have a 16-core / 32-thread CPU in here,” Tikoo said. “So, if you just compare the specs, I don’t see… now, Gorgon Halo, which is coming out in Q3, is going to be a better product.”

Hardware is only one part of the battle, which has become clear as AMD continues to push its way into AI infrastructure. Tom’s Hardware asked Zdravkovic about the so-called ‘CUDA moat’ that Nvidia has built for itself, and how AMD plans to address that as it rolls out updates for its own ROCm stack.

“If you asked me the same question like three years ago, I would be, yeah, that really matters. I think that matters less at this point,” Zdravkovic told Tom’s Hardware. “Nvidia has created a phenomenal ecosystem around CUDA, and our advantage is that ROCm is, from a developer point of view, extremely easy to use… the shift from one to another is easy, and the only challenge is if your application ends up using some of the specific commands that Nvidia has and we don’t, and the other way around.”

The posturing against Nvidia is expected, both on the hardware and software side, but Tikoo also pointed out that Nvidia’s entrance into the consumer PC market has downstream benefits for AMD.

“Nvidia has brought validity into the space… I think it’s also going to help the ecosystem move forward faster, right, because Nvidia and [AMD] are the two big players in this space, and both of us now being in this space not only drives the cloud ecosystem, it drives the AI ecosystem in the PC on Windows, and so we’re excited about that,” Tikoo said.

We’re still a few months away before we can see what material impact RTX Spark has on the broader industry, though we expect the initial rollout to be more muted than Nvidia’s keynote suggests. Although Nvidia plans to sell configurations of RTX Spark down as low as 16 GB of memory, the initial configuration will top out at 128 GB and likely demand several thousand dollars. At least initially, it’s a product that looks like it will appeal to a relatively small (but growing) market of AI developers, not dissimilar to Strix Halo.

AMD’s upcoming Gorgon Halo chips are largely a refresh of Strix Halo, leveraging the same Zen 5 cores for the CPU and RDNA 3.5 cores for the GPU, though with a bump up to 192 GB of unified memory. At least from the memory perspective, which continues to be an important specification for AI workloads, AMD has the edge. But, as we’re all well aware, there’s far more that goes into a platform (especially a consumer platform that costs several thousand dollars) than memory alone.

It will be interesting to see how the dynamic between Nvidia and AMD plays out, as we expect Gorgon Halo and RTX Spark to arrive in the same window; AMD says Q3 for Gorgon Halo, while Nvidia has simply said “fall” for RTX Spark.

Intel has published specifications for the Xeon 6377P, a 12-core server processor that pairs enterprise-grade features with clock speeds more commonly associated with high-end desktop CPUs. According to Intel's product database, the chip, based on Bartlett Lake silicon, has a recommended price of $1,045 and is scheduled to launch in Q2 2026. The 6377P is also notable as the first P-core-only processor Intel has placed in its enterprise Xeon lineup.

The Xeon 6377P appears to be an unusual addition to Intel's server lineup. While modern Xeon processors typically emphasize high core counts, large memory capacities, and extensive I/O connectivity, the new chip instead prioritizes frequency, boosting up to 5.7 GHz while maintaining a relatively modest 95W TDP.

Based on the specifications, the chip looks quite different from what most buyers expect from an Xeon. Dual-channel memory, a 128 GB capacity ceiling, 20 PCIe 5.0 lanes, and single-socket-only support are all constraints that would be unremarkable on a workstation processor but stand out on a $1,045 server part.

Intel's Xeon 6 lineup normally spans the high-core-count Granite Rapids P-core parts and the 288-E-core Clearwater Forest and Sierra Forest parts. Dropping a 12-core Bartlett Lake die — basically a desktop CPU with ECC support and a server product code — into this family appears to be a deliberate choice to address single-socket, entry-level server deployments where raw core count matters less than per-core performance and platform familiarity.

One standout number is the 5.7 GHz maximum turbo — unusually high for server silicon, where power efficiency and core density typically dominate the conversation. The 95W TDP — genuinely low for a $1,045 server chip — makes that figure even more impressive.

Now, not every enterprise workload needs dozens of cores. Electronic design automation, CAD, software compilation, financial modeling, and certain industrial control workloads are often bottlenecked by single-threaded or lightly threaded performance. For those use cases, a 5.7 GHz Xeon with ECC memory, PCIe 5.0, platform validation, and guaranteed long-term availability is a more targeted fit than a 64-core EPYC with slower per-core clocks.

On the other hand, the competitive picture is less flattering. AMD's EPYC 4005 series, built on Zen 5, targets the same single-socket entry-level segment at lower price points and with a newer architecture. The earlier EPYC 4004 series topped out at 16 cores on AM5 — more cores than the 6377P at a lower RCP. Intel's counter-argument may be per-core performance and the existing LGA1700 platform ecosystem. However, the chip's AVX2-only instruction set, with no AVX-512 support, may give pause to workloads that can use wider vector operations — a notable omission at this price.

So, why would a buyer choose the 6377P over a Core i9 running on a high-end desktop board? The answer probably lies in what consumer platforms don't offer: certified ECC support, validated system configurations, and the multi-year product lifecycle commitments that enterprise procurement often requires.

Intel has not indicated whether the 6377P will be compatible with existing consumer LGA1700 motherboards, and given its Server/Enterprise use designation, OEM system availability is the more likely path to market.

This week at Computex 2026, we saw Nvidia reveal its RTX Spark, and last month, AMD detailed its Ryzen AI Max 400 "Gorgon Halo" lineup, a refresh of the Strix Halo APUs that lifts supported unified memory to 192GB and allows up to 160GB of that pool to be addressed as VRAM. AMD describes the flagship Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 as the first x86 client processor able to run a 300-billion-parameter language model locally, pitching the platform for use cases that need to keep multiple AI agents resident in memory at once.

The market for Gorgon Halo will likely be directly shared with other chips, such as Nvidia's RTX Spark, which debuted at Computex 2026. RTX Spark is also positioned as an on-device agentic computing device. With local AI computing demanding lots of on-device RAM, it poses a difficult issue for device vendors.

DRAM contract prices are forecast to climb another 58% to 63% this quarter, on top of the record 90% to 95% jump TrendForce recorded in Q1, which also saw Nvidia raise the price of its DGX Spark desktop from $3,999 to $4,699, citing memory supply. So, what happens to the dream of accessible local AI compute?

DRAM supply squeeze

The local AI PC has become a category defined by how much memory it carries, and it’s scaling that memory up at a time when memory has never cost more. AMD's three Gorgon Halo SKUs reuse the same Zen 5 cores, RDNA 3.5 graphics, and XDNA 2 NPU as the existing Ryzen AI Max 300 parts, with the Max+ PRO 495 gaining a 100 MHz boost-clock bump to 5.2 GHz, a 40-compute-unit Radeon 8065S, and a 55 TOPS NPU.

Memory capacity has been increased 50% from the 128GB ceiling on Strix Halo, with a leaked PassMark entry putting the 192GB figure as eight 24GB SK hynix LPDDR5X packages on an HP test board, though AMD hasn’t yet confirmed this. Partner systems from Asus, HP, and Lenovo are due in the third quarter of 2026.

It’s all well and good that Nvidia and AMD are releasing machines like the RTX Spark and the Gorgon Halo line-up. However, Samsung, SK hynix, and Micron have all shifted the bulk of their wafer capacity toward high-bandwidth memory for AI accelerators because HBM carries far higher margins than commodity DRAM, and the conventional memory supply has tightened as a direct result of this. HP told investors in February that memory now accounts for roughly 35% of the cost of building a PC, up from 15% to 18% a quarter earlier.

SK Group chairman Chey Tae-won, speaking at Computex 2026 on the show’s official opening day, repeated his position that the shortage will run through 2030, despite the company's intention to double wafer capacity within the next five years. New fabs from all three makers are under construction, but none will reach volume production before late 2027 at the earliest, and most forecasts now predict a structurally higher price floor that persists even after the acute shortage eases.

The 192GB in a Gorgon Halo box, the 128GB in an RTX Spark or DGX Spark, and the LPDDR5X soldered into every AI laptop announced at Computex all come off wafers the memory makers would otherwise sell as HBM. That’s why Nvidia raised the DGX Spark by $700 in February without changing a single spec, and why component makers have begun passing memory costs through directly. One vendor has even taken an extremely on-the-nose approach of adding a flat memory surcharge to every purchase, and in some cases, smaller buyers are now quoted prices that change by the hour.

Bandwidth caps inference speed

A single pool of 192GB would enable an APU to hold a model that would otherwise require a multi-GPU server. While it doesn’t make the model run quickly, dense language model inference reads close to the full set of active weights from memory for every token generated, so generation speed is governed by memory bandwidth divided by the per-token weight footprint, not by idle memory.

Gorgon Halo keeps the same 256-bit LPDDR5X-8000 interface as Strix Halo, which tops out around 256 GB/s in theory and which independent testers have measured closer to 212 GB/s on the GPU. By comparison, the Apple M3 Ultra that AMD and Nvidia are chasing on capacity is rated at 819 GB/s, and an RTX 5090 moves data at 1,792 GB/s.

This gap explains why a dense 70-billion-parameter model fully resident on a Strix Halo iGPU lands in the low single digits of tokens per second, regardless of how much headroom the memory pool has. Our own Corsair AI Workstation 300 review found that Nvidia's slightly higher-bandwidth GB10 pulled ahead of Strix Halo as context length grew, for exactly this reason.

Capacity matters most for mixture-of-experts models, which activate only a fraction of their parameters per token and run far faster than their total size suggests, and for long-context agentic workloads, where it’s KVcache rather than model weights that consume memory. It’s these use cases that AMD’s agentic pitch points at, with leaked details on the next-gen Medusa Halo parts showing a move to LPDDR6 and as much as 80% more bandwidth.

Holding the line on price

Agentic AI is also something of a pricing tool for vendors, beyond describing a workload. A 192GB workstation sold on the promise of running 300-billion-parameter models locally can hold a four-figure price more comfortably than a mini PC sold on cores and clocks, and it justifies loading the most expensive component in the build to its maximum. AMD's Ryzen AI Halo developer box, a 128GB Strix Halo system, opens pre-orders in June at $3,999 through Micro Center, matching the launch price of Acer's GB10-based Veriton GN100 and the original DGX Spark before its increase.

Apple, the one vendor with the scale to hold priority memory allocation, has moved the other way. It pulled the 512GB Mac Studio configuration from sale, raised the price of its 256GB upgrade, and in May removed several more high-memory Mac mini and Mac Studio options as supply tightened.

This shows us beyond doubt that expanding capacity while holding the line on premium pricing is a choice the AMD and Nvidia camps are making, not one that the market is forcing. Whether buyers accept it rests on whether local agentic inference delivers enough value over cloud services to justify the outlay, on machines shipping with memory capacities that outpace the bandwidth that ultimately determines what that memory can do.

It's a grim time to be a PC gamer and enthusiast, as anybody who has spent any time making a build list well knows. The AI gold rush has made practically everything that goes into a PC more expensive as LLMs and agentic workflows conspire to grab every available square millimeter of logic, memory, and storage wafers the world over.

For all that, here we are at Computex 2026 with a fresh graphics card review. AMD is bringing its formerly China-only RX 9070 GRE (aka “Great Radeon Edition,” neé Golden Rabbit Edition) to global markets. This card has been available in the Chinese market for about a year, but AMD has decided that now is the time to bring the GRE to the wider world.

And here it is, launching at the same $549 in the USA that the RX 9070 ostensibly listed for. That's sure to cause some double-takes, but times have obviously changed since the 9070 arrived a bit over a year ago.

In today's wild graphics market, prices on what we might call "entry-level enthusiast" cards with large memory capacities have gotten out of whack with the performance levels they deliver. The $349 RX 9060 XT 16GB is now selling for closer to $450, and the $429 RTX 5060 Ti 16GB is now closer to $570. The RX 9060 XT might be situationally recommendable at that price, but the RTX 5060 Ti 16GB is clearly DOA.

And higher-end cards that would formerly have served as true midrange products are more expensive, too. The $549 RX 9070 sells for closer to $650, as does the RTX 5070.

So there's currently a wide gap in the graphics market for enthusiasts who want strong enough performance for high-refresh-rate gaming at both 1080p and 1440p without spending a dollar more than they need to, and AMD sees an opportunity for the RX 9070 GRE to fill it.

For a quick refresher, the RX 9000 series uses the RDNA 4 graphics architecture, AMD’s first to include dedicated matrix math accelerators for AI tasks like upscaling and frame gen. RDNA 4 also boasts improved RT units that claim up to a 2x improvement over the RDNA 3 CU. RDNA 4 also includes a much-improved media engine that can encode and transcode video quickly with much higher image quality than past Radeon products.

The RX 9070 GRE uses the same large Navi 48 GPU as the RX 9070 and RX 9070 XT, but it's the most cut-down version of that chip thus far, with only 48 RDNA 4 compute units of a possible 64. That downsizing has the expected downstream consequences for texture sampling throughput, pixel fill rate, and raw FLOPS compared to higher-end RDNA 4 cards.

AMD has also decked out the GRE with slower GDDR6 memory and less of it compared to its higher-end stablemates. This card offers 12GB of GDDR6 running at 18 Gbps on a 192-bit bus, which is good for 432 GB/s of raw memory bandwidth. (The RX 9070 and 9070 XT use 20 Gbps GDDR6, as does the RX 9060 XT.)

All of those cuts are clearly meant to thread the performance gap between the RX 9060 XT 16GB and the RX 9070. In terms of raw FLOPS, the GRE isn't that far behind the RX 9070, but its slower GDDR6 clocks and narrower bus both mean that vital memory bandwidth is down a whole 33% compared to the 9070 and 9070 XT. And just 12GB of GDDR6 means this card will be less well suited to RT and 4K gaming versus its two higher-end stablemates.

All that suggests it might have been good for AMD to be bolder with the RX 9070 GRE's price. With just 12GB of VRAM and relatively low memory bandwidth, this card is less appealing for local AI trailblazers than the higher-end 9070 and 9070 XT might be, and as we'll see, its gaming performance isn't so close to the 9070 that it would threaten to cannibalize sales of that product.

But a $479 9070 GRE (or even a $499 one) would probably kill every current RX 9060 XT 16GB card dead — or at least force prices back down, both of which are outcomes that AMD's board partners would likely be unhappy with in today's wild market and constrained upstream supply conditions.

But another angle here is that hardware is just the beginning of evaluating a given graphics card in 2026. You don't just plug one into a PC and install occasional driver updates for it any longer. Modern gaming requires a GPU vendor to conduct ongoing investment in a multi-part software stack encompassing upscaling, frame generation, and RT denoising, and to effectively evangelize that stack to developers and get it into games.

Thanks to Nvidia's sustained investment in the DLSS ecosystem, owning a GeForce card means that you can generally trust that you'll enjoy either day-one support for the latest DLSS versions in games or an easy override using the Nvidia App. And Multi Frame Generation on Blackwell has matured to the point that early tradeoffs with input latency are basically ironed out in the latest titles. That all means that you have a wide range of freedom to tune performance, smoothness, and image quality to taste on GeForces.

AMD certainly has competitive AI-powered upscaling options in FSR 4 and 4.1, both of which are major improvements over FSR 3 and earlier. And you can enable them in many games with driver overrides, just as with the Nvidia App. But community surveys have still shown a strong preference for the output of DLSS, so AMD still has work to do on its upscaling models.

And for those who want to embrace the smoothness boost of framegen, AMD is clearly behind. FSR 4 ML Frame Generation is still limited to a 2X multiplier, and it's only supported in a handful of games compared to DLSS MFG. Even Intel has enabled higher 3x and 4x framegen multipliers for its Arc products.

And AMD's Ray Regeneration RT denoiser is only available in a couple of titles, while you can usually find DLSS Ray Reconstruction alongside titles that are pushing the state of path-traced effects forward. Ray Reconstruction is a key feature in titles like Resident Evil Requiem, Pragmata, Indiana Jones and the Great Circle, Doom: The Dark Ages, and more. In fact, AMD cards are locked out of path-traced effects entirely in Resident Evil Requiem and Pragmata.

Whatever the cause of these divergent experiences on GeForces and Radeons, the fact of the matter is that Nvidia has the money and developer relations muscle to make sure its DLSS features make their way into practically every new game, whereas AMD apparently does not, and that gap seems to grow wider with every AAA release.

All that is to say that if you choose a Radeon today, you are likely going to encounter more inconsistent feature support, fewer cutting-edge options for eye candy, and a less flexible performance tuning experience compared to GeForces.

And that all means that AMD likely needs to be more aggressive on pricing to get gamers back into its camp (and perhaps funnel some of its AI cash back into developer relations to stoke broader adoption of its tech). It's tough to admit that you're behind on these features and their adoption, to be sure, but pricing is a powerful way to make up some of the difference.

• MORE: Best Graphics Cards
• MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
• MORE: All Graphics Content

For our testing, AMD sent over XFX's Swift Radeon RX 9070 GRE. This is XFX's most straightforward family of graphics cards, and the 9070 GRE version features a clean, reserved design without any kind of RGB or accent lighting whatsoever. If you like stealthy builds, this card would be a fine pick for the purpose.

This card is already listed at Best Buy in the USA for AMD's $549 MSRP, so we'll have to see whether that price holds and whether you can actually buy it from stock.

At least according to retail specs, XFX rates this card for the same 2790 MHz boost clock and 220 W TDP as AMD's reference spec, so its performance in our test suite should be representative of what a 9070 GRE "reference" card would deliver, even though no such actual product exists.

While this isn't a fancy RX 9070 GRE, it doesn't feel cheap or insubstantial. The backplate is made of sturdy metal, and the heatsink proper is well-finished and features a dense nickel-plated fin stack for plenty of surface area.

We weren't able to perform formalized noise testing on this card before we had to leave for Computex, but the large heatsink and trio of fans mean that its noise signature is quiet and pleasant under load. You likely won't be able to hear this card over other components in a gaming PC when it's running full tilt.

