AMD's Ryzen 7 5700X3D, while technically new, is not really so. What we have here is binned silicon that couldn't be sold as a 5800X3D, but instead of throwing it away, it's been cut down and offered for just $250.
AMD Ryzen 7 5700X3D Review: 3D V-Cache for $250
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
Kazkas
Posts: 33 +96
Evaluating a new AM4 processor, but not including the most popular AM4 cpus (3600/5600) for showing a possible uplift? Lame
It is pretty annoying I have to track through older comparisons to see where one of the ones on the chart sits against one not on the chart to try and compare the 5700X3D here..
Also worth noting is the 5700X3D is 105w TDP vs 65w TPD for many of the non X3D chips - so it doesn't suit all use cases.
Why does tomshardware paint such a different picture vs the top tier AMD cpus for intel? https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-7950x-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k
takaozo
Posts: 944 +1,479
Where I live the 5700x3d is 266 Euro and the 5800x3d is 285 Euro. For ~20 Euro difference this CPU makes no sense.
I agree with all here that 5600 should have been included in the charts but I know that 5600 and 5600x are 1-2% slower in gaming than 5700x
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-5-7600-non-x/25.html
I agree with all here that 5600 should have been included in the charts but I know that 5600 and 5600x are 1-2% slower in gaming than 5700x
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-5-7600-non-x/25.html
takaozo
Posts: 944 +1,479
Tom's who said "just buy it" related to Nvidia 2000 series?
Not on my reading list since.
Thatsdisgusting
Posts: 231 +286
Where I live, both these things cost like ~330$ with difference at about 20 bucks pro 5700x3d, while 7800x3d costs just below 399$. Useless thing in 2024…
Zen 3 was always overpriced. Guess thats the whole operation idea, to milk long-living platform users with most performing dead end solutions in the end.
Zen 3 was always overpriced. Guess thats the whole operation idea, to milk long-living platform users with most performing dead end solutions in the end.
MarcusNumb
Posts: 155 +301
Well this will be my final cpu upgrade, but I'll wait till September at least since my 3600x is still doing well. For playing at 1080p, I believe that this CPU will serve me well years to come.
Because writer is Intel fanboy. Features and specifications is a tie because "both support PCIe 5.0 and Intel supports DDR4 while AMD does not".
Of course no-one is buying top end CPU and already obsolete DDR4 platform. Also while Intel supports 16 PCIe 5.0 lanes, AMD supports 28. But hey, that's same thing, because both support PCIe 5.0. Pure BS.
ScottSoapbox
Posts: 1,048 +1,824
This would be tempting if I hadn't picked up the 5800x3d for $290 on black Friday.
...I really should get around to installing that CPU. LOL.
...I really should get around to installing that CPU. LOL.
fluffydroid
Posts: 69 +69
Same speed as 5600X3D.
maxxcool7421
Posts: 407 +615
Unlock the upper multiplier .. let the bios/cpu manage the clock speed and it should perform slightly better ..
Theinsanegamer
Posts: 5,451 +10,231
Multiplier is locked on x3d parts. Always has been. No OC allowed.
bluetooth fairy
Posts: 235 +166
Would like to know what GPU suits it best. 4090 is overkill, we can see it in the article. 4080/s probably either. But if it is for 3080/6800xt for example, how much is the difference between the 5700x and 5700x3d?
We need to find first GPU in the whole lineup that's not bottlenecking the 5700x3d, and then compare it to competitor CPUs. Then we'll find practical sense when we want to upgrade our rig on AM4, and if we need to choose between 5700x and 5700x3d. If it makes sense at all.
5700x is much cheaper, it clocks higher and can be oc'd (undervolted), and its tdp is 65w, as already noted in this topic. It's faster in many non cache sensitive scenarios.
Most points are valid for 5600 non-x.
Or in other words: what GPU is bottlenecked by the 5x00x but not bottlenecked by the 5x00x3d? And what is the difference? 3080/3090 probably? 10% in 1080p and 5% in 1440p? Where's the most valuable data? GPU and CPU scaling, I mean.
We need to find first GPU in the whole lineup that's not bottlenecking the 5700x3d, and then compare it to competitor CPUs. Then we'll find practical sense when we want to upgrade our rig on AM4, and if we need to choose between 5700x and 5700x3d. If it makes sense at all.
5700x is much cheaper, it clocks higher and can be oc'd (undervolted), and its tdp is 65w, as already noted in this topic. It's faster in many non cache sensitive scenarios.
