Review AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review: 3D V-Cache's Middle Child

[Admin]

We put AMD's $600 Ryzen 9 9900X3D through our full gamut of benchmarks. It performs like fast 6-core CPU in a lot of games, which puts it behind both the 9800X3D and 9950X3D.

AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review: 3D V-Cache's Middle Child : Read more

 

[m3city]

High power usage in iddle, really? One could draw some conclusions based on graphs provided, but definitely not that.

 

[Neilbob]

Really not sure why AMD are bothering with the #900 X3D variants. Neither the price or the performance fit, in either direction. Those 6 core chips with the extra cache would be far better diverted to a cheaper #600 X3D if there are enough defective dies to bother, that is.

If it was another 50-75 of your chosen currency cheaper, then it might be more interesting.

 

[logainofhades]

I agree that they should just sell these dies as a 9600x3d, and skip the 9900x3d altogether.

 

[Heat_Fan89]

From reading and hearing several reviews (Gamers Nexus), i'm surprised that the 9950X3D and 9900X3D did not demolish the lesser and older 9800X3D. In fact Steve Burke from GN, said the 9950X3D was on par with the 9900X3D and 9800X3D. I decided for my gaming build to go with the 9800X3D, not because of price but the 9800 was the choice for a gaming rig. I recently snagged a new 9800X3D on sale from Amazon for $443.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

High power usage in idle, really? One could draw some conclusions based on graphs provided, but definitely not that.

Why not? Are you missing these charts?

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Wpec6VRKFNm8Yz2XX46WN3.png

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MZ7DJqYn2gNn4vTHK9aWJ3.png

In idle and light workloads, AMD's CPUs are sitting about 14~17 watts higher than the Core Ultra 9 285K. Is that a terrible thing that should prevent people from buying it? No, but it is a weakness of AMD's design right now. It's something AMD should look into addressing with future designs. Because even though it's only 15W or so (that's two 60W LED bulb equivalents), it should be possible to get that power use down.

Imagine a phone or mobile device that used almost 3X more power at idle than the competition. That would be a major concern. And in light workloads like YouTube, if it had to use twice as much power, that would also be bad.

Some people seem to think the pros and cons are us screaming "THESE ARE AMAZING ASPECTS" and "THESE ARE TEH WORST ASPECTS" but they're really just a high-level summary of some key points — things that are going well, things that could be improved (without the shouting).

From reading and hearing several reviews (Gamers Nexus), i'm surprised that the 9950X3D and 9900X3D did not demolish the lesser and older 9800X3D. In fact Steve Burke from GN, said the 9950X3D was on par with the 9900X3D and 9800X3D. I decided for my gaming build to go with the 9800X3D, not because of price but the 9800 was the choice for a gaming rig. I recently snagged a new 9800X3D on sale from Amazon for $443.

I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised that, in gaming, the 8-core X3D and the 8-core X3D plus 8-core standard CCDs perform better in games than a 6-core X3D plus 6-core standard configuration. The whole point of the X3D is to shift cache-sensitive workloads to that CCD, away from the other CCD that lacks the extra cache.

It's a whitelist software solution (meaning, AMD explicitly lists which games should effectively disable the non-X3D CCD), and not everything benefits. But as we've seen plenty of times in the past, the dual-CCD (and quad-/hex-/octal-CCD Threadripper) solutions add latency to memory and cache transactions and that reduces gaming performance.

In fact, that's precisely the problem Intel has with Arrow Lake: higher memory latency means lower gaming performance.

 

[usertests]

Really not sure why AMD are bothering with the #900 X3D variants. Neither the price or the performance fit, in either direction. Those 6 core chips with the extra cache would be far better diverted to a cheaper #600 X3D if there are enough defective dies to bother, that is.

Higher margin on the chip, perhaps? Although the street price is already below MSRP.

This should be the last hurrah for the awkward AMD 12-cores. Zen 6 will move to 12-core chiplets. The equivalent chip in that lineup might have 16, 18, or 20 cores, a minimum of 8 cores in each CCX. The 3D cache whitelisting problem could persist, but the single-CCD 9800X3D successor will have 12 cores and walk all over the 9900X3D in every scenario.

 

[Neilbob]

Higher margin on the chip, perhaps? Although the street price is already below MSRP.

