AMD's Ryzen 7000X3D V-Cache processors, which will aim to take the number one spot on the list of best CPUs for gaming, are almost among us. However, before the rumor mill grinds to a stop, new benchmarks of the Ryzen 9 7950X3D reportedly illustrate the flagship Zen 4's supremacy over the Intel Core i9-13900K.
The gaming benchmarks (via chi11eddog (opens in new tab)) have the Ryzen 9 7950X3D pairing up with the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090 in five different titles. Additionally, the user seemingly tested the Ryzen 9 7950X3D's gaming performance at a 1080p (1920x1080) resolution with maximum graphics settings. Granted that it's a small sample size of games and being leaked benchmarks from an unidentified source, throw some salt over the results.
Overall, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D outperformed the Core i9-13900K by 11%. However, the margins were more pronounced in some games than others. For example, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D delivered up to 35% higher performance in Assassin's Creed Valhalla.
In other games, such as Far Cry 5 and Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Ryzen 9 7950X3D was only 12% and 11% faster than the Core i9-13900K, respectively. The Ryzen 9 7950X3D's dominance in Metro Exodus dropped to 5%. The only victory for the Core i9-13900K was in Star Control, where the Raptor Lake barely edged out the Ryzen 9 7950X3D by a 2% margin.
Ryzen 9 7950X3D Gaming Benchmarks
|Processor||Assassin's Creed Valhalla - Ultra||Far Cry 5 - Ultra||Shadow of the Tomb Raider - Highest||Metro Exodus - Extreme||Star Control - Great||Geometric Mean|
|Ryzen 9 7950X3D||149||240||249||88.32||168.7||167.7|
|Ryzen 9 7950X||107||182||215||84.54||167.1||142.7|
The Ryzen 9 7950X3D, on average, posted 18% better gaming performance than the Ryzen 9 7950X, one of the two highest-performance chips for gaming. Again, Assassin's Creed Valhalla heavily favored the Ryzen 9 7950X3D, as evidenced by the 39% delta between it and the Ryzen 9 7950X. The Ryzen 9 7950X3D also excelled in Far Cry 5, outperforming its vanilla counterpart by 32%.
Regarding Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Metro Exodus, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D pumped out 16% and 4% higher frame rates, respectively. Furthermore, unlike the case with the Core i9-13900K, the margin between the Ryzen 9 7950X3D and Ryzen 9 7950X was almost non-existent.
The Ryzen 9 7950X3D launches on February 28 for $699, the original MSRP for the Ryzen 9 7950X. However, much has changed, and the Ryzen 9 7950X currently retails for as low as $576 (opens in new tab). If you trust the benchmarks, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D offers 18% higher gaming performance for 21% more money. Comparing the Ryzen 9 7950X3D to the Core i9-13900K suddenly doesn't look like a good deal, though. The Core i9-13900K debuted at $599, but discounts have brought the Raptor Lake down to $570 (opens in new tab). Therefore, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D only provides gamers with 11% faster gaming performance at a 23% higher price tag.
However, this will come with some tradeoffs in creativity applications, which could impact the chips' ranking on our CPU benchmarks hierarchy.
The review embargo for the Ryzen 7000X3D V-Cache processors allegedly lifts on February 27 (opens in new tab), one day before the chips hit the retail market. We'll see what the Ryzen 9 7950X3D brings to the table soon enough, so put your final purchase decision on hold until the reviews come out.
Next up is the 7800X3D. 7800X3D maintaining similar performance and beating 13900K/13900KS in gaming would look better for AMD. But it should fall back a little if any games are correctly prioritizing the non-3D chiplet.
7900X3D is too closely priced to 7950X3D.
I am sure someone from intel could come up with a list of games where these cpu chips perform worse than both the AMD non x3d version as well as a 13900k.
We need to see a much larger list of games and games of different types. Since I don't tend to play that many older games that the benchmarks use I would really like to see a way to predict if a new game will benefit or not.
This is exactly my thinking. Few people actually aim to play games at 600fps to shoot the other guy first, when you are actually better off spending your money upgrading your router and ISP and running at a mere 300fps in your 1080p shoot-em-up, in those scenarios, lower LAN/Internet latency is king.
For the rest of us, 4K gaming, or a high-res ultrawide setup is what people want to see tested, and they will be tested for sure. I can honestly wait a couple of days to find out real-world examples, not that I am about to upgrade my CPU anytime soon, first I need to upgrade my 4K monitor to one that does 120+ Hz and a GPU that can keep up, and I need to rob a bank to pay for it.
I just want to see what this new tech can do, and the limitations of two different compute dies in the same CPU, this will give some foresight into future AMD designs, one of which has long been rumoured to use a Zen 5 compute die (probably with 3DV Cache, and a "Zen 4C" die without, thus being a more comparable competitor to Intel with a bigLITTLE CPU design.
I am not even considering such a thing. My internet is shockingly bad and there is no upgrade option yet, so I am well out of the scene of multiplayer games, especially "fast ones". that will be something to look into when I can upgrade my internet. The only online game I play now is WoWS, which rans at a flat 60Hz at 4K all dialled up, and then my ping jumps from 35 to 150, 300, 600 --- recovers or kicks me.!!! Decent internet is currently a pipedream :(
For most people upgrading the components in their computer is much easier than going from a Cable ISP to a Fiber one.
And upgrading a router won't do anything for you if your ISP is crap.