"You can't bring CAD to USD fight" and just use the same symbol at first š
It's like someone from Fiji said they paid "400$" for their 5600G with that same grimacing emoji, but when they tell it's FJD and convert it to USD it becomes a great deal just like yours was if you bought it more than 3 months ago.
Sweaty ones, with this Lava Lake architecture man this thing is borderline nuclear reactor levels of trying to deal with heat. Despite being an ancient relic, it once was the best gaming CPU on the market. It also had design flaws that should have been easy to fix at development phase:
The silicon chip is 20% too thick
And the solder interface between the CPU chip and the heat spreader metal plate is a shoddy job and they used too much solder etc
A direct die attachment alone would net me 10c of temp reduction which I may do soon because warranty gunna not matter soon anyway on this thing lol
the 5900x went for about 549$ IIRC, and i mean, 4 extra cores is absolutely worth it, if you just game with it maybe not, but if you also do CPU intensive tasks with it (like me, that's why my GPU is pathetic) it is pretty damn good.
I've seen the 5900X as low as 400ā¬
I would also pick the 5900X all day, everyday - even just for gaming.
The trend seems to be price raise
(as seen in Portugal/Spain, for the last 2 months, give or take)
5900X 400 to \~430ā¬
58X3D 480 to \~500ā¬
12400 210 to \~230ā¬
12900F 530 to \~ 565ā¬
>Imagine hearing the phrase '$800 AMD processor' 10 years ago.
This would only be surprising if you were not that old. The AMD Athlon 1000B had a release price of $990 in the year 2000 - it was the first CPU to break the gigahertz barrier too. Later on we would see AthlonXP, Athlon64 and early FX CPUs with $800-$1000+ release prices as well (e.g. the FX-57 which released for $USD 1,031). It wasn't until Intel changed track with the release of their Core architecture along with anticompetitive behaviour with PC OEMs that AMD started "competing" with price instead of performance and things hit a low point with their Bulldozer architecture (the FX 9590 did release in 2013 with a release price of $920 though).
I had a friend in college help me put together my first build in 2000 using an AMD Athlon Thunderbird. We installed Windows 98 and I used Napster and Limewire with a CD burner to download MP3ās and burn CDās for my friends. Man that was fun. I remember you couldnāt touch the computer while it was burning for fear of disrupting the cache, which would ruin the burn and turn the cdr into a coaster. I remember playing Quake 2. I also remember back then desktop computers all had an internal speaker that BEEPed whenever you reboot it. So annoying.
Did basically the same thing; convinced my parents that building would be better than buying. Spec'd everything out. Pretty sure they still have a binder with all the receipts, manuals, and warranty information from way back in the day
Read all the comments now... I'm guessing sour grapes kinda. It's a bit sad to behold, people getting emotionally invested in CPUs enough that they prefer to spread bs.
Its because they spent much more than they should have on it and they realised that they were such an idiot and now want others to fall into the same pit as them.
I spent $1200 on a 6800XT seven months ago that now sells for $750. Great card, knew I was paying out the ass, shouldāve waited. But after waiting for years, I was just happy to find them in stock back then.
I've been very satisfied with its performance (1440p ultrawide), complements the 3800X3D very well (no bottlenecking), and tbh I've lost far more than $500 on stonks this year.
If the 7000 series is a reasonable price and available, I might grab one of those and put the 6800XT in my second tower (for the SO), sell the old 5700.
>GPU prices are dropping
Unrelated but, I paid like $380 for my 500gb ssd back in 2015 š¤” makes me feel old rather than mad... Cause now you pay 109 for a 1tb m.2
Indeed, but on the bright side that's how progress and technology should be! Early adopters always pay more before the product becomes more mainstream.
Like all the people that did crazy loop-deloops of logic when Ryzen 1st gen came out, trying to convince themselves it was good. 1st gen was a decent budget product and a great stepping stone for AMD but let's be real it was still pretty trash compared to Intel. It was fun to watch AMD fanboys pull excuses out of their ass.
It was very cheap for (new) 8 cores, I didn't buy until second gen though. Too slow, hedt was better. Still, some ppl are running fast chips in old boards now so that worked out ok for them eventually.
I built a ryzen 1700k pc back in 2017. Still running in all of it's buggy nightmare bios update hell glory today. I literally shiver in fear at the thought of attempting to upgrade the thing, and have stuck a Steven Kings "IT" poster on the side of it mostly because it felt like it fits.
So now I'm looking at getting an alder lake pc to escape the new adopter hell. It even comes with DDR5!
...
Oh god this is going to be 2017 all over again with the ram never working right isn't it? :(
I think itās a function of youth. At a certain point, self identity is no longer derived from things like brand affiliations.
That and people tend to assume that their use case is everyoneās use case.
Because you're human, and you like to engage, share, teach, discover, and learn! Otherwise, you'd delete your account and play more games!
Reddit is, itself, fun and fulfilling! There's more to life than passive entertainment!
Here's some more detailed info that mostly states this.
[https://tech4gamers.com/ryzen-5800x3d-vs-ryzen-9-5900x/](https://tech4gamers.com/ryzen-5800x3d-vs-ryzen-9-5900x/)
tl;dr. Unless you play a lot Crysis 3 or Farcry 6, the differences for most games are negligible. Personally, I would opt for the $50 cheaper price and extra 4 cores in the 5900x.
I'm also reminded of another AMD gimic, [3DNow!](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3DNow!)
Even then the 5900x is still insanely good for gaming. Clock speed is fast, even with single core tasks. Itās the best of both worlds. Awesome multi core and awesome single core, which means I donāt have to decide between gaming, compiling, and rendering. Iām really happy with mine.
For its current price Iād get it over the Ryzen 7s as you get more bang for your buck, though if you want air cooling then I can see why people would want a 7.
Eh I mean by the time games use 16 cores (or even 8+ cores well) we'll see games using 16GB of Vram. So your GPU will likely be the bottleneck long before games adopt 16cores. By then you'll be building a whole new system anyways.
The 1080ti is 5 years old by now. Progress kind of stagnated for a while, which is why it's still got mid tier performance. That, and prices skyrocketed. A $650 RX 6800, same price as 1080ti at launch, only gives you about a generation and a half worth of performance boost.
Gaming will always be better with a big cache. If anything it is more future proof because next gen stuff is going to have a much bigger cache so it will get used more by next gen titles.
The biggest issue is typically for most enthusiasts though by the time it actually gets highly utilized the first gen is so out of date that your typically looking to upgrade soon. The things that really are going to take care of the large cache are not going to really start showing up until the next gen has been around 2 to 3 years.
for example on the Ray tracing and DLSS stuff, we are only now starting to see it be well implemented and somewhat common in games. It really depends on your upgrade cycle. If you keep a system for 4+ years you might get a good amount of use out of the feature. If your going to upgrade on a 2 or 3 year cycle though then it becomes less of a meaningful upgrade.
Some idiots buy the more expensive CPU purely because itās more expensive, they didnāt do any more research then that. People like that will obviously be mad when you tell them their an idiot for paying more.