As is common nowadays, XFX cuts a vent in this card’s backplate to allow air from the forward portion of the fin stack to escape directly upwards into the case’s airflow path.

Around back, you'll find three DisplayPort 2.1 connectors and a single HDMI 2.1b port.

The RX 9070 GRE relies on two eight-pin PCIe connectors to fuel its 220W TDP, so unless you do something really stupid, you won't have to worry about potential 12V-2x6 meltdowns.

• MORE: Best Graphics Cards
• MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
• MORE: All Graphics Content

We do our very best to deliver clean, reliable benchmark numbers. Each of our tests encompasses 60 seconds or more of real-world gameplay, carefully chosen to represent what we expect will be typical gameplay experiences. We sanity-check every result and retest whenever necessary to ensure that outliers don’t muck up our final standings.

We test without upscaling or frame generation at a mix of high and ultra settings across all of our titles. While we personally recommend using the full range of upscaling and frame generation options available in a given title to achieve your desired balance of performance and image quality, focusing on native rendering in reviews keeps our results directly comparable across different vendors' products.

Our 2026 GPU test suite covers 15 titles. 11 of them start with a raster baseline or are raster-only, while four more of them include additional RT options that we employ in our tests. Two more require a graphics card with RT support to run at all. We tested Assassin's Creed Shadows and GTA V Enhanced exclusively with RT enabled.

Here's our complete list of tested titles:

• Arc Raiders
• Assassin's Creed Shadows (RT only)
• Black Myth: Wukong (+RT)
• Marvel's Spider-Man 2 (+RT)
• Cyberpunk 2077 (+RT)
• Alan Wake II (+RT)
• Fortnite
• Marvel Rivals
• Apex Legends
• Counter-Strike 2
• Stalker 2
• Doom: The Dark Ages (RT required)
• Indiana Jones and the Great Circle (RT required)
• Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced (RT only)
• Clair Obscur: Expedition 33

We've tried to cover a broad mix of game engines, graphics APIs, and game types in this lineup, from popular esports experiences to crushing AAA visual feasts developed both natively for PC and ports from consoles. Our selected games stress every part of a modern graphics card, from pure compute horsepower to VRAM management to RT to driver overhead at high frame rates. If a card rises to the top of our charts after weathering all of these tests, you can be sure that it's a standout product.

When picking titles to test, we considered games' time in market, active player counts, review scores (to see whether a title is likely to become an enduring part of PC gaming), and the ease of conducting a repeatable benchmark, among other factors.

Wherever possible, we use real, live, eyes-on-screen, hands-on-mouse-and-keyboard benchmark runs. We don't think automated, on-rails, hands-off canned benchmarks fully capture the gameplay experience on a given graphics card.

Only by actually playing a game can we account for factors like how input lag affects the experience, and making sure that a title has acceptable input lag is becoming a key consideration when latency-sensitive framegen techniques are becoming more and more common as performance-boosting tools.

Our current test system comprises the following components:

• CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D
• Motherboard: ASUS TUF Gaming X670E-Plus Wifi
• Memory: G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo 32GB DDR5-6000
• Storage: Inland Gaming Performance Plus 4TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD
• Power supply: MSI Ai1600TS

With all that out of the way, let's dive into our results.

• MORE: Best Graphics Cards
• MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
• MORE: All Graphics Content

If all you want is the TL;DR, here you go: the RX 9070 GRE delivers a 120 FPS average at 1080p across our 11-game raster-only test suite and an 86.6 FPS average at 1440p. That puts it in a solid position to enable high-refresh-rate gaming for the two most popular monitor resolutions among PC gamers, and it's a nice boost over lower-midrange products like the RX 9060 XT 16GB and RTX 5060 Ti 16GB.

But overall raster performance falls short of a 60 FPS average at 4K, which remains the turf of the RTX 5070, RX 9070, RX 9070 XT, and RX 5070 Ti at a minimum. For a truly midrange product, though, that's an OK tradeoff for the GRE, as 4K monitors are still far less common than 1440p screens. And if you can deploy FSR 4, you can still upscale your way to a fast and high-quality 4K experience.

Read on for per-game results. We'll largely let these numbers speak for themselves except where a given game requires particular elaboration.

Black Myth Wukong

Why it's here: a stunning showcase for PC graphics

What it stresses: Compute, VRAM, RT (when enabled)

Black Myth Wukong is a gorgeous example of what’s possible from Unreal Engine 5, but it places heavy, heavy demands on graphics cards in exchange. This title has a free benchmark tool, but to ensure we get all the updates that Game Science has made to this game since launch, we picked up the full version and devised our own benchmark sequence.

Alan Wake II

Why it's here: One of the richest AAA feasts for the eyes on PC

What it stresses: Compute, VRAM, RT (when enabled)

Counter-Strike 2

Why it's here: over a million active players can't be wrong

What it stresses: Compute, driver overhead at high frame rates

Counter-Strike 2 needs no introduction as one of the most popular esports titles out there. In general, GeForce cards really seem to struggle with 1% lows in this title. Radeons do a better job of delivering both the high average frame rates and 1% lows that we want for a smooth gaming experience. But frame rates are so high in general that you're unlikely to notice any dips in performance.

Arc Raiders

Why it's here: One of 2026's most popular games, powered by UE5

What it stresses: Compute

Arc Raiders shows one of the widest performance divergences between GeForces and Radeons of any game in recent memory. The 9070 GRE barely outperforms the 5060 Ti in this title, and both it and the 9070 are outpaced by the RTX 5070.

We weren't aware of how large this divergence was before we set out to perform our 2026 GPU Hierachy testing, but given how popular Arc Raiders is, you should know about it before buying a Radeon.

Fortnite

Why it's here: It's Fortnite

What it stresses: Compute

Fortnite may have a reputation as a potato game, but make no mistake: this is an Unreal Engine 5 showcase through and through, and it can deliver stunning visuals in between the heated skirmishes of its pop-culture-blending brawls.

Radeons deliver an especially strong showing in Fortnite at 1080p and 1440p. The 9070 GRE even goes neck-and neck with the RTX 5070 until we reach 4K.

Apex Legends

Why it's here: Unique engine, giant player base

What it stresses: Compute

Apex Legends is another wildly popular esports title that needs no introduction. It normally has a 144 FPS cap, but you can disable it with a launch option to reach a 300 FPS ceiling.

In this full-range testing, many of our cards hit Apex's 300 FPS cap at 1080p. Unless you enjoy leaving large parts of your pricey GPU unused, you really should step up to 1440p at a minimum and possibly even 4K, where the 9070 GRE and many other cards can still deliver esports-friendly frame rates with better image quality.

Marvel Rivals

Why it's here: another hugely popular free-to-play title

What it stresses: Compute

Marvel Rivals is another popular free-to-play game that might have a reputation as a bit of a potato title. Unlike other games in our suite that share its UE5 foundation, Rivals doesn’t require a superhero of a graphics card to hit high frame rates. The 9070 GRE turns in a fine performance

Clair Obscur: Expedition 33

Why it's here: One of the most acclaimed games in recent memory

What it stresses: Compute

Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 has stunning Unreal Engine 5-powered visuals. Since it keeps VRAM usage in check even on 8GB cards, its performance is mostly defined by how much compute horsepower you can throw at it.

Marvel's Spider-Man 2

Why it's here: A newer PlayStation port

What it stresses: Compute, VRAM, RT (if enabled)

Marvel's Spider-Man 2 is a representative PlayStation port. Like many games in this vein, it really wants both strong compute resources and plenty of VRAM from a GPU to hit high frame rates, especially with RT enabled.

But for rasterization, 12GB is enough VRAM to allow the RX 9070 GRE to turn in over 100 FPS on average at 1080p and almost 80 FPS at 1440p, so it's a great foundation for swift and smooth gaming under those conditions.

Stalker 2

Why it's here: A visually stunning revival of a classic PC franchise

What it stresses: Compute, VRAM (to some degree)

Stalker 2 is another beast of a UE5 game, so much so that while the RX 9070 GRE manages over a 60 FPS average at 1080p, it falls short at 1440p. You'd probably want to dial in upscaling or dial settings back to high for a good 1440p experience here.

Cyberpunk 2077

Why it's here: One of the biggest PC releases of all time

What it stresses: Compute, VRAM, RT (when enabled)

Cyberpunk 2077 remains a beast of a title even this long after its introduction, at least once you get above 1080p. True to its mission, the 9070 GRE turns in high frame rates at 1080p and a solid 60 FPS average at 1440p.

• MORE: Best Graphics Cards
• MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
• MORE: All Graphics Content

Our 2026 ray-traced tests span relatively lightweight RT titles such as Doom: The Dark Ages, Indiana Jones and the Great Circle, and Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced to moderately challenging titles like Cyberpunk 2077 and Marvel’s Spider-Man 2 to performance monsters like Alan Wake II, Assassin’s Creed Shadows, and Black Myth: Wukong at its Very High RT preset. If a card passes all of these tests with flying colors, it’s ready for any RT experience you can throw at it.

Beyond the high initial performance cost of enabling ray tracing, RT titles at higher resolutions are more likely to run over lesser cards’ VRAM pools, resulting in rough performance. That behavior tends to show up as wide spreads between average and 1% low frame rates, so keep an eye out in our graphs for when cards with less VRAM start to stumble.

The TL;DR: The RX 9070 GRE handles our RT suite at 1080p just fine, turning in a 65 FPS average and well-controlled 1% lows overall and a nice generational uplift compared to the 7800 XT. That’s a good baseline for enabling FSR 4 upscaling and ML Frame Generation where it’s available in pursuit of higher output resolution targets.

At 1440p, though, the GRE is already showing weakness due to its 12GB of VRAM, barely outperforming the RX 9060 XT 16GB and RX 7800 XT and landing behind even the RTX 5060 Ti 16GB. The RX 9070 and its 16GB of VRAM pull far ahead. If you're serious about RT on a Radeon, we'd strongly suggest stepping up.

DOOM: The Dark Ages

Why it's here: one of a new crop of games that requires RT to run

What it stresses: Compute, RT, VRAM

Even with mandatory RT support and everything cranked to Ultra Nightmare, DOOM: The Dark Ages isn't terribly hard for our stable of graphics cards to run well. The 9070 GRE hands in strong results at 1080p and 1440p, but 4K proves too much (as it does for most of our cards without upscaling).

Indiana Jones and the Great Circle

Why it's here: another of a new crop of games that requires RT to run

What it stresses: Compute, RT, VRAM

Indiana Jones and the Great Circle is a weird beast. It uses a unique fork of the id Tech engine to deliver its cinematic adventure gameplay. And at least in our test area, it's full of autosave points that can have rough effects on 1% lows. We've tried to control for this as much as possible, but just be aware that the 1% lows here are as much a product of the game's behavior as they are any differences between graphics cards.

Alan Wake II

Alan Wake II's RT effects are crushing even without Path Traced Indirect Lighting enabled. The biggest issue beyond the performance demands of these settings is that these effects don't really make a huge visual difference in this title, so you could just as soon ignore them and enjoy much higher frame rates.

Cyberpunk 2077

Cyberpunk 2077 is one of the few RT-heavy titles we've seen where enabling the feature creates major differences in image quality, so you might actually care about its performance. What we’re really looking for here is a solid foundation for upscaling, and the 9070 GRE delivers that level of performance at 1080p with a near-60-FPS average.

At 1080p, 12GB of VRAM is enough to avoid performance cliffs, and you can see the huge generational advantage the 9070 GRE has over the 7800 XT. That raw performance difference persists at 1440p, but the 9070 GRE's 1% lows suggest that 12GB of VRAM is starting to become a problem. And at 4K, the GRE's performance is roughly half that of the RX 9070 and behind even the 7800 XT, showing the advantages of 16GB of VRAM.

But none of those cards are delivering a playable experience at native 4K with RT, showing why it's more important to evaluate 1080p and 1440p as upscaling foundations.

Black Myth Wukong

Black Myth Wukong is tough on graphics cards even before we apply its RT presets, and Very High RT crushes everything into dust with native rendering. Even then, the game favors GeForce cards to such a degree that you'd need a massive dose of upscaling to reach playability with Very High RT on Radeons, even at 1080p.

Assassin's Creed Shadows

A new title for our 2026 GPU Hierarchy testing, Assassin's Creed Shadows boasts gorgeous RT visuals that make for a major upgrade when they're enabled. And it does all this without putting major pressure on VRAM.

As with many of our other RT titles, though, Shadows really seems to expect you to dial in upscaling (and maybe even some framegen) to achieve smooth frame rates, and the 9070 GRE provides a strong enough foundation for that purpose if you consider 1080p an input resolution for FSR 4 Performance at 4K, for just one of many potential examples.

Marvel’s Spider-Man 2

Enabling RT in Spider-Man 2 greatly improves the appearance of reflections on the many glass-clad buildings you'll swing by in its New York City setting, so it's worth the performance hit in our eyes. But the RX 9070 GRE's 12GB of VRAM already seems to be holding it back in this game at 1080p, as it isn't performing much better than the RX 9060 XT 16GB and RX 7800 XT. And the 9060 XT 16GB even outperforms the GRE at 4K.

Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced

It’s hard to believe we’re still testing Grand Theft Auto V more than 10 years after its arrival on the PC, but here we are. The latest Enhanced re-release adds appealing RT eye candy to Los Santos, and its demands on hardware are modest enough that even modest hardware can provide a solid enough performance foundation for upscaling.

Even with that in mind, GTA V produces some... interesting results on our cards. Radeon RX 9000-series products suffer from a major frame rate drop partway through our run, and that results in much lower 1% lows compared to RX 7000-series cards, which don't experience the same issue. (And neither do RX 6000-series cards, even though they're not shown here.) We've watched this issue persist for many months, and it doesn't speak well for AMD's latest-gen graphics cards that it's lingered this long.

GeForces aren't immune to weird performance in this title either, however. At 1080p and 1440p, higher-end RTX cards seem to suffer from some weird potential CPU-boundedness, and that also appears as a wide gap between average frame rates and 1% lows in our charts. But unlike the RX 9000-series cards, those drops are only perceptible as slight stutters rather than an extended, painful dip. Raise the resolution to 1440p or especially 4K, and those stutters lessen or go away.

• MORE: Best Graphics Cards
• MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
• MORE: All Graphics Content

The Radeon RX 9070 GRE is surgically targeted to land in the wide-open performance gap between the RX 9060 XT and the RX 9070 for Radeons and the RTX 5060 Ti and RTX 5070 for GeForces, and it does exactly that for $549 as it arrives Stateside.

Wait, you might be saying. Didn’t the RX 9070 already launch at $549? Indeed it did, but outside of Prime Day events and holiday sales, we’ve rarely seen those cards available at that price. And the ongoing chip-pocalypse has durably spiked graphics card prices well above MSRP across the board, keeping $549 9070s a rare sight.

Even before the AI gold rush made all consumer tech more expensive, the past couple of years have shown that MSRPs are basically hopes and dreams without the supply to back them up, and that’s a headache that’s affected both AMD and Nvidia to varying degrees. Witness the consistently elevated prices of the RTX 5070 Ti, the RTX 5080, and the RTX 5090 even before the AI crunch.

But AMD was perhaps unreasonably aggressive with the promised pricing of the 9070 and 9070 XT given how rarely those products have been seen at MSRP. A 12GB card with a heavily cut-down die like the 9070 GRE would seem to offer a stronger price anchor, and as the distant player two in PC gaming graphics right now, AMD needs to give buyers a big, loud reason to pay attention.

At $479, the RX 9070 GRE would be the single best value in gaming by our calculations, period. But the realities of today’s market and AMD’s partner relationships probably limit the room for such a splashy sticker, given how much downward pressure it would place on the GDDR6-intensive RX 9060 XT 16GB. As things stand, the $549 MSRP makes the 9070 GRE the third-best value in gaming right now, after the RX 9070 and RTX 5070.

So what are you getting for that money? As a baseline, the GRE delivers a roughly 90 FPS 1440p raster experience, and that’s a solid place to be before you add FSR 4 upscaling and framegen to the mix. But if you got a $499 Radeon RX 7800 XT back in the day, you’re already enjoying a similar experience. And with a version of FSR 4 for RDNA 3 cards coming soon, there’s little reason for midrange RX 7000 owners to consider a jump.

Looking further back, the 9070 GRE is a strong upgrade for owners of the five-year-old RX 6700 XT and its 6750 XT refresh, both of which are now on the wrong side of 60 FPS at 1440p in our 2026 GPU Hierarchy testing. It delivers much better raster and RT performance, a vastly improved accelerated media engine, and official FSR 4 upscaling and framegen support, all of which will give RX 6000-series upgraders a much more modern and enjoyable gaming, streaming, and media transcoding experience.

The 9070 GRE might also tempt RTX 3070 owners that are struggling within the confines of that six-year-old card’s 8GB of VRAM. But the universal availability and generally superior image quality of DLSS upscaling and the added performance boost of DLSS MFG means that AMD will probably have a hard time convincing GeForce gamers to switch to an RX 9070 GRE versus an RTX 5070.

The two major drawbacks of this card lie in its 12GB of VRAM and, consequently, its RT performance at resolutions higher than 1080p. If you’re a fan of ray tracing and you’re considering this card, you will want to pay close attention to the availability of FSR 4 upscaling and ML Frame Generation or support for their overrides in any game you’d like to play. Those technologies will help mitigate the potential issues caused by 12GB of VRAM for memory-hungry RT titles.

But if you’re really serious about RT, we’d strongly recommend spending less than $100 more and getting an RTX 5070. It not only provides better baseline performance all around but also offers the one-two software punch of DLSS 4.5 upscaling and Dynamic MFG for effortless performance tuning, as well as Ray Reconstruction in some titles. You also avoid the annoying AMD lockout for path tracing in the latest Capcom releases like Resident Evil Requiem and Pragmata.

