I built my current computer around the 7950X3D. There was a lot of debate, sometimes heated and often fueled by a lot of bad or incomplete information.
My choice to go with the 7950X3D was simple, I wanted to be able to use my computer for lots of computer things but also play games without any disturbance to my gameplay.
With Process Lasso, screenshot from the app, you can see that almost every process, outside of the bare bones necessary to run Windows, has affinity set to the non-vcache cores.
There are still a lot of applications I use that take advantage of all the extra cores and threads, but having 8 clear cores just for gaming, even though I know many won’t use that, has made for an extremely stable experience.
imaginary_num6er
No the challenge is for someone to answer the question: “Why get the 7900X3D over the 7800X3D”
Long_Sl33p
It just seems like If you want a build for gaming you get a 7800x3d, and If you want a multitasking build you get an i7/i9. 7950x3d just feels like a weird no mans land in the middle
GGTriggerfinger
i got an 7800x3d and a 4090 32gig 6200mhz
I can play Tarkov, Stream over Discord, look a Stream on twitch and browse web with zero feeling of too less power
I dont need to cut anything or do anything like that.
i think for my needs the 7800x3d is by far the best choice, and if i got any other heavy load tasks i would go buy an intel. 7950x3d is just more money for 2percent more power
Relevant_Scallion_38
If I had the money I would get a 7950X3D right now.
I do game development as well as some indie stuff on the side. So, working in game engines, doing renders, modeling, art, Mocap, and video editing is part of my everyday routine.
When not working I like gaming
If I can have work working in the background as I stream my games on secondary devices without worrying about performance issues, I would.
Stark_Athlon
I think it would be better for a game + workstation focused build.
Hattix
The 7950X3D is best of all worlds. I’m not seeing any convincing argument against it other than “If you’re just gaming, then all it is is a really expensive 7800X3D”
_mp7
Technically the 7950x3d is better (better binning and higher clocks) but takes a lot of fine tuning with all the core scheduling stuff
Now is 670fps vs 700fps worth all that extra cash? Not unless you want multi core performance too
InHeavenFine
Sudden Hussein
Leopard1907
Sorry but dumb comparison there.
7800X3D is cheaper.
7800X3D also does non gaming tasks too, slower way, yes but it is cheaper so very understandable.
Only claim around 7800X3D is that it is the best gaming cpu with no fuss,no tinkering needed aspect. That’s it.
lexsanders
You are absolutely right and I think the exact same.
Unfortunately the Internet is where Science goes to die and nobody cares about facts, only opinions from bigshot youtubers that have no idea about computers or games.
ThrowawayLexus
I often see threads like this, and they are fully of silly conjecture and lots and lots of opinions. I am yet to see any conclusive evidence by any of these major publications like TechPowerUp handing the 7950x3D title of being “just as good as the 7800x3D”. Also, someone in comments keeps on claiming that first month’s chipset/driver updates fixed scheduling issues. They are on some massive copium dose.
Look at my post history. I put my 7950x3D machine through the paces… and switched to 7800x3D. Why? Because PL is neither as smooth nor as painless as all of these cope posts make it sound. Let’s take a heavily modified Skyrim running close to 4000 mods. The 7950x3D doesn’t play well when you put the game on vcache cores alone, so you then spread it out on both CCDs. Guess what? Give it time and script instructions don’t like flying through two CCDs, and eventually things get borked. Took me a long time to figure it out but turned out it was the shitty 7950x3D and its asynchronous BS design.
With the exception of MSFS or perhaps Tomb Raider, yet to find a game which actually beats the 7800x3D… but gaming is not the only use case. So, if you don’t want a hyper specialized gaming monster built with the 7800x3D then your next best option is the 14900K to *actually* get the best of both worlds. The 7950x3D is a confusing product, albeit slightly less than the 7900x3D.
Source: i have a 4090/7800x3D (switched from 7950x3D) machine and a 14900k/4090 machine. I still have a 7950x3D in a box somewhere.
__c8h10n4o2__
I went with the 7800X3D optimised my OS install.
I use it for work and games and have no slow downs or issues (or affinity issues). When AMD comes up with a Zen5 all CCD X3D product, I’ll upgrade.
WorthExamination5453
I got a 7950X3D for the thread count to do data science. Maybe should have just gone with the 7950X but I was drawn into the “X3D is good for gaming”. If I could afford it, I’d get a newer EPYC but this is as close as I could get.
MysteriousDrStranger
Wonder how many people play CPU heavy games in this thread. “My 3600 doesn’t bottleneck my 4090”, must be some GPU intensive games bro.
harry_lostone
well, has 7950x3d fixed the issues it used to had? Because if not, yeah that would be 600$ wasted
16 Comments
I built my current computer around the 7950X3D. There was a lot of debate, sometimes heated and often fueled by a lot of bad or incomplete information.
My choice to go with the 7950X3D was simple, I wanted to be able to use my computer for lots of computer things but also play games without any disturbance to my gameplay.
With Process Lasso, screenshot from the app, you can see that almost every process, outside of the bare bones necessary to run Windows, has affinity set to the non-vcache cores.
There are still a lot of applications I use that take advantage of all the extra cores and threads, but having 8 clear cores just for gaming, even though I know many won’t use that, has made for an extremely stable experience.
No the challenge is for someone to answer the question: “Why get the 7900X3D over the 7800X3D”
It just seems like If you want a build for gaming you get a 7800x3d, and If you want a multitasking build you get an i7/i9. 7950x3d just feels like a weird no mans land in the middle
i got an 7800x3d and a 4090 32gig 6200mhz
I can play Tarkov, Stream over Discord, look a Stream on twitch and browse web with zero feeling of too less power
I dont need to cut anything or do anything like that.
i think for my needs the 7800x3d is by far the best choice, and if i got any other heavy load tasks i would go buy an intel. 7950x3d is just more money for 2percent more power
If I had the money I would get a 7950X3D right now.
I do game development as well as some indie stuff on the side. So, working in game engines, doing renders, modeling, art, Mocap, and video editing is part of my everyday routine.
When not working I like gaming
If I can have work working in the background as I stream my games on secondary devices without worrying about performance issues, I would.
I think it would be better for a game + workstation focused build.
The 7950X3D is best of all worlds. I’m not seeing any convincing argument against it other than “If you’re just gaming, then all it is is a really expensive 7800X3D”
Technically the 7950x3d is better (better binning and higher clocks) but takes a lot of fine tuning with all the core scheduling stuff
Now is 670fps vs 700fps worth all that extra cash? Not unless you want multi core performance too
Sudden Hussein
Sorry but dumb comparison there.
7800X3D is cheaper.
7800X3D also does non gaming tasks too, slower way, yes but it is cheaper so very understandable.
Only claim around 7800X3D is that it is the best gaming cpu with no fuss,no tinkering needed aspect. That’s it.
You are absolutely right and I think the exact same.
Unfortunately the Internet is where Science goes to die and nobody cares about facts, only opinions from bigshot youtubers that have no idea about computers or games.
I often see threads like this, and they are fully of silly conjecture and lots and lots of opinions. I am yet to see any conclusive evidence by any of these major publications like TechPowerUp handing the 7950x3D title of being “just as good as the 7800x3D”. Also, someone in comments keeps on claiming that first month’s chipset/driver updates fixed scheduling issues. They are on some massive copium dose.
Look at my post history. I put my 7950x3D machine through the paces… and switched to 7800x3D. Why? Because PL is neither as smooth nor as painless as all of these cope posts make it sound. Let’s take a heavily modified Skyrim running close to 4000 mods. The 7950x3D doesn’t play well when you put the game on vcache cores alone, so you then spread it out on both CCDs. Guess what? Give it time and script instructions don’t like flying through two CCDs, and eventually things get borked. Took me a long time to figure it out but turned out it was the shitty 7950x3D and its asynchronous BS design.
With the exception of MSFS or perhaps Tomb Raider, yet to find a game which actually beats the 7800x3D… but gaming is not the only use case. So, if you don’t want a hyper specialized gaming monster built with the 7800x3D then your next best option is the 14900K to *actually* get the best of both worlds. The 7950x3D is a confusing product, albeit slightly less than the 7900x3D.
Source: i have a 4090/7800x3D (switched from 7950x3D) machine and a 14900k/4090 machine. I still have a 7950x3D in a box somewhere.
I went with the 7800X3D optimised my OS install.
I use it for work and games and have no slow downs or issues (or affinity issues). When AMD comes up with a Zen5 all CCD X3D product, I’ll upgrade.
I got a 7950X3D for the thread count to do data science. Maybe should have just gone with the 7950X but I was drawn into the “X3D is good for gaming”. If I could afford it, I’d get a newer EPYC but this is as close as I could get.
Wonder how many people play CPU heavy games in this thread. “My 3600 doesn’t bottleneck my 4090”, must be some GPU intensive games bro.
well, has 7950x3d fixed the issues it used to had? Because if not, yeah that would be 600$ wasted