News AMD Unveils Three Ryzen 7000X3D V-Cache Chips, Three New 65W Non-X CPUs, Too

[Admin]

AMD whipped the cover off three new Ryzen 7000 processors with its revolutionary 3D V-Cache tech, along with three other models that expand the roster of standard chips with lower-cost models.

AMD Unveils Three Ryzen 7000X3D V-Cache Chips, Three New 65W Non-X CPUs, Too : Read more

 

[thestryker]

I really thought that with Zen 5 being a 2024 part that AMD would wait until later this year to release the X3D chips. I'm happy for everyone who was waiting on them and look forward to reading through the reviews to see how much the clocks and TDP impact non-gaming performance.

 

[thisisaname]

Disappointed there was no price nor a solid release date on the X3D parts.

 

[blppt]

Now THIS I might actually upgrade my 5950X for.

 

[PlaneInTheSky]

AMD hasn’t shared pricing information for the new X3D chips, but says they will arrive in February.

Never a good sign when a product gets a release date, but the price can not be disclosed.

When you set a release date for a product, it is custom to disclose the price too.

 

[lmcnabney]

The X3D chips will be of interest to gamers with fat wallets and want the very best.

The problem is the lack of value in lesser chips. Building Zen4 on PCIe5 and DDR5 has slapped a significant platform cost since the expensive motherboards and DDR5 are not optional. I want to buy AMD, but I don't want to spend hundreds more for equivalent performance. They really didn't think this generation through.

 

[PlaneInTheSky]

The 65W “non-X” Zen 4 Ryzen models are long awaited by value seekers, as they provide a lower cost of entry to the AM5 platform – a much needed addition given the high cost of AM5 motherboards and the fact that Ryzen 7000 requires pricey DDR5 memory while Intel’s chips can support either DDR4 or DDR5, thus giving it an overall cost advantage.

Let's get real. No "value seeker has long awaited" these. These are still $230+ chips that are only $20 cheaper than their X counterparts. And you would still need to buy expensive DDR5.

Who cares about a $20 discount when you have to throw away your perfectly fine DDR4 and spend $150 buying new DDR5.

Value seekers are buying $100 i3 and using cheap DDR4. A $100 i3 with a $300 RTX 3050 is still a gaming beast of a PC for 1080p.

AMD has no answer to an i3 with DDR4. Forcing people to buy DDR5 was a dumb ass move by AMD.

 

[lmcnabney]

Let's get real. No "value seeker has long awaited" these. These are still $230+ chips that are only $20 cheaper than their X counterparts. And you would still need to buy expensive DDR5.

Value seekers are buying $100 i3 and using cheap DDR4. A $100 i3 with a $300 RTX 3050 is still a gaming beast of a PC for 1080p.

There are two ways to place value. What is the best bang/buck right now and what kind of system will have the longest useful life for the money? A cpu in the 13600k tier can be paired with a 3800 class GPU now and probably get upgraded to a 6800 class in 3-4 years and provide a nice useable life of 7-8 years without being seriously CPU bottlenecked at high resolutions.

 

[saunupe1911]

7950X3D paired with a 4090 is going to be incredible.

 

[watzupken]

7950X3D paired with a 4090 is going to be incredible.

In benchmark numbers, yes. In real life gaming performance, I think it is questionable. Assuming you are using a 5950X now, you should observe in games that most are the cores are at idle. Most games don't scale well with number of cores, which is exactly why Intel Alder Lake and Raptor Lake are able to keep up with the best Zen 4 chips, even with just 8 P-cores in games. Games as I understand don't utilize the E-cores based on the logic in the Windows Thread Director.

 

[TerryLaze]

As a reminder, AMD’s 3D V-Cache is a revolutionary new tech that 3D-stacks an additional SRAM chip vertically on top of the processor, thus boosting the L3 cache capacity by 64MB and enabling explosive performance gains in gaming (productivity workloads don’t benefit). This tech debuted in AMD’s Ryzen 7 5800X3D, the first ‘X3D’ model, which you can read the deep dive details about here. Intel doesn’t have a comparable technology, though it will soon bring the 6 GHz Core i9-13900KS to market in an attempt to hold onto its gaming crown.

