Benchmark chops are healthy as a result, and the main reason it’s slower than, say, a Ryzen 9 7950X rests mostly with a lower power budget and final speed. Logs reveal the chip pushing past 5.6GHz when under light load. Put all cores to work and 7950X3D averages around 4.9GHz, but that only tells half the story. Our testing shows the standard CCD to push past 5GHz whilst the cache-enhanced CCD meters effort to 4.8GHz. The heat produced by the 3D V-Cache forced AMD to lower the max operating temperature of the processor from 95 degrees C on the Ryzen 9 7950X to 89 degrees C on the Ryzen 9 7950X3D. A corresponding reduction in thermal design power (TDP) rating also occurred, with the Ryzen 9 7950X having a 170-watt (W) TDP and the Ryzen 9 7950X3D having a 120W TDP. When it comes to the synthetic benchmarks, there's very little difference between the 7950X3D and the 7950X. Both chips are phenomenal multitaskers, and though the 7950X has consistently stronger single core scores than the 7950X3D, the 7950X3D performs better with multi core performance than its non-3D V-Cache counterpart. The lower power consumption measured during Adobe Premiere and Cinebench gives the Ryzen 9 7950X3D better overall performance per watt and slightly better overall energy efficiency. This is hurt by the high idle power consumption, however, which never drops below 97W with the system sitting idle at the desktop for prolonged periods. This latter issue may be resolved with a BIOS or driver update, though. In terms of power draw, the minimum I recorded for the 13900K is a meager 2.882W, and it could hover around this for hours if you're not using your computer thanks to its energy-efficient hybrid-core design. Meanwhile, the 7950X3D is still slurping up just over eight times as much power as a baseline.

AMD Ryzen 9 7000 Series Socket AM5 Processors - SCAN UK AMD Ryzen 9 7000 Series Socket AM5 Processors - SCAN UK

Starting with the Ryzen 7000 series, AMD began adding low-power IGPs to all of its Ryzen desktop processors. (Before, it was limited to the subset known as the G-series.) But this has been a bittersweet change since its introduction. Leveraging the same technology we first witnessed with the impressive Ryzen 7 5800X3D, suffusing more L3 cache is inherently more difficult on two-CCD processors such as the review Ryzen 9 7950X3D and 7900X3D. The asymmetrical design and restrained power budget work well enough to deliver the same level of overall gaming performance as MadWattage™ Core i9-13900KS, which is a feat in itself.

Focus on input box

We’re curious as to why AMD restrained power so much when a 170W TDP and associated 220W PPT is fine for 7950X. Is it really a case of ensuring an extra 64MB of L3 cache doesn’t overheat, or is there something more sinister going on? Putting our conjecturing hat on, equipping X3D with the standard 170W TDP would make regular 7950X redundant. Product positioning and all that. Testing a processor is arguably one of the most involved processes of any component I review because there are so many things to measure and quantify. Cache is simply a very direct form of working memory that the processor keeps close by for instructions and data that it is using at that very moment. The more cache a processor has, the fewer trips to RAM it needs to make for data or instructions, which greatly improves performance for many common tasks. Generally, more cache is better, and the 7950X3D has more cache than any consumer processor available today. When it comes to the Intel Core i9-13900K, it too outperforms the 7950X3D in single core performance, with the 7950X3D running about 12% slower than the 13900K on average. The difference between the two tightens on multicore performance, with the 7950X3D running about 5% slower in multicore on average. The latest CPUs in the AMD Ryzen 7000 Series are here. Teased at CES 2023, the X3D Ryzen 9 models are finally hitting the shelves!As of April 6 th, we now also have an X3D Ryzen 7 model too!

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D review: Team Red retakes the lead with

Performance is in line with expectations of a 120W part, though there’s no escaping the fact regular 170W 7950X is the superior chip for demanding multi-threaded work. Underneath the integrated heat spreader (IHS), the Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 9 7950X3D are very similar. You'll see a large central die on both chips, called the IO die, which contains an integrated graphics processor (IGP), the PCI Express controller, and other important components. AMD also includes two core complexes (CCXs) inside of each of these chips that hold the actual CPU cores and the cores' associated cache.

Testing the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D: Cache Writes Checks It Can't Cash

Cache has been an essential and highly influential part of computers for decades now, and its importance is unquestionable. What is questionable, however, and what has been questioned since the beginning, is how much cache is enough. Some argue that you can never have enough, but this is illogical. More cache means a larger, or in this case, an extra, chip—and that leads to higher costs. Past a certain point, it becomes questionable if the CPU will even be able to use or take advantage of all the cache you have. It's simply the best gaming CPU by performance you can buy on the consumer market and that's not likely to change for the rest of this processor generation, at the very least. If you are using your PC for light gaming, internet browsing, or watching YouTube, you won’t need a hefty custom water-cooling system. An air CPU cooler will be plenty. However, if you’re looking to enjoy the latest AAA titles, want to start streaming, or run more intensive applications, you will need powerful cooling in the form of an AiO or custom water-cooled loop. Stress testing tools like Cinebench R23 push the processor to its engineered limits in terms of power use and operating temperature, and I use these to make sure that every chip is pushed to full 100% CPU utilization under load to determine the minimum and maximum amount of power the processor uses (measured in watts) and the minimum and maximum temperature recorded (measured in Celsius).