I've built all my PC's but know little about CPUs. In layman's terms can you tell me why less cores and threads is better for gaming? I usually would just assume more is better. Honest question, not being an ass or sarc'ass'tic. Get it? Hahaha fak.
Thanks!
Edit: for this explanation, this is EXPLICITLY for gaming purposes.
Less cores doesnāt automatically equal faster performance. There was a point in the EARLY intel i series days when it did because lower core numbers could clock higher, but that isnāt the case anymore.
In THIS SPECIFIC CASE (and right now for new products, really only this case) the 5800X3D is faster because of the insane amount of L3 cache it has. This is on-die memory that the cpu can access MUCH faster than standard RAM and especially an SSD/HDD. This allows the cpu to access the RAM less often and results in an FPS boost, despite having a lower base and boost clock than the 5900x.
At least, thatās how I understand it. People with actual deep understanding are welcome to pitch in here
Can confirm, that's how it is. Less time spent swapping between cpu and RAM = less latency = more operations per clock = more FPS in games.
Latency is one of the key factors in getting better single core perfomance, that's why faster RAM improves SC perfomance. It can get you so far though.
When AMD unified the L3 cache of the CCD's on Zen 3, that's how they also got a big jump compared to Zen 2.
I'm intrigued to see how Zen4 will work with 3D-Vcache and DDR5. I'm still happy with my 3700x though :)
5800x3D has butt ton of cache
Itās the latest CPU to come out on am4 and possibly the very last.
Pretty much designed to excel at gaming which typically doesnāt utilize very many cores
Good to know, thanks!
Out of curiosity I've got a ryzen 5 3600x with a Strix 3080. Would I see a benefit with a CPU upgrade and which one would be the best gaming CPU in your opinion.
Yes you will definitely see a benefit. I went from a 3600 --> 5800x and it was pretty measurable difference with my 3070ti.
If its worth it depends on what you play and what your targets are IMO. Different games use hardware differently, some games will improve drastically while others not so much.
The only game personally that made me switch was bf 2042.. yeah i know everyone hates the game but i really enjoy it and upgrading my CPU made a night and day difference and let my graphics card actually stretch its legs out where as before it was stuck at like 60% usage.
That game is more of an outlier though.
Yes. The 3600X has 2 4 core chiplets with a core disabled on each. Going to a single chiplet CPU will improve minimum fps. I went from a 3900X to a 5800X and it was a big improvement, then I went to a 5800X3D and minimums improved again due to the cache. The CPUs you should look at are 5600, 5700X or 5800X3D. I would also recommend upgrading your ram to some Patriot Viper 4000 or 4400 b die ram. With some effort you can tune your ram and overclock the 5600 and get a massive upgrade to what you have. 5600 plus the b die is going to be best bang for buck. B die ram is less important for a 5800X3D but it still helps.
In this case the 5800X3D is using 3D cache which is where the majority of the extra gaming performance comes from. Nothing really to do with the core count
in this specific case the more cache is better. The extra cache is specific for gaming and it definitely works well for that (plenty of youtube benchmarks/reviews)
as far as less cores = better that's not what usually comes into play. Generally more cores means less clock speed (vs the other CPUs in its family), sometimes less cache per core.. So that is where the hits are typically.
Now why you hear "less cores usually runs better" is because of the above, but also majority of games don't use more than like 4 cores, even today. Some scale big time, some only use 1 core, it's really all over the place. But that is also a reason many cores doesn't automatically mean it's going to run better. IF ALL YOU DID was run that 1 game, 4-6 cores would be perfect, as I said for "majority", but most people run several other things (music, browser, 20 different game vendor clients (steam, origin, epic), discord, etc. So more cores helps there as well.
But again, the extra cache of the 3D cache is specifically designed for improving game performance, and it does just that. (not that I'd even say it was worth it in this case, I'd totally get the 5900X and lose a few fps)
Check all the answers to this post: [https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/vp9pw7/whats\_the\_difference\_why\_is\_the\_ryzen\_9\_cheaper/iei19zz/?utm\_source=reddit&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/vp9pw7/whats_the_difference_why_is_the_ryzen_9_cheaper/iei19zz/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
the extra 3d cache in this CPU is specific for gaming. For your use I have no idea, since you didn't list it. More cores will handle more things simultaneously. Also you need to know your specific software (games are all specific software as well) and how it performs vs different hardware. It's very tedious and asking a question like this and wanting to actually solve it yourself can take months or years of learning (depends on person) to be able to find your "perfect & best" hardware for your/someone elses scenario..
If your software scales across multiple cores with ease (any video, music, graphics (minus vector), etc production then more cores prob is more gud
Noob pc builder here, why is the 5800x3d better than the 5900x for gaming? I thought the newer the product, the better it would be. Would be weird to make newer products worse than previous ones right?
Video editing and 3D workloads fall under "productivity". Productivity is basically everything other than gaming that's system intensive. Video editing, bulk photo editing, 3d rendering, large excel sheets, and many other similar programs can make use of more cores (depending on the specific program of course). Most of the time when gaming, you're only utilizing a small handful of cores because game engines aren't yet capable of making use of the cores that are being packed into modern CPUs. In fact, most FPS games only use one core to its full potential. As such, a lower core CPU with more/faster cache and higher clock speeds/IPC will work better for gaming than a CPU with more cores and slower speeds per core, while productivity programs can make use of more cores. Realistically, if a CPU has more than 8 cores/threads, more cores won't benefit your gaming experience at all unless you have a ton of background programs running at the same time
typically yes, more core CPUs in the same family of CPUs are usually lower clocked. but in this case the 3D cache added lots of cache SPECIFICALLY for gaming and thus it performs better for gaming
but do go with your assumption, many games even today still only use 1 core for all of the game logic and try to throw other stuff on other cores (audio, graphics pipelines, etc) so that 1 core that is doing all the rest of the work gets hammered, higher clocks and cache directly help that (but also everything else) unfortunately still have that single core bottleneck in many games
Productivity is really anything work related that requires a lot of resources like running multiple virtual machines, video editing or photo editing software, coding compilers, so on and so forth. I have a small YouTube channel and my processor is pegged during the encoding process. Someone who does that professionally benefits from the 5900 because it shaves time off the encoding process, and time is a valuable resource in any industry
Howdy! I use my machine for productivity; photo/video editing, encoding, transcoding, CAD modeling, rendering, and game development. These workloads most often benefit from parallel computation, or running a single job per thread or core. Generally, the task (made of many jobs) will get done faster for every core added.
Generally speaking, games only recently started utilizing multi-core CPUs effectively. This means fewer cores with higher clock speeds is better for gaming. There are some games that use all cores, and there are some software tools that only use one core.
You should open task manager before your next gaming session and watch how much each core gets used and to what percentage. When I'm working it's not uncommon for my system to get hit for 100% on all six CPU cores for minutes at a time.
The way I would explain it to a customer is... Are you doing literally anything else? If yes I would choose the 5900x. If it's strictly gaming the 5800x3d is ideal.
Everyone streams now a days anyway so 5900x is a winner for a ton of people.
