AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D outperforms Intel Core i9-12900KS by 16% in early gaming benchmarks

midian182

Posts: 7,891   +82
Staff member
Something to look forward to: AMD's highly anticipated Ryzen 7 5800X3D is set to launch on April 20, but we've already seen the first benchmarks for the chip, and it really could take the title of the 'world's fastest gaming CPU,' given that it's 16% faster than the Core i9-12900KS in Shadow of the Tomb Raider.

Peruvian outlet XanxoGaming released the first gaming benchmarks for AMD's Ryzen 7 5800X3D. The CPU utilizes the company's 3D V-Cache technology that stacks a cache die on top of the existing 7nm Zen 3 chiplet, increasing the amount of L3 cache—to 96MB, in the case of the new processor, as opposed to the 32MB used in the standard Ryzen 7 5800X.

Working alongside the developer of frame rate analyzing tool CapFrameX, the publication tested the game at a 1280 x 720 resolution with low settings to remove the graphics card as a potential bottleneck. Needless to say, this doesn't represent actual gaming conditions but is a known way to force a pure CPU test instead of having the graphics card becoming the limitation.

Each CPU test system was slightly different, but the surprising part is that the Intel PC was the more powerful, packing a GeForce RTX 3090 Ti and DDR5-4800 C40 memory, while the AMD test bench used a GeForce RTX 3080 Ti with DDR4-3200 C14 memory.

The results show the Ryzen 7 5800X3D managed an average framerate of 231 fps. The Core i9-12900KS hit around 200 fps, and the 12900K/KF came in at about 190 fps.

Tom's Hardware notes that Shadow of the Tomb Raider relies heavily on memory speed and is sensitive to memory latency, giving the Ryzen 7 5800X3D an advantage in this department. It will definitely be interesting to see some apples-to-apples tests with different games when the chip arrives in under two weeks.

Another factor to consider is that the Ryzen 7 5800X3D will be priced at $449 at launch, whereas the Core i9-12900KS, which an overclocker recently took to 7.45 GHz, is around $800. AMD's product will be limited in terms of overclocking because of its V-Cache and chiplet design, but many gamers are unlikely to care when it offers such performance at that price.

Permalink to story.

 

Irata

Posts: 2,108   +3,636
I‘d take that site‘s results with a large bag of salt. Waiting for HUB to do an analysis.

The really interesting part to see would be how the 5800X scored on the same system but that‘s missing here.

STR seems to be a game that scales very well with L3 cache:

TR.png
 

fps4ever

Posts: 905   +1,336
I wonder how it does in productivity tasks as well... the 12900 beats the 5950 in a bunch of those as well as being a gaming beast...

I think its geared towards gaming so I imagine the 12900 would still lead in those categories. But just my opinion on what I've read so far. Looking forward to more benchmarks.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 5,335   +4,980
I think its geared towards gaming so I imagine the 12900 would still lead in those categories. But just my opinion on what I've read so far. Looking forward to more benchmarks.
I would certainly assume that as well - it better at almost double the price! But I wonder whether the increased cache does anything for non-gaming related stuff... or if it's just the same CPU in everything with better gaming performance.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,206   +4,244
I think that Tomb Raider might be one of the only titles in which you see a commanding 16% lead with many more titles probably ending up being just about equal.

Still, with only a handful of titles or less to prop up AMD can probably slow down intel adoption rates while they buy themselves a few more weeks/months to build up their 7000 series inventory for later in the year.

Since both companies are now fully out of sync the best processor for the next long while will be whatever is the latest release: might be AMD, might be intel, they'll be trading #1 spot back and forth since they have very different tech and very different generations competing 6 months to 1 year apart in their release schedules and sadly, it means that both intel and AMD will release a lot more of these type of releases midway through their cycles as marketing tools to try and capture the "Top of the hill performance" title even when their actual competing products are many months away.
 

envirovore

Posts: 466   +868
TechSpot Elite
I wonder how it does in productivity tasks as well... the 12900 beats the 5950 in a bunch of those as well as being a gaming beast...

