The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D is real, and it’s spectacular. When Intel launched its flagship Raptor Lake Core i9-13900K/KS processors, it snatched the best CPU for gaming crown from AMD. However, we all knew AMD would field a 3D V-Cache counterpunch, and the Ryzen 9 7950X3D delivers on all fronts.
The $599 12-core 24-thread Ryzen 9 7900X3D has a 5.6 GHz boost clock and 104MB of cache (96 MB reserved for L3). The $699 Ryzen 9 7950X3D is a 16-core, 32-thread processor with a maximum boost frequency of 5.7 GHz and 144MB of total cache, 128MB of which is dedicated to the L3 cache.
As noted in our Ryzen 9 7950X3D review, the processor manages to outpace the Core i9-13900KS by 12 percent on average in gaming. However, the advantage grows to over 40 percent in some specific gaming scenarios.
For enthusiasts looking for the absolute best performance across a broad spectrum of games, the Ryzen 9 7900X3D and Ryzen 9 7950X3D are now available to purchase from various retailers.
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D Listings
The Ryzen 9 7900X3D is the cheaper of the two new 3D V-Cache offerings from AMD, and retailers are quickly running out of stock. Not surprisingly, Amazon is taking advantage of its position as an online juggernaut and has raised pricing on the chip compared to its $599 MSRP. We'd expect pricing to fall once competitor inventories stabilize.
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D $624.47 (opens in new tab) @ Amazon
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D $599 (opens in new tab) @ Best Buy
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D $599 (opens in new tab) @ Newegg
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D $599 (opens in new tab) @ B&H Photo
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D $599 @ AMD
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D Listings
The flagship Ryzen 9 7950X3D has an MSRP of $699, but Amazon is again inflating prices ever so slightly compared to Best Buy and Newegg.
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D $706.28 (opens in new tab) @ Amazon
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D $699 (opens in new tab) @ Best Buy
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D $699 (opens in new tab) @ Newegg
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D $699 (opens in new tab) @ B&H Photo
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D $699 @ AMD
Moreover, why is it even called "UK edition"? Future Publishing need to remember where they are based.
What's not to love? :LOL:
It's bad enough that AMD screwed themselves by producing the R9s with 3D cache but they made it even worse by NOT producing an R5-7600X3D. After all, what would a gaming APU need with 3D cache, eh?
Last time I checked, PC users are still allowed to do more than one thing on it, like gaming, content creation, or programming on the same machine. C'mon - who doesn't want to game on the fancy new workstation. What chip would you recommend then for those machines? ;)
<Moderator edit for content>
There are already some "simulated" 7800X3D reviews where they disabled the second chiplet (the one without the cache) and in some cases, it runs faster than the 7950x3d!
Since the system doesn't need to "figure out" where to run the game process (on the extra cache chiplet, or the higher frequency one?), that seems to give it a slight edge (on strictly gaming)
I fully expect that down the road that won't be the case, when all these scheduling issues have been resolved.
For gaming, what you linked above will be more than enough for the next couple of years, and that system won't be a slouch in productivity, either. The 7950X3D is as superfluous as I said it was from the start.
Yeah, 7950X3D trails behind a bit with AutoCAD. It also consumes less power though, and in that regard it is quite remarkable that it takes a solid 3rd spot e.g. with Cinebench R23, only "slightly" behind the top 2 in performance and way before the 4th.
In any case, I didn't see anyone arguing that the 7950X3D would be the top choice for productivity tasks, with the argument being rather that it offers top gaming performance while still letting one do other stuff on the same rig as well (without a huge setback, and still ahead of last gen CPUs).
And how much some are willing to pay (extra) for their hobby, that is individual, isn't it? E.g. some are spending thousands on a car, which may end up costing hundreds a month - and that not so much out of need as just for the sake of it. Others may be boozing away hundreds a month, or ending up spending a thousand per year on loot boxes, and so on. And e.g. I don't do any of that and I don't use AutoCAD. Instead I may eventually get me one of the new CPUs, where it wouldn't be so much about expecting a huge boost in gaming performance from the CPU as such, but rather about having a CPU which will still be a good performer in 4 years while not bottlenecking eventually also next-gen GPU as much as other CPUs would. If one can't see themselves spending more than e.g. $300 on a GPU, then even whichever current gen CPU may not be "needed" though, of course.
Again, an individual matter. E.g. if someone is playing just one game two hours a week, then depending on the game one may even argue that a console may be the top value option.