News AMD Ryzen 9000X3D rumored to reverse the 3D stacking hierarchy — the L3 cache block allegedly sits below the CCDs

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
This spells trouble for Intel since Core Ultra 9 285K, the flagship Arrow Lake chip, fails to beat even last generation's Ryzen 7 7800X3D.
Click to expand...

In games, it's nearly 30% faster in non gaming applications than said 7800X3D.

relative-performance-cpu.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: helper800
Alvar Miles Udell said:
In games, it's nearly 30% faster in non gaming applications than said 7800X3D.
Click to expand...
That probably has something to do with all the ecores, that chart, when compared to something with equivalent core counts, like a zen5 7950 and 9950 is about the same, where the 285K has 24 real cores, and those AMD parts running at the same perf in the chart only have 16(32 with SMT) and are on an older TSMC node. If you are not gaming and want productivity, why buy the intel part when you can have homogeneous cores with AVX512, and when you are gaming, will still beat the 285K, and use less power doing it, on a platform with an upgrade path that is also more stable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jp7189, atomicWAR and Makaveli
helper800 said:
I cannot wait until they get CCD density improvements at some point. Greater than 8 core CCDs will be when I jump back in on an X3D part coming from the 5800X3D.
Click to expand...
Maybe with Zen 6, or maybe AMD will take forever to increase cores for yield reasons.

I think what you really want is more than 8 cores in a CCX (rather than something like a 16-core Zen 5c chiplet with two CCXs).

DaveJ said:
What I would really like is an AMD 9800G-X3D that would be a great chip to own!
Click to expand...
Best you can hope for is Strix Halo (soldered) with added 3D V-Cache (not just the confirmed 32 MiB MALL cache, AKA Infinity Cache for the iGPU).
 
  • Like
Reactions: helper800
DaveJ said:
What I would really like is an AMD 9800G-X3D that would be a great chip to own!
Click to expand...
With a full Halo version of a 40cu iGPU... If that would actually work, it def would be an awesome APU!!! Imagine a mini PC with that inside. I'm into minis and am excited for the Halo versions. Pricey most likely, but there gonna be awesome!
 
DaveJ said:
What I would really like is an AMD 9800G-X3D that would be a great chip to own!
Click to expand...
I'm afraid you'd just create problems faster than you can solve them...

First of all: aggregating functionality and performance means aggregating heat, which is less troublesome to eliminate with more surface area on spread out dies.

In a thin and light notebook you accept that and compromise on performance, but if you're aiming for better gaming muscle, the returns have a hard time justifying that effort.

And SRAM simply uses too much real-estate with 6-8 transistors per bit of cache to completely replace a frame buffer, which means you'll still need something with sufficient sustainable bandwidth and capacity.

That can be multi-channel DRAM on a shared die carrier à la Mx or Lunar Lake, it could be HBM or GDDRx, but it will also need space and cooling and there is no chance it will fit into an AM5 socket.

You'd need to question your motives: why do you want an APU?

If it's about not needing a dGPU, it's all the troubles I mentioned above.

If it's about being able to transition from a very low power environment up to great gaming with a dGPU-on-demand, you'd be paying a lot extra for iGPU transistors that won't get used in gaming.

Again on a notebook, people pay extra for that flexibilitiy.

On a desktop there will still be some interested, myself included (because it runs 24x7), but AMD is financially so much more healthy than Intel, becasue they won't do bespoke small niche designs: if it doesn't have scale, they won't go for it.
 
endocine said:
and when you are gaming, will still beat the 285K, and use less power doing it, on a platform with an upgrade path that is also more stable.
Click to expand...
Uhm, yeah, only that did not happen. The 9950x used 40% more power for identical gaming performance on Tom's hardware 14 game test.
 
helper800 said:
I cannot wait until they get CCD density improvements at some point. Greater than 8 core CCDs will be when I jump back in on an X3D part coming from the 5800X3D.
Click to expand...
Well, they could do a "desktop" part using Zen 5c Turin dense CCDs, which have 16 cores each, but of course they won't clock as high as gamers might want.

Now those most likely won't have TSV dock points allocated for V-Cache, so they won't match what you want.

But in your case, going with a dual CCD SoC seems like the much easier solution than hoping for performance and density.

In a way AMD is very clearly demonstrating that you simply can't have both, but that they offer you a choice.

The 5800X3D is a very good chip, so perhaps you should concentrate on if CPU performance is actually limiting you in any way.

My impression is that reviewers are on a gaming performance craze comparing games at THD medium settings and triple digit FPS, while the actual games have long ceased to be CPU bound at all.

So you might be better off replacing your GPU or just enjoying your games.
 
abufrejoval said:
But in your case, going with a dual CCD SoC seems like the much easier solution than hoping for performance and density.

