Man, this video was great! I'm definitely gonna wait for the 9800X3D. I just wonder if the 9900X3D & 9950X3D might offer more performance and cause me to wait for those X3D chips instead...
Honestly the best CPU benchmarking channel. I'm currently thorn between waiting for the 9800X3D or take either a 9700X (390 EUR here) or a 9900X (490 EUR) (meanwhile the 7800X3D is 500...) So it will depends on the price and also if it is indeed, as we heard, good even in productivity work.
Appreciate the comment. It's the frequency boost that may really help with productivity work. I genuinely think the 9700X is a sleeper and it has dropped in price a lot since it launched, but I understand the hesitation ... especially when new chips are right around the corner. This is always a tough time to buy.
@@blackbirdpctech Yeah it definitely feels like the whole 9000X serie is being slept on because of a bad launch and Hardware CCs being lazy. But well it kinda works in our favor since there have been prices drops. Guess in a few days we'll know the prices of the 9800X3D and will be able to decide a bit more easily
I just checked your channel out ... very cool indeed ... I really love the style of your thumbnails ... I'm a big D&D fan, so one of the earlier videos I did on my channel was a custom BG3 PC build and I went through some of the history of D&D on PC's ... you might enjoy that one.
@@blackbirdpctech The Ultimate Baldur’s Gate 3 PC Build, I found it, thank you for letting me know! :D And thank you for the kind words about my thumbnails as well! :P
Nice video I have a 7800x3d and was thinking of upgrading to a 9800x3d chip your video show so many tips that alot of other you tubers dont show you have gained one more subscriber
First time here, appreciate how concise and quickly put everything together. Keep it up, and I like the hardware. I'm running a 7800x3d with a 4090 MSI Supreme
Couldn’t be waiting more patiently for this chip but man this is probably the longest it’s taken for them to do the rollout while these leaks are swirling around everywhere
For the stage that they are at before launching I'm actually pretty impressed that there aren't more leaks ... from what I've seen there are a couple of screenshots from an MSI event and another document of some type ... not too bad considering how many people must actually know at this point.
One note here. In gaming setups I would be very careful about prolonging tREFI. While in OCCT Memory test or Karhu you can pass this test overnight on the other hand as soon as you launch game and your VGA starts dumping waste heat into setup and it heats up DIMM sticks above 55 °C, you are doomed. Many memory overclockers like Buildzoid attach separate fan above this DIMM sticks to keep their temperature as low as possible. So in gaming setup I would rather tune other temperature insensitive subtimings. It is good to measure temperature of DIMM sticks after passing heavy memory tests and also after when VGA dumps a lot of waste heat into setup. Worst scenario is when you need high memory traffic and also VGA is busy, for instance reloading map in game. You can also try in OCCT Combined test where you mix 3D Standard and Memory test. In single rank DIMMs you might pass it in well ventilated case, but with dual rank DIMMs (32/48 GB per stick) it will most likely fail
I appreciate the comment and suggestion. For my 14900KS system the Apex Encore motherboard comes with a dedicated memory fan to help cool super high speed memory. One of the challenges with high speed DDR5 memory is that it gets warm due to the high voltages required for stability. This is why the new CUDIMM modules were developed, they significantly reduce the required voltage to achieve stability for DDR5.
Do you think paying more for a motherboard that supports ddr 5 8,000 ram would be useful if i plan to buy a 9800x3d and then later upgrade to zen 6 (which should have a new memory controller?) What would be the next sweet spot after ddr 5 6000 ram?
No, I don't think that would be a worthwhile investment. First, X3D chips don't really benefit from higher speed memory because the extra L3 cache means that they don't need to access the RAM modules as frequently. Second, AMD will need to modify the architecture of Zen 6 to benefit from memory above 6400 MT/s because that is the maximum to maintain UCLK=MEMCLK. Once you go above this speed then UCLK=MEMCLK/2, so that's why the higher speed memory doesn't make sense. That said I am currently testing 6000 vs 8000 on a 9700X just to see what the difference is in gaming.
That's likely true if you simply plug it in, turn EXPO on and hope for the best ... but Steve at HUB is not very good at getting systems to work, with some minor tweaks I am confident that you could get those motherboards to run stable with 8000 ... he had previously stated that you couldn't get the X670E Aorus Master stable with 8000, but it's because he didn't enable the "High Bandwidth" switch in Bios.
This video was wonderful, it clarified several points, but it left me with one question. For 9000x3d processors, which is better, 6400 MHz cl 30 or 6000 MHz cl28? Apparently the memory controllers of this generation are more stable in general thanks!!
Thank you, I really appreciate your feedback! For X3D chips the RAM speed is not as important, so I would go for the 6000 CL28 kit. I'm currently working on a 6000 vs 8000 video for a 9700X, and when the new 9800X3D comes out I will repeat it for that too. I will include a 6400 kit as well so that you will have all the information you need to make an informed choice.
I was impressed by all the things you explained in this video and I was happy to subscribe to your channel even though I rarely do, I wish for more videos like this 👍🏼
I don't think you addressed the 65w to 105w firmware update tdp revision in the tweaks, just under-volting or was this assumed? BTW, it would be nice to see recommendations for those who don't want to play with bios settings and testing and might casually want to overclock minimally directly in the O/S and game settings. IMO, waiting for ddr6 mobos might be more of a game changer if time is not an issue since most of these tweaks are about supercharging data to get processed by cpu/gpu faster-- lower latency would go a long way towards that & ddr6 is set to deliver on that promise of ddr4 latency at higher throughput.
As I explained in my video, that was one of the most important issues to address with the 9700X. Early in the video I list the 5 tweaks that I made, the third was to increase the CPU power limits. I didn't set a 105W limit, I completely removed the limit. I explain how I did this in the step-by-step optimization guide later in the video. For people that don't want to play with bios I show in the video how to perform an undervolt with Ryzen Master ... I also link to the step-by-step underolting guide video on this. With respect to latency, the tREF change significantly reduces your system latency ... I wouldn't recommend waiting for DDR6 ... you will be waiting for a long time.
As usual Matt, you are completely on point, sir! Clearly, your background in aeronautics gives you a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of physics which is why I find your videos so interesting. You innately understand the properties of both matter and energy, two things that are invaluable in both aeronautics and electronics. One of the reasons that I chose to go with the R7-5800X3D instead of upgrading to AM5 is because I recognised the probability that a huge L3 cache would go a long way to mitigate the performance difference between DDR4 and DDR5 in gaming. While it doesn't completely mitigate it, it certainly does enough as the R7-5800X3D falls somewhere between the R6-7600X and R5-7700X when it comes to gaming performance. The other reason of course is that it was far less expensive and allowed me to continue to leverage all of the high-end AM4 parts that I had already amassed like my ASRock X570 Pro4 Motherboard and my 64GB of DDR4. However, I made an error in the RAM as I the motherboard is only officially stable at 2666MHz when all four RAM slots are populated. Since I never once approached using even 32GB, I removed two DIMMs and enabled XMP to allow my RAM to run at 3600MHz. While I don't notice any difference in day-to-day tasks, I'm quite certain that my gaming performance has increased as a result. I am considering going back up to 64GB of RAM however because the latest large language AI models require a minimum of 32GB and I've been having a lot of fun with these since my RX 7900 XTX has proven itself to be a phenomenal AI engine. Oh, and Matt, I made up a physics trivia question that I think you'll find irresistible: Q: What is the true antonym for electronic?
Thank you, I really appreciate that. I just rebuilt an AM4 testbench so I can do some comparisons with the 5800X3D … still a great chip. My guess would be physical, but it’s likely not correct.
@@blackbirdpctech That's great! The longevity of the AM4 platofrm is a wonder to behold and it's great that you're still giving it its due when some others starting ignoring it long ago. As for the question, the answer is positronic. 😉 Cheers! 😁
@@blackbirdpctech Well, an electronic device is made of matter and uses the flow of electrons to operate. A positronic device is made of antimatter and uses the flow of positrons (anti-electrons) to operate. Thus, positronic is the antonym of electronic. 😉 👍
I ordered a custom build with a 9950x to replace my 5950x last week. I don't play games and its purely for music production. I'm constantly wanting more power and faster sample loading times.. I went overboard with this build,. getting 2x 4TB Corsair MP700 Pro - (12400MB/s Read & 11800MB/s Write) in RAID 0. All overclocked with 6400Mhz 96GB (2x 48GB) Dominator Platinum I really hope I feel the speed bump because loading large projects from clients with large amounts of samples and a lot of plugins running I often my limits on the 5950x.. and that thing has always been a tank. I've been an Intel user exclusively since 1992 ! The 5950x was my first AMD and I am absolutely converted. It's incredbile. It sounds like I jumped at exactly the right time too because Steinberg, the software company that makes Cubase for making music say they can't recommend Intel due to their botched implementation of Power and Efficiency cores.. and, some problem with the microcode physically and permanently damaging their CPUs... blimey. Could it get any worse?
The 9950X is an amazing cpu … if you haven’t already I recommend checking out my recent 9950X video … I included a full step-by-step tweak guide so you can extract the most out of it.
@@blackbirdpctech I don't suppose you might do a video on the future of transistor size. We've hit 4nm with this current generation and I just wonder how many more years of shrinkage we have left.. if any?
That’s an interesting idea … there are S-curves of technology and as we approach a limit we typically find a way to jump curves to a new tech … so in this case it might be nueromorphic or quantum computing … would be cool to dig into this.
Really enjoy your content. Very informative, as others have stated. This video helped me decide not to wait for the 9800X3D, but I couldn't decide if I should go with the 9700X or 9900X for gaming (the 9950X has gotten too expensive). I watched your vids comparing the chips to the Core i7 and the 7800X3D, but wasn't sure how the 9700X and 9900X compared to each other for gaming. What would you recommend? Also, would higher speed memory make much difference?