AMD 7000-Series Ryzen 9 Custom PC Builder - Cyberpower UK AMD 7000-Series Ryzen 9 Custom PC Builder - Cyberpower UK

Finally, the last major difference is the lower TDP on the 7950X3D compared to the 7950X (120W to 125W). This is mostly from the lower frequency on the 3D V-Cache cores (as well as some other optimizations), meaning that the 7950X3D can use less power overall to get the same or better performance. This difference is even more telling when it comes to gaming performance. Compared to the 7950X, the 7950X3D performs like it is fully one to two generations ahead of its non-3D V-Cache counterpart with roughly 20% to 25% better gaming performance at 1080p. Likewise, when it comes to the Intel Core i9-13900K, the 7950X3D lands about 16% to 19% faster on average, but some games will perform substantially better, and the 7950X3D is never that far behind the 13900K when it does occasionally lose out. Our Services Delivery Information Warranty Information Terms & Conditions WEEE Policy Finance Options Business & EducationThe cache clearly does not help enough to give the Ryzen 9 7950X3D the performance advantage in any other CPU test in our suite. At the same time, its lower TDP and heat limit cause the 7950X3D to operate a bit slower and perform worse in almost every test except that one. The Ryzen 9 7950X is slightly faster in many of these tests, but, considering how much cheaper that chip is at list price, it’s a bit of a no-brainer which is the better value in this scenario. The score in 3DMark obtained by the Ryzen 9 7950X3D is slightly lower than the one obtained by the Ryzen 9 7950X, but by so slim of a margin that it's essentially a tie. These two chips tie in other tests as well but, in F1 22, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D holds a decisive advantage over its similarly named counterpart while also narrowly passing the Intel competition. In short, this makes the Ryzen 9 7950X3D not particularly competitive against any of Intel’s competing processors either. In almost every test, the Core i9-13900K is simply faster while also costing less. Gaming Tests System scores are middling more than impressive, as these synthetic tests rely heavily on peak frequency. Surely it’s real games that count… Gaming Hefty performance requires ample cooling. The more advanced your chosen processor is, the higher the TDP will be. TDP stands for ‘Thermal Design Power’ and refers to the maximum amount of heat generated.

AMD Ryzen 7000 Series - OcUK The Best CPU Coolers for the AMD Ryzen 7000 Series - OcUK

After traditional levers have been twiddled and optimised to the nth degree, out-the-box thinking is required to increase performance without resorting to the age-old, sledgehammer technique of slamming as much power through the best CPU as possible. AMD believes it has uncovered a gem in X3D technology. First seen on Ryzen 7 5800X3D, the latest 7000 Series range is receiving cache-enriched upgrades to not one but three processors. Ryzen 9 7950X3D and Ryzen 9 7900X3D stride forward today, with Ryzen 7 7800X3D arriving April 6. Editors' Note, March 2, 2023: Some scrutiny by Tom's Hardware scrutiny by Tom's Hardware and online commenters pointed out that our integrated graphics (IGP) testing numbers for the earlier Ryzen 9 7950X chip were unnaturally low; this was likely due to early-driver issues that only became evident with this review of the 7950X3D, and made the 7950X3D's IGP look like a leap forward by comparison. We have retested the Ryzen 9 7950X and updated the numbers in the IGP testing table here and in that original review, and made minor tweaks to this article's intro and IGP Testing section to reflect the new numbers. We'll also be retesting the IGPs on the Ryzen 7 7700 and 7700X in the coming days. The original, fundamental conclusions we made about this chip, though, have not changed.] This graph is helpful in pushing up efficiency; do recall 7950X3D ships with a 120W TDP. Like 7950X regular, we believe AMD ought to have let it run mostly free of wattage constraints – a 170W TDP 7950X3D would certainly benchmark that little bit better… but then what would be the point of 7950X regular? Decisions, decisions. Not the start we had expected. After numerous runs, we couldn’t get 7950X3D past the scores recorded by single-CCD 5800X3D. Multiple Intel chips are faster, too, and perusing AMD’s supporting documentation shows X3D a fair bit slower than rival Intel Core i9-13900KS.

Search for precise phrases

Having the on-chip integrated graphics present is highly useful for troubleshooting and, if you aren’t going to run games, it can save you from having to buy a display adapter, which cuts costs. The IGP that AMD opted to use on its processors, however, is relatively weak. The last-gen Ryzen 7 5700G has the fastest IGP of any desktop CPU, and while we don’t necessarily need that much performance in every desktop CPU, it’s too bad AMD opted for as weak an IGP as it did. Gaming performance measures how well the processor calculates gaming operations like in-game physics by running several games' integrated benchmark tools like Returnal, Total War: Warhammer III, and F1 2022. In all cases, I run the benchmarks on the lowest graphics settings available at 1080p and using the most powerful graphics card I have available (in this case, an Nvidia RTX 4090) and with 32GB DDR5 RAM to isolate the actual CPU operations I am testing without having to worry about inteference from excessive memory or graphics management. The first part is a 3D V-Cache performance optimiser driver that’s included in chipset software 5.01.03.005 or newer. According to AMD, ‘the driver evaluates the performance in real time and dynamically modifies the preferred cores seen by Windows based on workload preference for the 3D V-Cache CCX or the standard die.’ Run automatically for best performance, behaviour can be overridden by the user for manual tinkering. Whaddya know, some games favour lots of cache. Catapulting to the top of the charts in no uncertain fashion, X3D technology can work really well. When trying to come to an overall assessment of these chips' relative performance, it's better to look at the measurable performance gains between chips across different tests. This makes for a much more sensible average when all is said and done than averaging absolute scores where one CPU test with one very large result can badly skew a final average.