Review AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D Review: 3D V-Cache's Forgotten Middle Child

[jeremyj_83]

yea ok sure, i and bet even you wouldn't be whining and complaining about intel if they had dropped ddr4 THIS round to go ddr5 only, why ? cause its Intel.
there isnt a lack of choice out there now, amd and intel both have viable systems based on a persons needs and such. to keep claiming amd and ddr 5 is the wrong choice, or too expensive is just BS now.

the FACT is this, i doubt any one would go and buy a brand new intel based board and cpu, and STILL get a ddr4 board, unless they are on a strict budget, or cant go ddr5. i have 96 gigs of ddr4 in my 5900x system, and i am STILL looking at ddr5 for my next upgrade,. and with the sales that are going on here, a 7950x ( with the 7900x being less, and making that combo LESS then intels )and 13900k are BOTH priced with in about $20 bucks of each other with the same model board ( x670 and z790 ? ), same ram and cpu.

im sorry, but i LOVE how you can spin things so intel always looks like the better way to go no matter what

Don't forget that most people who are going to be upgrading their CPU and having DDR4 are most likely using lower speed RAM like 2666MHz and might only have 8 or 16GB total. At that point it is pointless to reuse that RAM on the new system as it is so far below spec for the new CPUs.

 

[Ogotai]

are most likely using lower speed RAM like 2666MHz and might only have 8 or 16GB total. At that point it is pointless to reuse that RAM on the new system as it is so far below spec for the new CPUs.

not according to those who are crying about am5 being ddr5 only, those ones would STILL buy a ddr4 based board for the 13900k, carry over that ddr4 2666 mhz ram, then complain that their new comp still feels slow, even though its " new ":

 

[jeremyj_83]

not according to those who are crying about am5 being ddr5 only, those ones would STILL buy a ddr4 based board for the 13900k, carry over that ddr4 2666 mhz ram, then complain that their new comp still feels slow, even though its " new ":

They would carry over a 2x 4GB 2133MHz kit from their i7-6700k build from 2015 to "save money." Only to have their system underperform and then go on forums asking why their Userbench score is so low for a 13900k.

 

[Ogotai]

They would carry over a 2x 4GB 2133MHz kit from their i7-6700k build from 2015 to "save money." Only to have their system underperform and then go on forums asking why their Userbench score is so low for a 13900k.

yep. the fact is, as i have said, i highly doubt any one when buying a new comp, would carry over that ram, unless they had NO choice.

 

[jeremyj_83]

yep. the fact is, as i have said, i highly doubt any one when buying a new comp, would carry over that ram, unless they had NO choice.

Exactly. I'm skipping over the DDR4 generation completely as I got into DDR3 at the end of its life cycle. If I were buying today I'd go DDR5-6000 to give me a good chance of upping the CPU again while having faster RAM.

 

[bit_user]

yep. the fact is, as i have said, i highly doubt any one when buying a new comp, would carry over that ram, unless they had NO choice.

At the low-end is where someone would be most desperate to save a few $, but then such a low-end user probably has really old, small memory in their old system. So, even then, doesn't make a ton of sense.

I'll bet Intel did it mostly for the OEMs, so they could save money on 12th gen systems while DDR5 was still hard-to-source and super expensive.

 

[bit_user]

If I were buying today I'd go DDR5-6000 to give me a good chance of upping the CPU again while having faster RAM.

Sadly, the fastest ECC UDIMMs are just DDR5-4800. So, I will buy 2x 16 GB, with the plan to later replace them by larger, faster, dual-ranked DIMMs as they become available and affordable.

 

[Ogotai]

At the low-end is where someone would be most desperate to save a few $, but then such a low-end user probably has really old, small memory in their old system. So, even then, doesn't make a ton of sense.

I'll bet Intel did it mostly for the OEMs, so they could save money on 12th gen systems while DDR5 was still hard-to-source and super expensive.

probably, but i cant help to wonder IF 13th gen was ddr5 only if there would be such an uproar like there is with am5

 

[jeremyj_83]

Sadly, the fastest ECC UDIMMs are just DDR5-4800. So, I will buy 2x 16 GB, with the plan to later replace them by larger, faster, dual-ranked DIMMs as they become available and affordable.

That does make things tough. However, for home use there isn't really a need for ECC. Heck I've had firewalls running 24/7 using non ECC for 2 years straight without a single crash.

 

[bit_user]

However, for home use there isn't really a need for ECC.

Do you care about data corruption? Worst case, you could get filesystem corruption and not notice until it's too late.

Heck I've had firewalls running 24/7 using non ECC for 2 years straight without a single crash.

The probability of a crash is much lower than silent data corruption, because a crash only happens when either executable code is corrupted or some data consistency or constraint is violated that sends the program (or kernel) down an invalid code path.

A firewall is actually a good place for non-ECC RAM, since the data passing through it will have checksums and CRCs which the endpoints can use to detect errors. Plus, the chance of memory errors increases the longer data sits in RAM, which also isn't an issue with firewalls, routers, and gateways.

Gaming and content consumption (music, video) are other contexts where I wouldn't worry about using non-ECC memory.

