7800X3D, 7900X3D, 7950X3D..

[ironhard]

5 minutes ago, some1 said:

If MSFS is any indicator, it's good:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-cpu-review/6

Also here: 

https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2023-amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-review?page=2

Perhaps more interesting would be XP12 Vulkan benchmarks than DX11. I wouldn't plan a systems upgrade based on DX11, specially since 5800X3D is still very relevant.

[EightyDuce]

If it's on the 20-25% side of the scale like Tomb Raider it would be a solid upgrade. If building new, there's no contest, 7800X3D hands down. 

[Hoirtel]

Seems the 7950X3D with non vcache CCD disabled is likely the fastest, so 7800X3D is going to actually be the best. Also they say that to run to the 7950 in games it uses windows game mode to identify which CCD to use... Uhh isn't that what we all disable to get better performance? So that means the 7800x3d or a hobbled 7950x3d will be the best for DCS. Damn AMD holding it back for five weeks. Meh. 

[BitMaster]

It really shines in MSFS, that's a reason to hope

[dureiken]

and what about 7900x3D ?

[Hoirtel]

1 hour ago, dureiken said:

and what about 7900x3D ?

Seems AMD didn't send it out to reviewers. Someone will get one for review but it won't be until tomorrow or next day. I think it will be the worst buy of the three. 

[Hoirtel]

16 hours ago, EightyDuce said:

If it's on the 20-25% side of the scale like Tomb Raider it would be a solid upgrade. If building new, there's no contest, 7800X3D hands down. 

Dunno. I'm thinking of throwing in the towel at this late stage, save myself some money and get a Z790/i7 or maybe even an i9 stick my 64gb DDR4 and likely enjoy much the same performance. 

[EightyDuce]

5 hours ago, Hoirtel said:

Dunno. I'm thinking of throwing in the towel at this late stage, save myself some money and get a Z790/i7 or maybe even an i9 stick my 64gb DDR4 and likely enjoy much the same performance. 

I don't know your specific situation and needs so it's hard to make a call. The question is, ARE you going to get "much of the same performance" though, especially with DDR4 VS DDR5. I suppose that would also depend on what you consider similar performance (ie. Is it within 5% or are you considering 10-15% to be close enough). 

Are you looking to do an incremental upgrade or a new build that lasts next 3-4 years? Budget? Other games or productivity needs? 

 

[skypickle]

I looked at benches on tech powerup. At 4k the 7950 is only a hair better than the 13900k and less than 10% better than the 5800x3d. Who plays dcs at 1080p?

[blkspade]

5 hours ago, Hoirtel said:

Dunno. I'm thinking of throwing in the towel at this late stage, save myself some money and get a Z790/i7 or maybe even an i9 stick my 64gb DDR4 and likely enjoy much the same performance. 

The MSFS numbers are likely to most relevant to DCS. X3D is more meaningfully better in sims as opposed to the overall in most other more popular titles. There will certainly be a point on AM5 where there will be more performance to be had with less investment in time and money. The fire sale EOL chips for the platform, will look like what the 5800X3D is now.

3 minutes ago, skypickle said:

I looked at benches on tech powerup. At 4k the 7950 is only a hair better than the 13900k and less than 10% better than the 5800x3d. Who plays dcs at 1080p?

Given the known differences in visibility with resolution settings. Probably a lot of people. It's the 1% lows in VR that have been known to be a huge benefit though.

[skypickle]

@blkspadeat 4k even the min fps diffs are not so much -but they didn't test dcs

[blkspade]

1 minute ago, skypickle said:

@blkspadeat 4k even the min fps diffs are not so much -but they didn't test dcs

Everything collapsing at 4K is normal, and typically a GPU limit. Seeing an obvious difference at lower resolutions, means future less limited GPUs have some place to go. No one tests DCS. Star citizen is another one I'm interested in. I'm in a "fantastic" position where on occasion my 5950X can't fully push a 6800XT, but could also use more performance than a 6800XT. I like having all the threads, but need a little more grunt if I'm going to upgrade my GPU. After seeing the 5800X3D, the 7950X3D is something I've been waiting for.

