AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D Review: For the FPS Chasers

[amstech]

GPU benchmarking charts can be quite deceiving. You need to look at the actual numbers and average FPS. According to the Techpowerup Ultra 265K review in 2024 the difference in gaming at 1440P compared to the 7800X3d was 8 FPS average. The difference at 1080p was about 20FPS. This little of a difference is virtually indistinguishable in the real world. In demanding titles like Doom The Dark Ages, you are still getting 60-90FPS with modern GPU’s, even the old RTX 3080 hits 60FPS. So, while the X3D AMD CPU’s are at the top of the charts for gaming, and something like the 265K can be at the bottom it looks bad until you read the numbers. So lets look at the 7800X3D vs the 265K when playing at 1440p with an RTX 4090.
Elden Ring at 1440p: 7800X3D @ 177FPS, Ultra 265K @ 135FPS.
Elden Ring at 1440p with Ray Tracing: 7800X3D @ 84 FPS, Ultra 265K @ 83.4FPS
Hogwarts Legacy at 1440p: 7800X3D @ 207FPS, Ultra 265K @ 204 FPS
Starfield at 1440p: 7800X3D @ 116FPS, Ultra 265K @ 112FPS.
Cyberpunk 2077 at 1440p: 7800X3D @ 85FPS, Ultra 265K @ 83.5 FPS
Balders Gate 3 at 1440p: 7800X3D @ 146FPS, Ultra 265K 115 FPS
Remnant II at 1440p: 7800X3D @ 102FPS, Ultra 265K @ 100FPS

Now looking at Techspots August 2025 review of the 265K vs the 7600X for 1440P when using the RTX 5080, all games on Ultra/High settings:
Kingdom Come: Deliverance II at 1440p: 9800X3D @ 130 FPS, Ultra 265K @ 124 FPS
Marvel Rivals at 1440p: 9800X3D @ 94FPS, Ultra 265K @ 94FPS
Warhammer 40,000 Space Marine 2 at 1440p: 9800X3D @ 122FPS, Ultra 265K @ 101FPS
And the overall 4 Game Average at 1440p: 9800X3D @ 140FPS, Ultra 265K @ 132 FPS.

To be clear I am not saying the X3D AMD’s aren’t the better buy for gaming. What I am saying is, if you get a good deal on a Ultra 265K and plan to game at 1440p or 4K, it’s going to do just fine. While it may be lower on some charts, and there are some games that show 30FPS differences, at 1440p those examples are rare. In some games the 265K pulls ahead. So Techspots conclusion of saying “its extremely difficult to recommend the 265K for gamers” is complete horsesh!t. Right now the Ultra 265K is $309 on Newegg. The 9800X3D is $465. For $150 less, you are getting the same gaming performance at 1440p. The 7600X is only $180, but that CPU sucks for rendering, multitasking, encoding and AI creation. In Cinebench 2024, the 265K wipes the floor with the 7600X, it scores 2100 compared to 961. For machine learning/AI GPT2 tests, it demolishes Ryzen chips, even the 9950X by over 10%. In ¾ AI tests, it topped the charts on techpowerups review in 2024. The 265K is a solid option for gaming, production and multitasking. The 1851 platform’s will take time for applications to properly use its architecture, but the claim its not a good gaming processor and that AMD is just the way to go comes across biased and closed off. In the real world, for gaming, at 1440p, the 265K will give you the same exact experience as the 9800X3D for less $$. How do you like them apples? And we haven’t even talked about overclocking yet. Alot of these hardware reviewers, like Linus, Pauls Hardware, Hardware unboxed think their opinions carry alot of influence outside of their echo chambers. They dont. They been saying Radeons are the better buy for years yet Nvidia GPUS absolutely DOMINATE the market. Ryzen on the other hand mostly has done well due to it being priced cheaper, not performance, and Intel still, after the last 10 years of hate, still has 65% market share. Toodles.