All told, the RX 9070 GRE is a strong midrange graphics card that gives buyers a useful step up between the RX 9060 XT 16GB and RX 9070 (and the RTX 5060 Ti 16GB and RTX 5070). We’d much rather have this product as a lifeline for PC gaming than the long-rumored-to-be-reintroduced RTX 3060 12GB, which is well past its sell-by date by every measure at our disposal.

But we still think that AMD could have truly changed the midrange game by going even cheaper than the GRE's $549 MSRP, given its performance and software ecosystem limitations compared to GeForces. At its listed price, we'll have to see whether the 9070 GRE offers enough of a hook to get buyers to bite.

• MORE: Best Graphics Cards
• MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
• MORE: All Graphics Content

It is day three of Computex here in Taipei! With most of the big-name keynotes out of the way, we're traversing the show floor non-stop to bring you the latest, greatest, and weirdest from all your favorite hardware vendors.

Computex 2026: Headlines so far

• Microsoft Surface Laptop Ultra weilds Nvidia's RTX Spark superchip with 128GB of RAM
• Nvidia lays out RTX Spark roadmap for laptops and desktop PCs at Computex 2026
• Nvidia unveils RTX Spark Superchip for laptops and desktop PCs at Computex 2026
• Intel details long-awaited Crescent Island AI GPU at Computex, boasts up to 480 GB of LPDDR5X
• Intel Xeon 7 ‘Diamond Rapids’ CPUs officially launching in 2027 on Intel 18A-P
• Intel Xeon 6+ ‘Clearwater Forest’ puts 18A in the data center with up to 288 cores
• AMD’s formerly China-exclusive Radeon RX 9070 GRE goes global for $549 on June 2
• AMD confirms AM5 support through 2029
• AMD brings back Ryzen 7 5800X3D, launches Ryzen 7 7700X3D
• Dell XPS 13 targets MacBook Neo with Intel's Wildcat Lake
• Alienware debuts 39, 34-inch OLED gaming monitors

Computex 2026: Live updates

Well, good morning, and a very (very) warm (and humid) welcome to our Computex 2026 live blog. Stephen from the UK here to see you through the first few hours of Monday. As mentioned, it has already been a jam-packed first day!

There's really nothing like Taipei during Computex:

Nvidia enters the laptop and desktop market

If you're just joining us, then welcome. It is evening in Taiwan and there's a lot happening. Headlines from the first day of Computex include Nvidia's incursion into the desktop PC and laptop market by way of its new RTX Spark Superchip. RTX Spark is a Windows on Arm platform for laptops, which Nvidia claims is the most efficient every built. Top-spec chips offer 20 Arm CPU cores, a Blackwell GPU with 6144 CUDA cores, 128GB of LPDDR5X RAM, and up to 300 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

• Nvidia unveils RTX Spark Superchip for laptops and desktop PCs at Computex 2026

Surface Laptop Ultra

One of the first companies to get behind Nvidia's new RTX Spark, understandably, is Microsoft. The company has unveiled a new Surface Laptop Ultra, effectively its own version of the MacBook Pro. It features a 20-core CPU, Blackwell GPU, 128GB of unified RAM, and more. That's housed in a 15-inch chassis with a mini-LED display, replete with HDMI, USB-C, USB-A, and an SD card reader.

• Microsoft Surface Laptop Ultra weilds Nvidia's RTX Spark superchip with 128GB of RAM, 20 Arm CPU cores, and a Blackwell GPU

Intel Crescent Island

Somewhat overshadowed by Nvidia, Intel has unveiled its new Crescent Island AI GPU, featuring up to 480GB of LPDDR5X memory. The data center GPU is "built for agentic AI," is built on Intel's Xe3P architecture, but details about raw specs are scant at this stage.

• Intel details long-awaited Crescent Island AI GPU at Computex, boasts up to 480 GB of LPDDR5X to combat memory shortages

Radeon RX 9070 GRE

AMD's China-exclusive Radeon RX 9070 GRE is going global, with a $549 price tag when it launches on June 2. This GPU sits right between the 9060 XT and the RX 9070, and you'll be able to catch benchmarks on Tom's Hardware very soon.

• AMD’s formerly China-exclusive Radeon RX 9070 GRE goes global for $549 on June 2

Jake is hungry!

"You ever get to the end of the day and realize you haven't eaten a thing." A quick look behind the scenes at Tom's Hardware, where CPU analyst Jake Roach has just realised that he hasn't eaten anything today. It's 8pm.

AM5 lives on

After previously only committing to supporting its AM5 platform through 2027, the company this week confirmed that it is actually going to support AM5 through 2029, with both Zen 4 and Zen 5 likely to see two further generations of CPU release. It's unclear if this is 2029 will mark the end of the line for AM5.

• AMD confirms AM5 support through 2029

The return of a legend

AMD has announced it will bring back its legendary Ryzen 7 5800X3D, and is also launching a Ryzen 7 7700X3D to fight the rising price of PC building. The latter is a downclocked version of the 7800X3D for AM5 platforms, but the real headline is the 5800X3D, which supports DDR4 RAM and, in theory, should give users a more affordable way to build a potent gaming PC on AM4.

• AMD brings back Ryzen 7 5800X3D, launches Ryzen 7 7700X3D to combat rising component prices

Dell comes after the MacBook Neo

This $699 XPS 13 laptop built around Intel's Wildcat Lake platform is the company's answer to the popular MacBook Neo. Featuring between 8-32GB of RAM, a 13.4-inch display, and up to 1TB of storage, it comes with either the Intel Core 5 320 or an upcoming Intel Core Ultra 7 355 variant.

• Dell XPS 13 targets MacBook Neo with Intel's Wildcat Lake — $699 starting price, $599 for students

DLSS 4.5

Nvidia has confirmed that DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction, an advanced denoiser for better ray-tracing and path-tracing image quality when it releases later this year. Nvidia says it can process 35% more input data and uses 20% more paramaters using the same compute budget as the previous-generation.

• DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction update arrives in August for better ray tracing visuals — broader training data set and second-gen transformer architecture combine for improved image quality

Qualcomm hands on

Qualcomm's new $300 and up ARM laptops come with a mystery eight-core CPU and active cooling. Rocking the new Snapdragon C chip, our very own Paul Alcorn made a discovery that perplexed even the Qualcomm representative on the floor...

• We went hands-on with Qualcomm's new '$300 and up' ARM laptop platform with mystery eight-core CPU — active-cooled Snapdragon C laptop surfaces in Acer Aspire Go 15

A big EXPO boost

AMD is launching a new automatic memory overclocking feature. EXPO Ultra Low Latency promises a 13% uplift in performance compared to standard DDR5 JEDEC speeds, and a 4% uplift over existing EXPO.

• AMD promises 13% uplift with new EXPO ‘Ultra Low Latency’ overclocking on DDR5 DIMMs — automatic memory overclocking delivers 4% improvement over standard EXPO, says AMD

Intel not resting on its laurels

Speaking to Tom's Hardware in response to news about Nvidia's RTX Spark, Intel says it treats all such developments with "a healthy does of paranoia," but touted the virtues of x86, warning of compatibility, DRM, and other issues that inevitably follow Arm CPUs entering the market.

• Intel warns it has 'a healthy dose of paranoia' over Nvidia entrance into PC market — company says RTX Spark is 'great for the market' while touting the virtues of x86

Supermicro makes an appearance

Computex isn't all about consumer hardware, with plenty of B2B and industrial hardware on display too. We got a look at Supermicro's new Vera Rubin NVL72 rack, replete with a new type of cooling that the company says offers 1,000 times higher electrical impedance than standard.

• Supermicro shows off Vera Rubin NVL72 rack with all-new type of coolant — company claims coolant offers 1,000 times higher electrical impedance over standard cooling

A staggering 5090 from Asus

To celebrate 20 years of its ROG brand, Asus has unveiled a monster new ROG Astral GeForce RTX 5090 Edition 20, which includes a wraparound AMOLED display. There's also a 3,000W power supply, a new NUC, a PC case, peripherals, a gaming chair, and more.

• Asus' monstrous ROG Astral GeForce RTX 5090 Edition 20 includes expansive curved AMOLED display — also debuts 3,000W power supply and striking PC case

See what happened at the show before the show

Computex starts before the show floor opens. While it's nighttime in Taipei, you can still take a look at everything we saw early with our Day Zero Wrap Up.

You'll learn more about chips from Intel and AMD, monitors from Acer and Alienware, and, of course, learn a ton about Nvidia's RTX Spark system on a chip.

That should hold you over until the show floor doors open and we get into even more of the nitty-gritty.

Read: Computex 2026 Day Zero Wrap-Up: Nvidia launches RTX Spark Superchip assault on laptop and desktop markets, Intel readies Xeon 6+

Vincent van Gogh, on a laptop

MSI is taking its Prestige 14 Flip AI+ and putting some prestige art on it. The company says the laptops are "inspired by The Starry Night and Starry Night Over the Rhône". That language makes it unclear if they're exact duplicates of the paintings, but either way, they don't look like anything else we've seen lately.

Asus ROG Xbox Ally X20 finally brings an OLED screen

Among the many twentieth-anniversary branded Asus ROG gadgets the brand is releasing is a new version of the Asus ROG Xbox Ally X.

The ROG Xbox Ally X20 bundle includes an updated version of the handheld, with a clear shell, OLED display, TMR joysticks, and a transforming D-Pad with four and eight-way movement. It still has the same AMD Z2 Extreme processor as its predecessor.

ROG XREAL R1 Edition 20 Gaming AR Glasses, with a 171-inch, 240 Hz virtual display at 4 meters.

No pricing information is available just yet.

Who ISN'T having a milestone anniversary?

Lots of companies and brands at Computex seem to have started in years that end with 6.

• Asus ROG has a 20th anniversary product line
• MSI is celebrating 40 years, marked by the Titan 18 HX Dragon Edition Draco Epic laptop (pictured above).
• Gigabyte marked 40 years at the end of May, and is celebrating with its Infinity Design lanauage, including a GPU with rounded edges.

So consider this your reminder to at least get a card for your or a loved one's anniversary. Clearly everyone is celebrating.

How Intel is reacting to RTX Spark

With Nvidia's RTX Spark announced, CPU manufacturers are sizing up the field.

When we sat down with Tom’s sat down with Nish Neelalojanan, senior director of product management for Intel’s Client Computing Group, he told us how Intel is reacting:

“Nvidia puts out great products, right? And they know how to do gaming, they know how to do all these different things. So we always take everything with a healthy dose of paranoia, but we are also very, very confident with our products." He also pointed out Arm chips for Windows have typically had compatibility issues.

Read more: Intel warns it has 'a healthy dose of paranoia' over Nvidia entrance into PC market — company says RTX Spark is 'great for the market' while touting the virtues of x86

An 18-inch laptop for the rest of us

Usually, an 18-inch laptop is a massive workstation or gaming rig. But at Computex, Acer has an 18-inch system, the Aspire 18 AI designed for everyday use. Above, it's pictured next to a 16-inch PC.

That 18-inch screen has just a 1920 x 1200 resolution, but for people who turn up the font size to read (no shame in it!), it may still help. The refresh rate tops out at 165 Hz.

Specs include a CPU up to an Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, up to 32GB of DDR5 RAM, up to 2TB of SSD storage, and Wi-Fi 7 support. Acer claims 22 hours of battery life. And hey, there's room, so you get a number pad.

Like much of what we're seeing at Computex, we don't have a price. But if you've been jonesing for a big screen without a discrete GPU, it is on the way.

AMD had to reengineer the Ryzen 7 5800X3D for a rerelease

AMD's David McAfee shared the story behind the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, and why it took so long to come to market. Apparently, AMD had plans to bring back the chip earlier, but the silicon bonding process TSMC had previously used was no longer available, McAfee says. That led to some additional development time in order to get the CPU into shape, which happened to line up with the 10th anniversary of the AM4 socket. - Jake Roach

Get ready for Intel's Computex keynote

Intel's CEO Lip-Bu Tan is set to take the stage at Computex in just under an hour, and we expect about a 45-minute keynote from the executive, followed by a Q&A session that Tom's Hardware is attending. Although we've already seen most of Intel's announcements, ranging from the G3 Extreme Range to a Diamond Rapids tease, it's possible Tan could drop some hints about next-gen Nova Lake chips during the keynote. - Jake Roach

• Watch Intel's Computex 2026 keynote here — CEO Lip-Bu Tan takes the stage in Taipei at 10:30pm PT on June 1

Intel's 3D V-Cache competitor?

Tom's Hardware attended a Q&A session with Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan, as well as a panel of executives, including Alex Katouzian, a Qualcomm veteran who recently joined Intel's ranks. We asked Intel about its supposed 3D V-Cache competitor, rumored to be called bLCC or Big Last Level Cache, and Katouzian shared the following:

"When I first came in and started reviewing road maps for the team, I was very pleasantly surprised. So, stay tuned, a very strong roadmap coming, and we will be gunning for that section of the market as well. And so, please stay tuned," Katouzian told Tom's Hardware.

Phison has demoed its future PCIe 6.0 SSD controller in the past, but the earlier displays last year merely showed the chip on a large development. Development of the new X3 controller has obviously moved forward well, as the company had two reference SSDs on display in its booth here at Computex.

Phison says these new SSDs deliver up to 28 GB/s of sequential read/write throughput and an incredible 6.8 million IOPS, easily beating anything available on the market. Stay tuned for our full write up.

Stephen checking in

Well a very good morning from day 2 of Computex! Stephen here to see you through the next few hours.

Timing is everything!

Computex is just like comedy, timing is very important! Coordinating a team around the globe is pretty hectic, so here's some insight into how tricky it can be. It's 10:24am in the UK, but our team on the ground in Taipei have already been at it all day, where it's currently 5:24pm. Of course, our U.S. readership and staff are just waking up. Lots of companies are still working in Eastern or even Pacific time too. A lot of plates in the air.

Snapdragon makes an appearance

We haven't heard too much from Qualcomm this week, with Nvidia dominating the headlines thanks to RTX Spark. However, this Asus Ascent QN10 is a nifty new Mini PC with Snapdragon X2 Elite, which QC claims is the world's first to deliver 80 TOPS through its NPU.

Noctua's latest cooling efforts

For those who want to squeeze every last drop of power and temperature optimization from their CPU, Noctua has announced new thermal pads for AMD chips. Made in partnership with Carbice, these pads are for AM4 and AM5 Ryzen CPUs and are made from carbon nanotubes to improve thermal conductivity.

• Noctua announces new thermal pad for AMD chips in partnership with Carbice — product will work with processors in AM5 and AM4 sockets

Gigabyte's latest and greatest monitors

Gigabyte has unveiled a new series of Aorus Elite gaming monitors. Ranging in size from 27 to 32 inches, three of them feature fourth-generation Tandem WOLED technology for improved color and brightness. The fourth is a mini-LED monitor.

• Gigabyte debuts fourth-gen Tandem WOLED and multi-mode Mini LED gaming monitors — 27 to 32 inches, up to 480 Hz, and up to 5K resolution

Asus’ ROG Harpe II Extreme Edition 20 hands on

Asus is going big to celebrate the 20th anniversary of its Republic of Gamers brand. Alongside a monster RTX 5090 and a 3,000W PSU, there are new peripherals including this Asus ROG HArpe II Edition 20 gaming mouse. It features a gold logo and scroll wheel, as well as gold accents. A little garish for some tastes, it'll cost an eye-watering $259.99.

• Hands-on with Asus’ ROG Harpe II Extreme Edition 20 gaming mouse – 24K gold and a 65K sensor

Relive Intel's keynote

Intel held its Computex keynote overnight, with CEO Lip-Bu Tan taking to the stage. You can relive the keynote below!

The latest in cooling from Frore

Frore has been showing off its latest in solid-state cooling tech. Its AirJet Mini is out here cooling Intel's Wildcat Lake laptop reference design. With 15W of sustained power and just 11.3 mm in total thickness, could it give the MacBook Neo a run for its money?

• Frore System’s solid-state AirJet Mini cools Intel’s Wildcat Lake laptop reference design – 15W of sustained, fanless cooling helps MacBook Neo competitor reach a svelte 11.3 mm, remain silent

Take our quiz!

'The single most important tool of humanity'

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang says the company wants to 'reinvent the single most important tool of humanity' with its new RTX Spark. The company unveiled its new chip for desktops and laptops at the start of this week.

• Jensen Huang says Nvidia wants to 'reinvent the single most important tool of humanity' with RTX Spark — Nvidia CEO touts support of 'literally every computer maker in the world' for its agentic AI PC platform

Favorite Computex announcement so far?

Cooler Master's MasterDimm

Unveiled ahead of Computex, this Cooler Master MasterDimm is a collaboration with G.SKILL that brings active cooling to DDR5 RAM. No word on just how big those sticks are yet...

New from Gigabyte

Gigabyte is another vendor celebrating a major anniversary at Computex, specifically 40 years in the game. There's new motherboards, GPUs, and a monster 1,600W power supply.

• Gigabyte showcases new Infinity products for its 40th anniversary — X870 Infinity Next halo motherboard boasts metal 3D-printed elements, Aero Wood goes dark, MicroATX Stealth boards, Infinity-style GPUs extend down the product stack

Phison shows off its new controller

Down at Phison, we took a look at its new PCIe 6.0 SSD controller, the X3. The company touts sequential speeds of up to 28 GB/s and 6.8 million IOPS in random read/write workloads. There were also benchmarks on display for a new DRAM-less PCIe 5.0 SSD controller. Get the details here:

• Phison shows PCIe 6.0 X3 SSD controller with 28 GB/s of bandwidth and 6.8 million IOPS, supports 2 petabytes per drive— also new power-sipping E37T SSDs for PCIe 5.0 systems consume a mere 4.5W

You don't know the HAF of it

More from Cooler Master, where we took a look at the company's new cases, fans, and coolers. The new HAF500 case supports up to E-ATX motherboards, dual-GPU setups, and plenty of cooling.

Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98 Pro Edition 20 gets decked out in black and gold

Asus just launched the ROG Rapture GT-BE98 Pro Edition 20, the 20th-anniversary edition of its existing ROG Rapture GT-BE98 Pro. The overall design of the new router is identical, but the stealth black look is now accentuated with gold trimmings. You can even see gold plating beneath the clear plastic window on top of the router, along with a 20th anniversary badge finished in gold.

While you can expect the same blazing performance as the ROG Rapture GT-BE98 Pro, the ROG Rapture GT-BE98 Pro Edition 20 also includes an exclusive Signature Edition 20 web interface for configuring the router.

MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ joins the growing number of handheld gaming PCs

There's a new competitor to take on the likes of the Steam Deck, ROG Ally, and Legion Go 2. The MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ is a fresh entry using a 14-core Intel Arc G3 Extreme CPU and an Arc B390 GPU. The handheld can also be decked out with up to 32GB of RAM and up to 1TB of storage.

The design looks somewhat unorthodox, with the 8-inch 1080p IPS display jutting well below the flanking controllers. The display is spec'd for a 120 Hz refresh rate and maxes out at 500 nits. Rounding out the main features is an 80 WHr battery inside the 1.3-pound package.

Best Buy already has a product page for the Claw 8 EX AI+ on its website, listing the 32GB/1TB configuration at $1,699.99. However, the handheld is only shown as "coming soon" rather than being available for preorder.

Asus ROG Rapture GT-BN98 Pro will be among the first Wi-Fi 8 routers on the market

If you want to be on the bleeding edge in wireless networking, you won't have to wait much longer for Wi-Fi 8 routers. The first Wi-Fi 8 router coming from Asus will be the ROG Rapture GT-BN98 Pro, which is a gaming router aimed at the high end of the market.

We must caution that Wi-Fi 8 routers won't result in another huge leap in theoretical performance over existing Wi-Fi 7 routers. Instead, optimizations with the standard will make it so that real world performance and range will far exceed what's possible with current hardware. We should also see even longer range for IoT devices, epecially those sitting at the far reaches of the coverage for your home router.

The ROG Rapture GT-BN98 Pro will also include a wide range of LAN/WAN ports, including two 10 GbE ports and four 2.5 GbE ports.

• Asus unveils its first Wi-Fi 8 router — ROG Rapture GT-BN98 Pro offers up to 2x real-world throughput uplift over Wi-Fi 7

We go hands-on with the Acer Predator Atlas 8 Arc G3 gaming handheld

Last week, we brought you news that Acer was working on a Predator Atlas 8 gaming handheld. Well, we got a chance to get a hands-on with the device at Computex, and it's quite impressive.

The Predator Atlas 8 uses Arc G3 and Arc G3 Extreme processors paired with an Arc B370 or B390 iGPU. Systems come with an 8-inch 1200p 120 Hz variable-refresh-rate display rated for up to 500 nits of brightness. An 80 WHr battery should help extend your gaming runtime, and Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4 are included in the mix.

At 1.79 pounds, the Predator Atlas 8 slots in between the Legion Go and the Steam Deck OLED in weight.

Intel's Xeon 6+ in the flesh

We stopped by Intel's demo suite, and the company had a Xeon 6+ chip, along with a wafer, hanging on the wall. This is Intel's first time using 18A in the data center, with Xeon 6+ now sporting up to 288 Darkmont E-cores. You can learn more about it in our Xeon 6+ write-up and go behind the scenes with our Xeon 6+ interview transcript on Tom's Hardware Premium.

Day 3

Good morning and welcome to day three of Computex! I say day 3, but as we've explained before timing is tricky here. In Taiwan day three is almost over, but for our global audiences in places like the UK and U.S., it's just beginning! - Stephen Warwick

Some highlights from Acer

We dropped by Acer to see what the company has to offer at Computex this year. We saw the new Acer Swift Spin 14 AI tablet, the new Predator Atlas 8, and more!

Jensen will sign anything

Everyone knows that if you see Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang at Computex, chances are he'll sign something for you. How about this epic Nvidia GTX 1080Ti Founders Edition?

Noctua's AIO in all its glory

We've been hearing a lot about Noctua's entry into the AIO market for some time. The company is back at Computex 2026 and has finally revealed specs, pricing, and release date. Coming on June 16, pricing should be around $250 (It is listed at 220 euros), with more expensive 360mm and 420mm options available. The NL-LC1 features Asetek's Emma V2 pump and NF-A12/14 fans.

• Noctua's first-ever AIO features a silenced Asetek Emma V2 pump and NF-A12/14 fans — 240mm NL-LC1 starts at around $250, could cost $325 for 420mm cooler

The first 8K ultra-wideband gaming keyboard

Cherry's gaming branch Cherry XTRFY has unveiled the first 8K ultra-wideband gaming keyboard at Computex. With a 70% layout, the technology should be more reliable than 2.4GHz wireless. That means a more stable connection that is less vulnerable to interference from other wireless devices.

• Cherry XTRFY launches first 8K ultra-wideband gaming keyboard — featuring more compact 70-percent layout

Corsair's new mouse feat. Stream Deck

New from Corsair is this Nightsword v2 Wireless SD Stream Deck gaming mouse. Striking name aside, you can map its buttons to Stream Deck features, eight in all, so that you can control streaming functions without taking your hand off the mouse. It's a similar philisophy to the Scimitar Elite Wireless SE. However, the Nightsword also comes with a unique dedicated Stream Deck Launch button.

• Corsair shows off gaming mouse with dedicated Stream Deck launch button — wireless mouse also gets almost 50 hours of 8K battery life

New from NZXT

We stopped by NZXT to see what's news. The company showed off new RGB fans, cases, and more.

Counterfeit DRAM

Tom's Hardware spoke to G.Skill and V-Color at Computex. The latter confirmed to us that it has seen an influx of counterfeit DRAM hitting markets in China, to the extent that it is negatively impacting sales.

• Counterfeit G.Skill and V-Color DDR5 modules hit Chinese marketplaces, impacting company sales — cheap contraband memory using identical PCBs and heat spreaders almost impossible to spot

A long day for Jensen

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang is one of the main attractions at Computex, and is often mobbed wherever he goes, shutting down booths or even entire floors here in Taipei. Here he is enjoying some brief respite at the Gigabyte booth with a beer and some barbecue.

Taipei drone show

The evening skies in Taipei lit up with a drone show to celebrate Computex, check it out!

Lian Li's new Edge PSUs

Take a look at Lian Li's new Edge Platinum V2 PSUs, equipped with LED dust indicator, magnetic filter, snap-on fan, and a USB header hub. There's also the trademark 90-degree power connector.

The claaaaaaw

The new MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ is an 8-inch handheld that features a 120 Hz display and new ergonomic grips. Bathed in a striking 'Void Purple' finish, our immediate hands-on yielded some impressive performance.

• MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ brings Intel Arc G3 Extreme to handhelds — 8-inch, 120 Hz display and new ergonomic grips

AMD reacts to Nvidia RTX Spark

AMD is acting confident in the face of Nvidia's new RTX Spark announcements.

"I’m really excited that Nvidia has joined the game. You know, we were the only game in town for almost two years now, and the large local memory is becoming super critical in the agentic AI [workloads],” said AMD’s Rahul Tikoo, senior vice president and general manager of AMD’s client business. at Computex “I'm actually happy to see Nvidia join the race for these great products.

Comparing the specs, he suggested that "Gorgon Halo, which is coming out in Q3, is going to be a better product.”

We'll see how these platforms shake out later this year.

Read more: AMD executives react to Nvidia’s RTX Spark — ‘you’re just wrong if you don’t get a Strix Halo notebook’

Sizing up the Dell XPS 13 and MacBook Neo

Which of these systems is thicker? Trick question: both are half an inch thick. At Computex, our own Jake Roach saw the two together at Dell's booth.

The Neo's bottom is thicker, while Dell's is a bit more equal. And the XPS has a slightly rounded bottom, making it appear slightly thinner than Apple's blockier design style. But both list the exact same height, and the spec sheets are identical.

The XPS, however, is lighter than the MacBook Neo, at 2.2 pounds, compared the Apple's 2.7 pounds.

See all of the photos in the gallery above.

MSI adds an internal SSD slot to its flagship Wi-Fi 7 router

Wi-Fi 8 is just around the corner, but there’s still plenty of life left in the Wi-Fi 7 standard. MSI is proving that with a new flagship Wi-Fi 7 router called the RadiX BE19000. At first glance, the RadiX BE19000 looks like any other high-end gaming router, complete with eight antennas that give it an arachnid-like appearance.

However, the RadiX BE19000 hides a secret within — it features a PCIe SSD slot, making the router what MSI calls “NAS Lite.” You can add your own M.2 SSD to enable PC backups or simply to share files across your network.

You still get all the usual trimmings, like tri-band Wi-Fi, dual 10 GbE ports, and four 2.5 GbE ports. In addition, MSI says that the RadiX BE19000 is compatible with its proprietary mesh standard, allowing you to expand your network with compatible routers and access points.

Read more: MSI unveils latest set of WiFi 7 gaming routers touting ultra-fast speeds — flagship RadiX BE19000 model comes with a built-in SSD slot for 'NAS Lite' experience and wireless speeds up to 19 Gbps

Do your science homework

We talked a bit about Noctua's new AIO cooler in this live blog, but one thing we didn't mention: just how much homework they show. The company is ready to defend its doctoral thesis.

If you're ever at Computex, need to rest and do some not-so-light reading to explain what a thermosiphon or a flooded condenser is, Noctua has your back. You can see some of it in the gallery above, and believe me, that is just some of it.

Here ends Computex

Good morning folks, Stephen here to announce that we are signing off our Computex coverage for 2026. At least, our live correspondence from the floor. There's still plenty of news and insight to come from our conversations, but we'll be winding up this live blog soon. It'll remain on the site so you can look back and trawl through any announcements you may have missed, but thank you for joining us for another great year!

AMD is bringing a new automatic memory overclocking feature out, dubbed EXPO Ultra Low Latency (ULL). The new tool promises a 13% uplift in average performance across over 30 games compared to JEDEC standard speeds for DDR5, as well as a 4% uplift compared to standard EXPO, at least according to AMD’s internal benchmarks. The company hasn’t said when ULL will be available, but it has several memory partners lined up to support the feature.

We don’t know much about how EXPO ULL works, and more specifically, where AMD is finding improvements compared to standard EXPO. Despite that, AMD shared some broad benchmarks looking at EXPO ULL performance on a Ryzen 7 9700X CPU in over 30 games. AMD didn’t share resolution (presumably 1080p) or settings details for the titles, outside of the fact that they were tuned for “best performance.” You can see the full configuration in the gallery below.

Compared to JEDEC-standard DDR5-5600 CL46, AMD shows EXPO running at DDR5-6000 running 9% faster, and DDR5-6000 CL30 with EXPO ULL running 13% faster. Looking at 1% lows, AMD claims a performance improvement for EXPO and EXPO ULL of 11% and 15%, respectively. AMD didn’t clarify the CAS Latency of the standard EXPO memory, but it notes that it tested at CL28, CL30, and CL36 for both EXPO and EXPO ULL.

AMD simply says that EXPO ULL is “coming soon” from major memory partners, including G.Skill, Kingston, Klevv, Lexar, Origin Code, TeamGroup, V-Color, and XPG.

There are still several lingering questions about ULL, which we hope to learn more about on the ground at Computex 2026. Presumably, ULL isn’t a feature that’s being backported to older EXPO DIMMs, but rather a new standard moving forward. AMD hasn’t confirmed that’s the case, however.

We also don’t know what ULL is actually doing to find 4% extra performance compared to standard EXPO. Given the wide swath of games and CAS Latency settings AMD tested at, there’s a good chance ULL won’t show a benefit in all games. We should see better uplifts in smoothness, however, as evidenced by AMD’s 1% low results.

Tom’s Hardware is on the ground in Taipei for Computex, where we’ll be meeting with AMD to learn more about EXPO ULL, along with the newly-announced Ryzen 7 7700X3D and reintroduced Ryzen 7 5800X3D.

AMD confirmed that it will support its current AM5 socket through 2029 at Computex 2026. Previously, AMD had only committed to support the socket through 2027. With the extended timeline and AMD’s usual release cadence, support through 2029 should mean we’ll see at least two more generations on the socket as AMD continues to fight for slots among the best CPUs for gaming.

We first saw the AM5 socket with the release of Ryzen 7000 CPUs with the Zen 4 architecture in 2022. At the time, AMD said it would support the socket through “2025+.” With the release of Zen 5 in 2024, AMD extended the window to “2027+.” Now, we’re getting another two-year bump, though without Zen 6 CPUs in hand. We expect to see them soon, however, as AMD continues to double down on Zen 6 arriving in the data center this year.

Now, the support window is extended through “2029,” notably without a plus. That may seem like a small difference, but as you can see from AMD’s own slides, it uses “2027+” right next to “2029.” We’ve reached out to AMD to confirm if 2029 is the end of the line for AM5. A company spokesperson responded with the following: "AMD is unable to comment on future products/roadmap."

Still, two more generations on AM5, at least, seems likely. With Zen 6 set to arrive later this year in the data center, we should have a new generation on AM5 at some point next year. Assuming another two-year cycle for AMD’s following generation, that means AM5 would go out in 2029 with Zen 7, which we currently expect to see in 2028 (though that timeline could easily change as consumer launches move around in the AI era).

EXPO Ultra Low Latency, with promised 4% uplift coming soon

In addition to extending AM5 support, AMD teased a new version of EXPO automatic memory overclocking feature. EXPO Ultra Low Latency (ULL) is a new version of AMD’s branded memory overclocking that promises an average 4% uplift in performance compared to the first version of EXPO, as well as a 13% jump compared to running DDR5 at JEDEC speeds. AMD hasn’t confirmed when EXPO ULL will launch, outside of the fact that it’s “coming soon” and will be available from several memory partners, including G.Skill, Kingston, V-Color, Teamgroup, Lexar, and XPG.

AMD is bringing two X3D CPUs to market in a bid to combat rising component prices. The long-rumored Ryzen 7 5800X3D 10th Anniversary Edition arrives next month with a recommended retail price of $349, $100 less than the CPU launched for more than four years ago. For AM5 users, AMD has the Ryzen 7 7700X3D, which is a downclocked version of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D (still one of the best CPUs for gaming) with eight Zen 4 cores, launching at $329.

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D is, surprisingly, the star of the show. At the beginning of the year, AMD shared first with Tom’s Hardware its plans to bring back AM4 options as prices on DDR5 for the AM5 platform continue to rise. Supply of AMD’s sought-after AM4 options, such as the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, have largely dried up, with resellers demanding as much as $800 for the CPU.

The specs remain unchanged, at least based on what AMD has shared so far. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D 10th Anniversary Edition comes with eight Zen 3 cores and 16 threads, a maximum 4.5 GHz boost clock, 100 MB of combined L2 and L3 cache, and a 105W TDP. Just like the original version, the multiplier is locked, so you can't manually overclock the chip. It also uses AMD's first-gen 3D V-Cache design, with the SRAM placed on top of the cores.

AMD shared a handful of benchmarks comparing the Ryzen 7 5800X3D to older AM4 CPUs. Compared to the Ryzen 7 2700X, there’s a 115% uplift; against the Ryzen 7 3700X, a 47% jump. And against the base Ryzen 7 5800X, there’s an average 16% uplift. These are all familiar numbers for us at this point. We’ve seen the Ryzen 7 5800X3D in action for more than four years, and even with first-gen 3D V-Cache, it’s one fast gaming CPU.

Interestingly, AMD also compared the Ryzen 7 5800X3D to the Core i9-14900K, both running with DDR4 memory at 3600 MT/s. AMD claims the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is 10% faster on average at 1080p. We’ll have to run back some benchmarks to verify these claims; with DDR5, at least, even the Core i9-13900K is faster than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D based on our CPU benchmark hierarchy.

AMD says the Ryzen 7 5800X3D 10th Anniversary Edition will be available for sale on June 25, starting at $349. In addition to a new box with a 10th anniversary logo, the chip comes bundled with a Carbice Ice Pad, a thermal pad created with carbon nanotubes that’s normally only available through CyperPowerPC’s build configurator.

New (or at least newer) for AMD is the Ryzen 7 7700X3D. As the name suggests, this is an 8-core / 16-thread chip using 3D V-Cache and the Zen 4 architecture. It’s a downclocked version of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, sporting the same TDP, number of cores, and total amount of cache, just with slightly tweaked clock speeds.

The base clock is down from 4.2 GHz on the Ryzen 7 7800X3D to 4 GHz on the 7700X3D, and the boost clock tops out at 4.5 GHz (5 GHz for the 7800X3D). We’ve seen this playbook from AMD before with the Ryzen 7 5700X3D, rereleasing an older CPU with a worse bin at a lower price. And given the state of component pricing right now, that’s not a bad thing.

AMD didn’t share any performance data for the Ryzen 7 7700X3D, though we’ve asked the company if it has any broad performance claims for the new chip; the company says we should see more near launch. We expect the chip to perform largely the same as the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, however. With X3D CPUs, in particular, even large jumps in clock speed amount to very little extra performance in games, as you can read about in our Ryzen 7 9850X3D review.

Performance for the Ryzen 7 7700X3D is important, as it’s being flanked by two other excellent gaming CPUs around the same price. From AMD’s camp, the Ryzen 5 7600X3D is $230 and provides 95% of the gaming performance of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D on average; the Ryzen 7 7700X3D will likely slot somewhere in between. From Intel’s side, there’s the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus at the same price as the Ryzen 7 7700X3D. Intel is still about 10% off the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in games, but it’s more than twice as fast in application performance.

The Ryzen 7 7700X3D arrives after the Ryzen 7 5800X3D on July 16, starting at $329. Assuming similar gaming performance as the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, that’s not a bad price. Although the lowest sale price for the 7800X3D is technically $320, the CPU has almost exclusively sold for above $350, sale or not.

Full AMD Computex 2026 presentation

AMD has been accused of 'bait-and-switch' tactics following changes to the licensing of Vivado on Linux. As reported by It's Foss, AMD has decided that Linux users of the Vivado chip design environment need to pay up or stick with an older version that will become unsupported soon.