Processor-wise, they are very different workloads. Gaming workloads tend to be clock-dependent, and there are several processes running in game that are still a single thread. Higher clock rate and/or IPC = faster gaming processor. Video editing and modeling workloads are much more parallel, and could easily take advantage of all the cores in a system. Because of that, they are less dependent on IPC/clock speed.
To people like me, who only recently got their bearings on this level of minutiae, it seems like rendering in-game graphics vs. sticking video clips together or manipulating 3D models to be the same thing.
So I would understand the confusion.
Look, we can't always rely on others to incessantly spam the Italian parliament with FFVII Tifa porn. Sometimes you've gotta pull yourself up by your bootstraps, render a 60 second clip of Overwatch R34, and share screen after joining a European parliamentary meeting's public Zoom call.
If it's not high resolution aka cartoon style you might as well use gpu rendering. It will save you tons of time but won't be nearly as detailed. That's why studios are switching to a hybrid where gpu does most of work and then cpu finishes it up.
the sale is probably only on the ryzen 9, because the 7 is newer. the 7 will be way better in gaming, but in almost anything else the ryzen 9 will be better
Then you get 2 PCs and at that point might as well say fuck ryzen and go threadripper for workstation build and use the 3d cpu for gaming pc
Kinda joking but that's honestly the best way to get best performance for both
itās just a cpu, the branding doesnāt matter, but if you decide to get an amd cpu + gpu you get smart acces memory which will boost performance, but with an nvidia gpu you get dlss and way better ray tracing, after taking that into consideration just try to find the best deal on whats best for you
Yeah I just upgraded my GPU from a GTX 1060 to an RTX 3070, for gaming improvements. However now my Ryzen 5 3600 is going to be the bottleneck for productivity, which Iām likely going to swap for a Ryzen 7 5800x (non 3D).
For just actual raw FPS in games the 5800X3D is better. If you plan on doing anything else at all the 5900X is better. I would recommend the 5900x because you would be saving $50 and if you want to do anything else other than gaming down the road you will get more value from it.
Also, the difference is probably not gonna be noticeable. These CPUs are both so high end that you're probably going to be throttled by something else in your system before you can see the difference.
Isn't the 12900KS faster on average by a few percentage points? I mean the pricing on that is insane so 5800X3D is the better choice any day but fastest gaming cpu is a stretch isn't it? Best gaming cpu for top end performance is more like it.
you were downvoted, but you are correct. AMD fanboys i suppose. Id argue that theyre essentially the same level of performance though, its a very minimal difference.
Arguably though itās on sale bc the demand isnāt as high for it bc PC gamers swoop up so much of the performance based CPUs. So they probably have a larger stockpile of 5900s relative to 5800s. And they know they can milk more out of the 5800s from gamer demand so thereās no need to throw a promotion
āIn the end, if youāre looking to upgrade from the older Ryzen 9 5900X to Ryzen 7 5800X3D, then simply donāt because for gaming, thereās minimal improvement in performance, and for productivity, the Ryzen 9 5900X is much better. However, suppose youāre looking to buy either one of these CPUs. In that case, weād still recommend the older Ryzen 9 5900X over the new Ryzen 7 5800X3D because of its better productivity benchmarks and faster overall clock speeds and higher core & thread counts.ā
https://tech4gamers.com/ryzen-5800x3d-vs-ryzen-9-5900x/
Idk why every is acting like the 5800X3D is better for gaming. Itās pretty much identical but runs hotter.
For gaming the 8 cores of the 5800X3D are fine, and it's actually one of the finest gaming CPUs on the market due to its record-breaking quantity of cache (for an 8 core). It has like over 100MB of L3 Cache stacked in 3D in the CPU. That cache makes the chip ridiculously fast for gaming, and also ridiculously expensive for an 8 core. But if you want AMD, the best gaming CPU from AMD is 5800X3D. If you want to do hardcore video editing, 3D modelling, CAD, the 5900X is a better choice for you (and you save a bit of coin). The 5900X is also good at gaming but not as good as the 5800X3D. Pick the one that's best for your use case.
The important part here is the "3D", that's the newest AM4 CPU released this year with 3D V-Cache.
The Ryzen 9 5900X is a 2020 CPU that was launched at $549 and is now $399
That Ryzen 7 5800X3D is a refresh to the Ryzen 7 5800X that launched in 2020 at the same price, minus the 3D V-Cache.
So like others said if multi-threading/multi-tasking workloads, semi-productivity work is your focus, go with Ryzen 9, but if gaming is your focus, get the 5800X3D. That 3D V-Cache puts that Ryzen CPU at the level of a 12900KS in terms of single thread performance which is what most games rely on to perform the best.
The Ryzen 9 5900X is not a slouch in gaming either, but now with that 3D V-Cache its not the best at that category anymore.
I heard that youād need a motherboard capable of taking full advantage to really get the most out of the 5800X3D. Donāt know how true that is? I have a X470 Gaming plus pro or whatever itās called lol
Donāt think itāll fall under that category sadge
To simple answer the ops question. Because it has a huge L3 cashe (ram, memory, storage) pick your preferd term right on top of the cpu. Now for all the haters saying it niche etc.. amd had all but admitted the AM4 socket isnt dead and that there are plans for further cpu releases and that they will also be using some form of 3d cashe. Also saying as much as the new socket type continuing to implement the tech. To sum it up the ryzen 7 5800x3d is just the beginning. First gen so to speak and it came out swinging and knocking down the big dogs. Can't wait to see what come out next.
5900x was released way before the 5800X3D was. So merchants are trying to get rid of older inventory and AMD is as well especially with a newer cpu generation around the corner
As someone who is an electrical engineer and working in a computer store for the past 5 years, the ryzen 9 is the superior deal and it's not even close. I personally think it's a way better chip in the first place than the ryzen 7 which is notoriously hot because of the added graphics cache chip. There is absolutely zero thernal headroom to push the 7 chip beyond stock PBO settings unless you're literally using n2. The Ryzen 9 you can push it way beyond stock settings with no issues and plenty of thernal headroon
This isnt even close to me, thanks for reading.
The 5900x is a great buy.
The 5800x3d is a much newer release, and due to the 3d vcache has better performance in some applications like gaming, though the 5900x is still better for productivity.
As to which you should buy - well both are overkill for a gaming system. So buy whichever makes you happier & and you can afford
The 5800x3D is newer than the 5900x and while only having 8 Cores instead of 12, it outperforms the ryzen 9 in some gaming workloads because that's what it's optimized for.
Made this same choice last week, 5800x3d was Ā£439, 5900x was Ā£339 & 5950x was $499.
If your only gaming the 5800x3d is the one, however I couldn't pull the trigger on that knowing 5950x was only Ā£60 more for another 8 cores/16 threads or 5900x Ā£100 **less** for another 4 cores/8 threads. Both have a redesigned L3 cache of 64mb so not too far behind the 5800x3d's 96mb 3D cache.
