More Ryzen 7 5800X3D benchmarks surface as the Ryzen 9 5900X drops to lowest ever price

[nanoguy]

In context: Intel may have managed to stave off AMD's conquest in the desktop CPU space, but the latter company seems to have one last piece of heavy Ryzen artillery left for the AM4 platform before Zen 4 arrives. If early benchmarks are to be believed, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D might offer gamers who own a 300, 400, or 500 series motherboard a decent upgrade path.

Many gamers were disappointed to learn that AMD's Ryzen 7 5800X3D will come with some overclocking limitations when compared to the regular Ryzen 7 5800X, but most signs so far point to the 3D V-Cache being able to compensate for this shortcoming.

Last week, someone in Peru was able to get a hold of a Ryzen 7 5800X3D ahead of its official retail availability date, which is April 20. After performing a few benchmarks, they found AMD's new Ryzen 5000 series processor won't be exceptional in productivity tasks, which shouldn't come as a surprise since AMD is marketing this specifically as a gaming CPU.

However, it turns out the 3D V-Cache can lead to some significant performance gains in certain games. For instance, the larger effective size of the L3 cache seemed to make the Ryzen 7 5800X3D faster than Intel's Core i9-12900KS in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, which is notorious for being sensitive to memory speed and latency.

This week, XanxoGaming posted more benchmarks comparing the new AMD CPU to Intel's Core i9-12900KF, and this time around it used more comparable systems that were both equipped with DDR4-3200 CL14 memory and Nvidia's GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Founders Edition.

The new tests were done using resolutions like 1080p and even 720p to try and gauge pure CPU performance in titles like FFXV, Borderlands 3, Death Stranding, Control, Assassin's Creed Origins, Strange Brigade, The Witcher 3, and Shadow of the Tomb Raider, and it looks like the two processors are more or less equal in that regard. In some cases, the Ryzen 5800X3D pulled ahead of the Core i9-12900KF, while the latter processor had the upper hand in other tests.

Of course, we still need to wait for more comprehensive testing before we can pass any judgment on AMD's last processor for the AM4 platform, but if these tests are any indication, the company seems to be ending the AM4 era on a good note.

The Ryzen 7 5800X 3D will retail for $449, which is cheaper than Intel's latest and greatest. However, it will land at a time when AMD's Ryzen 9 5900X has dropped to its lowest ever price — you can snag one for $395 on Amazon or Newegg.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/94154-more-ryzen-7-5800x3d-benchmarks-surface-ryzen-9.html

 

[VitalyT]

5900X was the best-value (for $-performance) CPU. I purchased it back in June 2021 for $580. And because it was the best value, AMD produced massive amounts of them, and now trying to clear the warehouses. Now at $395 it is even a better value.

 

[Sausagemeat]

For the money the 5800X3D compared to a 12900KS is looking like a no brainier (for a gamer). But you might consider Intel still if you want PCIe5 and/or thunderbolt.

 

[Squid Surprise]

You really shouldn't be buying a 12900 if gaming is all you need... the 12700 (or even the 12500) is plenty good enough...

The 12900 rivals the 5950 in productivity while crushing it in single-threaded workloads... wasting all that money just for a few FPS seems rather pointless... but then, there are plenty of people who want bragging rights...

That you can get a 5900 cheaper than this CPU would make me seriously consider buying that... the 5900 is a beast and for under $400, that's a GREAT deal.

 

[Neatfeatguy]

5900X was the best-value (for $-performance) CPU. I purchased it back in June 2021 for $580. And because it was the best value, AMD produced massive amounts of them, and now trying to clear the warehouses. Now at $395 it is even a better value.

It was one of the hardest CPUs to get your hands on for a long time. AMD, if I remember correctly, actually slowed production of the 5600X and 5800X in an attempt to output more 5900X and 5950X - at least that's what I remember hearing, I'm not sure if that's really true.

I was able to get a 5900X at the end of January 2021 for $550. Thankfully just a week after I got it a new BIOS and with it was AGESA 1.2.0.0 that eliminated the WHEA errors I was getting when I ran any game. If I had purchased that CPU a few weeks earlier I probably would have been working with AMD to get it replaced since nothing that I did stopped the WHEA errors.