For the uninitiated, Vivado is AMD's proprietary design suite used to program Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs). These special chips can be rewired via software to mimic nearly any kind of computer hardware. This makes them invaluable for simulations and design testing. If you are designing, simulating, or testing custom circuits for AI, aerospace, or advanced electronics, Vivado is the gateway to making that hardware actually work.

The core of the outrage stems from a change in Vivado's upcoming 2026.1 update. Previously, the free "Standard" tier supported both Windows and Linux. Under the new tiered model, the free "Basic" tier is restricted entirely to Windows. If you want to use Vivado natively on Linux, you'll be forced to step up to the "Core" tier, which demands an eye-watering $1,200 to $1,800 annual subscription.

AMD's defense on its community forums has also not landed well. The company claimed that 70% of Vivado users are on Windows anyway, alienating the academic researchers, engineering students, and open-source hobbyists who heavily favor Linux-native environments and rely on free tools to learn the trade.

A forum representative for the company stated, "No one is stopping users (students, etc.) to continue using the current versions of Vivado (any Vivado version prior 2026.1)," and developing using the free Vivado ML Standard Edition, arguing that it was only if users decided to update that they'd need the license.

"I guess no one involved in this decision thought about the millions of hobbyists and amateurs like myself using Vivado for their hobby projects," one disgruntled user replied. Another noted that many users are already discussing moving to alternate platforms like Lattice and Altera due to these changes.

AMD's forum representative confirmed they were "collecting all the feedback received and passing on to the relevant team/marketing" at AMD, leaving the door ajar for a possible change to this policy down the line.

AMD has announced that its 6th Gen EPYC processor, codenamed Venice, has entered production ramp on TSMC's N2 (2nm-class) process technology in Taiwan. The chip, which packs up to 256 Zen 6 cores and claims a 70% compute performance gain over the current EPYC Turin lineup, is the first high-performance computing product in the industry to reach production on N2. AMD also announced a follow-on processor called Verano and said it plans to eventually produce Venice at TSMC's Arizona campus as well.

TSMC began volume production on its N2 node late last year, and the foundry is ramping five separate 2nm fabs this year to meet what it has described as record demand. Apple reportedly secured the lion’s share of initial N2 capacity for consumer silicon, but it’s AMD with Venice that’ll be the first HPC product on the node. Server and data center dies are larger and architecturally more complex than smartphone SoCs, and getting them through yield qualification on a brand-new process is a much bigger challenge.

"As AI and agentic workloads scale rapidly, customers need platforms that can move from innovation to production faster," said Dr. Lisa Su, chair and CEO of AMD, in the company's press release.

Venice brings the new SP7 socket, up to 16 memory channels delivering 1.6 TB/s of per-socket bandwidth, and doubled CPU-to-GPU bandwidth that likely indicates PCIe 6.0 support. AMD previewed these specs at its Advancing AI event last year and at CES in January, but this announcement puts the chip on track for commercial shipments later this year.

AMD could face limited next-gen competition in the server market right now, with Intel’s Diamond Rapids — the P-core Xeon 7 family that would be Venice's direct counterpart — rumored to be delayed to mid-2027. Intel's only new server product expected this year is Clearwater Forest, an E-core design built on Intel 18A with up to 288 cores. Clearwater Forest is optimized for high-density deployments at scale, not the high single-thread and general-purpose performance segment that Venice is targeting.

AMD already holds a record 46% server CPU revenue share as of Q1 2026, according to Mercury Research, up from roughly 40% at the company's Financial Analyst Day in November last year. Venice will likely extend that momentum into a segment where Intel will be relying on its existing Granite Rapids Xeon 6 lineup for at least another year.

AMD also confirmed Verano, another 6th Gen EPYC processor built on TSMC 2nm and optimized for performance-per-dollar-per-watt. AMD also says it plans to ramp Venice production at TSMC’s Arizona facility. That’s likely referring to Fab 21 Phase 3, which broke ground last April and is slated for N2 and A16 processes. Volume 2nm production isn’t expected before 2028 at the earliest here, however.

AMD is refreshing its stack of large SoCs, dubbed Ryzen AI Max, with new Gorgon Point chips. Codenamed Gorgon Halo, the Ryzen AI Max 400 range is a minor refresh to the Ryzen AI Max 300 ‘Strix Halo’ chips already available, similar to what we saw with Gorgon Point in laptops earlier this year. Gorgon Halo comes with one significant difference, however, which is space for up to 192GB of unified memory.

With Strix Halo, you could pack up to 128GB of unified memory, but AMD is pushing that boundary higher with Gorgon Halo; perhaps at the worst possible time, as global DRAM shortages continue to push prices up across all business categories. It’ll be a minor miracle if AMD is able to actually ship Gorgon Point with 192GB of unified memory consistently — we’ve seen Apple remove the 512GB option and even the 128GB option from the Mac Studio due to memory shortages.

Regardless, AMD has a lineup of three chips that should look very familiar if you’ve looked over the Strix Halo stack. All three chips use Zen 5 CPU cores and RDNA 3.5 GPU cores, alongside an XDNA 2 NPU. The flagship Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 495 comes with a minor clock speed bump of 100 MHz over the Ryzen AI Max+ 395, allowing it to boost to 5.2 GHz. Otherwise, you could scratch off the “4” and replace it with a “3,” at least based on the specs AMD has shared so far.

These chips currently have a “Pro” tag, which means they’re targeting the commercial market. However, the slides below refer to the Ryzen AI Max 400 range more broadly. I asked AMD about this discrepancy, and a spokesperson sent the following: “AMD will be announcing the Ryzen AI Max PRO 400 Series, featuring AMD PRO technologies which deliver enterprise-grade security, manageability, and reliability.”

So, I guess consumer Gorgon Halo is still up in the air. Maybe.

Interestingly, AMD opted to stick with a GPU with 32 CUs (the Radeon 8050S) for the Ryzen AI Max Pro 490 and 485. Earlier this year, AMD refreshed the Ryzen AI Max 385 and 390 with 40 CUs, the same as the flagship, in the form of the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 and 392. Maybe we’ll see a refresh of the refreshed Gorgon Halo chips with 40 CUs down the line.

Memory is the big upgrade here. Regardless of the GPU configuration, up to 160GB of unified memory can function as VRAM (32GB is reserved for the system). AMD says that much memory makes Ryzen AI Max 400 chips the first x86 client processors able to run a 300B+ parameter LLM. It wins in a category of one, however: Intel doesn’t make a large SoC like Gorgon Halo, and Apple uses the ARM ISA.

AMD says Ryzen AI Max 400 chips are “coming soon,” but didn’t share any timeline beyond that, nor any partners for Gorgon Halo systems. Strix Halo, as a niche product, was only available in a handful of machines, such as the Framework Desktop, ROG Flow Z13, and GMKtec EVO-X2. There’s a good chance we’ll see a similarly conservative rollout of Gorgon Halo, as well.

Despite not sharing any partners, AMD tells me that “several OEM partners have expressed excitement for the Ryzen AI Halo platform and the Ryzen AI Max Pro 400 series family of processors,” and that “systems will be announced from our partners starting in Q3 2026.”

AMD Ryzen AI Halo starts at $3,999 — pre-orders in June

The only confirmed machine with Ryzen AI Max 400 so far is the Ryzen AI Halo, which is “coming soon” configured with the Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 495. Coming sooner is the Ryzen AI Halo box AMD revealed earlier this year with the Ryzen AI Max+ 395. AMD is opening up pre-orders in June, and it says the machine starts at $3,999.

The starting configuration includes a Ryzen AI Max+ 395 with 128GB of unified memory and 2TB of storage. It says “details and pricing of the other configurations will be released closer to on-shelf,” so it sounds like we’ll see additional models in the future. The Ryzen AI Halo’s main competitor, Nvidia’s DGX Spark, is currently selling for $4,700 with 128GB of unified memory, Nvidia’s GB10 chip, and 4TB of storage.

The Ryzen AI Halo supports Linux and Windows, while the DGX Spark is limited to Linux. Still, the penguin seems like the primary platform for this box. With Linux, AMD says the Ryzen AI Halo offers up to 14% higher tokens per second than the DGX Spark with the GLM 4.7 Flash 30B model, as well as up to 4% higher tokens per second with Qwen 3.6 35B. AMD also compared the Ryzen AI Halo to the Mac Mini M4 Pro, showing around 4X scaling in AI workloads. That’s not really a fair comparison, however; a Mac Studio is more akin to the level of compute inside the Ryzen AI Halo or DGX Spark.

Outside of the core components, the Ryzen AI Halo comes with Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 5.4, and 10Gbps Ethernet, along with an HDMI 2.1b display output. The device includes three USB-C ports (no word on speeds yet), along with a fourth USB-C used for power delivery. The rated TDP is up to 120W for the box. It’s a lot of hardware crammed into a tiny space, with the Ryzen AI Halo coming in at 5.9 x 5.9 x 1.7 inches.

Although these boxes are expensive, AMD is framing the Ryzen AI Halo around the “token economy,” similar to how Nvidia has messaged against its data center hardware. AMD says one Ryzen AI Halo box can save up to $750 each month over using cloud compute, claiming the Ryzen AI Halo will break even on cost after six months (assuming six million tokens per day). With AI agents, that token usage is certainly possible. Just this month, we saw OpenClaw developer Peter Steinberger rack up $1.3 million in OpenAI API usage in just 30 days across a three-person team working on the agentic AI framework.

Pre-orders open in June for the Ryzen AI Halo., although AMD hasn’t shared the exact date. For the updated Ryzen AI Halo box with Gorgon Halo chips, AMD hasn’t announced any release date yet. Assuming we see more systems in Q3 as AMD has suggested, we should have a better idea about the Gorgon Halo rollout at that point.

Full presentation

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D, once regarded as the best CPU for gaming, is making a comeback, but this time in a refreshed packaging to mark the occasion. Leaked last month, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D AM4 10th Anniversary Edition has now appeared at an Indian retailer, priced at approximately $310. This anniversary edition SKU not only pays homage to a decade of AMD’s AM4 platform but also offers consumers the opportunity to purchase a still-very-solid gaming processor at an affordable price point.

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D AM4 10th Anniversary Edition appears in the same packaging as the vanilla version, but with distinct touches to commemorate AM4's milestone. Most notably, the box now proudly displays the 10th Anniversary Edition logo on both the front and back. The logo itself features the date April 16th, 2026, lining up with the date the CPU was leaked last month.

Beneath the anniversary logo, AMD has added the phrase “10 years of innovation,” highlighting a decade of technological advancement of the AM4 socket. The chipmaker has every right to celebrate the feat as the AM4 platform is probably the longest-lived consumer platform in computer history. Having launched in 2016, the platform has supported multiple generations of AMD processors, from the pre-Ryzen era through Zen 3, including all their respective refreshes. That's approximately over 125 unique AMD chips.

It’s highly improbable that AMD has made any technical modifications to the Ryzen 7 5800X3D AM4 10th Anniversary Edition. The processor almost certainly retains the same specifications and performance as the standard Ryzen 7 5800X3D. The octa-core part, which was the first to bring 3D V-Cache to a consumer processor, is just a tribute to AM4 and AMD's way of releasing a budget chip for gamers struggling with the memory and storage shortage.

Indian retailer 99deals.in has recently listed the Ryzen 7 5800X3D AM4 10th Anniversary Edition for approximately $310. For context, the original Ryzen 7 5800X3D debuted with an MSRP of $449 in 2024. With the anniversary edition SKU priced at roughly 69% of the regular model’s original price, gamers should enjoy the same exceptional gaming performance for 31% less. The anniversary edition's price is somewhat close (16%) to the vanilla's historical lowest price of $268.

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D AM4 10th Anniversary Edition first emerged on a Chinese PowerPoint slide, and the latest sighting places the chip at an Indian retailer. There has been no official announcement from AMD regarding the global availability or distribution plans for the anniversary edition.

AMD CEO Lisa Su met with Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Monday, pledging to expand AMD's operations and investment in the country days after President Trump's state visit to China. He Lifeng invited multinational companies, including AMD, to deepen cooperation, citing the "balanced and positive" outcomes of the Xi Jinping-Trump summit held May 13th to 15th, according to the Xinhua News Agency.

Su wasn’t part of the executive delegation that accompanied Trump to Beijing, a group that included Apple CEO Tim Cook, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, and Qualcomm CEO Cristiano Amon. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang was also initially left off the guest list before Trump personally called him and invited him to board Air Force One during a refueling stop in Anchorage. He Lifeng held a separate meeting with Huang as well.

Both AMD and Nvidia received export license approvals for their China-specific chips late last year, with AMD's MI308 and Nvidia's H20 each subject to a 15% revenue fee, but Nvidia has struggled to convert that clearance into actual sales. The company hasn’t completed a single H200 transaction with a Chinese buyer, hampered by both U.S. licensing bottlenecks and Beijing's decision not to allow purchases by domestic buyers.

Whether AMD's MI308 has fared better is unclear, but the company is thought to be actively moving forward with shipments. The more powerful MI325X, which delivers 1,300 TFLOPS of FP16 performance and pairs 256 GB of HBM3E with 6 TB/s of bandwidth, moved from a presumption of denial to case-by-case review under a Bureau of Industry and Security rule that took effect in January this year. That rule also covers Nvidia's H200 and carries a separate 25% tariff on chips that pass through the U.S. before export.

Following Su’s diplomatic outreach in Beijing, she delivered a keynote at AMD’s AI Developer Day in Shanghai. At the event, she predicted that roughly five billion people worldwide would use AI daily by 2030 and described China as a critical part of AMD's global footprint and “the world’s most dynamic AI ecosystem.” The company employs more than 4,000 engineers across R&D centers in Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and Taipei.

AMD is simultaneously scaling its commitments on the U.S. side of the chip divide. The company is building a gigawatt-scale data center for OpenAI, with the first phase scheduled for the second half of this year. Maintaining access to the Chinese market while deepening its role in American AI infrastructure requires AMD to deftly navigate the political waters of both sides of the Pacific, and Su's meeting is part of that ongoing corporate diplomacy.

Researchers at ETH Zurich disclosed a software-only vulnerability in April that silently undermines AMD SEV-SNP confidential computing protections on AMD's EPYC platforms, giving a malicious cloud host full read and write access to supposedly protected virtual machine memory. The technique, dubbed “Fabricked,” exploits flaws in how the CPU's Infinity Fabric interconnect handles memory routing during boot — and can forge the cryptographic attestation reports tenants rely on to verify their environment hasn't been tampered with.

The researchers presented the findings as part of a USENIX Security 2026 paper, describing the exploit as fully deterministic with a 100% success rate, without a need for physical access and no code execution inside the victim VM.

Confidential computing exists to address a fundamental trust problem in cloud infrastructure: tenants often have no way to verify that a cloud provider isn't accessing their data. AMD SEV-SNP addresses this by creating hardware-isolated Confidential Virtual Machines, where memory is encrypted and access-controlled by a dedicated on-chip security processor called the PSP. To enforce those boundaries, SEV-SNP relies on a structure called the Reverse Map Table — a per-page access control table stored in memory — which the PSP initializes securely during boot. Attestation, the mechanism by which tenants cryptographically verify their environment is genuine and untampered, depends on that chain holding. This is what Fabricked breaks.

The technique hinges on a component most users will never think about: the Infinity Fabric, AMD's internal chiplet interconnect responsible for routing memory traffic between CPU cores, memory controllers, and peripheral devices. Because platform configurations vary across hardware, parts of the Infinity Fabric must be configured during each boot sequence by the motherboard firmware — the UEFI. In AMD's own threat model, that firmware is explicitly untrusted, since cloud providers control it.

The researchers found that the UEFI is responsible for issuing two PSP API calls that lock down Infinity Fabric configuration registers after initialization. A malicious UEFI can simply skip them, leaving the Data Fabric — the memory routing layer within Infinity Fabric — writable by the attacker even after SEV-SNP has activated.

From there, the exploit leverages a second, subtler flaw. The researchers found that PSP memory requests were incorrectly checked against MMIO routing rules — rules normally reserved for hardware device communication — before standard DRAM routing rules were applied. By configuring those MMIO mappings to shadow the RMP's memory region, the attacker causes the PSP's initialization writes to be silently discarded. The RMP never gets properly set up, but SEV-SNP reports successful initialization anyway. The platform believes the system is secure when it is not.

With an uninitialized RMP under attacker control, the hypervisor can read and write arbitrary CVM memory. The researchers demonstrated two concrete exploits: enabling debug mode on a production CVM after attestation — giving the hypervisor the ability to decrypt arbitrary VM memory, undetected by the guest — and forging attestation reports wholesale, allowing a malicious image to pass as a trusted one.

The researchers confirmed the exploit on AMD Zen 5 EPYC processors. AMD's advisory also lists firmware updates for Zen 3 and Zen 4, suggesting broader exposure across generations. AMD acknowledged the vulnerability following ETH Zurich's responsible disclosure in August 2025, assigned it CVE-2025-54510, and published security guidance under advisory AMD-SB-3034 when the embargo lifted in April 2026.

Organizations running workloads on AMD EPYC-based confidential computing instances should verify with their cloud provider that updated firmware has been deployed. AMD has issued patches covering Zen 3, Zen 4, and Zen 5 platforms. Home users and standard cloud workloads that don't rely on SEV-SNP confidential computing are not affected.

Microsoft announced Advanced Shader Delivery (ASD) for Xbox ROG Ally devices last year, bringing precompiled shaders to the handheld to improve load times. Since then, ASD has been included in the DirectX SDK, with both Intel and Nvidia already releasing their own versions of the tech. Today, AMD joins them as Microsoft expands ASD beyond handhelds to RDNA 3, RDNA 3.5, and RDNA 4 GPUs.