 

[watzupken]

Brian D Smith: I get your point, but the Intel i9-13900K (the competitor to the Ryzen 9 7900X3D) supports both DDR4 and DD5. Therefore, Paul's feedback on this particular issue is warranted. AMD's design decision to switch exclusively to DDR5 is a detractor to many buyers, including myself, who would have upgraded their CPUs but can't because they would have to invest in DDR5. Conversely, Intel has eased the transition its 12th generation processor by offering compatible motherboards with either DDR4 or DDR5.

I would guess that Intel's 14th generation will ditch DDR4 for good, but as of now, DDR4 compatibility is one thing that the i9-13900K has going for it over the Ryzen 9 7900X3D.

Disclosure: I hold positions in both Intel and AMD stock and use predominantly AMD products.

I feel there is nothing wrong with AMD opting for DDR5 only when they launched Zen 4 late last year. I strongly believe that Intel's decision to support DDR4 then were driven by,

1. Very limited DDR5 supply
2. Exorbitant price of DDR5

These were the 2 main issues since Intel was the first to support DDR5. So if they kept to just DDR5 support only when they launched Alder Lake, it is going to kill any demand for it. Fast forward to the 700 series chipset, DDR5 got cheaper and readily available. So if they kill DDR4 support on the 700 series chipset, people will just buy cheaper 600 series boards. In any case, I am pretty sure Intel will drop DDR4 support with the 800 series chipset since they were not supportive of it for the 700 series chipset in the first place.

For AMD, I think the timing plays a part in their decision since DDR5 is in ample supply, and prices are on the decline. And since they mentioned they will support this chipset for a number of generations going forward, keeping DDR4 means they need to support both DDR4 and 5 for the next 3 years or more. In any case, people like me see no need for DDR5, so I am sticking on to my Alder Lake CPU with DDR4. So people still have an option with Intel for now.

 

[g-unit1111]

What mishaps?

For one thing, the lack of ITX motherboards. There were lots of options for AM4, but there’s very few, if any solid options for AM5, and the ones that are available haven’t exactly got the most favorable reviews. If I build a new full desktop next year I’ll definitely go for an AM5 option as there are much better motherboards available.

That said I am definitely considering the 7900XT over the 4070TI.

 

[cirdecus]

Brian D Smith: I get your point, but the Intel i9-13900K (the competitor to the Ryzen 9 7900X3D) supports both DDR4 and DD5. Therefore, Paul's feedback on this particular issue is warranted. AMD's design decision to switch exclusively to DDR5 is a detractor to many buyers, including myself, who would have upgraded their CPUs but can't because they would have to invest in DDR5. Conversely, Intel has eased the transition its 12th generation processor by offering compatible motherboards with either DDR4 or DDR5.

I would guess that Intel's 14th generation will ditch DDR4 for good, but as of now, DDR4 compatibility is one thing that the i9-13900K has going for it over the Ryzen 9 7900X3D.

Disclosure: I hold positions in both Intel and AMD stock and use predominantly AMD products.

From a consumer perspective, backwards compatibility is less of a CON for high-end products like the 7900x3D. However, I'd agree it's still relevant and the most compatible products are preferred. AMD's CPU's that were using AM4 for so long were credited with keeping the same socket for years for this reason.

However, I personally wouldn't consider it a CON as a buyer interested in a high end CPU to accommodate a high-end platform.

My primary concern is the tweaking required to get this thing to operate with the performance it's capable of. This irritation is why I wouldn't purchase. I think the design is just messy.

 

[mitch074]

People don't like to throw $200 worth of DDR4 RAM in the trash, just to buy DDR5 for a 0.1% gain in performance.

If DDR5 resulted in real-world performance gains, maybe AMD would have a point. But that's not the case, all this is doing is adding cost for users and more e-waste.

AMD is the only chip maker that tried to make RAM-agnostic sockets on processors that had an integrated memory controller - that was DDR2+DDR3 for the AM2+/AM3 socket. And it caused so many limitations that they had to break compatibility or else suffer big performance penalties with AM3+.
My guess is, they looked at it, evaluated the cost (in both R&D and forward compatibility) and decided "fsck it, one socket will do one RAM type" and left it at that.

 

[bit_user]

AMD is the only chip maker that tried to make RAM-agnostic sockets on processors that had an integrated memory controller

Intel CPUs have an integrated memory controller. It hasn't been on the motherboard since LGA 775, of the Core 2 era.

I take your point that AMD has done it before. And, I guess Intel made no such efforts around the time of the DDR3 -> DDR4 transition? Or were there actually DDR3 Skylake boards?

 

[phxrider]

This thing is looking like a lot better buy today than when this review was written... ~$460, or only $60 more than the 5800x3d and still $200 less than the 7950x3d. It beats the 13700K for gaming and comes close enough in multi-threaded productivity apps, pick your poison.....

 

[WINTERLORD]

I'm wondering does this review take into account the advancements that have been made in like core parking an such as is my understanding at and for a little while after launch this chip wasn't very good in gaming due to game scheduling and core parking being woefully ineffecient