Yeah intel skipped the bad version and went right to having hbm system ram right on the CPU that also works as cache.
It is going to take a while for this to show up in the core lineup for sure though.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-fires-up-xeon-max-cpus-gpus-to-rival-amd-nvidia

64GB of on-package HBM2E memory (four stacks of 16GB) provides a peak bandwidth of around 1TB/s, which translates to ~1.14GB of HBM2E per core at 18.28 GB/s per core. To put the numbers into context, a 56-core Sapphire Rapids processor equipped with eight DDR5-4800 modules gets up to 307.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which means 5.485 GB/s per core. Meanwhile, Xeon Max can use its HBM2E memory in different ways: use it as system memory, which requires no code change; use it as a high-performance cache for DDR5 memory subsystem, which does not require change code; use it as a part of a unified memory pool (HBM flat mode), which involves software optimizations.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Why does the 7950X3D only have 3DvCache on 1x Chiplet?
Why not both?

Are they trying to have their cake & eat it too!

Also, the author made a mistake:

Both the 7950X3D and the 7900X3D have two four-core chiplets, marking the first time that AMD has brought this tech to a multi-CCD processor.

That should be Eight-core chiplets, not Four-core.
AMD hasn't made Four-core chiplets in quite a while.

 

[ohio_buckeye]

Seems like they should consider a Ryzen 3 cpu to lower the cost of entry as well as some lower cost boards. If you could get a 150 dollar Ryzen 3 and an A620 board that was half decent that would accept say a Ryzen 7 7700 later, how many people would do that to get into the platform? They need to consider some folks don't have the money they used to have but that a way to build brand loyalty might be what they did for years, which was offer lower cost alternatives to intel. Not saying they can't charge in some cases what intel charges, but when intel is the bigger company and has value offerings compared to amd....just saying.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Seems like they should consider a Ryzen 3 cpu to lower the cost of entry as well as some lower cost boards. If you could get a 150 dollar Ryzen 3 and an A620 board that was half decent that would accept say a Ryzen 7 7700 later, how many people would do that to get into the platform? They need to consider some folks don't have the money they used to have but that a way to build brand loyalty might be what they did for years, which was offer lower cost alternatives to intel. Not saying they can't charge in some cases what intel charges, but when intel is the bigger company and has value offerings compared to amd....just saying.

I think AMD needs to have "Multiple Chiplet Dies" to choose from.

Making everything dependent on 8x Core CCX/CCD is too much of a One-Size fits all approach.

AMD needs multiple Chiplets to Mix/Match across the product stack.

At minimum:

1. 24-core CCD <- Using Zen #c Dual-CCX (2x12)
2. 16-core CCD <- Using Zen #c Dual-CCX (2x08)
3. 12-core CCD <- 48 MiB L3$ | X3D 1-Layer = + 96 MiB = 144 MiB L3$
4. _8-core CCD <- 32 MiB L3$ | X3D 1-Layer = + 64 MiB = _96 MiB L3$
5. _4-core CCD <- 16 MiB L3$ | X3D 1-Layer = + 32 MiB = _48 MiB L3$

This way, they can offer a "Full Product" stack from Top to bottom that accomadates everybody's needs.

 

[-Fran-]

7900X3D... Yummy.

I'll still wait for Zen5 or even Zen6 to upgrade though.

EDIT:
https://www.techpowerup.com/303084/...ure-3dv-cache-on-only-one-of-the-two-chiplets

What the hell, AMD? What the hell?

Regards.

 

[KraakBal]

7800x3d boost dissapointing vs the others. I hope it is actually more than that, and it not an upsell to the higher models. I don't want 2 ccds

 

[hannibal]

Disappointed there was no price nor a solid release date on the X3D parts.

That is easy. The price difference of non 3d cache vs 3d cache in 5000 series is $150 to $200, so you get the 7800x3x price by adding that $150-$200 to the price of 7700x and same with 7900x and 7950x!
7900x msrp $550 so 7900x3d should be about $700 to $750
And 7700x about $400, so 7800x3d will be about $550 to $600.
Ofcourse they are are still tweaking the prices. If normal x models come down in price a little bit then 3d models also come down a little bit. What we see from non x version 7600, 7700 an 7900, it means that the price of x version comes closer to their original MSRP, but how close remains to be seing, when the temporary price drops ends after holiday seasons and when non x models comes to the market.