I've had zero crashes since that BIOS update and it's been an amazing CPU. It has cut my time for transcoding h.264 by roughly 75% when compared to the i5-4670k I was using before. When I'd get a new blu-ray movie and needed to take the .mkv (20-25GB) file to .m4v on handbrake it used to take upwards of 4 hours - I'd let the computer run overnight for 2 movies that might be finished by the time I got up in the morning. Now it takes maybe 50-55 minutes for one of those blu-ray movies. Last week I just got done putting all episodes of Married With Children on my Plex server and it took about 24 hours of non-stop work at the slowest speed to get them all converted and on the plex server. It would have taking 3-4x as long with my old CPU.

I don't mind one bit having spent $550 on this CPU. Awesome upgrade from my aged Haswell.

If the 5800X3D does come out to be the top gaming CPU and if I was looking to build a system strictly for gaming, I would probably go this route of getting one, but if I need a CPU for doing other things well and not just for gaming then I'd be looking at the 12700K or the 5900X.

 

[Aceseven]

I'll probably splurge at the end of the year and buy whatever the most powerful cpu is for my mobo and sell off my 5600x for cheap

 

[Ohnooze]

I'm waiting for AM5. My old 3600 is still kicking well enough.

 

[envirovore]

I'd totally drop 400 on a 5900x right now as an upgrade from my 3700x if I had it to spend.
Not dropping the cash on a combination of new MoBo, CPU, and potentially RAM any time soon though.

 

[Lew Zealand]

Sitting and waiting for the dust to settle.

On the AMD side we have 2x 1600AFs and 1x 2600, 2x B450s, 1x B350. Will wait for reviews and BIOS updates. Maybe the B350 gets the 2600 and stays there, while one B450 gets a 5600 and the other a 5700x or 5800x?

All depends on pricing.

 

[hahahanoobs]

AM4 end note came after telling customers $300 was low enough and the 5800X at $450 was a great deal. Then rewarded your patience with poor options like the Ryzen 4500 and 5500. 5800X3D will be ~8% faster than a 5800X on average is my guess.

Now everyone is drooling over heavily discounted AMD CPUs wanting to buy chips with cores they don't even need!

And I found this while looking something up real quick before posting this:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d/17.html

 

[evolucion8]

AM4 end note came after telling customers $300 was low enough and the 5800X at $450 was a great deal. Then rewarded your patience with poor options like the Ryzen 4500 and 5500. 5800X3D will be ~8% faster than a 5800X on average is my guess...

Now everyone is drooling over heavily discounted AMD CPUs wanting to buy chips with cores they don't even need!

And I found this while looking something up real quick before posting this:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d/17.html

Seems some desperation here.

 

[Squid Surprise]

AM4 end note came after telling customers $300 was low enough and the 5800X at $450 was a great deal. Then rewarded your patience with poor options like the Ryzen 4500 and 5500. 5800X3D will be ~8% faster than a 5800X on average is my guess.

Now everyone is drooling over heavily discounted AMD CPUs wanting to buy chips with cores they don't even need!

And I found this while looking something up real quick before posting this:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d/17.html

I NEED a 512 core PC!!!! I need it to power my 32k 200" TV

 

[antiproduct]

I'm waiting for AM5. My old 3600 is still kicking well enough.

I'm waiting for AM5. My old i5-3570k is still... umm... alive I guess? I really need to upgrade.

 

[Alfatawi Mendel]

If you've dropped $1200 on a 12900+mobo+RAM, you're not going to buy this. If you're a hard-core gamer on AM4...You might. If you're still on Intel 7 series or suchlike...you should. Given the astronomical cost of 12xxx upgrade path. AM4 m/boards are cheap as is fast memory.
Myself...(on AM4/3600).I will wait for next gen AM5 or Intel 13xxx series...by which time, compatible memory will have gotten to near-sane pricing levels.
That's if we aren't all radioactive ash by that time.

 

[Mr Majestyk]

The 1% lows are the important figure and it mostly kills the 12900 for a far smoother gaming experience. I have no interest in this as I recently got the 5800X, but the 6800X/6900X will be huge upgrades.

 

[Irata]

Looking forward to HUB‘s review here on Techspot.

As far as upgrading my AM4 system from its current 2700x, it‘s most likely going to be to a 5700x but if the 5900x EOL prices are low enough I might be tempted.