The good news is that the data is comparable, so if you look at the 9900X data and compare it to the 9700X data you will see that the 9700X wins in gaming but the 9900X wins in professional applications. So if your primary focus is gaming I would go with a 9700X but if you do some hardcore professional workloads then go with the 9900X. I wouldn't recommend higher speed memory, it just wont make a big enough difference. However there are new DDR5-6000 EXPO kits out with a CL of 28, so if you can pick one of those kits up that's what I would do
@@blackbirdpctech Thanks! I appreciate you taking the time to respond. I also respect your advice. In the past, I would not change any motherboard settings out of fear of messing up my system, however after watching your vids, I feel confident in making your recommended changes.
Awesome video! Hey, you have a mislabeled chapter. 5:44 says "Intel 14900K Results." Awesome optimization tips and performance prediction! I'm hoping some of these underdog companies get their stuff together so that we see some competition. Hope you're well!
Thanks ... that was strange, there was nothing wrong with the chapters listed ... I simply cut them and re-pasted them back in ... must have been a UA-cam glitch.
I live near a Microcenter and can get a 7800X3d for $330(mobo and DDR5 ram combo deal). I'm wondering if you think it's still worth it to wait for the 9%-13% increase, but also the $130-$170 increase in price(assuming no deals from Microcenter).
Living near a microcenter is awesome but dangerous at the same time because it’s so easy to spend money there 😉 I am worried that AMD will price the 9800X3D too high, but at this point you might as well wait until the announcement from them later this week. You could always buy it now and return it after the announcement if the 9800x3d price is terrible.
I can predict the 9800X3D's performance in two ways. 1) As shown here, apply the same increment we now see between 7700X to 9900X. 2) Believe the hype from so-called "leaker" sources. The gains estimated here are, I think, optimistic. What most users want is CPUs that are configured from the fab to run their best and a BIOS that corresponds to that configuration. Tweaking is all fine and good for "enthusiasts," but not for most of us. I'm willing to do some basic BIOS settings, but I don't like messing with voltages and subtimings and yada-yada.
I think that’s a reasonable take, but I would argue that there are only two tweaks that you should make for X3D chips, turn EXPO on and undervolt. The reason I applied more extensive tweaks to make the prediction is that I purposely wanted to keep as many variables consistent as I could, and I needed to understand the true difference between the 7700X and 9700X.
I use Intel … checkout my ultimate gaming pc build videos … was a 14900KS with Apex Encore and 8200 MT/s RAM. I genuinely don’t care about brands, I just love tech.
@@blackbirdpctech based, as a amd user myself I noticed a lot of them don’t like you unless you have amd yourself and I NEVER saw that type of stuff from intel in 2022
Amd fans are completely unhinged…I love their cpus but I am not bending over and inviting them in like their rabid fanboys online, they are just another company trying to make profit just like any other
@@samgoff5289 seriously, they act like intel is the only company that’s capable of virtually no upgrades from the next generation and high prices. 7000-9000 series was a worse jump than 13th gen-14th gen and intel was melted ALIVE for it, all I’ve seen is five videos about the amd one and the x3d chips are literally More expensive than a 13900kf(I was debating buying one but went with a 7700x last week)
Great video, how long do you need to run karhu and cinebench to be happy it is stable? I bought the same 6400ddr5 from your 9700x video, just waiting to see local 9800x3d prices vs 9700x.
That’s a great question and it depends. When I’m testing I usually only run karhu for 10min and just one run of multi-core cinebench. However, once I think I have my full tweaks ready I test karhu over night, say 12+hrs just to make sure, and I test multiple benchmarks. For cinebench I will do a 30min run at the end. I test a lot so I typically don’t go overboard with stability testing, most of the time it’s very obvious.
"9000x3d" release confirmed November 7th. Looks like the 9000x sales just didn't hit target and AMD has decided to hit the Turbo button. God I miss turbo buttons, you just felt faster.
That's what I should call the tweak guides that I make ... "Hitting The Turbo Button". It felt amazing to hit that button and watch the frequency increase ... even if it didn't really do much. The good old days 😉
Thanks for the data! :) Sorry for the long, French-to-English translated "comment"-it’s more of a book chapter than a comment. I won’t be offended if no one reads it all, just sharing my thoughts. First, I have a question I haven’t found a clear answer to regarding undervolting. I see lots of people successfully undervolting their CPUs to some degree, and no one ever says, “I can’t do it, my chip won’t allow it.” So who decides the default voltage for these CPUs, and why is it set so “high” if most chips seem capable of at least a slight undervolt? Is it just to be safe because Intel or AMD knows 1-2% of chips might fail? I wish we had real data on this because it would help clarify your position. If we knew 99% of chips could be safely undervolted to the same level, then sure, reviewing them at those settings makes sense. But if the "silicon lottery" is less favorable, like 60/40, using undervolting to showcase “real potential” seems less relevant, in my opinion. That’s why I’m still conflicted about your approach to CPU reviews. While I get your point, I don’t agree with labeling other reviewers, mainstream or not, as "lacking technical competence". No fanboy here, but I understand why some of them had a less favorable opinion about the AMD 9xxx launch. Forgive my French, but it was a mess. You guys have different jobs, and we need all of you. That’s why I think you’re a bit too harsh on other reviewers. Both your perspectives are valid from a consumer standpoint. It’s AMD’s (or Intel’s) job to deliver a good CPU out of the box, not anyone else’s. Allowing headroom for power users is great, but a product should still impress a minimum without customer intervention. When AMD launches a new CPU that fails to deliver meaningful improvements out of the box, AMD is incompetent, not the reviewers. Reviewers are supposed to point out when a product doesn’t deliver, and as a consumer, I expect that honesty. In the case of the 9xxx series, AMD failed-not because there wasn't improvement over the previous generation (there was), but because they never claimed the CPU would mostly deliver the same performance with lower power consumption. And that's certainly not what most PC users expect, except perhaps on laptops. The CPU was marketed based on its potential rather than its actual out-of-the-box performance. Since most users won’t extract that hidden potential, they end up overpaying for what they actually get. This deserves strong criticism to prevent it from happening again. From a customer’s perspective, the harsh reviews of the 9xxx series are ultimately helpful in the long run. Reviewers like Hardware Unboxed test products as they are used by most consumers. They at least tried to understand the poor results they were getting, and according to them, AMD initially found nothing surprising. It was only later that AMD began working to improve things, and we all saw the results. Finding a product’s “real potential” through optimization is different from what we ask reviewers to do. Your work is valuable because you go beyond typical reviews-you explore a product’s full potential. But overclocking, undervolting and tweaks add uncertainty for consumers, given the silicon lottery and the quality of their own setup. Most of us can't afford to gamble on potential; we need to know what we’re actually sure to get for our money. The rest, is bonus. Reviewers absolutely need to call out companies when they deliver poor value at high prices. After that, we rely on people like you to dive deeper and show us how to get the most out of what we ultimately decide to buy. I hope your predictions about the 9800X3D are spot-on because, in the end, we all want a good product from day one that we won’t regret purchasing. I really appreciate your content, and my 7800X3D is thriving thanks to your insightful work. But as a consumer, I rely more on reviewers’ conclusions because I’m more likely to be disappointed if I hope for results like yours. Power users will find your content because they have that same curiosity and patience. Everyone else deserves to know what they’re getting without needing to invest extra time and effort. And the companies get the memo. No hard feelings-just thinking out loud, as I said earlier. And now, off to bed. Again, sorry for the long post! Long posts should help content creators with visibility !