 

[hannibal]

7800x3d boost dissapointing vs the others. I hope it is actually more than that, and it not an upsell to the higher models. I don't want 2 ccds

That is because one ccd does not have 3d cache (it does boost normally) and another has 3d cache and that does not boost as high. Because 7800x3d only has one ccd and that ccd has 3d cache that is why it does not boost as high!

 

[hannibal]

Let's get real. No "value seeker has long awaited" these. These are still $230+ chips that are only $20 cheaper than their X counterparts. And you would still need to buy expensive DDR5.

Who cares about a $20 discount when you have to throw away your perfectly fine DDR4 and spend $150 buying new DDR5.

Value seekers are buying $100 i3 and using cheap DDR4. A $100 i3 with a $300 RTX 3050 is still a gaming beast of a PC for 1080p.

AMD has no answer to an i3 with DDR4. Forcing people to buy DDR5 was a dumb ass move by AMD.

’
Yes they have… 5800x3d with b550 mobo and ddr4 memory.

 

[hannibal]

Why does the 7950X3D only have 3DvCache on 1x Chiplet?
Why not both?

Are they trying to have their cake & eat it too!

Also, the author made a mistake:

That should be Eight-core chiplets, not Four-core.
AMD hasn't made Four-core chiplets in quite a while.

Why one chiplet… One 3d cache chiplet increase price $150 to $200… Two 3dcache chiplets would increase price $300 to $400, while does not give speed increase compared to one in gaming. So yeah there is good reason why only one ccd has this!
It is big difference if 7900x3d is $200 or $400 more expensive than 7900x!

 

[DavidLejdar]

Let's get real. No "value seeker has long awaited" these. These are still $230+ chips that are only $20 cheaper than their X counterparts. And you would still need to buy expensive DDR5.

Who cares about a $20 discount when you have to throw away your perfectly fine DDR4 and spend $150 buying new DDR5.

Value seekers are buying $100 i3 and using cheap DDR4. A $100 i3 with a $300 RTX 3050 is still a gaming beast of a PC for 1080p.

AMD has no answer to an i3 with DDR4. Forcing people to buy DDR5 was a dumb ass move by AMD.

If you want to make full use of a high-performance CPU, then DDR4 is not good enough anymore. And in my view, having spent a bit extra on DDR5, not that a price difference as between tiers of GPUs (and would seem kind of weird expecting the cheapest hardware ever while then spending up to $1000 or more on the GPU).

But sure, if someone wants a new CPU while still using DDR4, then the current gen of AMD CPUs doesn't support that.

 

[RodroX]

Great, more hardware that goes on a high priced platform (that does not seems to go down any time) and thats not available where I live, or if its, is many times more expensive than MSRP.

At least books are still cheap, and doesn't need cooling nor power to work.

 

[bill001g]

The only reason gamers bought the 5800x3d was it was a lot cheaper way to get similar performance to a much more expensive system. Gamers did not care that you got better benchmark number on a 12900k in blender.
Things like extra cores and DDR5 memory are much more relevant to non gaming applications. The most relevant cpu is likely going to be the 7800x3d.

I am going to bet the 7800x3d is going to be about the same price increase over the 5800x3d we saw for say the 7700x to the 7900x. This will put just the cpu itself slightly under the cost of a 13900k which for many people is still too expensive.
When you factor in the extra costs for ddr5 and motherboards this chip is going to have to greatly exceed 13900k in gaming benchmarks.

Then again it seems the manufactures are only selling to those who seem to have unlimited money. You generally have to be able to afford the a 4090 to even worry about the cpu being the bottleneck.

 

[helper800]

If you want to make full use of a high-performance CPU, then DDR4 is not good enough anymore. And in my view, having spent a bit extra on DDR5, not that a price difference as between tiers of GPUs (and would seem kind of weird expecting the cheapest hardware ever while then spending up to $1000 or more on the GPU).

But sure, if someone wants a new CPU while still using DDR4, then the current gen of AMD CPUs doesn't support that.

My 4x8gb kit of CL 14-15-15-36 3600mghz G skill RAM that I got for less than a comparable DDR5 kit begs to differ. I currently have it at tighter than stock timings as well.

 

[gdmaclew]

"The new high-performance AMD chips come in 8-, 16- and 24-core flavors, "

I don't see any 24-core CPUs in the lists. The 7950X3D, 7900X3D and 7900 feature 24 threads.

I think you meant to say 8-, 12-, and 16-core flavors.