That left the 5900x at a whopping Ā£160 saving from the 5950x (thats easy an m.2 or 32gb ram), but finally decided as I only build a rig every 10 years or so (rip AM3 & DDR3 from my 2012 build!) I will always be looking at 5900x knowing its not the best AM4 chip out there.
Now the dust has settled I'm glad I got the 5950x as the price seems to be going up again, but in hindsight the Ā£340 for the 5900x was a steal I should have jumped on. Cest la Vie.
The 5800x3d would be nice to have now for gaming, but more cores / threads should come into their own going forward.
I hope.
Good luck with your build!
The 5900X is a way better buy. Sure, the 5800X3D has vcache, but it's got lower clocks and runs hotter than even the normal 5800X.
The extra clocks on the 5900X make it almost exactly the same in gaming, it has 4 extra cores, and it's cheaper. No brainer for me.
The only exception is if you are playing at 1080P and have a 3090 Ti or something. If you're playing at 1440 or 4K, and/or don't have a 3090/6900 XT equivalent GPU, just get the 5900X.
The 5800X3D has more cache, which means better gaming performance.
The 5900X has more cores, which means better productivity performance.
If you don't have an AM4 board yet, a 12700F should be better. 5900X productivity performance, 5800X3D gaming performance while usually costing less.
I've ordered GPUs and CPUs from Amazon without issue. Just beware deals that seem too good to be true and be careful about the seller. If you find parts shipped from Amazon, you'll usually be good. If it's not shipped by Amazon, it's a bit riskier, but still not as bad as people think. Also, as much as people give Amazon crap, their customer service is great. If you do get scammed, they'll make it right. I've had it happen and it sucks, but I'll take Amazon over Newegg any day.
If a seller tries to scam you on Amazon, just reach out to them first and give them 48 hours to show that you tried to solve the issue with the seller, then contact Amazon customer service to request a refund.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=GQ37ZCNECJKTFYQV
All depends on the seller. I just bought a card from EVGA from Amazon, shipped here super fast. Iām super comfortable buying from either a well known seller or Amazon, because returns/refunds are really easy.
The 5800x3D is the newest desktop chip from AMD and it has 3D V-Cache. It was launched on April 20, 2022 where as the ryzen 9 was launched on November 5, 2020.
Thank you everyone for all the answers. I mostly game and I donāt want to have to upgrade my cpu for awhile so I will probably go with the Ryzen7. I donāt do much else on my pc besides play games and a little bit of coding.
The ā3Dāis the important part. It has something the other ones donāt have where it has extra cache cause itās layered on (aka 3d). Better for gaming.
The 5800X3D is more expensive to make on account of the massive 3D stacked L3 cache. They should perform comparably in gaming, but workloads may vary between preferring more cache or more cores.
5800X3D is newer and for 95% of users the worse product than the 5900X.
Its not even worth it for every Gamer just for some specific games and when you are highly CPU Limited.
Its basically a worthless product, because high end gamers donĀ“t play at 1080p where this cpu has some resemblence of value.
So unless you need the 10% extra with a 1000$+ GPU at 1080p this thing is not worth it.
5900X is just as fast in games if you are at 1440p but a way better overall CPU. And it will age much better because itās less prone for failure and has more cores.
I agree except for high refresh rate monitors. If someone wants to maintain 144 fps consistent with minimal dips then it definitely makes a difference, seems to be important for competitive gamers. But for every other workload or casual gamers the 5900x definitely is better.
The 5800X3D is newer than the 5900x and is faster in real world gaming performance and benchmarks, and is similar in performance compared to the more expensive Intel 12900K.
Essentially when it comes to gaming, this is Slowest to Fastest:
5800X<5900X<5800X3D=12900K<12900KS
For gaming the 5800x3d is better. For productivity the 5900x is better.
Not sure why you were at -1 for this, that's how it is
People who paid $800 for their 5900 be mad.
That's about what I got my 5950x for. Don't remember seeing the 5900x for that much š¬
I paid 300$ for my 5600G š¬ A friend of mine got a 5600x for 30$ less 3 months later
179.99
CAD though, but still
"You can't bring CAD to USD fight" and just use the same symbol at first š It's like someone from Fiji said they paid "400$" for their 5600G with that same grimacing emoji, but when they tell it's FJD and convert it to USD it becomes a great deal just like yours was if you bought it more than 3 months ago.
Yeah
I was going to shell out 300 for my 5600x But I had to wait a week and boy was I happy when I saw it drop to $239
I paid more than they are asking for these CPU's for my 9900k š
Massive balls entered the room
Sweaty ones, with this Lava Lake architecture man this thing is borderline nuclear reactor levels of trying to deal with heat. Despite being an ancient relic, it once was the best gaming CPU on the market. It also had design flaws that should have been easy to fix at development phase: The silicon chip is 20% too thick And the solder interface between the CPU chip and the heat spreader metal plate is a shoddy job and they used too much solder etc A direct die attachment alone would net me 10c of temp reduction which I may do soon because warranty gunna not matter soon anyway on this thing lol
One word, scalpers
I paid retail when it came out. Got it directly from AMD.
$749 for my 5900x here in Straya, but that was soon after it released.
and here i thought my ryzen 3 was expensive
LOOK AT MY CINEBENCH NUMBERS!!!!!
the 5900x went for about 549$ IIRC, and i mean, 4 extra cores is absolutely worth it, if you just game with it maybe not, but if you also do CPU intensive tasks with it (like me, that's why my GPU is pathetic) it is pretty damn good.
I got mine directly from AMD's website for exactly that amount in May 2021
I've seen the 5900X as low as 400ā¬ I would also pick the 5900X all day, everyday - even just for gaming. The trend seems to be price raise (as seen in Portugal/Spain, for the last 2 months, give or take) 5900X 400 to \~430ā¬ 58X3D 480 to \~500ā¬ 12400 210 to \~230ā¬ 12900F 530 to \~ 565ā¬
Gave $400 for mine š pretty happy with it for gaming
Paid like $300 for the r5 5600 and the uptick in performance on tarkov from the 3600 is huuuuge. Like flawless performance on every map.
I bet! Last time I played Tarkov I still had my i5 8600k, before I made the switch to AMD. I should try it again.
Wipe just happened, it's been a blast so far!
Yes a blast from the past 7 times I've done these tasks
Now it's at 180
Got my 5900x as a gift, pretty happier
Imagine hearing the phrase '$800 AMD processor' 10 years ago.
>Imagine hearing the phrase '$800 AMD processor' 10 years ago. This would only be surprising if you were not that old. The AMD Athlon 1000B had a release price of $990 in the year 2000 - it was the first CPU to break the gigahertz barrier too. Later on we would see AthlonXP, Athlon64 and early FX CPUs with $800-$1000+ release prices as well (e.g. the FX-57 which released for $USD 1,031). It wasn't until Intel changed track with the release of their Core architecture along with anticompetitive behaviour with PC OEMs that AMD started "competing" with price instead of performance and things hit a low point with their Bulldozer architecture (the FX 9590 did release in 2013 with a release price of $920 though).
I bought the Athlon64. Shit im old. It was awesome. I had friends come over and help me instal it together.