Wccftech have some leaked productivity benchmarks posted as of yesterday, from the same source (using more than one program to test).
On average this CPU is ~2% slower than the non-3D cache part in them. Which I feel makes sense given the slight core speed reduction these units got.

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-58...etic-workloads-show-little-to-no-improvement/


Grain of salt and all, especially given it's Wccf.
 
Last edited:

Geralt

Posts: 1,126   +1,740
I‘d take that site‘s results with a large bag of salt. Waiting for HUB to do an analysis.

The really interesting part to see would be how the 5800X scored on the same system but that‘s missing here.

STR seems to be a game that scales very well with L3 cache:

TR.png
But they are Peruvians from Paititi! You should believe then.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 5,335   +4,980
Wccftech have some leaked productivity benchmarks posted as of yesterday, from the same source (using more than one program to test).
On average this CPU is ~2% slower than the non-3D cache part in them. Which I feel makes sense given the slight core speed reduction these units got.

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-58...etic-workloads-show-little-to-no-improvement/


Grain of salt and all, especially given it's Wccf.
Ouch.... if that ends up being the case, then this is a hard pass... will wait for reviews :)
 

Ojref

Posts: 26   +36
AMD doesn't seem to understand or realize the importance in single-threaded performance. Their architecture is tuned around modularity, maximum cost optimization and recuperation of dies for product segmentation. Cache can only get you so far. IMO if they want to compete properly in this segment they need to focus on reducing latencies and consider a monolithic die.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,321
AMD doesn't seem to understand or realize the importance in single-threaded performance. Their architecture is tuned around modularity, maximum cost optimization and recuperation of dies for product segmentation. Cache can only get you so far. IMO if they want to compete properly in this segment they need to focus on reducing latencies and consider a monolithic die.
AMD focuses on servers, there money is. Simple as that.
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,597   +1,421
The 12900KS will be much faster at productivity but that’s irrelevant. People will buy these chips for gaming and at the current price difference if the 5800X3D is the same speed or faster than the 12900KS then the enthusiasts will flock to it.

Personally, id buy an i5 12400F.
 

meric

Posts: 364   +359
The 12900KS will be much faster at productivity but that’s irrelevant. People will buy these chips for gaming and at the current price difference if the 5800X3D is the same speed or faster than the 12900KS then the enthusiasts will flock to it.

Personally, id buy an i5 12400F.
Well, that 3D cache has the potential to greatly increase the speed in productivity software but given AMD's inability to support its chips with quality software...
 

Kosmoz

Posts: 600   +1,110
If this CPU, more than 1 and a half year old Zen3 with the added V-cache can at least equal the 12900KS in gaming (on average in dozens of games), imagine what a Zen4 with V-cache can do!

For the record, AMD marketed the 5800X3D for gamers. Up to 15% faster than the 5800X they said.
Actually it's vs 5900X and it's on average +15%, not up to 15%.
amd_ryzen_7_5800x3d_performance_image_1647415224743.jpg
 

Arbie

Posts: 369   +668
given AMD's inability to support its chips with quality software...
Well there's an underhanded remark. I've been running high-end AMD CPUs for five years now and have ZERO problem with anything related to them. So why don't you state exactly what issues you've had?
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 1,133   +2,262
Um, no.

There's a back and forth because the performance leader always gets lazy. True competition works for all consumers, not just anyone's favorite meatshield brand.

I dont mind more competition, just prefer that intel died.

Plenty of others are joining the market, so we will be good.
 

meric

Posts: 364   +359
Well there's an underhanded remark. I've been running high-end AMD CPUs for five years now and have ZERO problem with anything related to them. So why don't you state exactly what issues you've had?
it's not only about providing a stable and error free experience. Times have changed, stability is required as a bare minimum. It's also about exploiting hardware features/resources using creatively designed software for providing quality of life improvements with the user experience. An on chip cache of this size opens the possibility to provide boost for so many computer tasks. I'm just not hopeful that AMD will exploit this precious resource.
I can state the issues I've had with AMD's products (and I'm sure a lot of users even in this platform would agree) but I think I clearly explained what I meant in my previous post.