I appreciate that you took the time to write all of this and I am always good with people sharing their opinions, even if I disagree with them, as long as it's done in a respectful manner. Let me try to address some of the items you mentioned: - when manufacturers define the specs for a product they always have to account for the worst silicon, and even then they include a safety margin to account for environmental factors, ambient conditions, degradation, etc., so we end up with all chips being able to undervolt, at least to some degree. I have never come across an AMD Ryzen CPU from the 5000 series onward, that can't run with at least a -20 CO on all cores. That doesn't guarantee that all will, but it's definitely not something like 60-40, it's probably more like 95-5. And yes, it would be good to have a statistically meaningful dataset to verify what that percentage actually is. That would have to come from AMD directly. - with respect to other reviewers, especially the larger channels that I've criticized for how they handled the day one 9000 series reviews. I completely agree that we should test CPU's with stock settings. However, when that data leads you to a conclusion that says "Zen 5 Sucks For Gaming", which is what Hardware Unboxed put in their title for their 9700X review, I think that's irresponsible and misleading. This is a technical field and reviewers should spend the time necessary to provide a complete picture for technical components. They could have showed stock performance and also showed what is possible with some minimal tweaks, but they didn't. Drama sells and they knew they would generate clicks by posting a negative video. - we should also talk about what out-of-the-box or stock conditions really means. Most people are comfortable going in to Bios and overclocking their RAM by turning on XMP or EXPO. This is not "stock" or "out-of-the-box". All of the tweaks that I've mentioned in my optimization guides have been basic Bios switches, similar to turning XMP/EXPO on/off. So I think it's reasonable to expect that the larger so-called "tech" reviewers would have the basic knowledge to do that before trashing products. - specifically wrt Hardware Unboxed, I pointed out that they test CPU's incorrectly by testing them at 1080p with Ultra settings. I showed specific examples of how their data was misleading because they were offloading the CPU. The example I used was in Baldur's Gate 3 where they showed a 2 fps difference between the 7700X and the 9700X, and I compared it to the Gamers Nexus data that showed a much larger difference. This isn't an opinion, it's simply wrong. I tried reaching out to Steve at HUB and suggested that he modify how he tests, but he does not take feedback well and came across in an arrogant manner, so I think my criticism was justified. - wrt the 9000 series launch, I stated multiple times that I think the primary blame is on AMD for configuring their chips poorly, especially the 9700X. Hopefully they don't screw up the launch of the 9800X3D ;)
@@blackbirdpctech I appreciate the time you took to respond! Thank you for the clarification about undervolting. It might be worth suggesting to motherboard manufacturers that they create something similar to XMP profiles for CPUs, making the process even more "Lego-like," as you’ve described. While it’s true that undervolting isn’t rocket science, navigating some of the more confusing BIOS menus can still be cumbersome. :) I revisited the HUB videos because I didn’t recall that specific title-perhaps I was more focused on the thumbnail, which said "FLOP." After reviewing it, I now fully agree with you: while the criticism of the launch and broken promises was justified, claiming the new CPU "sucks at gaming" is indeed outright wrong, technically. Regarding the need to thoroughly examine review results, I still have mixed feelings. Taking your opinion into account, I can now better articulate my thoughts. On one hand, it's essential to call out AMD for how poorly they handled the launch, which reflects on their marketing and management departments, who seem to have a knack for undermining good products. On the other hand, I completely respect your perspective, as the product itself-and the considerable effort AMD's engineers put into creating it-deserves the additional work you advocate for. The 9xxx series is not inherently a bad batch. This leads to a dilemma: if, within the same review, you criticize the company for its poor handling (as you’ve done multiple times, indeed), but then balance that criticism with data showing that the product can be "rescued" from the marketing disaster, we risk offering the brand, and especially its marketing department, unearned "forgiveness." My concern is that this will only encourage them to continue with unethical practices, which we obviously want to avoid. Therefore, trashing the launch quite hard is still a valid approach, even though the situation could play out in different ways if the product fails to sell: either the marketing department takes responsibility, in which case we were right to criticize them, or they deflect blame onto the engineers, as we’ve seen in cases like Boeing-a company with strong engineering roots that was gradually overtaken by individuals with questionable competence and ethics. As for the game testing methodology, I completely agree with you. HUB even released a video addressing why they always test CPUs at lower resolutions with the most powerful GPU on the market, creating seemingly unrealistic scenarios. However, they never explained why they stopped midway by using high and ultra settings instead of low settings. I find it disappointing that they didn’t address your points with the attention and respect they deserved. I tried to go through the comments on that video, but it’s too time-consuming to sift through them all. In the end, I think it's about establishing an arbitrary "low" benchmark while maintaining a sense of "realism." (We could opt for even lower resolutions-1080p is already somewhat arbitrary, likely chosen because it’s still the most common lower resolution among gamers.) It's surprising how many people still don’t understand the point of testing at low resolution, even though the video clearly explains why reviewers do it and how the data benefits the end user. For now, I think you’re right in advocating for 1080p low testing. It may seem less "realistic," but it’s far more relevant for comparing current hardware and helps in making smarter purchasing decisions. To conclude this very interesting discussion, here’s what I’d say: referring to Boeing earlier might have been a bit far-fetched and extreme in this context, but as I mentioned, I try to evaluate things with a long-term perspective. I still think the backlash against AMD is well-deserved, even if, from a product standpoint, it might seem somewhat unfair. And if I understood correctly, we’re on the same page here. That said, if AMD wants to increase its market share, its credibility is absolutely crucial. I want them to maintain that credibility because competition benefits us as consumers. Intel is struggling at the moment, and this was a great opportunity for AMD-one they squandered. My final conclusion is this: your approach should generally be the one to follow, as it makes more sense by focusing on what matters-the product and its real performance. However, sometimes drama can serve a purpose (beyond just generating more views) and isn’t inherently bad when it’s in the best interest of consumers. The 9xxx series wasn’t a bad product, but it was very poorly launched, as you also concluded. In a day-one review, I felt it was appropriate to address this first, leaving the deeper analysis for a later video. While it was indeed unfair and untterly incorrect to say "the CPU sucks at gaming," I won’t deny that the reaction was, in a way, necessary-and largely deserved. And regarding HUB, we’re also on the same page. I’m pretty sad and disappointed that they didn’t address your concerns with the same patience and respectful manner in which you treated my own remarks. So, Thank you. and have a great day :)
I really like the Boeing example ... it is a perfect case of letting CFO's run an engineering company. And yes, AMD deserves to be punished financially for screwing up the 9000 series launch ... the problem is they seem to do this every time. I also really like the idea of having motherboard manufacturers include an "easy" optimize switch in Bios ... some of them have attempted this before but with poor results. It looks like Gigabyte is attempting to do this with a new feature in Bios ... I will need to test it to see if it works. This is actually a great way to really use AI, but unfortunately none of the motherboard manufacturers actually understand AI ... they only use it as a marketing tool. Appreciate your comment and feedback.
@@blackbirdpctech honestly i was tempted with the 5800x3d because i was still on AM4 before going to the 7800x3d but i wanted to play in 4K 120fps and wanted the best i could afford.
@@blackbirdpctech Considering that initially AMD only wanted to support AM5 til end of 2025 and rumors that Zen 6 is gonna be a new socket then it doesn't look that good for longevity. They only extended support for ZEN 5 to 2027 after massive backlash.
@@kazuviking the challenge for AMD is that they can extract more performance with a new socket, so they need to balance pleasing their fans vs performance ... the rumor is that the new Core Ultra series from Intel will be the only generation on the new LGA 1851 socket, so clearly Intel simply doesn't care
Unfortunately no because it would just be a guess. I was able to do a quality prediction of the 9800X3D because AMD had already released the 9700X. Unfortunately Nvidia hasn’t released any Blackwell consumer cards yet, so it makes a prediction very low quality, i.e. a guess.
Do these tweaks shorten the life of the processor overall? Also, would you say the new Core Ultra 9 285k will come close to the 9950x (with tweaks) in gaming and productivity benchmarks? I'm building a new system which I want to use for gaming and light to medium productivity (video and photo editing). I will be using the 4080 super but I still can't decide on a CPU.
Undervolting would likely increase processor life while increasing the power limits will likely shorten it ... that said, I don't think that any of the tweaks will impact the life of the CPU in any meaningful way ... these are all relatively minor tweaks. According to Intel the 285K performs about the same as a 14900K, so if you look at my recent 9950X video you will see the benchmarks where I compare it to a 14900K. The 9950X is an outstanding CPU and one that I highly recommend. Hopefully that helps.
@@blackbirdpctech I'm unsure whether to go for a monster productivity CPU like the 9950x that is also great at gaming or get the 9800x3d, which will be the gaming king but only ok at productivity. Realistically, I don't know if my productivity needs require a powerhouse type CPU in the first place. I do video editing for a YT channel in Capcut and thumbnail design in photoshop and lightroom. Considering my current system is ~8 years old and I'm running an i5 6500 and a 1070, the upgrade will be massive either way, but I want a good system that will last me at least 5 years and be able to handle anything I throw at it. Also regarding the 9950x and gaming, do you have to disable the CCD every time you play the same game?
Anything you get will be fine and you likely won't notice a big difference between any of the options. Don't forget that the 9900X3D and 9950X3D will also be coming out and there is a rumor floating around that they might have 3D v-cache on both CCD's, which would be interesting. For the 9950X, if there is a game that you play a lot then you can create a shortcut and assign affinity to CCD0 with that shortcut. An alternate way to do it is to use Process Lasso, a free tool that allows you to assign and prioritize cores for each application.
@@blackbirdpctech Thank you for the quick replies! Unfortunately, I can't wait until January for the 9900x3d and the 9950x3d, as editing on my current PC is very difficult and time consuming... So I guess it's between the 9800X3D and the 9950X. Whichever I end up getting, I'll be sure to try out the tweaks to extract max performance from it!
Some people chase frames and never play games, while others enjoy the games with the system they have … there is no right or wrong answer … as long as you are happy.
I tried to explain it as clearly as I could because the equation is basic math, the key is to unlock the performance of the 7700X and 9700X consistently ... that was the difficult part. And I prefer time per hour better 😉
Thank you for the comprehensive prediction. It has been eye-opening. I am an intel user that uses computer to play games and do little/some productivity work. Using 9700k (don't laugh guys) Did missed out on the hype train for 7800x3d when it all started and woke up a year & a half after the launch. Waited 6 more months and 9800x3d finally is coming. I totally understand any upgrade will be a legitimate choice. my current situation is I am using a 2K monitor, 3090 GPU & 1000w PSU Which CPU is a good choice to pair with 3090? I have a feeling that 9800x3d might be overkill for the 3090 Been thinking should I be upgrading to 7800x3d (with MSRP) and sleeping again for the next 5 years or should I be going after 9800x3xd but might be waiting for 3-6 more months? Or wait for the 9800x3d but get the 7800x3d for a lower price tag.
If you plan to upgrade every 5 or so years then at this point I would recommend waiting for the 9800X3D. The price of the 7800X3D is currently inflated, so I don't think it's a good buy ... the 9700X is much better value for basically the same performance when tweaked. I also wouldn't worry about trying to match your CPU to your current GPU, it will not hurt your system if your CPU is more powerful than perhaps it "needs" to be and it will offer you an upgrade path should you decide to get a 5080 when it comes out next year.
@@samgoff5289 I showed how to achieve those results with some basic tweaks, you can choose not to do it, the same way you can choose not to enable XMP or expo, but that doesn’t mean that the chip can’t deliver the performance shown.