Most points are valid for 5600 non-x.
Or in other words: what GPU is bottlenecked by the 5x00x but not bottlenecked by the 5x00x3d? And what is the difference? 3080/3090 probably? 10% in 1080p and 5% in 1440p? Where's the most valuable data? GPU and CPU scaling, I mean.
Because it's an ad disguised as an article. Notice the referal links to amazon below. Had this been an actual review, it would show the middle of the bell curve which is most likely Ryzen 5 1600 to 5600. It's a great upgrade I did for only $120 last year.
Exactly. The advertisement picked the absolute unlikely scenario that would show the maximum improvement to push the sale. 4090 at 1080p? What % of gamers have this combo? At least have the decency to show 4k results. Most people have mid range cards and play at 1440 or 4k. My 6950 is somewhat equivalent to 7800xt and little under 4070ti. Show some modern mid range GPUs at 1440 and 4k.
bluetooth fairy
Posts: 235 +166
Funny but 5700x3d is the most valuable upgrade for those who uses 6950xt on AM4. Because 6950xt is highest chip not bottlenecked by the 5700x3d, I guess. But I'd love to see the data gathered by a respectable reviewer instead of my guesses.
Proper product review could have such verdict, for example: incredible solution if you are here and here. But if you're here, it's pointless, skip it.
This article represents the same kind of verdict, but to my opinion, it lacks many details, especially considering that the target audience is using AM4 a priori.
Zen 3 was not “always overpriced”, you could get a 5600 for $99 at one point, and 8-cores were in the mid $100s range for quite some time. The X3D chips represented a terrific end-of-platform upgrade for those of us who bought in at a prior gen, but for those of us on Zen 1/+, even the non X3D chips are a huge upgrade in gaming. X3D is always going to be sold at a premium since it’s the best gaming experience the platform has to offer.
TechSavy101
Posts: 27 +45
"Tomshardware". Lol thats one site I never bother reading. Try Wizard at Techpowerup.com, Anandtech.com or Hilbert Hagedoorn at Guru3d.com. Of course, Steven at techspot.com is also reliable.
I'm with you that some 1440p/4k scores with midrange GPUs would be great, even a tiny glimpse into those resolutions. I just fear that those results would be disappointing, even boring. Steven or anyone else would struggle in showing the benefits of an upgrade from let's say 5700x to 5700x3d on 1440p and most surely 4k - at least with midrange GPUs.
Let's just thank him for sparing us the 720p scores nowadays. The absurdly overpowered 4090 is a godsend for hardware sites and the single reason we are not seeing 720p reviews anymore in 2023/2024. It is the card to test out those tiny CPU differences (tiny today, larger with the games of tomorrow).
If you try to represent reality in your benchmark rig, so holding back on the 4090 and 1080p and use an 6800XT for wqhd or an 3060 12gb (which is in the common market lead on steam statistics) for 1080p testing, those CPU benchmarks get boring really fast.
Last edited:
takaozo
Posts: 944 +1,479
More important data for me is to have the average GPU and GPU utilization percentage.
If the GPU drops below 95% or the CPU rise above 40% then it's a bottleneck for me.
Since HT and SMT I consider 50% CPU usage = 100%. This is only for CPU's with only big cores. The Intel ones Big+little I dont know how to calculate exact 100% usage since only some cores have HT enabled.
If the GPU drops below 95% or the CPU rise above 40% then it's a bottleneck for me.
Since HT and SMT I consider 50% CPU usage = 100%. This is only for CPU's with only big cores. The Intel ones Big+little I dont know how to calculate exact 100% usage since only some cores have HT enabled.
Axeia
Posts: 120 +144
Imo looking at it realistically look at your budget and look at the particular games you play. Some scale extremely well and some don't.
* If you're on a 1xxx, 2xxx, 3xxx CPU these can be really nice if the games you play scale well with it.
* If they don't, get a non 3d.
* If you're buying new get a 7xxx CPU and then upgrade to 9xxx or 1000x3d at some future point (it might be a standard feature by then)
Also AMD graphics cards use less CPU power so if the CPU is the bottleneck you could win a few frames by not picking NVIDIA.
maxxcool7421
Posts: 407 +615
Booo! :|
Similar threads
- Locked
Latest posts
-
DARPA unleashes 20-foot autonomous robo-tank with glowing green eyes
- Squid Surprise replied
-
Need some games advice- Malone12 replied
-
Gigabyte and MSI also provide BIOS settings to address Intel crashing CPUs- WhiteLeaff replied