Oh, I definitely understand the reason for it, but I like to delude myself in to thinking that AMD would do something 'nice' for us dinky liddle consumers. I know; I may as well wish for world peace, with a mysterious multi-million inheritance thrown in.

Then again, I can't see how a 9600X3D wouldn't sell like hot cakes at 300, or even a bit more.

 

[usertests]

Oh, I definitely understand the reason for it, but I like to delude myself in to thinking that AMD would do something 'nice' for us dinky liddle consumers. I know; I may as well wish for world peace, with a mysterious multi-million inheritance thrown in.

Then again, I can't see how a 9600X3D wouldn't sell like hot cakes at 300, or even a bit more.

The other reason they are wary of doing a wide, early release of 6-core X3D is because it clearly undercuts the 8-core X3D for the many games that are fine running on 6 fast cores.

They could probably get away with charging $350 for a 9600X3D, but if it costs about the same to make as $480+ 9800X3D due to high yields, a chunk of money is left on the table. So it will probably get introduced much later in this generation when enough defective chips are accumulated, following the pattern.

 

[Albert.Thomas]

"We measured the Core Ultra 9 285K at 20W under these conditions, but the Ryzen 9 9900X3D consumed 37W. While we can see that the 9900X3D has improved compared to the previous-gen Ryzen 7000X3D models, this is still a significantly higher amount of active idle power draw than the Intel chips."

What about medium-light conditions Paul?
I've been able to pull a (relatively) insane amount of power with the 9950X3D just by spinning my mouse around really quickly.

With the disclaimer that I haven't tested this in detail, it appears that AMD's flagship X3D CPU is much less efficient below 100W, but is more efficient above 100W.

 

[Notton]

What AMD really needs is an 8+4, not a 6+6
Although, judging by the amount of binned 4-cores they sell, it seems the yields are so good they have almost none.

 

[HideOut]

From reading and hearing several reviews (Gamers Nexus), i'm surprised that the 9950X3D and 9900X3D did not demolish the lesser and older 9800X3D. In fact Steve Burke from GN, said the 9950X3D was on par with the 9900X3D and 9800X3D. I decided for my gaming build to go with the 9800X3D, not because of price but the 9800 was the choice for a gaming rig. I recently snagged a new 9800X3D on sale from Amazon for $443.

You dont understand how these CPUs are built then. This is effectively a 6 core X3D + 6 core regular 9xxx CPU. For gaming use its just a 6 core, and clocked slightly lower than the 9950x3d. No one is surprised, other than you its slower in gaming. Being slower isnt the issue really. Its goint to be a compromise chip. Its the bad pricing thats the issue.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

What AMD really needs is an 8+4, not a 6+6
Although, judging by the amount of binned 4-cores they sell, it seems the yields are so good they have almost none.

Yeah, I suspect there are not many CCDs with fewer than six functional cores. Would be interesting to get an 8-core + 4-core, and then the 9900X3D would potentially make more sense as a step down from the 9950X3D... but really, we need the next-gen Zen 6 that will probably correct this by using 12-core CCDs.

 

[logainofhades]

Yea AMD really needs to step up to more cores within a CCD. We have been on 8 core CCD's for far longer than I would have ever expected.

 

[Amdlova]

My 14700t draw 1w from cpu at idle...

 

[helper800]

Where's my 12 core CCD's? I cant wait for a 12+ core X3D CPU with 1 CCD.

 

[Notton]

Yeah, I'm hoping AMD's rumored next gen 12-core is real.
That'll open up a slew of possibilities of an ungimped x900 and x600 class.
12+12, 12+10, 12+8, 12+6, 10+10, 10+6 for dual CCD.
12, 10, 8, maybe even the 6 for single CCD.

 

[JayGau]

From reading and hearing several reviews (Gamers Nexus), i'm surprised that the 9950X3D and 9900X3D did not demolish the lesser and older 9800X3D. In fact Steve Burke from GN, said the 9950X3D was on par with the 9900X3D and 9800X3D. I decided for my gaming build to go with the 9800X3D, not because of price but the 9800 was the choice for a gaming rig. I recently snagged a new 9800X3D on sale from Amazon for $443.