@@blackbirdpctech I am not talking about enabling xmp dude obviously, under volting and overclocking or raising power won’t work on most chips that’s why companies don’t release products tuned up to perfection because not every chip can achieve that
@@samgoff5289 XMP and EXPO overclock your RAM and are not stock or default settings. They require the user to go in to Bios and enable them. Turning them on can cause a lot of stability related issues, which is why I recommend testing with a tool like Karhu after you enable them. How is that different than going in to Bios and enabling an undervolt with a simple core offset? In fact, you can do it directly in Windows with Ryzen Master. All chips, even the lowest quality silicon, has margin to account for extreme environmental conditions, aging, etc., so that's why the simple tweaks that I recommend work on most CPU's. I state very clearly in all of my videos the performance you achieve will be based on silicon quality and that not every tweak may work. I also avoid hardcore complicated overclocking ... I try to offer advice that anyone can follow to extract the most from their system.
When you look at the gaming benchmarks you should focus on the 1080p/low data to make an assessment as to the relative performance of any CPU. So a 13% average boost in FPS is a significant gen-to-gen increase. If AMD prices it too high then I agree it would be a mistake, but I don't think they will ... at least I hope they don't.
That’s not a valid argument because it makes no sense in the context of testing CPU’s. To test the performance of CPU’s you need to fully load them, that’s why we test at 1080p/low settings. At higher resolutions and game settings the gpu will typically carry most of the load. That said, if you look at a game like F1 2023, at 4K Ultra settings it has RT on by default, which heavily loads the CPU as well as the GPU. You don’t test at 1080p to represent what gamers would actually do, it’s simply to ensure the CPU’s are heavily loaded so we can get an accurate measure of their relative performance.
Well this should be a no brainer now 7800x3D has sold out and gone up, only pricing can screw this up. Still my predicted performance includes improvements to V-cache implementation, the Zen5 cache had been re-architected with V-cache tech in mind. So the leaks make sense, Zen4 7800x3D had less clock speed bump than other models, the 9800x3D should improve that.
7800X3D prices will make a 9800X3D look like a great deal when it's soon more expensive than the 9800X3D will be. 😅 Currently going for 465€ here in Finland and rising.
Cost per frame, 5800x3d/265 euro, is still the leader even for a new AM4 rig...looking at prices today, 7800x3d aprox 500 euro, i'll skip all AM5 platform..
@@blackbirdpctech I'm focused on 1080p gaming with the highest frame rates and want to record at high frame rates too. 4K, shaders, and visuals don't matter to me. I asked about X3D chips because I saw someone say they're not ideal for Minecraft, but I mostly play competitive titles. I realize it's an odd question, but no one really benchmarks Minecraft or many 1080p games anymore, so it's a bit difficult to make an informed purchase. (I just want the most overkill cpu possible for CPU dependent games) What's your opinion?
I'm so sorry, I thought you were messing with me. I have never tested minecraft but the 9800X3D will be the fastest gaming CPU on the market when it releases in a few weeks. If you play games at 1080P then you will notice a significant difference with an X3D chip because the CPU will be heavily loaded. Hope that helps.
I have a hard time buying any new cpu or frankly any new elctronics day one or the first 6 months of release. You get to pay full price to find the bugs and boo boos
I agree when it's a first gen product ... we saw that when AM5 launched and I am sure that the new Intel platform will have some bugs too. The 9800X3D shouldn't have any bugs however you will likely pay an early adopter price.
So, for someone like me who has a dedicated gaming pc running at 4K, caps frames to around 90fps, what's the benefit of upgrading from a i7 9700k to a Ryzen 7 9800X3D?
That's a great question. First, if you are happy with how your system performs then there really is no good reason to upgrade ... that is the same advice I would give anyone. In your case, if you play games or start playing games with ray tracing then your CPU will likely start limiting your performance below your 90 fps cap. When you look at a game like F1, at4K and ultra settings (includes RT on by default), the max thread load for your CPU will hit numbers like 75% while your GPU is at 99% load ... it's crazy. Games like Black Myth, Cyberpunk, F1, etc. all exhibit this behavior.
In India the 9700x is available for 35k INR whereas the 7800x3d is 42k INR Before the Ryzen 9000 launch it 78003xd was around 34K I think it makes a lot of sense to wait at this point
I don’t want to buy either the 7800X3D or the 9800X3D just because I don’t have a good GPU! Haha, it’s simple, and I don’t have a good 4K high refresh rate HDR gaming monitor either.
@@J.king87 it's not possible to predict the performance of the 5090 with any degree of accuracy because, unlike the 9000 series CPU's, there are no Blackwell based GPU's available.
@@blackbirdpctech you can kind off, they say its 60% sronger then 4090. Sooo i think we are now cpu bottlenecked ( even on 4k with this beast 6090 of a gpu)
Same boat here. Building a new PC not an upgrade so I can wait for 5090/80. The plan is to play on 4K as well. Based on the previous Blackbird videos, it seems that 4090 does benefit from a good CPU when RT is on - and RT should be on for all games at this level of hardware. I suspect 5090 will be similar because RT seems to be CPU heavy regardless of GPU capability.
If what your video is suggesting is true, then the 9800X3D will destroy the Ultra 9 285K in gaming, because it loses to the 7800X3D already by 5-10% according to Intel's internal numbers.
Yeah ... so it looks like AMD will actually have a clear winner on its hands ... so I find myself asking "how are they going to screw this up" ... it should be a slam dunk 😉
Check out my 9700X versus 7800X3D video, I go into detail showing what the issue is. Basically they test at 1080p but at ultra settings, which means they are offloading the cpu in most of the games they test. That’s why, for example, in BG3 they showed a 2 fps difference between the 7700X and 9700X. GN showed a much larger difference. I tried reaching out to Steve to let him know but he’s pretty arrogant. I do however like the other guy and his monitor reviews.
@@blackbirdpctechYou made me curious, I'll take a look at it later, although of course it makes sense to test a cpu in the cpu limit and not in the gpu limit. It's like I'm testing a seat belt (CPU), because the fastening loop and the holding mechanism (GPU and other components) have to be significantly stronger than the belt, otherwise I can't make any statements about the belt load limit.
That’s a good performing chip, just incredibly inefficient … the 9800X3D will be much easier to cool and tweak. That said, I am working on a Raptor Lake optimization guide.
@@blackbirdpctech I usually upgrade my cpu and gpu every generation but you know know how this past 2 generations been so imma go with AMD this generation
That’s fair, but I’m pretty confident that the gaming benchmarks are going to be accurate. There is a big difference between rumors, guessing and using a robust technical approach.
@blackbirdpctech sorry wasn't saying anything bad about what u was doing but amd can mess it up badly worse than we can imagine lol but I see what u mean .
@@blackbirdpctechVery nice video, btw. 98x3d is not released. 😅 I put my bet on arrow lake for this one. I want productivity improvement from Intel and I don't usually play game at 1080p with 300+ fps which is where the x3d cpus really shine.
Take a look at the F1 2023 results from my recent 9950X video ... when Ray Tracing is turned on at 4K Ultra, the load on the CPU can go up to 75%, so CPU's will start to matter more even at high resolutions when features like RT become more popular.
The reason PC's are great is that you can choose to simply run your system at stock settings and not worry about tweaking it. That said, I would argue that Intel systems are much more difficult to tweak and get stable, so keep that in mind if you do plan to go Intel.
@blackbirdpctech i'd appreciate straight stock out of the box benchmarks, doesn't help that AMD themselves tells reviewers to use overclocked RAM and shit for their tests
Most reviewers consider XMP/EXPO settings to be "stock" even though it is overclocking the RAM. AMD is not alone in suggesting that reviewers use overclocked memory, Intel has been doing this for many years. For example, I test Raptor Lake CPU's with 7200 MT/s memory. That said I always show what the difference is with slower memory.
I am saving this video forever..You answered every question I ever had about ryzen
Thank you, I really appreciate your comment!
I have never seen a UA-camr or Reviewer as knowledgeable as this guy! I just subscribed for this reason.
Thank you and welcome to the Blackbird PC Tech community!
@@blueferrari397 never?
@@haidar6280 Most of them are full of shit.
Man, this video was great! I'm definitely gonna wait for the 9800X3D. I just wonder if the 9900X3D & 9950X3D might offer more performance and cause me to wait for those X3D chips instead...
If rumors are true the upcoming dual CCD X3D chips may have 3D v-cache on both CCD’s, so that would be super interesting.
honestly, get the 9800x3d. then when u want to upgrade, get the zen 6 16 core x3d as the last am5 cpu
Honestly the best CPU benchmarking channel.
I'm currently thorn between waiting for the 9800X3D or take either a 9700X (390 EUR here) or a 9900X (490 EUR) (meanwhile the 7800X3D is 500...)
So it will depends on the price and also if it is indeed, as we heard, good even in productivity work.
Appreciate the comment. It's the frequency boost that may really help with productivity work. I genuinely think the 9700X is a sleeper and it has dropped in price a lot since it launched, but I understand the hesitation ... especially when new chips are right around the corner. This is always a tough time to buy.
@@blackbirdpctech Yeah it definitely feels like the whole 9000X serie is being slept on because of a bad launch and Hardware CCs being lazy. But well it kinda works in our favor since there have been prices drops. Guess in a few days we'll know the prices of the 9800X3D and will be able to decide a bit more easily
Ironically the bad reviews really helped drop prices 😉
Get the 7800x3d in a bundle at microcenter. If you can.
@@rkwjunior2298 Theses doesn't exist here
Wow, your methodology and writing is so good for a small channel!
Very very good! Thank you for this!
Really appreciate the feedback, glad you liked the video!
I just checked your channel out ... very cool indeed ... I really love the style of your thumbnails ... I'm a big D&D fan, so one of the earlier videos I did on my channel was a custom BG3 PC build and I went through some of the history of D&D on PC's ... you might enjoy that one.
