Discussion why ANYONE would buy an 7000-x cpu now

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

gamr

Prominent
Jul 29, 2022
113
5
585
with the non-x variants, im assuming all you need to do is to PBO/manually overclock to get perf of 7000-x cpus
 
Even the mighty 13900K and 7950X with all their speed and multiple cores/CCDs, still drive games by a SINGLE THREAD.
To desire an upgrade later on, is less likely from a lack of cores, but because the master thread 'is slow' or even faster ones are available... it's quite a waste, yeah?
This is a bit misleading.
While there may be one orchestrator thread that drives a game, that thread can spawn several jobs/tasks (as least in newer titles) that can make use of over a half dozen idle cores.

...casual manual OCing is pretty much dead as the nature of it has changed from always beneficial to sacrificial. Extreme lives on.
Applying all core OCs on some of today's cpus, some users are shooting themselves in the foot, because that single thread may have achieved higher speeds before the OC.
Max boost clock scales with the number of active threads and not all games take advantage of 8+ threads. Adding to this, I imagine no one wants to go and enable/disable their OCs based on what game they're playing.
Casual OCing isn't dead it's just changing.
Because Turbo/PBO settings are getting more and more complex, it's no longer best to shoot for the moon and keep an all-core max OC going all the time, unless you're specifically going for a one time benchmark score with extreme cooling.
With AMD CBS and Ryzen Master, you can change and test 90% of your OCing settings on the fly, right there in the OS, without needing to reboot. These settings get written to the BIOS CBS section, just like if you went into BIOS and changed them there yourself. If anything, I was baffled by the number of actual overclocking options available in BIOS. There must be at least 100 different settings I can adjust, more than I've ever seen on any of my motherboards to date.

So far, I've increased my FCLK to 2167 - no downside just performance boost, lowered my RAM from CL36 to CL32 - again no downside just performance boost, and set a max PPT of 125W for the CPU - slight performance deficit but, since I play at 4K, it'll always be my GPU holding things back. CPU PPT now peaks at 127W instead of 227W - running cool and quiet. ;)
 

Phaaze88

Titan
Ambassador
While there may be one orchestrator thread that drives a game, that thread can spawn several jobs/tasks (as least in newer titles) that can make use of over a half dozen idle cores.
I don't follow how this statement is any different? If CoD: Warzone can utilize up to 12 threads, 11 of those threads still have to get their tasks from the one.


There must be at least 100 different settings I can adjust, more than I've ever seen on any of my motherboards to date.

So far, I've increased my FCLK to 2167 - no downside just performance boost, lowered my RAM from CL36 to CL32 - again no downside just performance boost, and set a max PPT of 125W for the CPU - slight performance deficit but, since I play at 4K, it'll always be my GPU holding things back. CPU PPT now peaks at 127W instead of 227W - running cool and quiet. ;)
I wouldn't consider that casual at all... I'm referring to when folks want to dial in a new max ratio, vcore, hit apply, and probably not look at it again.
AMD CBS and RM goes over some users heads just as much as the bursty low load thermals do.
 
I don't follow how this statement is any different? If CoD: Warzone can utilize up to 12 threads, 11 of those threads still have to get their tasks from the one.
Maybe it's what I thought you were implying(?) That having more cores, above and beyond the one required by the orchestrator thread, doesn't improve performance or make a difference.

I wouldn't consider that casual at all... I'm referring to when folks want to dial in a new max ratio, vcore, hit apply, and probably not look at it again.
AMD CBS and RM goes over some users heads just as much as the bursty low load thermals do.
Casual OCers can still do exactly as you described. It just may not have the desired affect. ;) Or it actually might. It depends on the board and the settings available.
There are definitely many more settings available, I'll give you that. I really didn't read up a lot to do what I did though - I'm ignoring 96-97 of those 100 settings I mentioned and still got a nice performance boost and much better thermals.

And I'm still gonna learn, tweak, and definitely make mistakes along the way. My last AMD rig had an FX-8350. lol. An entirely different animal, in a different zoo, in a different time.
 

Phaaze88

Titan
Ambassador
Maybe it's what I thought you were implying(?) That having more cores, above and beyond the one required by the orchestrator thread, doesn't improve performance or make a difference.
Maybe. More cores do make a difference, to a point. Once there's 'enough', then what? IPC, cache, and bandwidth(those unfortunate single dimm systems) are needed for more performance.

Casual OCers can still do exactly as you described. It just may not have the desired affect.
Yes to this.
 
Good news on the non-X performance numbers. We just need the boards to drop by 20%.

After researching, I picked the Gigabyte B650E Aorus Master. It's still $350 but it's got almost all of what the more expensive $600 boards have, even the super beefy VRM. It's just missing the extra internal SATA, the external USB ports, and maybe a dual NIC that the X670 boards get (mind you, it still has 12 rear I/O USB ports).
 

sonofjesse

Distinguished
Another reason someone might be an X chip right now is cause who knows when you can actually get some of these non X chips.......I have tried to find pricing and most peoples don't have any stock.

What is funny Microcenter is showing the 7900X now 519 while the 7900 NON X is 430. However I paid 438 for the 7900x. So for an 8 dollar difference I think the X version is worth it. Now with current pricing its NOT worth it.
 
Another reason someone might be an X chip right now is cause who knows when you can actually get some of these non X chips.......I have tried to find pricing and most peoples don't have any stock.

What is funny Microcenter is showing the 7900X now 519 while the 7900 NON X is 430. However I paid 438 for the 7900x. So for an 8 dollar difference I think the X version is worth it. Now with current pricing its NOT worth it.
Supply chain issues are always going to be an unknown factor, which is why people here ask where the person's at so they can know what's available.

However when it comes to questions like these, I think it's better to consider just the parts in a vacuum, or ideal conditions. That gives a baseline of what to look for first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sonofjesse