Older? Lesser? They are all from the same generation, only a few months apart. And the 9800X3D is still the king for gaming, not sure why you call it "lesser" (unless you are talking about productivity but hey, it's an 8-core CPU so no surprises here). And as Jarred pointed out to you, the 9900X3D only has 6 cores for gaming (with the extra L3 cache) as compared to 8 for both the 9800X3D and the 9950X3D.

 

[Albert.Thomas]

Where's my 12 core CCD's? I cant wait for a 12+ core X3D CPU with 1 CCD.

This is what we need!

 

[A Stoner]

I wonder if they ever tested a 4 core ccd with an 8 core ccd with the 4 core having the extra cache? With fewer cores over much of the same area, it is possible that ccd could run cooler and more efficiently and thus faster.

 

[Mr Majestyk]

If high power is a worry why are you even mentioning the disgraceful 14900K even ignoring the disastrous silicon degradation issues. The natural competitor for the 9900X/X3D is the 265K, not 285K. I don't care about the price differential, as the v-cache models add $100+. 9900X3D price is relatively poor because it relies on bad yields of 9950X3D, it' is not as plentiful. AMD price it that way because they don't really want you buying it and don't have a lot of stock any way.

With Zen 6 moving to 12 cores ccd's, I'm waiting. I'll bet next year the 10800X3D is the 12 cores variant and the 10900X/X3D will be 12+6 config. 10800X3D should be unbeatable for gaming and productivity in value and kick the living daylights out of 9900X/X3D in all metrics.

For now I'd get a 9800X3D if I cared a lot about gaming (I don't as even my lowly 5800X is doing a dandy job) or a 265K/9900X for productivity. And as bad as 9900X is supposed to be for gaming, it's still a lot faster than the 5800X3D on average which is a lot faster than 5800X.

One word on value. in Australia the price differential between 9950X3D and 9900X3D is a lot more than in USA, try $230. Also 9800X3D is only $110AU cheaper or about $60US. So 9900X3D is far better value than in US.

 

[thestryker]

At least we now know what a budget 9600X3D might look like down the road.

AMD's more recent 12-core parts have been in a weird place in general due to the disadvantage of 6-core CCDs. I do think there's a place for the non-X3D SKU, but the X3D is very questionable.

Moving to a 12-core CCD puts their client desktop business in a weird place unless they're going to dramatically shift pricing per core. I can't help but wonder if they will have multiple CCD sizes and potentially use advanced packaging across desktop and mobile so they can use the same CCDs.

 

[usertests]

What AMD really needs is an 8+4, not a 6+6
Although, judging by the amount of binned 4-cores they sell, it seems the yields are so good they have almost none.

I wonder if they ever tested a 4 core ccd with an 8 core ccd with the 4 core having the extra cache? With fewer cores over much of the same area, it is possible that ccd could run cooler and more efficiently and thus faster.

This could work without X3D: Set the 4-core CCD to never be preferred. Add the X3D cache and you have the same whitelisting problem, except whichever game prefers the 4-core CCD may add a latency penalty if it tries to use more than 4 cores.

The heterogeneous approach is always going to complicate the CPU, except maybe if one of the units is slower in every way so it is always a fallback. Even mobile SoCs are starting to move away from heterogeneity or at least ditching Cortex-A5xx cores.

Where's my 12 core CCD's? I cant wait for a 12+ core X3D CPU with 1 CCD.

That's the expectation for products using Zen 6 CCDs. 12 cores, 48 MiB of L3 cache, all unified. Multiple leakers agree on this. Then we get to talk about ~24-core stagnation when AMD does it three gens in a row. 😛

MLID has also leaked separate "LP cores" that could be found in desktop or mobile I/O dies, that could act like Intel's LP E-cores. Idle power consumption could go down in situations where the CCDs can be turned off.

So you might get your unified 12 cores with 3D V-Cache and 2 extra small, slow cores off to the side. A 9600X(3D) equivalent would have 8 or 10 big cores. If we see more dual-CCD disabled chips like the 9900X(3D), maybe AMD would disable 3 cores on each to make it an 18-core sitting exactly between the 12-core and 24-core.

 

[extremepcs1]

I'm very happy with my 9800x3d. I'm not convinced that core parking on the 9900 and 9950 works very well. If we could get 12 cores on a single CCD with v-cache, maybe I'll upgrade then.

 

[ManDaddio]

Should be $499 max.