 

[human7]

The best thing about the 9850X3D is that it (theoretically) puts a price cap on the 9800X3D (availability concerns not withstanding).

 

[Vulcanproject]

I upgraded from a 7800X3D with PBO to a 9800X3D with OC to 5.5 GHz all core and fps gain were in the 20-30% range post memory tweaking (6400/CL28).

Application performance and shader compilation was also like 25-30% faster if not more.

It is unfortunate you struggled with overclocking a 7800. My 7800X3D comfortably ran at 5400MHz all core, it would also do 6400MHz DDR5 CL32 memory speeds without much sweat. 6000 CL30 was just the normal sweet spot. Probably still is even for this latest chip.

The limitation was as much the chipset and BIOS revision on memory speed. On an X670E you ran into limitations. On an X870E with the revised BIOS it was far more tolerant of higher memory speeds.

As a result the difference between a well tweaked 7800X3D and 9800X3D is very small in gaming, with modest generational increases in productivity. 10 percent at best. 9850X3D is similar, but it uses too much power for what it is.

It is only 14 percent faster at 1080p tested here over a 7800X3D. Assuming you aren't paying premium CPU money to only game at 1080p, the differences at 1440p and above are near worthless. I have seen 9850X3D max PBO with a -35 offset is 8 percent faster than a bone stock 7800X3D with an RTX5090. Probably about 2-3 percent faster if you likewise OC the 7800X3D!

The real worthwhile upgrade over the 7800X3D will be the likely 12 core CCD parts, probably next year. That'll be the best upgrade for anyone that adopted AM5 early.

 

[Rapob]

It is unfortunate you struggled with overclocking a 7800. My 7800X3D comfortably ran at 5400MHz all core, it would also do 6400MHz DDR5 CL32 memory speeds without much sweat. 6000 CL30 was just the normal sweet spot. Probably still is even for this latest chip.

The limitation was as much the chipset and BIOS revision on memory speed. On an X670E you ran into limitations. On an X870E with the revised BIOS it was far more tolerant of higher memory speeds.

As a result the difference between a well tweaked 7800X3D and 9800X3D is very small in gaming, with modest generational increases in productivity. 10 percent at best. 9850X3D is similar, but it uses too much power for what it is.

It is only 14 percent faster at 1080p tested here over a 7800X3D. Assuming you aren't paying premium CPU money to only game at 1080p, the differences at 1440p and above are near worthless. I have seen 9850X3D max PBO with a -35 offset is 8 percent faster than a bone stock 7800X3D with an RTX5090. Probably about 2-3 percent faster if you likewise OC the 7800X3D!

The real worthwhile upgrade over the 7800X3D will be the likely 12 core CCD parts, probably next year. That'll be the best upgrade for anyone that adopted AM5 early.

Sure it did. Lets see your Cinebench numbers, then I will show you mine.
Most people don't eCLK OC.
Besides, 9800X3D can do 5.7-5.8 GHz with eCLK OC as well. Even saw 5.8+ GHz.

And that is even without burning the 3d cache due to heat, as 3d cache is not sitting on top of the CCD with 9000X3D. You know, heat moves up, result = higher clockspeeds and less throttling, which was the biggest issue with 7000X3D series.

My own 9800X3D does 5.75 GHz with eCLK OC. No point really. 5.5 GHz all-core is fine at lower voltages/wattage.

99.99% of users with 7800X3D runs sub 5 GHz on average. Even with PBO, which most are doing, if they even bother to OC, then it won't even hold 5 GHz in demanding games. 4.6-4.8 GHz in games like Cyberpunk is very normal. 7800X3D just throttles way more due to cache heating up. Bad cache placement.