Forza Horizon 6 is the latest game to feature ASD on Windows 11 PCs, but you need the Microsoft Store/Xbox PC app version to take advantage of it. Using an RX 7600 GPU and a Ryzen 7 5800 CPU, Advanced Shader Delivery helped the game boot up 95% faster, taking only four seconds to load on first launch. Without ASD enabled, Forza Horizon 6 took nearly a minute and a half to load otherwise.

This is because every time you install a new game or go through an update, the game needs a fresh shader cache, which can take a few minutes to rebuild. Even if you don't touch the game, but your GPU drivers are updated, you need to recompile shaders for all of your games when you open them for the first time. This process is necessary because shader compilation is performed on-device and must account for hardware variability.

Microsoft's solution is to decouple shaders from drivers entirely and place them in a Precompiled Shader Database (PSDB) that lives in the cloud. Every time you download a game from the Microsoft Store or the Xbox PC app, ASD detects your specific configuration (game, GPU, driver) and downloads the precompiled shaders in advance. So, when you open the game, the shaders are already compiled, and you don't have to wait.

Consoles have done this forever, which makes sense considering they don't have to worry about different hardware configs. Even Valve has a version of precompiled shaders for Linux that it developed for the Steam Deck, but never ported to Windows. Since SSDs have made long load times a thing of the past, this has been one of the last remaining hurdles to instantaneous game launches.

Advanced Shader Delivery is available only on RDNA 3 and later GPUs and only on games downloaded via the Xbox PC app or the Microsoft Store. We don't know when other Windows marketplaces will adopt it, but at least 34 other games should support ASD right away, since they were part of the original announcement for the Xbox ROG Ally handhelds.

Moreover, you need to be enrolled in the Xbox Insiders program to get the Xbox Insiders Hub app, which is required to enable Advanced Shader Delivery, since Microsoft is classifying this as a preview. The company worked closely with AMD to develop it, which is why it's limited to RDNA 3+ hardware for now, because otherwise, it's supposed to be a universal solution for all GPUs on Windows 11 going forward.

Regardless, if you have an Nvidia GPU, the Nvidia app should have a feature called "Auto Shader Compilation" that does the same thing. It gives you more granular control over the size of the shader cache, too. If you're rocking an Intel GPU, then check out "Precompiled Shader Distribution" in the Intel Graphics app instead. Intel has implied that it's using its own cloud database for now, with the ASD standard being adopted later this year.

Owners of Radeon RX 9000-series cards have been enjoying the benefits of the company's FSR 4 upscaling tech for some time now, and that feature has officially been exclusive to those products since launch. Gamers with older Radeons were left out in the cold, sparking community outrage—until today. AMD VP Jack Huynh has revealed that FSR 4.1 upscaling will be made available for RDNA 3 cards (RX 7000-series products) in July, and for RDNA 2 cards (RX 6000-series products) in "early 2027."

Community testing of AMD's INT8 FSR 4 code puts the penalty at around 10-20% versus FSR 3 on 6000-series cards, and a lower cost on 7000-series Radeons, but only testing with the full official version will tell the full story. Having said that, even with lower performance scaling, the quality-to-speed ratio of FSR 4.1 is almost certainly worth it.

The company has hinted at open-sourcing FSR4 in the wake of the aforementioned leak, a move that would probably be a good idea for the future of the technology, given how AMD's GPU division seems focused on catching up to Nvidia in the far more lucrative market AI accelerators. A more recent SDK update also suggested that FSR frame generation might get 4-6x multipliers, too, which would give it feature parity with Nvidia's MFG. In any event, making FSR 4 available to owners of older Radeons is a welcome step that will extend the useful life of those products for some time.

The news is certainly welcome for gamers with older Radeons, though technically minded folks already had access to FSR 4's improvements by way of community tools like Optiscaler. AMD initially restricted FSR 4 to RDNA 4's accelerated FP8 hardware, but an FSR 4 source code leak in August 2025 revealed that the company had also created an INT8 version of the AI upscaling model that was compatible with older cards. The community used that source code to enable support for FSR 4 on older Radeons through unofficial tools, creating an ongoing outcry for official support that's now been answered.

It's notable that the upcoming official release will incorporate the latest FSR 4.1 release. That upscaler improves on the original FSR 4.0 on most every front, with less blurring and smearing, better detail retention on thin lines and distant retention, and finer particle effects. There's also significantly less shimmer on object edges (aka improved temporal stability).

The first quarter of 2026 was quite favorable for AMD as the company managed to increase its unit share on the market of client systems and skyrocketed its share in servers past 33%, according to Mercury Research. In addition, the company's revenue shares set records across client and server market segments, so AMD now controls 38.1% of all x86 CPU market value and 46.2% of all x86 server CPU revenue share. Perhaps an alarming sign is that the company's desktop PC unit and revenue shares declined sequentially, though they are up year-over-year (YoY).

Consumer CPUs: AMD gains ground, but only modestly

In the consumer PC segment, AMD continued to gain ground in the first quarter of 2026 as its client CPU unit share rose to 29.6%, up slightly from 29.2% in Q4 2025 and up sharply from 24.1% the same quarter a year ago, according to data by Mercury Research.

The quarter, however, showed a split between desktops and notebooks as Intel has managed to claw back 3.2% of the desktop PC market. Also, Intel remained the dominant supplier of client CPUs with a 70.4% share, though its position weakened from 75.9% in Q1 2025 as AMD did rather well in notebooks.

However, when it comes to the revenue side of things, AMD's position remained particularly strong. The company's client CPU revenue share reached 31.4%, slightly above the previous quarter and substantially higher than a year ago (26.6%), which perhaps reflects the company's continued strength in premium client processors. Nonetheless, Intel still controlled nearly 69% of client CPU revenue, which is a big deal. How things will unfold in the second half of the year — when Intel launches its Nova Lake processors for client systems that it pins a lot of hopes on — is something that remains to be seen.

Desktop CPUs: Market share comes, market share goes

In the desktop PC segment, AMD gave back a portion of the massive gains it made during the exceptionally strong holiday quarter, but still maintained a historically high position, so the decline can be considered as a correction, rather than a new trend.

AMD's desktop CPU unit share stood at 33.2% in Q1 2026, down from the record 36.4% in Q4 2025, but well above the 28% recorded in the quarter a year earlier. Intel regained some ground sequentially and increased its desktop share to 66.8%, but remained far below its year-ago level of 72% as AMD continued to hold a much stronger position than it did in recent years.

On the revenue side, AMD remained strong despite the sequential share drip: the company's desktop CPU revenue share was 37.6%, down from the record quarter before, but still notable 3.2% higher than a year earlier. Intel continued to generate most desktop CPU revenue overall, but AMD's ability to maintain a high revenue share relative to its unit share shows the continued strength of premium Ryzen CPUs.

Mobile CPUs: Another record quarter

In the mobile PC segment, AMD delivered its strongest result ever as it managed to once again increase its share and set its highest share in laptops ever.

AMD's mobile CPU unit share climbed to 28.3% in Q1 2026, up from 26% in Q4 2025 and from 22.5% a year earlier, the best quarter ever for the company's mobile processors. For obvious reasons, Intel commanded the lion's share of the market — 71.7% — though its lead narrowed further as AMD increased its share by improving availability and expanding its footprint in segments (e.g., business and commercial notebooks) traditionally dominated by Intel.

As for revenue share, AMD's progress was even more impressive. The company’s mobile CPU revenue share rose to 28.9%, an increase from 24.9% in Q4 2025 and from 22.2% in Q1 2025, which reflects stronger sales of higher-value notebook processors. Intel continued to control the majority of notebook CPU revenue overall (71.7%, down from 77.5% in Q1 2025), but AMD's ability to approach 28.9% revenue share clearly indicates its increasing competitiveness in higher-margin premium laptops that historically favored Intel almost exclusively.

Server CPUs: Another breakthrough quarter

While the first quarter was good for AMD's mobile processors, it was exceptional for AMD's EPYC CPUs for servers. The company not only set a record in terms of unit share, but it has also managed to skyrocket its revenue share by 5% in a single quarter.

AMD's server processor unit share climbed to 33.2%, up from 28.8% in Q4 2025 and 27.2% a year earlier, the data by Mercury Research shows. Intel still shipped the majority of server processors with a 66.8% share, but its position weakened both sequentially and year-over-year as EPYC adoption continued to expand across hyperscale cloud providers, enterprise deployments, and AI/HPC infrastructure.

On the revenue side, AMD's performance was even more striking: the company's server CPU revenue share reached a record 46.2%, which means that AMD now commands nearly half of all x86 server CPU revenue while shipping roughly one-third of units. This gap between unit share and revenue share reflects significantly higher average selling prices of AMD's processors in general and the popularity of the company's high-core-count premium configurations. While Intel generated more server CPU revenue than AMD, ASPs of its Xeon products were lower compared to those of EPYCs, which is in line with market performance in prior quarters.

Summary

AMD started 2026 on a strong note: it expanded its share in both client and server CPUs and set new records for overall x86 CPU revenue share, according to Mercury Research.

The company posted particularly strong gains in notebooks and servers, where EPYC adoption pushed AMD’s server revenue share close to half of the entire x86 server market. While AMD's desktop CPU share declined sequentially after an exceptionally strong holiday quarter, it remained well above year-ago levels, so the strong momentum for the company continues.

In general, AMD continues to strengthen its positions in the most profitable parts of the x86 CPU market, while Intel retains shipment leadership but loses further ground in revenue share and premium segments.

With the prices of memory and storage at record highs, the amount of laptop you get for the money has shrunk significantly. We've used our knowledge and experience, informed by our extensive testing and benchmarking program, to find the best available gaming and productivity laptops on sale for under $1,000 to help you find the right laptop for you. We're updating this page constantly with the best deals available, but be aware that these deals often expire quickly, so you'll need to act fast.

A giant desktop gaming PC isn't for everyone! Price, space, and portability are negatives of a giant desktop gaming rig. These are things a compact and powerful gaming or productivity laptop can help to solve, especially if you can get your hands on one for under $1,000. There are, of course, obvious compromises that you'll need to make if you're going to try to find a budget machine. Things like dedicated graphics, the amount of onboard RAM, storage space, and even the size and quality of the screen and chassis.

Apple has jumped to the rescue with the likes of the MacBook Neo, but Windows users haven't been as lucky as of late. For gaming laptops, you're going to be looking at the lower end of GPUs from Nvidia's RTX 5050 and even graphics chips from older generations. The same goes for the processors used. Expect to see previous-gen CPUs in lower-priced laptops that are available for under $1,000.

Best Gaming and Productivity Laptops Under $1,000: Quick Links

• Amazon: Top gaming laptops under $1,000 at Amazon
• Amazon: The best productivity laptops under $1,000
• Dell: Our favorite Dell laptop deals
• HP: Amazing HP laptop discounts
• Lenovo: Deals on Lenovo laptops

Best Gaming and Productivity Laptops Under $1,000

More Tech Deals

Best Tech and PC deals | Best gaming PC deals | Best RAM combo deals | Best 3D printer deals | Best RAM deals | Best gaming laptop deals | Best monitor deals | Best Wi-Fi Router deals | Best GPU deals | Best SSD deals | Best hard drive HDD deals | Best CPU deals | Best gaming chair deals | Best PC building tool deals | Best PC peripherals deals | Best filament and resin deals | Best motherboard deals | Best CPU cooler deals | Best PC case deals | Best Dell and Alienware deals | Best USB charger deals | Best gaming and productivity laptop deals under $1,000 | Best laptop PC deals

Also, you can join the Tom's Hardware deals Discord for up-to-the-minute hardware deals.

When Arm introduced its first 'physical' AGI processors in late March, the company expressed optimism about their adoption by select customers. In less than two months, the company attained around $2 billion in commitments for its AGI CPU over the next several years, smashing the company's expectations two-fold. But despite this heightened interest, Arm's market share will remain in the low single digits even if it manages to ship $2 billion worth of CPUs in two years, Mercury Research told Tom's Hardware.

"Customer response to the Arm AGI CPU is already strong, with more than $2 billion of customer demand across FYE27 and FYE28 – more than double what was stated at Arm Everywhere," Arm declared in its earnings press release.

Arm officially introduced its AGI CPU on March 24, 2026, and referred to it as 'production silicon,' meaning the design of the processor itself is final. Actual production of the CPU is expected to begin in the second half of 2026, with initial customer shipments expected in Q4 2026. Arm expects to ship $90 to $100 million worth of AGI CPUs in Q4 2026 alone.

Given the rising interest in the new chip, the company expects to generate $15B in AGI CPU sales and $10B in IP revenue by FY 2031 (ending on March 31, 2031), which will drive its total revenue to $25B per year, up from $2.61B in FY 2026.

Generating $15 billion in data center CPU sales in a single year is a big deal; Intel earned $16.8B selling server processors last year, after all. Given the rising demand for CPUs, particularly for agentic AI workloads, Arm's revenue may indeed increase by almost a factor of 10, with actual CPUs accounting for 60% of that total figure.

Single-digit percent of the server market

While $100M worth of AGI CPUs in Q4 2026 and over $2B of demand for the next two fiscal years looks like a lot of money (especially given the fact that Arm's current annual revenue is $2.61B), Arm's presence in the server and data center CPU market (silicon CPUs, not IP) will be negligible (yet still quite hard to achieve) if compared to share of merchant CPUs.

AMD and Intel sold just under 20 million data center-oriented EPYC and Xeon SP processors worth tens of billions of dollars in 2025, according to Dean McCarron, president and principal analyst at Mercury Research, a leading CPU market research firm. If we consider only 2025 data center CPU shipments, Arm would need around 4% unit share of the current server CPU market to achieve its $2 billion revenue target.

"In round numbers for 2025, AMD's EPYC average selling price was about $1,325," Dean McCarron told Tom's Hardware Premium. "For Intel, the 2025 ASP for Xeon SP* is about $1,125. What Arm gets of course might be different, and prices are rising, but something like $1,250 probably is not a bad starting place."

At this point, it is hard to estimate the actual ASP of Arm's AGI since while the company advertises processors with up to 136 cores, we can only wonder how many SKUs there will be and how many cores entry-level models will have. If Arm behaves like a typical CPU maker — balancing recovery of development and manufacturing costs against maximizing margins — then AGI's ASP will be comparable to that of EPYC or Xeon.

"So, $2 billion would take roughly 1.6 million CPUs, if that is done over the course of a couple years — eight quarters — that is an average of 200,000 units per quarter," McCarron explained. "For comparison, in 2025, the combined EPYC and Xeon SP markets averaged just under 5 million units per quarter, and of course, that is going to be growing rapidly in 2026 and beyond. So, Arm's $2 billion in server CPU revenue requires them to sell just 4% of the total units right now, and this would be an even smaller percentage of the total in a couple years."

Since Meta is a co-designer partner and lead customer for Arm's AGI CPU, it might get a considerably lower price, which means that Arm will have to supply more units to meet its revenue target, which will mean a higher market share at the cost of lower profits.

"While those [ASP] figures span entry-level to the largest cores, the volumes (and ASPs) are dominated by the hyperscalers," explained McCarron. "When you buy hundreds of thousands of units at a single time, there are some volume discounts, which is why the ASPs are in the low thousands and not $10,000+."

*Other Intel server products were excluded from the comparison as they are not direct competitors to Arm-based data center CPUs.

But can Arm supply?

Given the widespread shortages of everything from wafers at TSMC to memory and from storage devices to advanced chip packaging capacity, we can only wonder whether Arm can increase its output of its AGI CPUs in the next two years by a factor of two. The company has not given a positive answer straight away, but it claims that it is working on it.

"How quickly can we get units?" Rene Haas asked rhetorically. "The number that we talked about end of March was supply in place to support $1 billion of demand, and that includes memory, that includes wafers, that includes packaging, that includes access to test equipment. For the $2 billion, we are now in the process of securing supply to support that. The teams are working around the clock to make sure we can find the right answers for our customers."

Strategic positioning

Strategically, Arm positions its AGI CPUs not as traditional off-the-shelf processors competing directly with merchant CPU vendors and/or custom silicon designed by (or for) leading hyperscale cloud service providers, but as scalable compute platforms and subsystems that hyperscalers and OEMs can use for specific workloads and vertically integrated AI stacks.

The first-gen Arm AGI processor was co-developed with Meta, which will be the first and lead customer for the CPU. Nonetheless, Cerebras, Cloudflare, F5, OpenAI, Positron, Rebellions, SAP, and SK Telecom plan to deploy the Arm AGI CPU for a variety of use cases that include agentic AI CPU workloads. These include accelerator management and control plane processing, as well as other CPU workloads that support AI agent infrastructure or typical cloud workloads.

While the AGI processors will not be available on demand like server CPUs from AMD and Intel, interested parties will be able to get AGI-based rack-scale solutions from such OEMs and ODMs as ASRock Rack, Lenovo, Quanta Computer (which is the leading supplier to Meta), and Supermicro.

On the hardware side, Arm claims that its AGI processor is the world's most efficient agentic CPU. In particular, Arm claims that its AGI CPU was purpose-built as a new class of processor for sustained parallel performance at rack scale, delivering high 'per-task performance' without throttling across thousands of cores and retaining modern data center power and cooling limits.

Arm's 1^st Generation AGI is a data center-bound processor that features up to 136 high-performance Neoverse V3 cores at up to 3.70 GHz, based on the Armv9.2 instruction set architecture, equipped with dual 128-bit SVE2 (Scalable Vector Extension 2) units per core, as well as 2MB of L2 cache per core.

The CPU features a 12-channel DDR5 memory subsystem supporting up to 6 TB of 8800 MT/s memory, providing up to 6 GB/s of bandwidth per core, and has an I/O that supports 96 PCIe Gen6 lanes with CXL 3.0 on top for caching and memory expansion. The CPU is comprised of two identical chiplets (with their own memory interfaces and I/O) made using a 3nm-class process technology and has a thermal design power of 300W.

Arm has a roadmap for its own AGI processors that spans years. While the company does not disclose it to the public, its management implies a consistent and significant core count increase, and believes that agentic AI workloads will call for racks full of CPUs rather than racks that pack a few CPUs and tens of AI accelerators. When it comes to agentic AI workloads, they will not call for more CPUs, but rather for more CPU cores; hence, the rapid core count increase seems to be a logical evolution for Arm's own AGI processors.