 

[Usukosej]

Looks great AMD, sadly only gaming performance is comparable to Alder Lake, meaning that i7-12700K/KF is better value and you get PCIe 5.0 and DDR5. 5800X3D loses to 5800X in most applications because of the lower clockspeed and sadly can't be overclocked at all. Also consider that 5800X can gain a few hundred MHz from OC/PBO which 5800X3D won't.

5800X3D probably should have been 349 dollars to be worth it over i7-12700KF which is 375 dollars and will easily perform like a 12900k or better in gaming when overclocked. i7-12700K/KF will easily do 5 GHz or more on all cores, some will do 5.2 GHz all core and the best ones will do even higher. A friend of mine is running his at 5.2 GHz on a cheap 240mm AIO.

NOW we just need AMD to add this amount of cache (or more) to all the higher end Ryzen 7000 SKUs and hopefully they will run at even higher clockspeed (again because OC won't be possible with 3D CACHE).

It would suck if you to CHOOSE if your chip should be good at gaming OR applications - because personally I do both on my rig. CPU needs to be good ALL-ROUND.

My 5800X is doing fine tho, running at around 4.6 GHz all core so I am slightly higher than this 5800X3D in most benches and applications. This chip would be great for some people running older Ryzen chips if motherboard allows it I guess, however AM5 and next gen chips are close including Raptor Lake 13th Gen from Intel.

 

[Aaron Fox]

Looks great AMD, sadly only gaming performance is comparable to Alder Lake, meaning that i7-12700K/KF is better value and you get PCIe 5.0 and DDR5.

5800X3D loses to 5800X in most applications because of the lower clockspeed and sadly can't be overclocked at all. Should probably have been 349 dollars to be worth it over i7-12700KF which is 375 dollars and will easily perform like a 12900k or better in gaming when overclocked. The i7-12700KF will easily do 5 GHz or more on all cores, some will do 5.2 GHz all core and the best ones will do even higher.

NOW we just need AMD to add this amount of cache (or more) to alle the higher end Ryzen 7000 SKUs and hopefully they will run at even higher clockspeed (because OC won't be possible with 3D CACHE)

Isn't DDR-5 really expensive? Is PCI-e 5 important-enough at this time to be a serious future-proofing concern — or is it like buying Turing for ray tracing was?

People who already own DDR-4 RAM and a compatible motherboard will see quite a savings over buying DDR-5 (which is still in early adopter mode, when it comes to its speed versus its price) and a new board.

For most potential buyers of this CPU, it will come down to the question of upgrading an existing AM4 system (with this CPU or with a different Zen 3) versus waiting for Zen 4 or whatever the next iteration is from Intel. Basically... the main target market is a person with an AM4 system who will benefit from a more current CPU.

However, those who spent a pretty penny on high-performance DDR-4 may be swayed to buy an AM4 board at this late a date — especially if the system is a gift to someone else.

The cost of a cooler robust enough to handle the overclocking you're talking about is also a factor. Some of us aren't interested in overclocking, too — at least if it's manual. Turbo has advanced so far that I don't see the value in spending a lot of time hoping to obtain stability with a manual overclock.

 

[Usukosej]

If you've dropped $1200 on a 12900+mobo+RAM, you're not going to buy this. If you're a hard-core gamer on AM4...You might. If you're still on Intel 7 series or suchlike...you should. Given the astronomical cost of 12xxx upgrade path. AM4 m/boards are cheap as is fast memory.
Myself...(on AM4/3600).I will wait for next gen AM5 or Intel 13xxx series...by which time, compatible memory will have gotten to near-sane pricing levels.
That's if we aren't all radioactive ash by that time.

Alder Lake with DDR4 is possible and performs close because DDR5 needs to mature in terms of clockspeed and timings before it will beat DDR4 alot more than it does now. This is why DDR4 boards exist.

In a few years, DDR5 will be much faster than DDR4 and possibly cheaper. DDR4 becomes more expensive when most stuff requires DDR5.

DDR5 will become really great when we see 8000-10000 at CL32-40 ish and then current DDR5 memory will seem like cheap low-end stuff by then.

It took DDR4 a few years to finally hit good clocks/timings

 

[Aaron Fox]

Alder Lake with DDR4 is possible and performs close because DDR5 needs to mature in terms of clockspeed and timings before it will beat DDR4 alot more than it does now. This is why DDR4 boards exist.

Your post, though, cited DDR-5 as part of the superior value offered by AL:

i7-12700K/KF is better value and you get PCIe 5.0 and DDR5.