@@blackbirdpctech The Ultimate Baldur’s Gate 3 PC Build, I found it, thank you for letting me know! :D
And thank you for the kind words about my thumbnails as well! :P
Nice video I have a 7800x3d and was thinking of upgrading to a 9800x3d chip your video show so many tips that alot of other you tubers dont show you have gained one more subscriber
Thank you and welcome to the Blackbird PC Tech community!
First time here, appreciate how concise and quickly put everything together. Keep it up, and I like the hardware. I'm running a 7800x3d with a 4090 MSI Supreme
Thank you, appreciate the feedback. Nice setup!
Amazing video! Ill definitely be waiting for the 9800x3d. I was about to upgrade to a 7800x3d but as much as i want the upgrade now, i will wait 😂
Thank you … after the news today from AMD you might as well wait … at a minimum the 7800X3D price should drop.
@blackbirdpctech It'll be a win win situation for me 😄 What was the news from AMD today?
Couldn’t be waiting more patiently for this chip but man this is probably the longest it’s taken for them to do the rollout while these leaks are swirling around everywhere
For the stage that they are at before launching I'm actually pretty impressed that there aren't more leaks ... from what I've seen there are a couple of screenshots from an MSI event and another document of some type ... not too bad considering how many people must actually know at this point.
One note here. In gaming setups I would be very careful about prolonging tREFI. While in OCCT Memory test or Karhu you can pass this test overnight on the other hand as soon as you launch game and your VGA starts dumping waste heat into setup and it heats up DIMM sticks above 55 °C, you are doomed. Many memory overclockers like Buildzoid attach separate fan above this DIMM sticks to keep their temperature as low as possible. So in gaming setup I would rather tune other temperature insensitive subtimings. It is good to measure temperature of DIMM sticks after passing heavy memory tests and also after when VGA dumps a lot of waste heat into setup. Worst scenario is when you need high memory traffic and also VGA is busy, for instance reloading map in game. You can also try in OCCT Combined test where you mix 3D Standard and Memory test. In single rank DIMMs you might pass it in well ventilated case, but with dual rank DIMMs (32/48 GB per stick) it will most likely fail
I appreciate the comment and suggestion. For my 14900KS system the Apex Encore motherboard comes with a dedicated memory fan to help cool super high speed memory. One of the challenges with high speed DDR5 memory is that it gets warm due to the high voltages required for stability. This is why the new CUDIMM modules were developed, they significantly reduce the required voltage to achieve stability for DDR5.
Do you think paying more for a motherboard that supports ddr 5 8,000 ram would be useful if i plan to buy a 9800x3d and then later upgrade to zen 6 (which should have a new memory controller?) What would be the next sweet spot after ddr 5 6000 ram?
No, I don't think that would be a worthwhile investment. First, X3D chips don't really benefit from higher speed memory because the extra L3 cache means that they don't need to access the RAM modules as frequently. Second, AMD will need to modify the architecture of Zen 6 to benefit from memory above 6400 MT/s because that is the maximum to maintain UCLK=MEMCLK. Once you go above this speed then UCLK=MEMCLK/2, so that's why the higher speed memory doesn't make sense. That said I am currently testing 6000 vs 8000 on a 9700X just to see what the difference is in gaming.
@@blackbirdpctech Thanks so much for the info. I look forward to the video regarding 6000 vs 8000 ddr5 in gaming
Not to forget not all high-end motherboards on X870 and X870E can even hit 8000 MT/s judging by the latest Hardware Unboxed video
That's likely true if you simply plug it in, turn EXPO on and hope for the best ... but Steve at HUB is not very good at getting systems to work, with some minor tweaks I am confident that you could get those motherboards to run stable with 8000 ... he had previously stated that you couldn't get the X670E Aorus Master stable with 8000, but it's because he didn't enable the "High Bandwidth" switch in Bios.
This video was wonderful, it clarified several points, but it left me with one question. For 9000x3d processors, which is better, 6400 MHz cl 30 or 6000 MHz cl28?
Apparently the memory controllers of this generation are more stable in general
thanks!!
Thank you, I really appreciate your feedback!
For X3D chips the RAM speed is not as important, so I would go for the 6000 CL28 kit.
I'm currently working on a 6000 vs 8000 video for a 9700X, and when the new 9800X3D comes out I will repeat it for that too. I will include a 6400 kit as well so that you will have all the information you need to make an informed choice.
I was impressed by all the things you explained in this video and I was happy to subscribe to your channel even though I rarely do, I wish for more videos like this 👍🏼
Thank you and welcome to the Blackbird PC Tech community! If you liked this video you might also like an earlier video I did on Bottlenecks.
I don't think you addressed the 65w to 105w firmware update tdp revision in the tweaks, just under-volting or was this assumed? BTW, it would be nice to see recommendations for those who don't want to play with bios settings and testing and might casually want to overclock minimally directly in the O/S and game settings. IMO, waiting for ddr6 mobos might be more of a game changer if time is not an issue since most of these tweaks are about supercharging data to get processed by cpu/gpu faster-- lower latency would go a long way towards that & ddr6 is set to deliver on that promise of ddr4 latency at higher throughput.
As I explained in my video, that was one of the most important issues to address with the 9700X. Early in the video I list the 5 tweaks that I made, the third was to increase the CPU power limits. I didn't set a 105W limit, I completely removed the limit. I explain how I did this in the step-by-step optimization guide later in the video.
For people that don't want to play with bios I show in the video how to perform an undervolt with Ryzen Master ... I also link to the step-by-step underolting guide video on this.
With respect to latency, the tREF change significantly reduces your system latency ... I wouldn't recommend waiting for DDR6 ... you will be waiting for a long time.
As usual Matt, you are completely on point, sir! Clearly, your background in aeronautics gives you a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of physics which is why I find your videos so interesting. You innately understand the properties of both matter and energy, two things that are invaluable in both aeronautics and electronics.
One of the reasons that I chose to go with the R7-5800X3D instead of upgrading to AM5 is because I recognised the probability that a huge L3 cache would go a long way to mitigate the performance difference between DDR4 and DDR5 in gaming.
While it doesn't completely mitigate it, it certainly does enough as the R7-5800X3D falls somewhere between the R6-7600X and R5-7700X when it comes to gaming performance.
The other reason of course is that it was far less expensive and allowed me to continue to leverage all of the high-end AM4 parts that I had already amassed like my ASRock X570 Pro4 Motherboard and my 64GB of DDR4. However, I made an error in the RAM as I the motherboard is only officially stable at 2666MHz when all four RAM slots are populated. Since I never once approached using even 32GB, I removed two DIMMs and enabled XMP to allow my RAM to run at 3600MHz. While I don't notice any difference in day-to-day tasks, I'm quite certain that my gaming performance has increased as a result.
I am considering going back up to 64GB of RAM however because the latest large language AI models require a minimum of 32GB and I've been having a lot of fun with these since my RX 7900 XTX has proven itself to be a phenomenal AI engine.
Oh, and Matt, I made up a physics trivia question that I think you'll find irresistible:
Q: What is the true antonym for electronic?
Thank you, I really appreciate that. I just rebuilt an AM4 testbench so I can do some comparisons with the 5800X3D … still a great chip.
My guess would be physical, but it’s likely not correct.
@@blackbirdpctech That's great! The longevity of the AM4 platofrm is a wonder to behold and it's great that you're still giving it its due when some others starting ignoring it long ago.
As for the question, the answer is positronic. 😉
Cheers! 😁
@@AvroBellow ha ha ... that sounds like some type of traction control for a car ;)
@@blackbirdpctech Well, an electronic device is made of matter and uses the flow of electrons to operate. A positronic device is made of antimatter and uses the flow of positrons (anti-electrons) to operate.
Thus, positronic is the antonym of electronic. 😉 👍
I ordered a custom build with a 9950x to replace my 5950x last week. I don't play games and its purely for music production. I'm constantly wanting more power and faster sample loading times.. I went overboard with this build,. getting 2x 4TB Corsair MP700 Pro - (12400MB/s Read & 11800MB/s Write) in RAID 0.
All overclocked with 6400Mhz 96GB (2x 48GB) Dominator Platinum
I really hope I feel the speed bump because loading large projects from clients with large amounts of samples and a lot of plugins running I often my limits on the 5950x.. and that thing has always been a tank.
I've been an Intel user exclusively since 1992 !
The 5950x was my first AMD and I am absolutely converted. It's incredbile.
It sounds like I jumped at exactly the right time too because Steinberg, the software company that makes Cubase for making music say they can't recommend Intel due to their botched implementation of Power and Efficiency cores.. and, some problem with the microcode physically and permanently damaging their CPUs... blimey. Could it get any worse?
The 9950X is an amazing cpu … if you haven’t already I recommend checking out my recent 9950X video … I included a full step-by-step tweak guide so you can extract the most out of it.
@@blackbirdpctech Thank you! Subscribed :)
Welcome to the Blackbird PC Tech community!
@@blackbirdpctech I don't suppose you might do a video on the future of transistor size. We've hit 4nm with this current generation and I just wonder how many more years of shrinkage we have left.. if any?
That’s an interesting idea … there are S-curves of technology and as we approach a limit we typically find a way to jump curves to a new tech … so in this case it might be nueromorphic or quantum computing … would be cool to dig into this.
Really enjoy your content. Very informative, as others have stated. This video helped me decide not to wait for the 9800X3D, but I couldn't decide if I should go with the 9700X or 9900X for gaming (the 9950X has gotten too expensive). I watched your vids comparing the chips to the Core i7 and the 7800X3D, but wasn't sure how the 9700X and 9900X compared to each other for gaming. What would you recommend? Also, would higher speed memory make much difference?