[Hoirtel]

2 hours ago, EightyDuce said:

I don't know your specific situation and needs so it's hard to make a call. The question is, ARE you going to get "much of the same performance" though, especially with DDR4 VS DDR5. I suppose that would also depend on what you consider similar performance (ie. Is it within 5% or are you considering 10-15% to be close enough). 

Are you looking to do an incremental upgrade or a new build that lasts next 3-4 years? Budget? Other games or productivity needs? 

 

Well, I have a i9900KS so really was expecting to replace everything, I have a 64Gb Cl18, 3600 kit so not super high end for DDR4. DCS is what my PC is for really, yeah I do other stuff but its not that important, its not like the 7800X3D won't do anything else...

13th gen i7 and D4 mobo is the cheaper option for me but whatever I get will end up in new case probably with 4090/ti down the line. I probably just need to be patient and wait. The reviews have convinced me that the dual CCD chips are just not a good idea for me, using xbox game bar and keeping to balanced power mode is a compromise to get this thing to work correctly, I could see me shutting off that other CCD, total waste of money. 7800X3D is the gamer specialist CPU. 

7950X3D just went on sale here, and they are out of stock! 7900X3D is still there, I don't think that's going to be popular...

1 hour ago, blkspade said:

The MSFS numbers are likely to most relevant to DCS. X3D is more meaningfully better in sims as opposed to the overall in most other more popular titles. There will certainly be a point on AM5 where there will be more performance to be had with less investment in time and money. The fire sale EOL chips for the platform, will look like what the 5800X3D is now.

Given the known differences in visibility with resolution settings. Probably a lot of people. It's the 1% lows in VR that have been known to be a huge benefit though.

Yeah this is what I hang onto, its a different thing for VR. Not so much extra max or average FPS but cleaner, consistent timings with higher lows. I heard the 5800X3D really heklps with ground stutter, which isn't something FPS rates really show but a huge difference in game.

[EightyDuce]

Yeah, honestly, I can't really find a justification for 7900X3D's existence other than to eat up reject dies that only have 6 good cores. 

At this point folks are either getting a 7800X3D for pure gaming or they're getting a 7950X3D for heavier workloads and having gaming vroom...the price delta between the two high end SKUs aren't doing 7900X3D any favors. 

[Hoirtel]

19 minutes ago, EightyDuce said:

Yeah, honestly, I can't really find a justification for 7900X3D's existence other than to eat up reject dies that only have 6 good cores. 

At this point folks are either getting a 7800X3D for pure gaming or they're getting a 7950X3D for heavier workloads and having gaming vroom...the price delta between the two high end SKUs aren't doing 7900X3D any favors. 

I hope that a DCS player has managed to get one of the 7950X3Ds, and is happy to post results here!

[EightyDuce]

43 minutes ago, Hoirtel said:

I hope that a DCS player has managed to get one of the 7950X3Ds, and is happy to post results here!

Indeed. 

[Tom Kazansky]

Seems like the 7900X3D gets the full 128MB  96MB L3 cache for its 6 "game cores". So there is more cache per game core than with both of the others 7000X3Ds?

For games that use 6 or less cores, shouldn't this turn out as an advantage?

Edit2: or is it more like the same to have 6 or 8 cores with the same cache for those games? Just wondering.

Edited March 1, 2023 by Tom Kazansky

[some1]

It's the same, all 6 or 8 cores have access to the whole L3 cache on that CCD, there is no split per core.

[Hoirtel]

27 minutes ago, Tom Kazansky said:

Seems like the 7900X3D gets the full 128MB  96MB L3 cache for its 6 "game cores". So there is more cache per game core than with both of the others 7000X3Ds?

For games that use 6 or less cores, shouldn't this turn out as an advantage?

Edit2: or is it more like the same to have 6 or 8 cores with the same cache for those games? Just wondering.

 

What will be interesting is the 7900X3D with the non vcache CCD disabled, running as a six core. Maybe it will have more thermal room but I would worry that might not be enough for a modern system to run DCS, windows and any add-on apps without potential compromise. 

I also heard that AMD might be hold the clocks down on the 7800X3D even further to keep the 7950X3D ahead, I would assume the 7900X3D would slot in the middle. 

[Tom Kazansky]

3 minutes ago, some1 said:

It's the same, all 6 or 8 cores have access to the whole L3 cache on that CCD, there is no split per core.