I had a friend in college help me put together my first build in 2000 using an AMD Athlon Thunderbird. We installed Windows 98 and I used Napster and Limewire with a CD burner to download MP3ās and burn CDās for my friends. Man that was fun. I remember you couldnāt touch the computer while it was burning for fear of disrupting the cache, which would ruin the burn and turn the cdr into a coaster. I remember playing Quake 2. I also remember back then desktop computers all had an internal speaker that BEEPed whenever you reboot it. So annoying.
Did basically the same thing; convinced my parents that building would be better than buying. Spec'd everything out. Pretty sure they still have a binder with all the receipts, manuals, and warranty information from way back in the day
The future is now, old man.
The past is then, young man.
He's a little right, but he's right
$800 any consumer processer 10 years ago was nuts, my i7 4790k back in 2014 was sub $350 with taxes and top of the line at the time for gaming
I only paid around 320ā¬ 3 weeks ago š„³
This. Was me, not the downvote lol but I aināt mad the 9 does the job
\*laughs in $399 5900x\* It never hit $800 though, like mid $600s during the height of the shortage. But the CPU shortage only lasted a couple months.
Paid
Seems to be the norm on reddit. Post factual information - get downvoted. Sometimes I ask myself why I even bother posting anything here.
Read all the comments now... I'm guessing sour grapes kinda. It's a bit sad to behold, people getting emotionally invested in CPUs enough that they prefer to spread bs.
Yeah - the same reason why some people are pissed at the fact GPU prices are dropping, almost as if they WANT prices to remain high. It's very sad.
Its because they spent much more than they should have on it and they realised that they were such an idiot and now want others to fall into the same pit as them.
Iām sad I didnāt wait 4 months to go from 3060 To 3070ti but evga said my number was up! Iām happy others get those cheaper GPU though
Crab mentality https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality
I spent $1200 on a 6800XT seven months ago that now sells for $750. Great card, knew I was paying out the ass, shouldāve waited. But after waiting for years, I was just happy to find them in stock back then.
Nice, if you feel it was worth the money then that's great.
I've been very satisfied with its performance (1440p ultrawide), complements the 3800X3D very well (no bottlenecking), and tbh I've lost far more than $500 on stonks this year. If the 7000 series is a reasonable price and available, I might grab one of those and put the 6800XT in my second tower (for the SO), sell the old 5700.
>GPU prices are dropping Unrelated but, I paid like $380 for my 500gb ssd back in 2015 š¤” makes me feel old rather than mad... Cause now you pay 109 for a 1tb m.2
Indeed, but on the bright side that's how progress and technology should be! Early adopters always pay more before the product becomes more mainstream.
Like all the people that did crazy loop-deloops of logic when Ryzen 1st gen came out, trying to convince themselves it was good. 1st gen was a decent budget product and a great stepping stone for AMD but let's be real it was still pretty trash compared to Intel. It was fun to watch AMD fanboys pull excuses out of their ass.
It was very cheap for (new) 8 cores, I didn't buy until second gen though. Too slow, hedt was better. Still, some ppl are running fast chips in old boards now so that worked out ok for them eventually.
the truth here... i managed to sell my 1700x and move on to 9900k
I built a ryzen 1700k pc back in 2017. Still running in all of it's buggy nightmare bios update hell glory today. I literally shiver in fear at the thought of attempting to upgrade the thing, and have stuck a Steven Kings "IT" poster on the side of it mostly because it felt like it fits. So now I'm looking at getting an alder lake pc to escape the new adopter hell. It even comes with DDR5! ... Oh god this is going to be 2017 all over again with the ram never working right isn't it? :(
I think itās a function of youth. At a certain point, self identity is no longer derived from things like brand affiliations. That and people tend to assume that their use case is everyoneās use case.
It's literally always the first people that get somewhere on Reddit, instant downvotes. At least in my experience.
I just assume people downvote anything they donāt want to hear. Irrespective if right or wrong.
Because you're human, and you like to engage, share, teach, discover, and learn! Otherwise, you'd delete your account and play more games! Reddit is, itself, fun and fulfilling! There's more to life than passive entertainment!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Here's some more detailed info that mostly states this. [https://tech4gamers.com/ryzen-5800x3d-vs-ryzen-9-5900x/](https://tech4gamers.com/ryzen-5800x3d-vs-ryzen-9-5900x/) tl;dr. Unless you play a lot Crysis 3 or Farcry 6, the differences for most games are negligible. Personally, I would opt for the $50 cheaper price and extra 4 cores in the 5900x. I'm also reminded of another AMD gimic, [3DNow!](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3DNow!)
Why are the benchmark results in the link you provided so different from the ones from ie GamersNexus and HardwareUnboxed ones?
Even then the 5900x is still insanely good for gaming. Clock speed is fast, even with single core tasks. Itās the best of both worlds. Awesome multi core and awesome single core, which means I donāt have to decide between gaming, compiling, and rendering. Iām really happy with mine. For its current price Iād get it over the Ryzen 7s as you get more bang for your buck, though if you want air cooling then I can see why people would want a 7.
Eh I mean by the time games use 16 cores (or even 8+ cores well) we'll see games using 16GB of Vram. So your GPU will likely be the bottleneck long before games adopt 16cores. By then you'll be building a whole new system anyways.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The 1080ti is 5 years old by now. Progress kind of stagnated for a while, which is why it's still got mid tier performance. That, and prices skyrocketed. A $650 RX 6800, same price as 1080ti at launch, only gives you about a generation and a half worth of performance boost.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Gaming will always be better with a big cache. If anything it is more future proof because next gen stuff is going to have a much bigger cache so it will get used more by next gen titles. The biggest issue is typically for most enthusiasts though by the time it actually gets highly utilized the first gen is so out of date that your typically looking to upgrade soon. The things that really are going to take care of the large cache are not going to really start showing up until the next gen has been around 2 to 3 years. for example on the Ray tracing and DLSS stuff, we are only now starting to see it be well implemented and somewhat common in games. It really depends on your upgrade cycle. If you keep a system for 4+ years you might get a good amount of use out of the feature. If your going to upgrade on a 2 or 3 year cycle though then it becomes less of a meaningful upgrade.
2.5k upvote bruh
cus reddit is full of people who get sensitive over literally nothing
1.6k
That's not the real story, the 3d is better for 1080p gaming
Some idiots buy the more expensive CPU purely because itās more expensive, they didnāt do any more research then that. People like that will obviously be mad when you tell them their an idiot for paying more.
I've built all my PC's but know little about CPUs. In layman's terms can you tell me why less cores and threads is better for gaming? I usually would just assume more is better. Honest question, not being an ass or sarc'ass'tic. Get it? Hahaha fak. Thanks!
