AMD Ryzen 9900X3D & 9950X3D benchmarks surface with strong single-core uplift

AMD Ryzen CPU
(Image credit: AMD)
Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Sayem Ahmed
Subscription Editor

Sayem Ahmed is the Subscription Editor at Tom's Hardware. He covers a broad range of deep dives into hardware, both new and old, including the CPUs, GPUs, and everything else that uses a semiconductor. He has worked as a professional tech journalist since 2015 and has written for Gamespot, IGN, and Dexerto.

  • Notton
    You should include more chips in the geekbench graph.
    Like you'd see it has similar single core performance to the 9800X3D.
    The multi core performance is a bit of a let down.
    https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance/3
    Reply
  • Heat_Fan89
    Thanks for posting this. I decided to cancel my 9800X3D order and wait for the 9900X3D instead.
    Reply
  • Mr Majestyk
    Notton said:
    You should include more chips in the geekbench graph.
    Like you'd see it has similar single core performance to the 9800X3D.
    The multi core performance is a bit of a let down.
    Basically BS IMO. 9900X3D has 400MHz higher all core clocks than 7900X3D, then there's the fact it's using Zen 5, so for crapbench6 to find multicore is slower means it is an engineering cpu running at low clocks.
    Reply
  • jp7189
    Notton said:
    You should include more chips in the geekbench graph.
    Like you'd see it has similar single core performance to the 9800X3D.
    The multi core performance is a bit of a let down.
    https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance/3
    They noted ddr5-4800 which is pretty far from the ideal and likely plays a bigger role in the multicore scores.
    Reply
  • Shiznizzle
    The tech is running away from the games it was meant to run. 16 cores on some chips now. %100 overkill. In the past it was the chips trying to keep pace.
    Reply