AMD's Ryzen 9 9950X3D and 9900X3D arrive March 12, starting at $599

[Burty117]

And most of those aren’t being played by people who care if they get 150 or 250 FPS…

Maybe I just play with ultra-sweats or something, but I've never met a CS player who plays at 60fps, 120fps is the absolute minimum, most people usually play at 200fps+.

And I’m not pushing anyone to buy anything… I’m saying you don’t need to upgrade your CPU for no reason…. They may be cheaper than a GPU, but they need motherboards and RAM…

Right, I agree with this, but if someone is on a 3600 for example, upgrading to a 5700X3D, and they play 9 out of the 10 most popular games at the moment, they would probably have a substantially better experience (in CS's case, close to double the framerate) for very little money, no?

 

[Squid Surprise]

Maybe I just play with ultra-sweats or something, but I've never met a CS player who plays at 60fps, 120fps is the absolute minimum, most people usually play at 200fps+.

You do… but that’s fine - everyone is entitled to game how they feel fit…

Right, I agree with this, but if someone is on a 3600 for example, upgrading to a 5700X3D, and they play 9 out of the 10 most popular games at the moment, they would probably have a substantially better experience (in CS's case, close to double the framerate) for very little money, no?

Perhaps… but we’re not talking about upgrading from 3000 to 5000… this is the 9000 series we’re talking about.

If you have an Ryzen 5 3000 level CPU, your refresh rate on your monitor is probably 120hz or less (probably 60) and your GPU is probably a 3060/3070 level one…so getting anything more than 60FPS will be barely noticeable. Your gaming experience will not change much in a CPU upgrade…if you upgraded your GPU and monitor, you’d gain something..

But if you’re considering a 9950, comparing to a Ryzen 5 is probably not relevant… you probably had a 7 or 9 level CPU to begin with… and there, the gaming difference will be virtually nonexistent - unless you’re a competitive gamer.

And again, if you ARE a competitive gamer, you are buying the 9800X3D as it will outperform these 2 CPUs.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Phoronix benchmarks are out, 20-25% faster in non-gaming workloads than the 7950X(3D).

How does it compare to the 9950x though?

 

[Burty117]

Perhaps… but we’re not talking about upgrading from 3000 to 5000… this is the 9000 series we’re talking about.

I'll be honest, I completely forgot this was on an article about the 9000 series.

Here I do agree, I built a computer with a 7600 not too long ago, vs the 7800X3D, there's not much in it @ 1440p/144Hz with a 4070 Super.

There is still something to be said about the X3D chips though, I don't really know how to explain it, there's some games that just "hiccup" less, just smoother.

 

[Squid Surprise]

I'll be honest, I completely forgot this was on an article about the 9000 series.

Here I do agree, I built a computer with a 7600 not too long ago, vs the 7800X3D, there's not much in it @ 1440p/144Hz with a 4070 Super.

There is still something to be said about the X3D chips though, I don't really know how to explain it, there's some games that just "hiccup" less, just smoother.

Yes - for gaming, that cache is clearly excellent... my original argument was that if you want to game, go 9800X3D... the 9950X3D and 9900X3D sacrifice productivity over their "vanilla" versions (unless you are one of the few doing specific productivity tasks that require it) so I can't see too many people needing them - especially at a $200+ premium...