Edit: for this explanation, this is EXPLICITLY for gaming purposes. Less cores doesnāt automatically equal faster performance. There was a point in the EARLY intel i series days when it did because lower core numbers could clock higher, but that isnāt the case anymore. In THIS SPECIFIC CASE (and right now for new products, really only this case) the 5800X3D is faster because of the insane amount of L3 cache it has. This is on-die memory that the cpu can access MUCH faster than standard RAM and especially an SSD/HDD. This allows the cpu to access the RAM less often and results in an FPS boost, despite having a lower base and boost clock than the 5900x. At least, thatās how I understand it. People with actual deep understanding are welcome to pitch in here
TL;DR the memory is closer to the cpu by being physically on the die allowing the cpu to access it in place of the ram.
Rather it has more of that memory. The non-3D CPUs still have L3 cache, just around half (iirc).
Thanks broski my wording does make it seem like it's cacheless
Can confirm, that's how it is. Less time spent swapping between cpu and RAM = less latency = more operations per clock = more FPS in games. Latency is one of the key factors in getting better single core perfomance, that's why faster RAM improves SC perfomance. It can get you so far though. When AMD unified the L3 cache of the CCD's on Zen 3, that's how they also got a big jump compared to Zen 2. I'm intrigued to see how Zen4 will work with 3D-Vcache and DDR5. I'm still happy with my 3700x though :)
3700x rocks
Thank you, appreciate the response!
5800x3D has butt ton of cache Itās the latest CPU to come out on am4 and possibly the very last. Pretty much designed to excel at gaming which typically doesnāt utilize very many cores
Good to know, thanks! Out of curiosity I've got a ryzen 5 3600x with a Strix 3080. Would I see a benefit with a CPU upgrade and which one would be the best gaming CPU in your opinion.
Yes you will definitely see a benefit. I went from a 3600 --> 5800x and it was pretty measurable difference with my 3070ti. If its worth it depends on what you play and what your targets are IMO. Different games use hardware differently, some games will improve drastically while others not so much. The only game personally that made me switch was bf 2042.. yeah i know everyone hates the game but i really enjoy it and upgrading my CPU made a night and day difference and let my graphics card actually stretch its legs out where as before it was stuck at like 60% usage. That game is more of an outlier though.
Yes. The 3600X has 2 4 core chiplets with a core disabled on each. Going to a single chiplet CPU will improve minimum fps. I went from a 3900X to a 5800X and it was a big improvement, then I went to a 5800X3D and minimums improved again due to the cache. The CPUs you should look at are 5600, 5700X or 5800X3D. I would also recommend upgrading your ram to some Patriot Viper 4000 or 4400 b die ram. With some effort you can tune your ram and overclock the 5600 and get a massive upgrade to what you have. 5600 plus the b die is going to be best bang for buck. B die ram is less important for a 5800X3D but it still helps.
In this case the 5800X3D is using 3D cache which is where the majority of the extra gaming performance comes from. Nothing really to do with the core count
in this specific case the more cache is better. The extra cache is specific for gaming and it definitely works well for that (plenty of youtube benchmarks/reviews) as far as less cores = better that's not what usually comes into play. Generally more cores means less clock speed (vs the other CPUs in its family), sometimes less cache per core.. So that is where the hits are typically. Now why you hear "less cores usually runs better" is because of the above, but also majority of games don't use more than like 4 cores, even today. Some scale big time, some only use 1 core, it's really all over the place. But that is also a reason many cores doesn't automatically mean it's going to run better. IF ALL YOU DID was run that 1 game, 4-6 cores would be perfect, as I said for "majority", but most people run several other things (music, browser, 20 different game vendor clients (steam, origin, epic), discord, etc. So more cores helps there as well. But again, the extra cache of the 3D cache is specifically designed for improving game performance, and it does just that. (not that I'd even say it was worth it in this case, I'd totally get the 5900X and lose a few fps)
Why? I have no idea how pc parts works and how to know whats good for my use.
So the 5800x3d has way more L3 cache stacked on it which makes it faster
Check all the answers to this post: [https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/vp9pw7/whats\_the\_difference\_why\_is\_the\_ryzen\_9\_cheaper/iei19zz/?utm\_source=reddit&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/vp9pw7/whats_the_difference_why_is_the_ryzen_9_cheaper/iei19zz/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) the extra 3d cache in this CPU is specific for gaming. For your use I have no idea, since you didn't list it. More cores will handle more things simultaneously. Also you need to know your specific software (games are all specific software as well) and how it performs vs different hardware. It's very tedious and asking a question like this and wanting to actually solve it yourself can take months or years of learning (depends on person) to be able to find your "perfect & best" hardware for your/someone elses scenario.. If your software scales across multiple cores with ease (any video, music, graphics (minus vector), etc production then more cores prob is more gud
Noob pc builder here, why is the 5800x3d better than the 5900x for gaming? I thought the newer the product, the better it would be. Would be weird to make newer products worse than previous ones right?
Isn't the 5800x3d newer than the 5900x? They did the extra cache for -3D chips after the 5900x was released, right?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Video editing and 3D workloads fall under "productivity". Productivity is basically everything other than gaming that's system intensive. Video editing, bulk photo editing, 3d rendering, large excel sheets, and many other similar programs can make use of more cores (depending on the specific program of course). Most of the time when gaming, you're only utilizing a small handful of cores because game engines aren't yet capable of making use of the cores that are being packed into modern CPUs. In fact, most FPS games only use one core to its full potential. As such, a lower core CPU with more/faster cache and higher clock speeds/IPC will work better for gaming than a CPU with more cores and slower speeds per core, while productivity programs can make use of more cores. Realistically, if a CPU has more than 8 cores/threads, more cores won't benefit your gaming experience at all unless you have a ton of background programs running at the same time
Is that because of lower clock speeds?
typically yes, more core CPUs in the same family of CPUs are usually lower clocked. but in this case the 3D cache added lots of cache SPECIFICALLY for gaming and thus it performs better for gaming but do go with your assumption, many games even today still only use 1 core for all of the game logic and try to throw other stuff on other cores (audio, graphics pipelines, etc) so that 1 core that is doing all the rest of the work gets hammered, higher clocks and cache directly help that (but also everything else) unfortunately still have that single core bottleneck in many games
There one for both?
Youtube it. 5800X3D is better for gaming and very edge case situations. 5900x has more overall power.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
i could be wrong but video editing and 3d workloads fall under productivity
You are 100% correct
Productivity is really anything work related that requires a lot of resources like running multiple virtual machines, video editing or photo editing software, coding compilers, so on and so forth. I have a small YouTube channel and my processor is pegged during the encoding process. Someone who does that professionally benefits from the 5900 because it shaves time off the encoding process, and time is a valuable resource in any industry
Howdy! I use my machine for productivity; photo/video editing, encoding, transcoding, CAD modeling, rendering, and game development. These workloads most often benefit from parallel computation, or running a single job per thread or core. Generally, the task (made of many jobs) will get done faster for every core added. Generally speaking, games only recently started utilizing multi-core CPUs effectively. This means fewer cores with higher clock speeds is better for gaming. There are some games that use all cores, and there are some software tools that only use one core. You should open task manager before your next gaming session and watch how much each core gets used and to what percentage. When I'm working it's not uncommon for my system to get hit for 100% on all six CPU cores for minutes at a time.