The 5800X3D is a very good chip, so perhaps you should concentrate on if CPU performance is actually limiting you in any way.

So you might be better off replacing your GPU or just enjoying your games.
Click to expand...
At some point in the future, AMD will move up core counts for each tier, e.g. giving 24-32 cores instead of 16, 10-12 cores instead of 8, and perhaps eliminating the 6-core. One way they could do that is to increase the number of cores in a standard/non-dense CCD. If they do, the cheaper CPUs with only one CCD will get more cores. If the CCX also increases beyond 8 cores, that keeps it simple and prevents a potential source of latency. That's assuming it's technically appealing for AMD to do that. If not, then a 16-core, dual-CCX die like Zen 4c/5c could be the easier option.

@helper800 is obviously in no hurry to upgrade, isn't getting a 9800X3D, and may end up skipping AM5 entirely. By the time core counts increase (maybe Zen 6 or Zen 7), there could be decent reasons to upgrade from the 5800X3D. You seem to have a bad habit of telling people what they can't wish for.
 
abufrejoval said:
Well, they could do a "desktop" part using Zen 5c Turin dense CCDs, which have 16 cores each, but of course they won't clock as high as gamers might want.

Now those most likely won't have TSV dock points allocated for V-Cache, so they won't match what you want.

But in your case, going with a dual CCD SoC seems like the much easier solution than hoping for performance and density.

In a way AMD is very clearly demonstrating that you simply can't have both, but that they offer you a choice.

The 5800X3D is a very good chip, so perhaps you should concentrate on if CPU performance is actually limiting you in any way.

My impression is that reviewers are on a gaming performance craze comparing games at THD medium settings and triple digit FPS, while the actual games have long ceased to be CPU bound at all.

So you might be better off replacing your GPU or just enjoying your games.
Click to expand...
I agree with almost all of your advice. Like I said, I have no intention of replacing my CPU because I am highly GPU limited with my 3080. I was just making comment on what would entice me to upgrade what I currently have. 4k 240hz monitors be very GPU hungry. I want to get a 5090 and hope that I get 120+ fps in all my games with my 4k 240hz monitor. If I find I am CPU limited at that point I will probably upgrade my platform to 9800X3D or the 2X5k from Intel, whichever gets me to my requirements while using the least power. I spend 0.43 cents per kWH in California...
 
Peksha said:
Yes, the 285k should be compared to the 14900k/7950x/9950x. And it was compared, and it lost to them all in performance. And that's not in games.
Click to expand...
It did? So if I post 50 different workloads where the 285k won against all of them, does it mean you are lying? Or what?
 
Elusive Ruse said:
What res are you gaming at and what’s your GPU? What else do you do with your PC?
Click to expand...
Its all in my signature I have an EVGA 3080 10gb. 1440p165hz, 4k 240hz, 4k 120hz. I mainly just do light production tasks, some photo editing, browsing, and mainly gaming. I mainly want a single CCD X3D chip at 10-16 cores because that would be a core upgrade along with multiple node shrinks and frequency bumps to back it up. That is really the only thing that would entice me at this point as I am mainly graphics limited, however, that does not mean there are a few highly CPU intense games that I can benefit from having more cores with right now.
 
helper800 said:
Its all in my signature I have an EVGA 3080 10gb. 1440p165hz, 4k 240hz, 4k 120hz. I mainly just do light production tasks, some photo editing, browsing, and mainly gaming. I mainly want a single CCD X3D chip at 10-16 cores because that would be a core upgrade along with multiple node shrinks and frequency bumps to back it up. That is really the only thing that would entice me at this point as I am mainly graphics limited, however, that does not mean there are a few highly CPU intense games that I can benefit from having more cores with right now.
Click to expand...
Sigs don’t show on my phone. I would say you’re probably gonna get more performance upgrade on your photo editing than gaming if you step up to 9800X3D. I personally plan to buy the 5080 if the price is not outrageous and it manages to outperform the 4090. I recommend the same to you.
 
Alvar Miles Udell said:
In games, it's nearly 30% faster in non gaming applications than said 7800X3D.

relative-performance-cpu.png
Click to expand...


The 7800x3D is a gaming chip, why are you comparing apples and oranges? You don't benchmark it with non-gaming production workloads because that's not the processor it's meant for.

Look for the 7950x and 9950x for production comparisons... Those are the production workload models. Intels new processor just sucks.
 
Elusive Ruse said:
Sigs don’t show on my phone. I would say you’re probably gonna get more performance upgrade on your photo editing than gaming if you step up to 9800X3D. I personally plan to buy the 5080 if the price is not outrageous and it manages to outperform the 4090. I recommend the same to you.
Click to expand...
I am not getting a 9800X3D because its an 8 core sidegrade to what I have at 4k gaming and probably only marginally better at the other things I do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom