I don't understand why no one is comparing this to the past, remember when intel sold the 9900ks and people were buying that cpu, the same people would buy the x3d, and definitely should over 129ks
Also the main target for the x3d imo are am4 users, rn for gaming of you have older am4 cpus, rather than a 12400f/12600k it's probably more convinient to get a 5600x, abd if you want high fps you get the x3d, if you can't find x3d you get the 5700/5800x
You have plenty options as an am4 user, and amd can't sell the 5800x for 450 anymore, so they are milking customers with the x3d (just like intel did with the 9900kfc ) however rather than just +200mhz and +200w, you are getting a shitton of cache which gives 10%+ fps in 90% of games at 1080/1440p
I'd say for enthusiastic cpus that's a win, obviously higher tier cpus aren't about value but 800 is too much.
As for production workloads, really? The cpu is marketed for gaming, and people say the 12900k is better for production/ editing but it's $800, get a used threadripper for that much instead, more ram and pcielanes too, probably not muchore for a threadripper system vs ddr5+ 129k + very expensive z690 mobo
Ofc it goes without saying if you are building new and want best name for buck below 12700k is an excellent buy woth ddr4 there is plenty of competition which lower end cpus and ts fond fore most gamers
Just imo, and this rant is just in general, it's about the wider picture, there are many good cpus out there if you don't find one in stock there is another and we as consumers win