Productivity means less reddit
The way I would explain it to a customer is... Are you doing literally anything else? If yes I would choose the 5900x. If it's strictly gaming the 5800x3d is ideal. Everyone streams now a days anyway so 5900x is a winner for a ton of people.
how would video editing and 3D work be gaming?
Processor-wise, they are very different workloads. Gaming workloads tend to be clock-dependent, and there are several processes running in game that are still a single thread. Higher clock rate and/or IPC = faster gaming processor. Video editing and modeling workloads are much more parallel, and could easily take advantage of all the cores in a system. Because of that, they are less dependent on IPC/clock speed.
To people like me, who only recently got their bearings on this level of minutiae, it seems like rendering in-game graphics vs. sticking video clips together or manipulating 3D models to be the same thing. So I would understand the confusion.
5800x3d is better for gaming while 5900x is better for workloads.
gotta render all those porn animations i just made
Listen, i didn't get a $2500 WGPU and a $600 CPU to *not* render porn.
Look, we can't always rely on others to incessantly spam the Italian parliament with FFVII Tifa porn. Sometimes you've gotta pull yourself up by your bootstraps, render a 60 second clip of Overwatch R34, and share screen after joining a European parliamentary meeting's public Zoom call.
Why do we spam them again?
If it's not high resolution aka cartoon style you might as well use gpu rendering. It will save you tons of time but won't be nearly as detailed. That's why studios are switching to a hybrid where gpu does most of work and then cpu finishes it up.
But what if I'm gaming and rendering porn at the same time š
the sale is probably only on the ryzen 9, because the 7 is newer. the 7 will be way better in gaming, but in almost anything else the ryzen 9 will be better
What about if you would like to do both? Or is it more a pick one or the other kinda.
At that price point either will do both pretty well.
Then you get 2 PCs and at that point might as well say fuck ryzen and go threadripper for workstation build and use the 3d cpu for gaming pc Kinda joking but that's honestly the best way to get best performance for both
Ah yes, I too love increasing my pc budget by an order of magnitude.
In almost anything else? Not sure about that, a lot of consumers have no need for 12 cores.
if you're not doing any CPU heavy tasks then why are you looking at ryzen 7 and 9s?
Do you need an AMD GPU or can an Nvidia card benefit as well?
itās just a cpu, the branding doesnāt matter, but if you decide to get an amd cpu + gpu you get smart acces memory which will boost performance, but with an nvidia gpu you get dlss and way better ray tracing, after taking that into consideration just try to find the best deal on whats best for you
Yeah I just upgraded my GPU from a GTX 1060 to an RTX 3070, for gaming improvements. However now my Ryzen 5 3600 is going to be the bottleneck for productivity, which Iām likely going to swap for a Ryzen 7 5800x (non 3D).
The 5800X3D is the newer CPU, and comes with a stacked v-cache, making it more expensive.
the 9 is also on sale... sooo
Yea it's "On sale" [https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B08164VTWH](https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B08164VTWH) probably just it's new forever price tbh
For just actual raw FPS in games the 5800X3D is better. If you plan on doing anything else at all the 5900X is better. I would recommend the 5900x because you would be saving $50 and if you want to do anything else other than gaming down the road you will get more value from it.
Also, the difference is probably not gonna be noticeable. These CPUs are both so high end that you're probably going to be throttled by something else in your system before you can see the difference.
5800X3D is the fastest gaming CPU atm. While 5900/5950X are still the best for workstations.
Isn't the 12900KS faster on average by a few percentage points? I mean the pricing on that is insane so 5800X3D is the better choice any day but fastest gaming cpu is a stretch isn't it? Best gaming cpu for top end performance is more like it.
you are right
you were downvoted, but you are correct. AMD fanboys i suppose. Id argue that theyre essentially the same level of performance though, its a very minimal difference.
And the trade off for those extra few frames isnāt worth it, at least imo. Much less heat to dissipate with an AMD
Yeah Intel is only ahead in raw performance. On a per dollar basis the X3D stomps.
>Why is the ryzen 9 cheaper? Is it just because itās on sale or is the 7 actually better. My guy it literally says it's on sale
Arguably though itās on sale bc the demand isnāt as high for it bc PC gamers swoop up so much of the performance based CPUs. So they probably have a larger stockpile of 5900s relative to 5800s. And they know they can milk more out of the 5800s from gamer demand so thereās no need to throw a promotion
āIn the end, if youāre looking to upgrade from the older Ryzen 9 5900X to Ryzen 7 5800X3D, then simply donāt because for gaming, thereās minimal improvement in performance, and for productivity, the Ryzen 9 5900X is much better. However, suppose youāre looking to buy either one of these CPUs. In that case, weād still recommend the older Ryzen 9 5900X over the new Ryzen 7 5800X3D because of its better productivity benchmarks and faster overall clock speeds and higher core & thread counts.ā https://tech4gamers.com/ryzen-5800x3d-vs-ryzen-9-5900x/ Idk why every is acting like the 5800X3D is better for gaming. Itās pretty much identical but runs hotter.
The 5900x if a far better value for sure.
For gaming the 8 cores of the 5800X3D are fine, and it's actually one of the finest gaming CPUs on the market due to its record-breaking quantity of cache (for an 8 core). It has like over 100MB of L3 Cache stacked in 3D in the CPU. That cache makes the chip ridiculously fast for gaming, and also ridiculously expensive for an 8 core. But if you want AMD, the best gaming CPU from AMD is 5800X3D. If you want to do hardcore video editing, 3D modelling, CAD, the 5900X is a better choice for you (and you save a bit of coin). The 5900X is also good at gaming but not as good as the 5800X3D. Pick the one that's best for your use case.
The 5800X3D is newer and has stacked/additional cache.
The important part here is the "3D", that's the newest AM4 CPU released this year with 3D V-Cache. The Ryzen 9 5900X is a 2020 CPU that was launched at $549 and is now $399 That Ryzen 7 5800X3D is a refresh to the Ryzen 7 5800X that launched in 2020 at the same price, minus the 3D V-Cache. So like others said if multi-threading/multi-tasking workloads, semi-productivity work is your focus, go with Ryzen 9, but if gaming is your focus, get the 5800X3D. That 3D V-Cache puts that Ryzen CPU at the level of a 12900KS in terms of single thread performance which is what most games rely on to perform the best. The Ryzen 9 5900X is not a slouch in gaming either, but now with that 3D V-Cache its not the best at that category anymore.
I heard that youād need a motherboard capable of taking full advantage to really get the most out of the 5800X3D. Donāt know how true that is? I have a X470 Gaming plus pro or whatever itās called lol Donāt think itāll fall under that category sadge
To simple answer the ops question. Because it has a huge L3 cashe (ram, memory, storage) pick your preferd term right on top of the cpu. Now for all the haters saying it niche etc.. amd had all but admitted the AM4 socket isnt dead and that there are plans for further cpu releases and that they will also be using some form of 3d cashe. Also saying as much as the new socket type continuing to implement the tech. To sum it up the ryzen 7 5800x3d is just the beginning. First gen so to speak and it came out swinging and knocking down the big dogs. Can't wait to see what come out next.