"The way I think they think about it is that while the ratios may not go to more CPUs than GPUs from a chip standpoint, they probably will from a core count standpoint," said Rene Haas, chief executive of Arm, during the recent earnings call. " CPUs today, the Arm AGI CPU, for example, has 136 CPU cores. [Nvidia's] Vera, that is 88. As I mentioned earlier, could I see those core counts doubling or quadrupling over the next number of years? Absolutely. […] Will you see many more CPUs inside a data hall, dedicated racks of CPUs that are doing agentic orchestration and scheduling and management? 100%."

With up to 136 highly high-performance cores optimized for agentic AI and data center workloads and available starting from Q4 2026, Arm's AGI CPU is poised to be in high demand from those who need high-end CPUs to run their AI agent infrastructure and whose software stack is already optimized for Arm.

Arm braces for AGI influx

Orders for Arm's 136-core AGI CPUs have doubled to over $2 billion since their announcement on March 24. The development is a result of the skyrocketing growth of demand for CPUs for agentic AI infrastructure and reflects similar occurrences at AMD and Intel. The company now expects to generate $15 billion in AGI CPU sales and $10 billion in IP revenue in fiscal 2031 (which ends on March 31, 2031), increasing its revenue by 9.5X in five years.

However, while $2 billion by FY2028 and $15 billion in FY2031 look like a huge amount of money, Arm will remain a strong contender, rather than a major supplier of data center CPUs, as AMD and Intel earn tens of billions per year selling their EPYC and Xeon parts and are projected to earn hundreds of billions in the 2030s.

Mercury Research believes that Arm could ship roughly 1.6 million of AGI CPUs over the next two fiscal years, which looks pale compared to nearly 20 million of EPYC and Xeon processors sold in 2025. Still, it should be noted that Arm does not plan to compete directly with merchant CPUs as its AGI processors will be available to select hyperscale CSPs and through OEMs and ODMs that will offer rack-scale solutions based on AGI CPUs.

AMD’s landmark K5 processor family will no longer be supported by Linux when kernel version 7.2 arrives. The Linux-watchers at Phoronix noticed the forced retirement of the venerable K5 in a recent patch designed to “remove support for TSC-less Pentium variants.” The lack of TSC (Time Stamp Counter) in the K5 apparently makes it a burden for developers to support in the kernel.

The K5 holds a special place in AMD history as the firm’s first independently designed x86 processor. However, it wasn’t a very popular processor as it arrived late, then offered lackluster performance in the competitive environment it joined.

AMD’s shiny homegrown 4.3M transistor chip featured a “RISC-based internal architecture that decoded x86 instructions into micro-instructions before executing them,” we noted in a 2008 retrospective. However, launch SKUs in 1996 were limited to clocks from 75 MHz to 133 MHz, and, due to being late, Intel’s Pentium line was already faster. AMD still managed to get an edge on the Cyrix 6x86, though.

As was de rigueur at the time, these AMD K5 chips were sold with a ‘performance rating’ (PR) figure, suggesting an integer performance comparison with an Intel Pentium with the indicated clock speed. For example, a second revision K5 with a 116 MHz clock was marketed as a K5 PR166. Enthusiasts don’t like this kind of obfuscation, even when it is clearly on the surface. We also note that this era marked the introduction of the heatsink and fan as a CPU-partnering necessity.

Intel i486, AMD Elan SoCs, and AMD Geode CPUs also put out to pasture

We reported a month ago that Linux devs had started to remove support for the 37-year-old Intel i486 CPU in patches destined for the Linux 7.1 kernel. That was probably a bigger deal than today’s AMD K5 news, as many more of these processors were sold.

Other lesser-known processor lines have also been retired from Linux support, but are still worth a mention for the sake of completeness. Specifically, the AMD Elan (i486‑class, TSC‑less) SoC for embedded systems which first launched in 1995, looks set to be retired in Linux 7.2. Similarly the AMD Geode x86 embedded processors (early 2000s Elan replacements) will be cut off from Linux support from Linux kernel 7.2.

With no end in sight for the RAMpocalypse, it is a little sad to see older hardware getting dropped from support. However, machines packing these retired processors can still be used in fun projects where a fully up-to-date security-hardened internet-connected patched OS isn’t essential.

AMD’s new Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 already earned a spot among our best CPUs for gaming, leveraging the company’s 3D V-Cache across both CCDs and topping the Zen 5 lineup. At $900, it’s the most expensive consumer CPU AMD currently offers, and with performance to match, with the chip often coming out on top in our CPU benchmark hierarchy.

Still, that price tag puts it in a unique but difficult position. It is hundreds of dollars more expensive than anything AMD or Intel currently offers, but also not in the same territory as AMD’s Threadripper CPUs. This makes the 9950X3D2 a unique proposition, and even though AMD claims it's a CPU aimed at creative professionals, we must know how fast it is in gaming.

That brings us to the Ryzen 9 9950X3D, the vanilla X3D chip that previously held the top spot in AMD’s lineup and has vertically stacked cache on only one of the CCDs. It is only logical to compare the 9950X3D2 with the 9950X3D to see if the upgrade is worth it, and that is what we are going to do today.

Should you spend an extra $200 to $300 to get the “Dual Edition” over the standard 9950X3D? We ran both CPUs through a six-round gauntlet to find out.

This faceoff breaks down how two CPUs compare to each other in a head-to-head battle. If you'd like to read more about either processor, as well as see our full suite of tests, make sure to read our Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 review and Ryzen 9 9950X3D review.

Features and Specifications: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 vs Ryzen 9 9950X3D

AMD recently expanded its Ryzen 9000 X3D lineup with the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2. The interesting bit with this one is that, unlike the Ryzen 9 9950X3D, which has 3D V-Cache stacked on only one CCD, the 9950X3D2 has stacked cache on both CCDs, hence the name. AMD even added a “Dual Edition” to the name just to drive the point home.

The Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 is the flagship X3D model of the Ryzen 9000 series based on the Zen 5 architecture. It is built on TSMC's 4nm production process and features 16 cores and 32 threads. The 9950X3D2 can boost up to 5.6 GHz, and has integrated Radeon graphics as well. The Dual Edition has a TDP of 200W and a PPT of 270W, the highest in the Ryzen 9000 lineup.

The cache layout is where the 9950X3D2 distinguishes itself from the pack. Owing to the dual 3D V-Cache configuration that spans both core complexes, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 has 192 MB of total L3 cache (96 MB per CCD). The CPU supports DDR5 memory at 5600 MT/s officially, provides 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and is compatible with the AM5 socket.

Its competitor, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D, is quite similar to the new Dual Edition, apart from the cache configuration. It is also a Zen 5 CPU with 16 cores and 32 threads, but it has a boost clock of 5.7 GHz, a 100 MHz bump over the Dual Edition. Furthermore, it has a lower TDP of 170W and a PPT of 230W.

As mentioned before, the 9950X3D has vertically stacked cache on only one of the core complexes, resulting in a total L3 cache of 128 MB; 64 MB stacked, and 32 MB on each CCD. Other than that, the 9950X3D also supports DDR5 memory at 5600 MT/s, provides 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and is compatible with the AM5 socket, just like the new 9950X3D2.

On paper, the new 9950X3D2 wins easily, but that is to be expected given it is an improved version of the 9950X3D. Its larger cache pool and higher power ratings set it apart from the 9950X3D.

⭐ Winner: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2

Although it has a slightly lower boost clock, the larger L3 cache pool just makes the 9950X3D2 hard to beat on paper, especially when all the other specs are the same.

Gaming Benchmarks and Performance: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 vs Ryzen 9 9950X3D

We tested the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 and the 9950X3D in a suite of 17 games across various genres to get a good idea of the two CPUs' general performance, along with some relevant competitors. The CPUs were paired with a GeForce RTX 5090, and the tests were run at 1080p to minimize bottlenecks and maximize the differences between the two CPUs.

This round will focus specifically on gaming performance, but you can get a more detailed analysis of the 9950X3D2 in our in-depth review.

Starting with the overall gaming geomean, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 lands at a 211.3 FPS average across our test suite, while the original 9950X3D comes in at 209.6 FPS. That works out to less than a 1% difference, barely over a single frame per second on average. Across 17 titles at 1080p, the two processors perform almost identically, and in real-world usage, you would not feel the difference. Right out of the gate, the generational step from 9950X3D to 9950X3D2 is essentially a rounding error.

The 1% low results follow the same pattern. The 9950X3D2 posts a geomean 1% low of 148 FPS, compared to the 9950X3D's 146. Again, it’s a negligible margin that won’t translate into a perceptibly smoother experience in blind testing. This average doesn’t hold up in every title, though, which is where the comparison gets more interesting.

When you break things down per game, most titles show the two trading blows within a frame or two. In Baldur’s Gate 3, DOOM: The Dark Ages, Far Cry 6, Starfield, The Last of Us Part I, and Cyberpunk 2077, both CPUs are within a frame or two of each other. In the bulk of our test suite, there’s no real difference between them, but they alternate between the first and second spots.

That makes the edge cases all the more worth pointing out. Borderlands 4 is the clearest example where the 9950X3D pulls ahead of the newer dual-V-cache part. The older 9950X3D has a 9% lead in average FPS, and an 8% lead in 1% lows over the newer processor. This reinforces the point that more cache on both CCDs doesn’t always translate into better real-world performance.

However, when you look at Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024, the script flips completely. The 9950X3D2 soars to a 24% lead in average FPS lead and a 21% higher 1% low score over the 9950X3D. However, the base Ryzen 9 9950X3D had core parking issues in this title, parking the cores on the X3D CCD instead of the non-X3D, which explains the large gap we’re seeing.

Crimson Desert also gives the 9950X3D2 a 6% lead in 1% lows, even though the averages are within a frame, showing that while the numbers can flip, the dual-cache configuration can sometimes stabilize frame delivery in certain engines. The 1% low situation in Final Fantasy XIV is worth mentioning, too. The 9950X3D2 has a higher average FPS, but the 9950X3D actually posts a better 1% low (134 versus 130). That's a small gap, but the pattern is opposite to what you'd expect from a newer chip.

During gaming, the 9950X3D2 pulls an average of 135.4 W across our test suite, compared to 130.1 W for the 9950X3D. Translating that to frames per watt, the efficiency drops from 1.61 on the original to 1.56 on the new part. It’s not a wild regression, but it’s a step backward at a time when efficiency is increasingly important. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 averaged 67 °C during our tests, while the 9950X3D averaged 65°C.

The 9950X3D already sits at $640, and the 9950X3D2 pushes that to $900 based on the pricing at the time of writing. When you do the FPS-per-dollar math, the 9950X3D turns in 0.32 FPS/$, while the 9950X3D2 drops to 0.23 FPS/$. That’s a brutal 28% decline in value for a sub-1% average uplift in the geomean. Make no mistake, the top-shelf gaming performance here is an upside, not the main draw for either of these CPUs.

⭐ Winner: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D

We're looking at basically identical performance between the Ryzen 9 9950X3D and its dual cache counterpart. Considering the base model has an edge in efficiency and scores much better on the value front, it takes the lead this round.

Productivity Benchmarks and Performance: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 vs Ryzen 9 9950X3D

When looking at productivity numbers, we have to analyze both the single-threaded and multi-threaded performance. Starting with the multi-threaded performance ranking geomean, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 comes out on top with 681 points, leading the Ryzen 9 9950X3D by 3.9%. AMD claims the 9950X3D2 is a workstation-grade chip, so that kind of performance uplift is to be expected.

Interestingly, the single-threaded ranking is flipped, with the older 9950X3D leading the 9950X3D2 by 0.7%. This is an interesting trend, so let’s look at individual results to get a clearer picture.

In the Cinebench 2024 multi-core test, the new Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 leads the 9950X3D by 4.3%. The lead for the new dual V-cache CPU is 1.3% in POV-Ray’s multi-core test, and 3.3% in Blender Junkshop. In fact, similar leads for the 9950X3D2 can be seen in Blender Monster, Classroom, V-Ray 6, and the Cinebench 2026 multi-core test. So far, so good for the new flagship X3D processor.

In encoding tests, a similar pattern can be observed. The HandBrake x265 10-bit encoding test shows the 9950X3D2 leading the 9950X3D by 2.3%. Similarly, it leads by 6.4% in the HandBrake SVT_AV1 10-bit encoding test, and by 8.7% in the x264 10-bit benchmark. It looks like the second L3 cache stack provides a small but noticeable performance uplift for multi-core, heavily threaded tasks.

Now the story becomes a bit more interesting once we look at single-threaded results in individual benchmarks. The new 9950X3D2 actually trails the 9950X3D in these tests, despite leading the same tests in multi-core scores. Bear in mind that the two CPUs have the same number of cores and threads, but the 9950X3D2 has a 100 MHz lower boost clock due to its unique dual 3D V-cache design, which is likely the reason for its lower single-threaded performance.

In POV-Ray’s single-core test, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D leads the new 9950X3D2 by 2%. It also leads by 0.7% in Lame’s single-thread audio encoding test as well as in the Lame Extended test. However, in Cinebench 2024’s single-core test, the 9950X3D2 wins back the lead by scoring 1.1% higher than the 9950X3D.

The regression in single-threaded performance is to be expected due to the slightly stunted boost clocks of the 9950X3D2. Still, the roughly 4% bump in multi-core performance is underwhelming, given that AMD marketed this chip for workstation use. Not to mention, the 9950X3D2 is $200 more than the standard 9950X3D at the time of writing, making this a tough sell even for creative professionals.

There are some upsides in specific applications, however. We saw leads of 20% or higher in AI inference workloads, as well as a boost to data science tasks.

⭐ Winner: Ryzen 9 9950X3D2

The new Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 provides better overall multi-core performance, although only slightly. It wins this round despite actually losing the single-threaded tests; however, its value proposition is looking shaky in the initial rounds.

Overclocking: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 vs Ryzen 9 9950X3D

AMD hasn’t introduced anything new or revolutionary with the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2's overclocking suite. It has the same overclocking capabilities and features as the Ryzen 9 9950X3D, and by extension, the rest of the Ryzen 9000 lineup.

Both the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 and 9950X3D have fully unlocked multipliers for manual overclocking, but the tool of choice for Ryzen CPUs remains Precision Boost Overdrive 2 (PBO2). AMD CPUs respond better to this semi-automated overclocking feature, which adjusts the CPU's clock speed based on available power and thermal headroom. There is also support for Curve Optimizer in both CPUs.

Regardless, the basic overclocking functionality remains almost identical. What differs is the underlying CPU and its cache layout. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 already has a 100 MHz lower boost clock due to its unique design, and perhaps more importantly, it consumes way more power at stock. Its peak power consumption is about 50 watts higher than the 9950X3D, which can limit its overclocking headroom.

However, that will vary chip to chip. It also depends on the system that houses these CPUs and on the cooling solution used to keep temperatures in check. While there are minor differences in the overclocking potential, both CPUs offer the same basic functionality and core features.

⭐ Winner: Tie

Despite the 9950X3D2 having a lower boost clock and higher power consumption, the two CPUs end this round in a tie due to shared overclocking features and capabilities.

Power Consumption, Efficiency, and Cooling: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 vs Ryzen 9 9950X3D

The Ryzen 9 9950X3D was already a pretty power-hungry chip, and AMD seems to have pushed the limits with the 9950X3D2. In our testing, we saw the new dual 3D V-cache CPU consume around 250 watts on average in all-core workloads, while the 9950X3D sat around 200 watts. Let’s look at individual benchmarks to get a better idea.

Starting with the idle power consumption, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 consumes almost the same amount of power as the 9950X3D (24 vs. 25 watts), which can be chalked up to the margin of error. However, in an active-idle scenario such as YouTube playback, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 consumes about 12% more power than the 9950X3D. The difference is just 4 watts, but it is a significant deviation nonetheless.

Moving onto all-core workloads that give us an idea of peak power consumption, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 consumes 18.5% more power on average than the 9950X3D in y-cruncher’s multi-threaded AVX test. In Linpack, the 9950X3D2 again pulls ahead in power consumption, sipping 15% more power than the 9950X3D. The same can be observed in the Cinebench 2024 multi-core render, with the 9950X3D2 consuming 25% more power.

In Blender Monster, the new dual-cache chip is 31% more power hungry, while the difference is 13% in Blender Classroom. The gap widens in Blender Junkshop, where the 9950X3D2 hits nearly 240 watts, 54.2% more than the 9950X3D in this test. HandBrake x264 shows the 9950X3D2 pulling ahead by 23%, but in HandBrake x265, the two CPUs consume pretty much the same amount of power.

In single-threaded workloads, the story is a bit different. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 is actually more efficient in y-cruncher’s single-threaded AVX test, consuming 11.6% less power than the 9950X3D. This is a one-off, but it's likely due to the 9950X3D2's lower peak boost clock.

Efficiency is a better metric to consider than just raw power consumption numbers alone. In Handbrake x265, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 consumed 6.56 watts per frame, while the 9950X3D was almost identical at 6.55 watts per frame. The situation becomes a bit clearer with Linpack’s efficiency graph, where the 9950X3D2 is 3.2% more efficient than the 9950X3D. The Cinebench 2025 watts-per-point result is more conclusive, with the 9950X3D leading by 16.5% in efficiency over the new 9950X3D2.

Another great way to visualize efficiency is via a scatter plot. In this chart, the CPUs towards the bottom right are most efficient. We can see that across all three plots, the two CPUs are in very similar positions, with the 9950X3D2 often providing slightly better performance.This means that the average efficiency numbers are very similar despite the slight performance difference.

The Ryzen 9 9950X3D shines in this round, consuming less power and delivering better efficiency than the 9950X3D2. The new dual V-cache CPU is quite power-hungry, and although it managed to score some wins in a few tests, it just can’t compete with its single-cache counterpart in this category.