The good news is that the data is comparable, so if you look at the 9900X data and compare it to the 9700X data you will see that the 9700X wins in gaming but the 9900X wins in professional applications. So if your primary focus is gaming I would go with a 9700X but if you do some hardcore professional workloads then go with the 9900X. I wouldn't recommend higher speed memory, it just wont make a big enough difference.
However there are new DDR5-6000 EXPO kits out with a CL of 28, so if you can pick one of those kits up that's what I would do
@@blackbirdpctech Thanks! I appreciate you taking the time to respond. I also respect your advice. In the past, I would not change any motherboard settings out of fear of messing up my system, however after watching your vids, I feel confident in making your recommended changes.
That is awesome to hear and exactly what I was hoping for ... it really is Lego!
Awesome video! Hey, you have a mislabeled chapter. 5:44 says "Intel 14900K Results." Awesome optimization tips and performance prediction! I'm hoping some of these underdog companies get their stuff together so that we see some competition. Hope you're well!
Thanks ... that was strange, there was nothing wrong with the chapters listed ... I simply cut them and re-pasted them back in ... must have been a UA-cam glitch.
I live near a Microcenter and can get a 7800X3d for $330(mobo and DDR5 ram combo deal). I'm wondering if you think it's still worth it to wait for the 9%-13% increase, but also the $130-$170 increase in price(assuming no deals from Microcenter).
Living near a microcenter is awesome but dangerous at the same time because it’s so easy to spend money there 😉
I am worried that AMD will price the 9800X3D too high, but at this point you might as well wait until the announcement from them later this week. You could always buy it now and return it after the announcement if the 9800x3d price is terrible.
I can predict the 9800X3D's performance in two ways. 1) As shown here, apply the same increment we now see between 7700X to 9900X. 2) Believe the hype from so-called "leaker" sources. The gains estimated here are, I think, optimistic.
What most users want is CPUs that are configured from the fab to run their best and a BIOS that corresponds to that configuration. Tweaking is all fine and good for "enthusiasts," but not for most of us. I'm willing to do some basic BIOS settings, but I don't like messing with voltages and subtimings and yada-yada.
I think that’s a reasonable take, but I would argue that there are only two tweaks that you should make for X3D chips, turn EXPO on and undervolt. The reason I applied more extensive tweaks to make the prediction is that I purposely wanted to keep as many variables consistent as I could, and I needed to understand the true difference between the 7700X and 9700X.
@@blackbirdpctechall chips cannot be tweaked as you shown otherwise it would be default…that is the entire point
@@samgoff5289 that’s not entirely correct … you misunderstand what stock or default settings are developed for … do you turn XMP or EXPO on?
only intel user here 12700K😂
I use Intel … checkout my ultimate gaming pc build videos … was a 14900KS with Apex Encore and 8200 MT/s RAM. I genuinely don’t care about brands, I just love tech.
@@blackbirdpctech ah nice, yeah me too, i like use different brands otherwise i get bored quickly, i will check out
@@blackbirdpctech based, as a amd user myself I noticed a lot of them don’t like you unless you have amd yourself and I NEVER saw that type of stuff from intel in 2022
Amd fans are completely unhinged…I love their cpus but I am not bending over and inviting them in like their rabid fanboys online, they are just another company trying to make profit just like any other
@@samgoff5289 seriously, they act like intel is the only company that’s capable of virtually no upgrades from the next generation and high prices. 7000-9000 series was a worse jump than 13th gen-14th gen and intel was melted ALIVE for it, all I’ve seen is five videos about the amd one and the x3d chips are literally
More expensive than a 13900kf(I was debating buying one but went with a 7700x last week)
Great video, how long do you need to run karhu and cinebench to be happy it is stable? I bought the same 6400ddr5 from your 9700x video, just waiting to see local 9800x3d prices vs 9700x.
That’s a great question and it depends. When I’m testing I usually only run karhu for 10min and just one run of multi-core cinebench. However, once I think I have my full tweaks ready I test karhu over night, say 12+hrs just to make sure, and I test multiple benchmarks. For cinebench I will do a 30min run at the end. I test a lot so I typically don’t go overboard with stability testing, most of the time it’s very obvious.
Awesome video as always
Thanks for watching!
"9000x3d" release confirmed November 7th. Looks like the 9000x sales just didn't hit target and AMD has decided to hit the Turbo button. God I miss turbo buttons, you just felt faster.
That's what I should call the tweak guides that I make ... "Hitting The Turbo Button". It felt amazing to hit that button and watch the frequency increase ... even if it didn't really do much. The good old days 😉
Thanks for the data! :)
Sorry for the long, French-to-English translated "comment"-it’s more of a book chapter than a comment. I won’t be offended if no one reads it all, just sharing my thoughts.
First, I have a question I haven’t found a clear answer to regarding undervolting. I see lots of people successfully undervolting their CPUs to some degree, and no one ever says, “I can’t do it, my chip won’t allow it.” So who decides the default voltage for these CPUs, and why is it set so “high” if most chips seem capable of at least a slight undervolt? Is it just to be safe because Intel or AMD knows 1-2% of chips might fail?
I wish we had real data on this because it would help clarify your position. If we knew 99% of chips could be safely undervolted to the same level, then sure, reviewing them at those settings makes sense. But if the "silicon lottery" is less favorable, like 60/40, using undervolting to showcase “real potential” seems less relevant, in my opinion.
That’s why I’m still conflicted about your approach to CPU reviews. While I get your point, I don’t agree with labeling other reviewers, mainstream or not, as "lacking technical competence". No fanboy here, but I understand why some of them had a less favorable opinion about the AMD 9xxx launch. Forgive my French, but it was a mess.
You guys have different jobs, and we need all of you. That’s why I think you’re a bit too harsh on other reviewers. Both your perspectives are valid from a consumer standpoint.
It’s AMD’s (or Intel’s) job to deliver a good CPU out of the box, not anyone else’s.
Allowing headroom for power users is great, but a product should still impress a minimum without customer intervention. When AMD launches a new CPU that fails to deliver meaningful improvements out of the box, AMD is incompetent, not the reviewers. Reviewers are supposed to point out when a product doesn’t deliver, and as a consumer, I expect that honesty.
In the case of the 9xxx series, AMD failed-not because there wasn't improvement over the previous generation (there was), but because they never claimed the CPU would mostly deliver the same performance with lower power consumption. And that's certainly not what most PC users expect, except perhaps on laptops. The CPU was marketed based on its potential rather than its actual out-of-the-box performance. Since most users won’t extract that hidden potential, they end up overpaying for what they actually get. This deserves strong criticism to prevent it from happening again.
From a customer’s perspective, the harsh reviews of the 9xxx series are ultimately helpful in the long run.
Reviewers like Hardware Unboxed test products as they are used by most consumers. They at least tried to understand the poor results they were getting, and according to them, AMD initially found nothing surprising. It was only later that AMD began working to improve things, and we all saw the results.
Finding a product’s “real potential” through optimization is different from what we ask reviewers to do. Your work is valuable because you go beyond typical reviews-you explore a product’s full potential. But overclocking, undervolting and tweaks add uncertainty for consumers, given the silicon lottery and the quality of their own setup. Most of us can't afford to gamble on potential; we need to know what we’re actually sure to get for our money. The rest, is bonus.
Reviewers absolutely need to call out companies when they deliver poor value at high prices. After that, we rely on people like you to dive deeper and show us how to get the most out of what we ultimately decide to buy.
I hope your predictions about the 9800X3D are spot-on because, in the end, we all want a good product from day one that we won’t regret purchasing.
I really appreciate your content, and my 7800X3D is thriving thanks to your insightful work. But as a consumer, I rely more on reviewers’ conclusions because I’m more likely to be disappointed if I hope for results like yours. Power users will find your content because they have that same curiosity and patience. Everyone else deserves to know what they’re getting without needing to invest extra time and effort.
And the companies get the memo.
No hard feelings-just thinking out loud, as I said earlier.
And now, off to bed.
Again, sorry for the long post! Long posts should help content creators with visibility !
I appreciate that you took the time to write all of this and I am always good with people sharing their opinions, even if I disagree with them, as long as it's done in a respectful manner. Let me try to address some of the items you mentioned:
- when manufacturers define the specs for a product they always have to account for the worst silicon, and even then they include a safety margin to account for environmental factors, ambient conditions, degradation, etc., so we end up with all chips being able to undervolt, at least to some degree. I have never come across an AMD Ryzen CPU from the 5000 series onward, that can't run with at least a -20 CO on all cores. That doesn't guarantee that all will, but it's definitely not something like 60-40, it's probably more like 95-5. And yes, it would be good to have a statistically meaningful dataset to verify what that percentage actually is. That would have to come from AMD directly.
- with respect to other reviewers, especially the larger channels that I've criticized for how they handled the day one 9000 series reviews. I completely agree that we should test CPU's with stock settings. However, when that data leads you to a conclusion that says "Zen 5 Sucks For Gaming", which is what Hardware Unboxed put in their title for their 9700X review, I think that's irresponsible and misleading. This is a technical field and reviewers should spend the time necessary to provide a complete picture for technical components. They could have showed stock performance and also showed what is possible with some minimal tweaks, but they didn't. Drama sells and they knew they would generate clicks by posting a negative video.
- we should also talk about what out-of-the-box or stock conditions really means. Most people are comfortable going in to Bios and overclocking their RAM by turning on XMP or EXPO. This is not "stock" or "out-of-the-box". All of the tweaks that I've mentioned in my optimization guides have been basic Bios switches, similar to turning XMP/EXPO on/off. So I think it's reasonable to expect that the larger so-called "tech" reviewers would have the basic knowledge to do that before trashing products.