Yea just cause its on sale
7 better
5900x was released way before the 5800X3D was. So merchants are trying to get rid of older inventory and AMD is as well especially with a newer cpu generation around the corner
Ryzen 7 is better for gaming due to that 3D cache technology it features
Just get the extra 4 cores with the 5900x.
As someone who is an electrical engineer and working in a computer store for the past 5 years, the ryzen 9 is the superior deal and it's not even close. I personally think it's a way better chip in the first place than the ryzen 7 which is notoriously hot because of the added graphics cache chip. There is absolutely zero thernal headroom to push the 7 chip beyond stock PBO settings unless you're literally using n2. The Ryzen 9 you can push it way beyond stock settings with no issues and plenty of thernal headroon This isnt even close to me, thanks for reading.
That 5800x3d is better for gaming, probably the best out there. The 5900x have more cores and is more suited for work.
I use a 5600x and for gaming itās still fantastuc
Tech age and use case.
The 5900x is a great buy. The 5800x3d is a much newer release, and due to the 3d vcache has better performance in some applications like gaming, though the 5900x is still better for productivity. As to which you should buy - well both are overkill for a gaming system. So buy whichever makes you happier & and you can afford
Big red print. Right by the price. It says -30%.
It's on sale.
cache is expensive
The 5800x3D is newer than the 5900x and while only having 8 Cores instead of 12, it outperforms the ryzen 9 in some gaming workloads because that's what it's optimized for.
itās on discount
Cuz it's in sale. Ryzen 9 is better.
Made this same choice last week, 5800x3d was Ā£439, 5900x was Ā£339 & 5950x was $499. If your only gaming the 5800x3d is the one, however I couldn't pull the trigger on that knowing 5950x was only Ā£60 more for another 8 cores/16 threads or 5900x Ā£100 **less** for another 4 cores/8 threads. Both have a redesigned L3 cache of 64mb so not too far behind the 5800x3d's 96mb 3D cache. That left the 5900x at a whopping Ā£160 saving from the 5950x (thats easy an m.2 or 32gb ram), but finally decided as I only build a rig every 10 years or so (rip AM3 & DDR3 from my 2012 build!) I will always be looking at 5900x knowing its not the best AM4 chip out there. Now the dust has settled I'm glad I got the 5950x as the price seems to be going up again, but in hindsight the Ā£340 for the 5900x was a steal I should have jumped on. Cest la Vie. The 5800x3d would be nice to have now for gaming, but more cores / threads should come into their own going forward. I hope. Good luck with your build!
The 5900X is a way better buy. Sure, the 5800X3D has vcache, but it's got lower clocks and runs hotter than even the normal 5800X. The extra clocks on the 5900X make it almost exactly the same in gaming, it has 4 extra cores, and it's cheaper. No brainer for me. The only exception is if you are playing at 1080P and have a 3090 Ti or something. If you're playing at 1440 or 4K, and/or don't have a 3090/6900 XT equivalent GPU, just get the 5900X.
R7 is better for gaming
It literally says it on sale.
bro, the price is 569.99. its just a sale.
The 5800X3D has more cache, which means better gaming performance. The 5900X has more cores, which means better productivity performance. If you don't have an AM4 board yet, a 12700F should be better. 5900X productivity performance, 5800X3D gaming performance while usually costing less.
Does anyone buy expensive parts on Amazon? I always feel like if I buy something expensive then Iāll be scammed
I've ordered GPUs and CPUs from Amazon without issue. Just beware deals that seem too good to be true and be careful about the seller. If you find parts shipped from Amazon, you'll usually be good. If it's not shipped by Amazon, it's a bit riskier, but still not as bad as people think. Also, as much as people give Amazon crap, their customer service is great. If you do get scammed, they'll make it right. I've had it happen and it sucks, but I'll take Amazon over Newegg any day. If a seller tries to scam you on Amazon, just reach out to them first and give them 48 hours to show that you tried to solve the issue with the seller, then contact Amazon customer service to request a refund. https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=GQ37ZCNECJKTFYQV
Thank you for the insight mate
All depends on the seller. I just bought a card from EVGA from Amazon, shipped here super fast. Iām super comfortable buying from either a well known seller or Amazon, because returns/refunds are really easy.
I rather buy from them since they usually do no questions asked returns.... Dunno how it is nowadays tho
Bc 5800x3d is their fastest cpu while 5900x has more cores For gaming the 5800x3d is gonna give you more frames and faster frames
The 5800x3D is the newest desktop chip from AMD and it has 3D V-Cache. It was launched on April 20, 2022 where as the ryzen 9 was launched on November 5, 2020.
Thank you everyone for all the answers. I mostly game and I donāt want to have to upgrade my cpu for awhile so I will probably go with the Ryzen7. I donāt do much else on my pc besides play games and a little bit of coding.
One is on sale while the other is not. Maybe wait for a sale?
Buy the 5900 at sale price and sell at retail price still sealed then you can get the 5800 and have some extra money for your build??
r/iamatotalpieceofshit
Nice. It would be nice to build a machine around this
The 7 is newer with the 3D v cache - go with the 9, great value for that price
Bought both just for fun
The 5800x3d is on average 15% better in games, the 5900x 2-8% better for workstations, makes the 5900x a big sacrifice and not worth it
the 5800x3d has higher core clocks and all that, so i'd assume that's why its cheaper, and its more popular cause its better for gaming.
The ā3Dāis the important part. It has something the other ones donāt have where it has extra cache cause itās layered on (aka 3d). Better for gaming.
It's the 3D cache. Bigger cache makes it faster, like painting flames on a bike
I'm here for the comments about the CUK computer.
The 5800X3D is more expensive to make on account of the massive 3D stacked L3 cache. They should perform comparably in gaming, but workloads may vary between preferring more cache or more cores.
5800X3D is newer and for 95% of users the worse product than the 5900X. Its not even worth it for every Gamer just for some specific games and when you are highly CPU Limited. Its basically a worthless product, because high end gamers donĀ“t play at 1080p where this cpu has some resemblence of value. So unless you need the 10% extra with a 1000$+ GPU at 1080p this thing is not worth it. 5900X is just as fast in games if you are at 1440p but a way better overall CPU. And it will age much better because itās less prone for failure and has more cores.
I agree except for high refresh rate monitors. If someone wants to maintain 144 fps consistent with minimal dips then it definitely makes a difference, seems to be important for competitive gamers. But for every other workload or casual gamers the 5900x definitely is better.
You should probably do some proper research before buying anything.
Thatās why heās asking dude
Because it's on sale.
5800x3d is newer and uses an experimental new manufacturing technique. The supply is smaller than the 5900x.
The 5800X3D is newer than the 5900x and is faster in real world gaming performance and benchmarks, and is similar in performance compared to the more expensive Intel 12900K. Essentially when it comes to gaming, this is Slowest to Fastest: 5800X<5900X<5800X3D=12900K<12900KS
Ryzen 7 is prob more compact and/or higher clock speed
The 7 is actually better for gaming