The relocated cache placement on 9000X3D did wonders. They run less hot, even while using more power = allowing for higher clockspeeds across the board. Every single 9800X3D does 5.4 GHz with absolute ease. No eCLK OC needed. 5.2 GHz all-core at stock, at all times. Want 5.4? Just PBO 200 and you will get 5.45+ GHz - eCLK OC still possible, if you go after 5.6-5.8 GHz, regardless, 9800X3D win

Also, most Ryzen 7000 won't be able to run 6400 memory. Some people can't even hit 6000 stable with 7000 series. Who buys 800 series chipset and Ryzen 7000? It does not change anything as 600 and 800 chipsets are similar. No difference in the chipset beside the name in terms of memory speeds and OC. Zero difference. IMC in the CPU is what makes 6400 possible on Ryzen 9000 and 6000-6200 is like 100% guarranteed, which is not the case on 7000 series.

9800X3D/9850X3D is pretty much a perfected 7800X3D. I would never save 100 dollars and buy the 7800X3D instead, never.

7800X3D needs to be half the price or close to make any sense. Besides the chip is pretty much EOL and gone when inventory is drained.

Upgrading to 9800X3D was a nobrainer. Sold the 7800X3D for 300 dollars and bought a 9800X3D for 400 dollars. 100 dollars, totally worth it. Will upgrade again next time if worth it, don't really care. By the time Zen 6 comes out, I had this 9800X3D for 2+ years, and gotten vastly better performance in the CPU bound games I play.

I am a 1440p/500 Hz OLED gamer, with RTX 4090, aiming for 400-500 fps, believe me, the 9800X3D was a huge upgrade over 7800X3D 1% lows in the 200-250 range, avg. fps in the 400-500 fps range, in BF6 MP 64 player matches. Show me a 7800X3D build that comes close. I gained 20-30% fps across the board overall. Vastly faster in applications and for shader compilation as well.

7800X3D is better value, and still a decent chip, its cheaper but its cheaper for a reason. I would never personally buy a 7800X3D over a 9800X3D/9850X3D for a new system but if you already have 7800X3D and only use 144-240 Hz or so, then sure, keep it till Zen 6.

Pretty much the difference I said it would be, around the 25% mark. 20-30% diff. Massive difference in smoothness when using high refresh rate monitors. I bet you don't even have 240 Hz.
When you tweak the game further for max fps, lowering settings even more (esport settings), any game will become even more CPU bound and 9800X3D/9850X3D is the best CPU by far.

Once you see 500 fps on 500 Hz OLED, you will understand. Smooth as butter. That is how I play most games. Especially multiplayer shooters and CPU is the limiting factor in most cases.

 

[jpvalverde85]

It's okay, more like a stop gap sku, anyway still giving Intel a royal spank. It is crazy that one could pick a 9800X3D, put it to sip power at 65W, and still spank incredible hard the best Intel has to offer, at least gaming wise.

 

[ultimezpooja]

Its a great review. That grabbed my more attention is the large cache available in Ryzen chips. Thats the same reason why Ryzen chips got famous in some of the crypto mining setups

 

[hahahanoobs]

If you recommend this CPU to anyone you should get your head checked for CTE.
See all the gains disappear going from 1080p Medium to 1080p Ultra?
Now imagine 1440p and 4K.
Complete joke for gaming confirmed. Just like KS chips.

 

[Rapob]

If you recommend this CPU to anyone you should get your head checked for CTE.
See all the gains disappear going from 1080p Medium to 1080p Ultra?
Now imagine 1440p and 4K.
Complete joke for gaming confirmed. Just like KS chips.

This is for people who is CPU bound and wants peak performance, in combination with 240+ Hz monitors.

You can easily be CPU bound in 1440p and 2160p/4K/UHD as well. At 1440p it is in fact very easy, plenty of 360-500 Hz displays, or even faster here.

Also, most people using 4K uses upscaling, so CPU performance matters again.

People that chase very high fps, usually don't run high graphical settings, hence they become CPU bound. Very simple really.

Does not change the fact that 9850X3D is just an overclocked 9800X3D tho. Worlds fastest gaming CPU.

Tons of people don't care about maxing games out visually. They prefer high fps and solid performance, highest 1% lows possible for buttery smooth gameplay. CPU is the most important for this and X3D reigns supreme.