- specifically wrt Hardware Unboxed, I pointed out that they test CPU's incorrectly by testing them at 1080p with Ultra settings. I showed specific examples of how their data was misleading because they were offloading the CPU. The example I used was in Baldur's Gate 3 where they showed a 2 fps difference between the 7700X and the 9700X, and I compared it to the Gamers Nexus data that showed a much larger difference. This isn't an opinion, it's simply wrong. I tried reaching out to Steve at HUB and suggested that he modify how he tests, but he does not take feedback well and came across in an arrogant manner, so I think my criticism was justified.
- wrt the 9000 series launch, I stated multiple times that I think the primary blame is on AMD for configuring their chips poorly, especially the 9700X. Hopefully they don't screw up the launch of the 9800X3D ;)
@@blackbirdpctech I appreciate the time you took to respond!
Thank you for the clarification about undervolting. It might be worth suggesting to motherboard manufacturers that they create something similar to XMP profiles for CPUs, making the process even more "Lego-like," as you’ve described. While it’s true that undervolting isn’t rocket science, navigating some of the more confusing BIOS menus can still be cumbersome. :)
I revisited the HUB videos because I didn’t recall that specific title-perhaps I was more focused on the thumbnail, which said "FLOP." After reviewing it, I now fully agree with you: while the criticism of the launch and broken promises was justified, claiming the new CPU "sucks at gaming" is indeed outright wrong, technically.
Regarding the need to thoroughly examine review results, I still have mixed feelings. Taking your opinion into account, I can now better articulate my thoughts. On one hand, it's essential to call out AMD for how poorly they handled the launch, which reflects on their marketing and management departments, who seem to have a knack for undermining good products. On the other hand, I completely respect your perspective, as the product itself-and the considerable effort AMD's engineers put into creating it-deserves the additional work you advocate for. The 9xxx series is not inherently a bad batch.
This leads to a dilemma: if, within the same review, you criticize the company for its poor handling (as you’ve done multiple times, indeed), but then balance that criticism with data showing that the product can be "rescued" from the marketing disaster, we risk offering the brand, and especially its marketing department, unearned "forgiveness." My concern is that this will only encourage them to continue with unethical practices, which we obviously want to avoid.
Therefore, trashing the launch quite hard is still a valid approach, even though the situation could play out in different ways if the product fails to sell: either the marketing department takes responsibility, in which case we were right to criticize them, or they deflect blame onto the engineers, as we’ve seen in cases like Boeing-a company with strong engineering roots that was gradually overtaken by individuals with questionable competence and ethics.
As for the game testing methodology, I completely agree with you. HUB even released a video addressing why they always test CPUs at lower resolutions with the most powerful GPU on the market, creating seemingly unrealistic scenarios. However, they never explained why they stopped midway by using high and ultra settings instead of low settings. I find it disappointing that they didn’t address your points with the attention and respect they deserved. I tried to go through the comments on that video, but it’s too time-consuming to sift through them all. In the end, I think it's about establishing an arbitrary "low" benchmark while maintaining a sense of "realism." (We could opt for even lower resolutions-1080p is already somewhat arbitrary, likely chosen because it’s still the most common lower resolution among gamers.) It's surprising how many people still don’t understand the point of testing at low resolution, even though the video clearly explains why reviewers do it and how the data benefits the end user. For now, I think you’re right in advocating for 1080p low testing. It may seem less "realistic," but it’s far more relevant for comparing current hardware and helps in making smarter purchasing decisions.
To conclude this very interesting discussion, here’s what I’d say: referring to Boeing earlier might have been a bit far-fetched and extreme in this context, but as I mentioned, I try to evaluate things with a long-term perspective. I still think the backlash against AMD is well-deserved, even if, from a product standpoint, it might seem somewhat unfair. And if I understood correctly, we’re on the same page here.
That said, if AMD wants to increase its market share, its credibility is absolutely crucial. I want them to maintain that credibility because competition benefits us as consumers. Intel is struggling at the moment, and this was a great opportunity for AMD-one they squandered.
My final conclusion is this: your approach should generally be the one to follow, as it makes more sense by focusing on what matters-the product and its real performance. However, sometimes drama can serve a purpose (beyond just generating more views) and isn’t inherently bad when it’s in the best interest of consumers. The 9xxx series wasn’t a bad product, but it was very poorly launched, as you also concluded. In a day-one review, I felt it was appropriate to address this first, leaving the deeper analysis for a later video. While it was indeed unfair and untterly incorrect to say "the CPU sucks at gaming," I won’t deny that the reaction was, in a way, necessary-and largely deserved.
And regarding HUB, we’re also on the same page. I’m pretty sad and disappointed that they didn’t address your concerns with the same patience and respectful manner in which you treated my own remarks.
So, Thank you. and have a great day :)
I really like the Boeing example ... it is a perfect case of letting CFO's run an engineering company. And yes, AMD deserves to be punished financially for screwing up the 9000 series launch ... the problem is they seem to do this every time. I also really like the idea of having motherboard manufacturers include an "easy" optimize switch in Bios ... some of them have attempted this before but with poor results. It looks like Gigabyte is attempting to do this with a new feature in Bios ... I will need to test it to see if it works. This is actually a great way to really use AI, but unfortunately none of the motherboard manufacturers actually understand AI ... they only use it as a marketing tool. Appreciate your comment and feedback.
Decided to get the 7800x3d then wait until the end of Am5 or a little ways into Am6 then buy whatever is best Am5 CPU to hopefully last me 5 years
That’s the great thing about a socket that lasts multiple generations … the 5800X3D is a good example, coming at the end of AM4.
@@blackbirdpctech honestly i was tempted with the 5800x3d because i was still on AM4 before going to the 7800x3d but i wanted to play in 4K 120fps and wanted the best i could afford.
The good thing now is that you can upgrade again towards the end of AM5 and extend the life of the entire system.
@@blackbirdpctech Considering that initially AMD only wanted to support AM5 til end of 2025 and rumors that Zen 6 is gonna be a new socket then it doesn't look that good for longevity. They only extended support for ZEN 5 to 2027 after massive backlash.
@@kazuviking the challenge for AMD is that they can extract more performance with a new socket, so they need to balance pleasing their fans vs performance ... the rumor is that the new Core Ultra series from Intel will be the only generation on the new LGA 1851 socket, so clearly Intel simply doesn't care
Hey! Could you do a rtx 5090 performance prediciton benchmark pls?
Unfortunately no because it would just be a guess. I was able to do a quality prediction of the 9800X3D because AMD had already released the 9700X. Unfortunately Nvidia hasn’t released any Blackwell consumer cards yet, so it makes a prediction very low quality, i.e. a guess.
@@blackbirdpctech Oh ok understandable
Do these tweaks shorten the life of the processor overall? Also, would you say the new Core Ultra 9 285k will come close to the 9950x (with tweaks) in gaming and productivity benchmarks? I'm building a new system which I want to use for gaming and light to medium productivity (video and photo editing). I will be using the 4080 super but I still can't decide on a CPU.
Undervolting would likely increase processor life while increasing the power limits will likely shorten it ... that said, I don't think that any of the tweaks will impact the life of the CPU in any meaningful way ... these are all relatively minor tweaks. According to Intel the 285K performs about the same as a 14900K, so if you look at my recent 9950X video you will see the benchmarks where I compare it to a 14900K. The 9950X is an outstanding CPU and one that I highly recommend. Hopefully that helps.
@@blackbirdpctech I'm unsure whether to go for a monster productivity CPU like the 9950x that is also great at gaming or get the 9800x3d, which will be the gaming king but only ok at productivity. Realistically, I don't know if my productivity needs require a powerhouse type CPU in the first place. I do video editing for a YT channel in Capcut and thumbnail design in photoshop and lightroom. Considering my current system is ~8 years old and I'm running an i5 6500 and a 1070, the upgrade will be massive either way, but I want a good system that will last me at least 5 years and be able to handle anything I throw at it.
Also regarding the 9950x and gaming, do you have to disable the CCD every time you play the same game?
Anything you get will be fine and you likely won't notice a big difference between any of the options. Don't forget that the 9900X3D and 9950X3D will also be coming out and there is a rumor floating around that they might have 3D v-cache on both CCD's, which would be interesting. For the 9950X, if there is a game that you play a lot then you can create a shortcut and assign affinity to CCD0 with that shortcut. An alternate way to do it is to use Process Lasso, a free tool that allows you to assign and prioritize cores for each application.
@@blackbirdpctech Thank you for the quick replies! Unfortunately, I can't wait until January for the 9900x3d and the 9950x3d, as editing on my current PC is very difficult and time consuming... So I guess it's between the 9800X3D and the 9950X. Whichever I end up getting, I'll be sure to try out the tweaks to extract max performance from it!
@@Kk-wp5rl I would go with the 9950X ... it's an amazing CPU.
Still using a 5900X/6800XT combo on UWQHD and all those new CPU's do not convince me enough to change my whole platform.
Some people chase frames and never play games, while others enjoy the games with the system they have … there is no right or wrong answer … as long as you are happy.
This is a bit like the 4D chess version of calculating watts per frame. Or my preferred variable, thrust per pound. 😉
I tried to explain it as clearly as I could because the equation is basic math, the key is to unlock the performance of the 7700X and 9700X consistently ... that was the difficult part. And I prefer time per hour better 😉
@@blackbirdpctech You were fine, it was supposed to be a cheeky compliment. 👍 I geek out on equations, too.
I understood the intention, that's why I liked your comment ... but I was genuinely worried about how best to communicate what I was doing.
Thank you for the comprehensive prediction. It has been eye-opening.