 

[Usukosej]

You really shouldn't be buying a 12900 if gaming is all you need... the 12700 (or even the 12500) is plenty good enough...

The 12900 rivals the 5950 in productivity while crushing it in single-threaded workloads... wasting all that money just for a few FPS seems rather pointless... but then, there are plenty of people who want bragging rights...

That you can get a 5900 cheaper than this CPU would make me seriously consider buying that... the 5900 is a beast and for under $400, that's a GREAT deal.

Another note to this, i5-12600K and i7-12700K pretty much performs the same in gaming as i9-12900K especially after you overclock them. Most will hit close to 12900K stock perf or even beat it.

ALSO the non-i9 parts use WAY LESS WATTS/POWER than the top SKU.

Especially KF models are good value if you don't need iGPU)

 

[Aaron Fox]

Will the power consumption and the cost of the cooling eat most or even all of the savings? Then, there is the DDR-5 issue already discussed.

I have no interest in manual overclocking. In my view, recent CPUs are best left to turbo, provided the cooling is adequate and the board's power delivery is also. I have many years of experience overclocking (such as having obtained an 80% overclock with an e2140 on a cheap board) and I think it's mainly a waste of time, even prior to modern turbo. That, though, is the final nail in. Whatever the Intel equivalent is of AMD's PBO stuff seems to be enough, for those who aren't content with stock. I have been running my Coffee Lake at 'motherboard stock' (all-core turbo) and it has offered enough performance. If I were in the market for a replacement overclocking wouldn't be on my list, especially since I decided to drop the custom loop in favor of the simplicity of air. Performance-per-watt would rank higher.

 

[Usukosej]

Will the power consumption and the cost of the cooling eat most or even all of the savings? Then, there is the DDR-5 issue already discussed.

I have no interest in manual overclocking. In my view, recent CPUs are best left to turbo, provided the cooling is adequate and the board's power delivery is also. I have many years of experience overclocking (such as having obtained an 80% overclock with an e2140 on a cheap board) and I think it's mainly a waste of time, even prior to modern turbo. That, though, is the final nail in. Whatever the Intel equivalent is of AMD's PBO stuff seems to be enough, for those who aren't content with stock. I have been running my Coffee Lake at 'motherboard stock' (all-core turbo) and it has offered enough performance. If I were in the market for a replacement overclocking wouldn't be on my list, especially since I decided to drop the custom loop in favor of the simplicity of air. Performance-per-watt would rank higher.

If you do a value Alder Lake build, you always choose DDR4 over DDR5, atleast for now. Performance penalty is very low but savings are big (both on memory and motherboard).

A B660 board with 12400 and DDR4 is crazy value. Especially if you choose a board than allows for overclocking of non-K chips, there is multiple boards that allows that these days.

Alder Lake 12600 and 12700 does not use alot of watts. They are pretty easy to cool, unless you overclock them like crazy and aim for 5+ GHz on all cores, then you need decent cooling, like 240 AIO or dual tower air.

i7-12700K has better performance per watt than Ryzen 5800X and better overall performance too. Even i5-12600K pretty much beats 5800X... And this is why price took a dive on all Ryzen 5000 parts

The only chips in Alder Lake lineup that sucks alot of watts are 12900Kx, obviously 12900KS uses the most but also has 5.5 GHz boost on 2 cores and most will hit 5.4-5.6 GHz on all cores with OC. People that buy these chips, typically aim for records. Highly binned chips, hence the price.

Regular people (or even pro gamers) only need to look at 12600K and 12700K. Much better in terms of performance per dollar and watt usage.

 

[Usukosej]

Your post, though, cited DDR-5 as part of the superior value offered by AL:

Yeah if you go with high-end offerings and high-end DDR5.

Buying cheap DDR5 is worse than buying high-end DDR4.

DDR5 will become cheaper over time tho and in 1-2 years we will have 8000+ speeds with lower timings than 6000 kits now.

DDR5 should hit about 10000 at CL40 at some point.

Remember DDR4 in the beginning? 2400-2933 MHz with terrible timings. High-end DDR3 beat DDR4 with ease.

DDR5 was better on launch than DDR4 was, tho.

 

[AIC1Drew]

Still rockin a Z97/4790K.....waiting for DDR5 to mature and the dust to settle with the chip shortage.