Thanks. Doesn't make it easier to sell the 7900X3D. Especially with today's small difference in price tags compared to the big one (in Germany).

[Tom Kazansky]

7 minutes ago, Hoirtel said:

What will be interesting is the 7900X3D with the non vcache CCD disabled, running as a six core. Maybe it will have more thermal room...

Interesting thought to look at in the upcoming reviews. Thanks.

[derneuemann]

vor 17 Stunden schrieb skypickle:

I looked at benches on tech powerup. At 4k the 7950 is only a hair better than the 13900k and less than 10% better than the 5800x3d. Who plays dcs at 1080p?

In 1080p you can see the difference in performance more clearly. That's all.

In VR you often have CPU limitations, especially in multiplayer. there you will have the advantages that you also see in 1080p.

If the X3D is now, for example, 30% faster, then you will also be able to get at least 30% more fps in VR in CPU-limited scenes.

Or at least the frame times of the CPU are 30% better, at least. that's a big difference.

But the 5800X3D also normally runs at 10ms (medium settings, high rather 15-18ms). Then there is the GPU with 5-25ms. Everything depending on the settings!

If now the CPU only needs 7.7ms instead of 10 and the GPU 10ms.

Then you had an improvement of
1. 10+10ms = 50fps too
2. 7.7+10ms=56.5fps

or at high settings
1. 15+15ms = 33 fps too
2. 11.5+15ms = 38fps.

However, if you have set DCS in such a way that you have reached around 72fps with low to medium settings, it should look like this.
CPU at 8ms and the GPU at 6ms.

1. 8+6ms = 71.4fps to
2. 6.1+6ms=82.6fps

You just have to see where you are, what you want and what it can do best.

I have high hopes for Vulkan and DLSS as a bigger help than getting the fastest hardware.

DCS currently uses 1 core massively and 1 core a little.
If DCS can make good use of 4-6 cores with Vulkan, even on CPUs like an I7 9700k, or an R5 5600, that would be a bigger leap than an X3D CPU brings.

Of course, depending on how ED Vulkan is optimized, it can only bring little.

Hope dies last

[Hoirtel]

1 hour ago, derneuemann said:

In 1080p you can see the difference in performance more clearly. That's all.

In VR you often have CPU limitations, especially in multiplayer. there you will have the advantages that you also see in 1080p.

If the X3D is now, for example, 30% faster, then you will also be able to get at least 30% more fps in VR in CPU-limited scenes.

Or at least the frame times of the CPU are 30% better, at least. that's a big difference.

But the 5800X3D also normally runs at 10ms (medium settings, high rather 15-18ms). Then there is the GPU with 5-25ms. Everything depending on the settings!

If now the CPU only needs 7.7ms instead of 10 and the GPU 10ms.

Then you had an improvement of
1. 10+10ms = 50fps too
2. 7.7+10ms=56.5fps

or at high settings
1. 15+15ms = 33 fps too
2. 11.5+15ms = 38fps.

However, if you have set DCS in such a way that you have reached around 72fps with low to medium settings, it should look like this.
CPU at 8ms and the GPU at 6ms.

1. 8+6ms = 71.4fps to
2. 6.1+6ms=82.6fps

You just have to see where you are, what you want and what it can do best.

I have high hopes for Vulkan and DLSS as a bigger help than getting the fastest hardware.

DCS currently uses 1 core massively and 1 core a little.
If DCS can make good use of 4-6 cores with Vulkan, even on CPUs like an I7 9700k, or an R5 5600, that would be a bigger leap than an X3D CPU brings.

Of course, depending on how ED Vulkan is optimized, it can only bring little.

Hope dies last

Good information, thanks. They have said that initial multicore will be implementing two cores but will MT take away the advantages of vcache?

[Terrorvogel]

https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Ryzen-9-7950X3D-CPU-279466/Tests/Tuning-Benchmark-Review-Release-7800X3D-1414209/

[Tom Kazansky]

1 hour ago, Terrorvogel said:

https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Ryzen-9-7950X3D-CPU-279466/Tests/Tuning-Benchmark-Review-Release-7800X3D-1414209/

makes me wonder what a 5800X3D could do with 5 GHz and 5200 RAM (not feasable I know)

Edited March 1, 2023 by Tom Kazansky