⭐ Winner: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D

With a lower average power consumption and better overall efficiency, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D takes this round despite being slightly slower.

Pricing: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 vs Ryzen 9 9950X3D

Usually, when we compare the pricing of two CPUs in our faceoffs, we have to compare the price of the entire platform to get a clear picture. It is important to factor in the price of the motherboard, RAM, and CPU cooler, in addition to the CPU, since these costs are directly attached to the chip itself. However, with the 9950X3D2 and 9950X3D, that conversation takes a back seat to the MSRP.

The Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 has launched at $900, $200 higher than the 9950X3D's launch price of $700. However, at the time of writing, the 9950X3D can be found at various retailers, regularly priced between $640 and $660. Moreover, although AMD has yet to announce any price cuts for the 9950X3D, it wouldn’t be out of the question to expect discounts on the horizon.

Looking at the platform costs for a moment, both CPUs are compatible with DDR5 memory and AM5 motherboards. Both CPUs are high-end, power-hungry CPUs, so a premium X870E motherboard is the way to go. Although DDR5 RAM prices are absolutely ridiculous at the moment due to the global memory crisis, this factor cancels out between the two CPUs.

The CPU cooler conversation is a bit more interesting. While the Ryzen 9 9950X3D can be adequately managed by a dual-tower air cooler ($100-120) or a 280mm AiO ($120-150), a 360mm AiO liquid cooler ($150-250) is more appropriate. The 9950X3D2 consumes more power and produces more heat, so a 360mm AiO is a must for this one. You may even consider a custom liquid-cooling loop if you can afford it and handle the technical challenges.

That does not even account for miscellaneous costs, such as the potential need for a higher-capacity power supply. The 9950X3D2 is simply a more expensive CPU to own and operate, and there’s no pricing category where it comes out on top. As we saw in previous rounds, it also loses in the FPS-per-dollar metric, which is a big blow to its value proposition.

⭐ Winner: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D

With a lower initial price, potentially lower platform cost, and a higher FPS-per-dollar value, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D wins the pricing round with ease.

Bottom Line: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 vs Ryzen 9 9950X3D

Concluding our six-round matchup between the two CPUs, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D wins the faceoff with a 4-3 lead. It barely edges out the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 in this detailed comparison, and mainly due to its much lower price.

The Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 is a feat of engineering and a proof of concept; that much is true. However, as a product, it is a bit lackluster since the gains from the second V-Cache stack are minimal at best, in both gaming and productivity tasks. On the flip side, the cost is high, both in terms of pricing and power consumption.

The 9950X3D, on the other hand, starts to look like a more complete CPU compared to the Dual Edition. It delivers gaming performance that is pretty much identical to the 9950X3D2, and can hold its own in productivity as well. It also costs less and consumes less power.

At the end of the day, the choice depends on your specific use case. The 9950X3D2 does have better productivity performance, although you should really only consider it if you run specific workloads, such as AI inference and data science. For overall productivity performance, Intel’s new Arrow Lake Refresh CPUs like the 270K Plus provide strong performance in that category for a fraction of the price.

In gaming, the 9950X3D is the way to go in this price bracket, though the Ryzen 7 9850X3D remains the fastest gaming chip on the market if you are building a PC just for gaming.

⭐ Winner: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D

Check Out More CPU Faceoffs

• AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D vs AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D
• Intel Core i7-14700K vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265K
• AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D
• Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265K

Gaming laptops can be pricey, and in the past few years, they have only gotten more expensive. The components inside laptops have gotten more expensive, the market below $1,000 has effectively been decimated, and finding a good deal is harder than ever. But we're still testing, and while the goal posts of what defines a budget gaming laptop may be a bit more expensive than they used to be, there are still ways to save.

At Tom's Hardware, we test many gaming laptops every year at a range of prices with different features and parts, so we know what to expect at every price point, no matter what your budget. While even the budget gaming laptops may not be cheap, we can still point out where you get the most for your money. We thoroughly benchmark all of the best budget gaming laptops in numerous games, extensively measuring gaming performance under a wide range of graphical conditions to suss out the best cheap laptops on the market.

Most gaming laptops under $1,500 will use Nvidia's GeForce RTX 5050 and RTX 5060 graphics cards. Many of them will use the latest Intel Core Ultra or AMD Ryzen mobile processors, though sometimes you'll still find last-gen options. Above $1,500 (which, unfortunately, is still on the low end with all-new components these days), you should have the latest. That being said, don't cut corners so far that you settle for 8GB of RAM or just 256GB of storage. Those are outdated specs for gaming laptops.

With a budget gaming laptop, you'll be able to play most games — even graphically intensive ones — on medium or high settings, if not better. If you're playing lighter games, like esports, you should still be able to achieve high frame rates.

Best Budget Gaming Laptops You Can Buy

Best budget gaming laptop overall

The Acer Nitro V 16S AI is, as of this writing, typically selling around $1,500. This laptop is great for those who are willing to trade off some gaming performance for a bright and colorful screen and a ton of ports, including a microSD card slot.

Those ports, paired with a speedy storage drive in our tests, make the Nivro V 16S AI a solid productivity machine alongside one that can play most games. Acer is using an RTX 5060 with an 85W graphics card, so it's not the most performant system out there, but it's well-balanced if you're going to use just one laptop for gaming, work, or school.

The 16-inch, 1920 x 1200 IPS screen goes up to 180 Hz, allowing for smooth gameplay for esports and indie games. Our system came with a 1TB storage drive, which should hold a few games, and there's room to add another inside. It also came with 32GB of RAM, which should be a bit future-proof.

There is a bunch of bloatware that you'll probably want to uninstall, and the webcam is just 720p.

Read: Acer Nitro V 16S AI review

Best budget gaming laptop for work and play

We had previously seen this laptop as high as $1,800, but lately it's been on sale closer to $1,500. The machine is another good mix of productivity and gaming. Like many other budget systems, it's using an 85W GPU (in this case, an RTX 5070), which means you won't get the most powerful gaming performance.What it does allow for, however, is strong battery life, lasting 9 hours and 13 minutes on our test. We also found the keyboard and touchpad to be quite comfortable.

The Ryzen AI 7 350 is a recent chip, and one that offers strong productivity performance, should you be using this system for work other than just gaming.It would have been nice to see Wi-Fi 7 at this system's full price, though on sale, Wi-Fi 6E is more forgivable. That being said, the display and audio are both middling, so this may be best if you use a monitor or speakers to bump up your experience.

Read: Gigabyte Aero X16 review

Best for battery life

If you want something a bit more minimalist, the Alienware 16 Aurora, the gaming brand's stripped-down machine, may work for you. This one has been consistently available.

The Aurora has an attractive chassis that mixes its plastic body with an alumium lid. The indigo color seems almost black, but has a navy shimmer in the right light.

The biggest benefits we saw were in the 16-inch, 2560 x 1600 IPS display, which goes up to 120 Hz. That screen was brighter and far more vivid (112% of sRGB color volume, 312.2 nits) in our measurements compared to other budget machines.

We also appreciated the Aurora's 96 WHr battery, which helped the system last for 9 hours and 41 minutes on our battery test.

The 80W RTX 5060 is fairly low-power, which might help with the longevity, but means you'l have to set your expectations while gaming. Additionally, the storage could be faster, though you could consider swapping that out down the line.

Read: Alienware 16 Aurora review

Quick Shopping Tips

What to Expect From the Best Budget Laptops for Gaming

Modern data center workloads are very diverse, and so are the requirements of data center operators for their hardware, which is why virtually all hyperscale cloud service providers nowadays have their own custom silicon programs. In a bid to stay competitive in the coming years, AMD plans to expand its portfolio of CPUs for data centers that will be targeted at different workloads.

With the Zen 4-based 4^th Generation EPYC family, AMD offers a variety of processors SKUs aimed at AI, cloud, enterprise, network/edge, and small business/hosted service providers. But with Zen 5, the family is somewhat narrower. AMD's messaging today suggests that the company is moving toward more segmented EPYC products, including workload-specific SKUs, potentially different core/cache/interconnect configurations, and CPUs tailored for inference clusters, orchestration, low-latency AI tasks, and GPU-heavy deployments. Specifically, Su also hinted that this expansion is going beyond Venice, which includes Zen 7 and probably Zen 8 microarchitectures.

"We are working with customers right now on beyond Venice and what we are doing in those architectures," Su said.

 "[The industry] is going to need a broad portfolio of CPUs, not all CPUs are the same," said Lisa Su, chief executive and chairman of AMD, during the company's earnings call with financial analysts and investors. "Frankly, you are going to need different CPUs for whether you are talking about general purpose operations or you are talking about head nodes or you are talking about agentic AI tasks."

During the Q&A, Su repeatedly emphasized that AMD no longer sees server CPUs as a single homogeneous category. Instead, the company now views the market as split into multiple workload-specific segments, including general-purpose compute, CPU head nodes for accelerators, and CPUs optimized for agentic AI workloads. However, AMD plans to offer differentiation even within these categories to address the particular needs of its customers more precisely.

"What we have been focused on is building, not just one type, but […] throughput optimized, power optimized, cost optimized, and AI infrastructure optimized [models] as we have done in the Venice family," Su said.

Indeed, when it comes to AMD's 6^th Generation EPYC processors based on the Zen 6 microarchitecture, the company plans to offer its codenamed Venice CPU with up to 256 cores for general-purpose servers as well as codenamed Verona processors for AI infrastructure (previously, AMD only introduced Verano CPUs as the processor that will power its next-generation rack-scale AI solutions). We yet have to learn whether CPUs aimed at agentic AI workloads will use separate silicon configurations or will re-use what was originally intended for general-purpose servers, but with different clocks or cache configurations.

" The Venice family spans a broad set of CPUs optimized for throughput, performance per watt, and performance per dollar, including Verona, our first EPYC CPU purpose-built for AI infrastructure," Su said.

Considering the fact that AMD now expects the server CPU total available market to grow at a 35% compound annual growth rate and reach $120 billion by 2030, development of specialized models may be well justified even though CPU development in general and CPU implementation on leading-edge nodes in particular has become especially expensive in recent years.

So, while AMD did not formally announce any new CPU categories, its chief executive clearly signaled an ongoing expansion and specialization of EPYC offerings around AI infrastructure and other segments of the market.

On Tuesday, AMD reported its financial results for the first quarter of 2026. Driven by record demand for AMD's EPYC server processors, Ryzen CPUs, and Instinct accelerators, the company's revenue totaled $10.253 billion, slightly down quarter-over-quarter (QoQ), but up significantly year-over-year (YoY). Furthermore, AMD raised its long-term outlook for the server CPU market, expecting it to reach $120 billion by 2030 due to increased demand from AI and agentic AI workloads. At the same time, the company admitted that sales of its AI accelerators were down sequentially.

For the quarter ending March 28, AMD generated $10.253 billion in revenue, down slightly from $10.270 billion in the fourth quarter, but up 38% compared to $7.438 billion in the first quarter of 2025. The company's GAAP net income nearly doubled to $1.383 billion from $709 million as its gross margin hit 53%, up 3% YoY. Operating income rose 83% year-over-year to $1.476 billion.

"We delivered an outstanding first quarter, driven by accelerating demand for AI infrastructure, with Data Center now the primary driver of our revenue and earnings growth," said Dr. Lisa Su, AMD chair and CEO. "We are seeing strong momentum as inferencing and agentic AI drive increasing demand for high-performance CPUs and accelerators. Looking ahead, we expect server growth to accelerate meaningfully as we scale supply to meet demand."

Data center: A record quarter and great prospects

While traditionally the lion's share of AMD's revenue came from selling processors and system-on-chips (SoCs) for client devices, in the recent years the company's data center segment delivered the bigger portion of the company's revenue while also showing rapid growth. In the first quarter, AMD's data center division earned $5.8 billion in revenue (up 57% year-over-year) and $1.6 billion in operating income (up from $900 million a year ago). AMD said server CPU sales increased more than 50% from the same quarter last year, with both cloud and enterprise demand growing over 50%.

Lisa Su said AMD is seeing significantly higher CPU demand because AI workloads increasingly require CPUs for orchestration, data movement, head-node operations, and agentic AI execution. As a result, AMD now expects the server CPU market to grow at more than 35% annually through 2030 (compared to its prior forecast of around 18% CAGR), reaching $120 billion in 2030. In fact, the company expects sales of its EPYC processors for data centers to increase 70% year-over-year and sales of Instinct AI accelerators to be up 46% YoY in the second quarter.

 "In response to this demand, we are working closely with our supply chain partners to meaningfully increase our wafer and back-end capacity to support this growth," Su said. "As a result, we now expect server CPU revenue to grow by more than 70% year-over-year in the second quarter, with robust growth continuing through the second half of 2026 and into 2027 as we ramp our next generation EPYC processors."

AMD also revealed deeper engagement with major AI infrastructure customers. During the quarter, the company expanded its partnership with Meta, which plans to deploy up to 6 GW of AMD Instinct GPUs across several generations, including custom Instinct MI450-based accelerators integrated into AMD's Helios rack-scale AI platform. AMD said shipments tied to the Meta deployment are scheduled to begin in the second half of 2026.

In addition, the company indicated that demand for its Instinct MI450-series accelerators and Helios systems from its alpha customer is already exceeding its initial expectations for 2027. Furthermore, multiple customers are now evaluating large-scale deployments for both training and inference workloads.

"With this expanded visibility, we have strong and increasing confidence in our ability to deliver tens of billions of dollars in annual data center AI revenue in 2027 and to exceed our long-term growth target of greater than eighty percent in the coming years," Su said.

At the same time, sales of AMD's Instinct accelerators — while growing 38% year-over-year — dropped slightly quarter-over-quarter due to lower sales to customers in China. Nonetheless, the company remains optimistic about Instinct's trajectory in Q2 and then in the second half of the year when the Instinct MI450-series starts to ramp.

AMD not only set its own record in enterprise hardware sales during the quarter, but it continued to outsell Intel, which recorded $5.1 billion in revenue and $1.5 billion in operating income in the first quarter.

Client and Gaming: Great results, but tepid outlook

When it comes to sales of client Ryzen CPUs, Radeon GPUs, and game console SoCs, AMD's revenue increased $3.6 billion, an increase of 23% year-over-year. Client revenue alone reached $2.9 billion, up 26%, driven by strong Ryzen processor demand and commercial PC share gains. Gaming revenue rose 11% to $720 million due to stronger Radeon GPU demand.

" Semi-custom revenue declined year-over-year as expected at this stage of the console cycle, while engagements with customers on next generation platforms remain strong," said the head of AMD. "In graphics, revenue increased year-over-year, led by demand for our latest generation Radeon nine thousand series GPUs.

AMD warned that both client and gaming revenue in the second half of the year would decline by more than 20% compared to the first half because of higher memory and component costs.

" Similar to the PC market, we believe that second half demand in gaming will be impacted by higher memory and component costs, and we are planning the business accordingly," said Su.

Embedded: Slow growth, good prospects

AMD's embedded revenue reached $873 million, up 6% year-over-year as industrial and edge demand improved. The business unit generated $338 million operating income, up from $328 million a year ago. The success of AMD's embedded division was driven by the company's strong positions across a variety of market segments that span from aerospace to communications and from defense to scientific applications.

"Design win momentum for [embedded products] grew by a double-digit percentage year over year, with billions of dollars in new wins across markets, reflecting the continued expansion of our embedded business from a primarily FPGA-focused portfolio to a broader set of adaptive embedded x86 and semi-custom solutions, significantly expanding our TAM," said Su.

Q2 outlook: Massive growth expected

AMD projects Q2 2026 revenue to reach about $11.2 billion ± $300 million. At the midpoint of the guidance, this would represent a 46% increase compared to the same period last year and about 9% growth sequentially. The company also expects non-GAAP gross margin to be around 56%.

"[Q2 results will be ]driven by a very strong growth in our data center segment, [modest] growth in our client and the gaming segment, and a double-digit growth in our embedded segment," said Jean Hu, AMD executive vice president, CFO and treasurer.

AMD is potentially working on introducing a new flagship APU as the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 was recently listed on PassMark’s benchmark database. The unconfirmed chip is expected to be a part of the company’s upcoming “Gorgon Halo” lineup and a successor to the existing Strix Halo flagship, the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395. It is worth mentioning that the primary difference between the PRO and non-PRO variants is the target market. For instance, the existing Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 is meant for enterprise and business customers, while the standard Max+ 395 is aimed at high-performance consumers.

The listing suggests that this particular mobile APU will be more of a refresh featuring a similar 16-core and 32-thread configuration as the Ryzen AI Max+ 395/Max+ PRO 395. What does change is the unified memory capacity, which has increased from 128GB on the Max+ 395 to 192GB of LPDDR5X spread across eight 24GB SK hynix modules. It is surprising to see AMD adding more memory despite the ongoing RAMpocalypse, but the increased memory is a welcome addition that should help tasks that use large datasets like AI, machine learning, and content creation.

Another notable change is the integrated GPU solution, which is listed as the Radeon 8065S, which is expected to be a slightly higher clocked version of the current Radeon 8060S. The 8060S is currently one of the most powerful iGPU solutions capable of offering performance similar to and in some cases better than the Nvidia RTX 4060 laptop edition.

As for the performance, Passmark benchmark results aren't the most indicative of real-world performance, so take these results with a shovel full of salt. The Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 scored 57,525 points in CPU Mark and 4,293 points in single-thread. This makes the new chip 4.1% faster in multi-thread and 3.1% ahead in single-thread when compared to the Ryzen AI Max+ 395, which is listed at 55,163 points and 4,161 points respectively. However, this could be due to the run-to-run variability.

While AMD has yet to confirm the existence of the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495, the leaked specifications suggest a strategy similar to its recent APU updates. Much like the “Gorgon Point” Ryzen AI 400 series, which was introduced as a modest refresh over the “Strix Point” Ryzen AI 300 lineup, AMD may take a similar approach with the upcoming “Gorgon Halo” Ryzen AI Max+ 400 series, focusing on incremental improvements rather than an overhaul.