No, it's
definitely not worth it. There are things to consider as to what IS worth it, but it won't be the R7-7800X3D. I'll explain:
The first question that I have is:
"Is your R7-3700X not performing to your satisfaction?"
What I mean by that is:
- Is it noticeably laggy in applications?
- Is it noticeably hurting your gaming performance?
- Is it taking forever to complete productivity tasks?
If your answer to #1 is yes, then I recommend the R7-5700X. That would instantly fix any lagginess that you're experiencing. I don't think that you are experiencing this because my old R5-3600X is still plenty quick for normal application tasks and the R7-3700X is a faster CPU than the R5-3600X.
If your answer to #2 is yes, then drop in an R7-5800X3D. I'd rather have that CPU with 32GB of DDR4 than an R7-7800X3D with only 16GB of DDR5. I put my money where my mouth is because I personally AM running an R7-5800X3D with 32GB of DDR4. I bought it only because I build systems with my older parts and sell them to friends and co-workers for
very good prices.
If your answer to #3 is yes, then get an R9-5950X, drop it in and you won't have to worry about
anything for a long time. The R9-5950X is one of the greatest CPUs that AMD has
ever made. Gamers Nexus calls it the most performance-efficient CPU that they've ever seen.
If your answer to all of these is "no", then you shouldn't upgrade at all. You should only spend money when you're no longer satisfied with what you have. To do otherwise is to be a consumerist robot.
You have an AM4 platform and its biggest strength is drop-in CPU upgrades. You'd be a fool not to take advantage of that. You have 32GB of DDR4 and I'd take 32GB of DDR4 over 16GB of DDR5 every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Besides, if you get as much as you can out of what you have, by the time you want to upgrade to the next platform (AM5), everything will be cheaper and any platform bugs will have been ironed out by then.
The AM4 platform is, without a doubt, the greatest PC platform ever made and it's not even close. It brought AMD from the brink of bankruptcy to being a household name that's almost as well-known as Intel instead of being rather obscure like it used to be.
Just look at the gaming performance of the R7-5800X3D, even compared to the (much faster) R7-7800X3D (Credit to Techspot):
Now, it sure looks like the R7-7800X3D is
much faster than the R7-5800X3D and it is. However, you have to take a couple of things into account. Firstly, you're never going to notice the difference in a game between 178FPS and 221FPS. They're both going to be perfect and they're going to be perfect for years to come because they both more than max-out 144Hz monitors. If you don't even have a 144Hz monitor but a 60Hz like most people, it will take even longer before you can tell the difference.
By the time the R7-5800X3D is no longer good enough to game with (we're talking
at least 5 years here), the cost difference between an entire AM5 platform and just the R7-5800X3D would be enough to buy you an AM5 platform that's much faster than anything available now. Bank the money you save by only buying the R7-5800X3D instead of the entirely new platform and you'll be able to upgrade again to something even faster than the new platform without spending one extra red cent.
During that time, your gaming performance will still be flawless because it's still a 5800X3D. If games change to use cache more often, you might even see your 5800X3D get
faster in games than it was when you bought it. That's exactly what happened to me with my FX-8350 because over the five years that I used it, games evolved to use more and more cores. This meant that they were better able to utilise the 8 CPU cores (ALUs) in the FX-8350 and my gaming performance in later games was faster than in earlier games. Instead of slowing down over time, it got faster or at least, remained the same (and it was a damn good gaming CPU!).
Hardware always out-paces software because the hardware gets made and then the software gets made to take advantage of the new hardware. Thus, we've entered a new period of CPU stagnation because software now has to catch up. Thanks to AMD, we went from a minimum of 2 cores and a maximum of 4 cores to a minimum of6 cores and a maximum of 16 cores. I'm willing to bet that you'd be perfectly happy with an 8-Core Zen3 CPU (Ryzen 5000-series) for
at least another five years (and maybe more). Here's a video explaining the current situation (It's really good):