I am an intel user that uses computer to play games and do little/some productivity work. Using 9700k (don't laugh guys)
Did missed out on the hype train for 7800x3d when it all started and woke up a year & a half after the launch.
Waited 6 more months and 9800x3d finally is coming.
I totally understand any upgrade will be a legitimate choice.
my current situation is I am using a 2K monitor, 3090 GPU & 1000w PSU
Which CPU is a good choice to pair with 3090? I have a feeling that 9800x3d might be overkill for the 3090
Been thinking should I be upgrading to 7800x3d (with MSRP) and sleeping again for the next 5 years
or should I be going after 9800x3xd but might be waiting for 3-6 more months?
Or wait for the 9800x3d but get the 7800x3d for a lower price tag.
If you plan to upgrade every 5 or so years then at this point I would recommend waiting for the 9800X3D. The price of the 7800X3D is currently inflated, so I don't think it's a good buy ... the 9700X is much better value for basically the same performance when tweaked. I also wouldn't worry about trying to match your CPU to your current GPU, it will not hurt your system if your CPU is more powerful than perhaps it "needs" to be and it will offer you an upgrade path should you decide to get a 5080 when it comes out next year.
Everything but INTEL :)
looks like 7800X3D is quite nice, no reason to buy 9800X3D
the difference between the two is so small
A greater than 10% performance boost gen-to-gen is significant but yes, the 7800X3D is still a great chip.
@@blackbirdpctechit would be nice if zen 5 actually delivered that instead but it is not
@@samgoff5289 I showed how to achieve those results with some basic tweaks, you can choose not to do it, the same way you can choose not to enable XMP or expo, but that doesn’t mean that the chip can’t deliver the performance shown.
@@blackbirdpctech I am not talking about enabling xmp dude obviously, under volting and overclocking or raising power won’t work on most chips that’s why companies don’t release products tuned up to perfection because not every chip can achieve that
@@samgoff5289 XMP and EXPO overclock your RAM and are not stock or default settings. They require the user to go in to Bios and enable them. Turning them on can cause a lot of stability related issues, which is why I recommend testing with a tool like Karhu after you enable them. How is that different than going in to Bios and enabling an undervolt with a simple core offset? In fact, you can do it directly in Windows with Ryzen Master. All chips, even the lowest quality silicon, has margin to account for extreme environmental conditions, aging, etc., so that's why the simple tweaks that I recommend work on most CPU's. I state very clearly in all of my videos the performance you achieve will be based on silicon quality and that not every tweak may work. I also avoid hardcore complicated overclocking ... I try to offer advice that anyone can follow to extract the most from their system.
solid gains new gaming cpu KING
Should be a slam dunk for AMD … let’s hope they don’t screw it up by pricing it too high.
Is anyone gonna mention the infinity fabric? Will it still be 2,000MT/s?
It will still be 2000 because the architecture is not changing, as we’ve seen with the other 9000 series chips.
flawed assumptions that increased clock speeds won't help performance
In CB its 20% faster but in games its 2% to 12% so the avg is gonna be around 3.5-6% better than the 7800X3D for 100-150€ more meaning DOA.
When you look at the gaming benchmarks you should focus on the 1080p/low data to make an assessment as to the relative performance of any CPU. So a 13% average boost in FPS is a significant gen-to-gen increase. If AMD prices it too high then I agree it would be a mistake, but I don't think they will ... at least I hope they don't.
@@blackbirdpctech Back to the classic argument you don't buy a top end X3D chip for 1080p low.
That’s not a valid argument because it makes no sense in the context of testing CPU’s. To test the performance of CPU’s you need to fully load them, that’s why we test at 1080p/low settings. At higher resolutions and game settings the gpu will typically carry most of the load. That said, if you look at a game like F1 2023, at 4K Ultra settings it has RT on by default, which heavily loads the CPU as well as the GPU. You don’t test at 1080p to represent what gamers would actually do, it’s simply to ensure the CPU’s are heavily loaded so we can get an accurate measure of their relative performance.
Well this should be a no brainer now 7800x3D has sold out and gone up, only pricing can screw this up.
Still my predicted performance includes improvements to V-cache implementation, the Zen5 cache had been re-architected with V-cache tech in mind.
So the leaks make sense, Zen4 7800x3D had less clock speed bump than other models, the 9800x3D should improve that.
I’m starting to get a bad feeling about pricing … I think they might actually go for $499 given the lackluster performance of the 285K.
7800X3D prices will make a 9800X3D look like a great deal when it's soon more expensive than the 9800X3D will be. 😅 Currently going for 465€ here in Finland and rising.
That’s crazy
Cost per frame, 5800x3d/265 euro, is still the leader even for a new AM4 rig...looking at prices today, 7800x3d aprox 500 euro, i'll skip all AM5 platform..
The 9700X is my pick of the currently available processors but yes, the 5800X3D is a great CPU and is still going strong.
@@blackbirdpctech if you can find..actually 57003d is better value, but wasn't availabe 2 years ago..
@@torukmahtomahto409 I used it in one of my recent upgrade videos … great chip.
Hello sir i have a question for you
I have a 2k monitor and 4060 which processor you suggest for gaming.. x3d or something...?
What motherboard do you have?
Think I will go with the 9800x3D in around 1 year and be done for this decade lol
Wow, a decade ... that's how to extract max value from tech 😉
@@blackbirdpctech Na, I meant at least till 2030 lol
10 STAR RATING VIDEO
Thank you, glad you liked it!
Are the x3d chips good for minecraft? Specifically this new and upcoming 9800x3d
If you turn ray tracing on and run it at 4K then you might actually need a 9800X3D. You should be able to play Tetris too 😉
@@blackbirdpctech I'm focused on 1080p gaming with the highest frame rates and want to record at high frame rates too. 4K, shaders, and visuals don't matter to me. I asked about X3D chips because I saw someone say they're not ideal for Minecraft, but I mostly play competitive titles. I realize it's an odd question, but no one really benchmarks Minecraft or many 1080p games anymore, so it's a bit difficult to make an informed purchase. (I just want the most overkill cpu possible for CPU dependent games) What's your opinion?
I'm so sorry, I thought you were messing with me. I have never tested minecraft but the 9800X3D will be the fastest gaming CPU on the market when it releases in a few weeks. If you play games at 1080P then you will notice a significant difference with an X3D chip because the CPU will be heavily loaded. Hope that helps.
So as a key away is either buy the r7 9700x to get the performance - with some tweacks - of a 7800x3d for cheaper or wait the 9800x3d.
Yes, well said … the only real unknown is the price.
@@blackbirdpctech hi sir! I hope you are doing well!
I have a hard time buying any new cpu or frankly any new elctronics day one or the first 6 months of release. You get to pay full price to find the bugs and boo boos
I agree when it's a first gen product ... we saw that when AM5 launched and I am sure that the new Intel platform will have some bugs too. The 9800X3D shouldn't have any bugs however you will likely pay an early adopter price.
So, for someone like me who has a dedicated gaming pc running at 4K, caps frames to around 90fps, what's the benefit of upgrading from a i7 9700k to a Ryzen 7 9800X3D?
That's a great question. First, if you are happy with how your system performs then there really is no good reason to upgrade ... that is the same advice I would give anyone. In your case, if you play games or start playing games with ray tracing then your CPU will likely start limiting your performance below your 90 fps cap. When you look at a game like F1, at4K and ultra settings (includes RT on by default), the max thread load for your CPU will hit numbers like 75% while your GPU is at 99% load ... it's crazy. Games like Black Myth, Cyberpunk, F1, etc. all exhibit this behavior.
@@blackbirdpctech You're absolutely right! I do hit 99% with RT and 75% or so on my cpu. So, in this case, perhaps it's worth upgrading.
It took me a while to really understand that this was happening because I originally thought that CPU's were somewhat pointless at high resolutions.
9800x3d launching in 23-25th Oct
That’s the announcement however it looks like we won’t see the chips themselves until early November
In India the 9700x is available for 35k INR whereas the 7800x3d is 42k INR
Before the Ryzen 9000 launch it 78003xd was around 34K
I think it makes a lot of sense to wait at this point
Agreed
Bro in bangalore its 48k 7800x3d so I'll wait for 9800x3d then I'll make a decision which to get
I don’t want to buy either the 7800X3D or the 9800X3D just because I don’t have a good GPU! Haha, it’s simple, and I don’t have a good 4K high refresh rate HDR gaming monitor either.
All things that you can upgrade over time, which is the cool thing about PC’s.
I’m still using an intel 10700 i7 with a 3070
So, How many cores do gamers relly need ? and are more cores bad for gaming ?
I covered those questions in my recent 9950X video … check it out!
Curious if we are gpu bottlenecked with 5090 or still cpu bottlenecked with 9800x3d... on 4k gaming
I don't understand your question ... do you mean 4090?
@@blackbirdpctech 5090
@@J.king87 it's not possible to predict the performance of the 5090 with any degree of accuracy because, unlike the 9000 series CPU's, there are no Blackwell based GPU's available.
@@blackbirdpctech you can kind off, they say its 60% sronger then 4090.
Sooo i think we are now cpu bottlenecked ( even on 4k with this beast 6090 of a gpu)
Same boat here. Building a new PC not an upgrade so I can wait for 5090/80. The plan is to play on 4K as well. Based on the previous Blackbird videos, it seems that 4090 does benefit from a good CPU when RT is on - and RT should be on for all games at this level of hardware. I suspect 5090 will be similar because RT seems to be CPU heavy regardless of GPU capability.
If what your video is suggesting is true, then the 9800X3D will destroy the Ultra 9 285K in gaming, because it loses to the 7800X3D already by 5-10% according to Intel's internal numbers.
Yeah ... so it looks like AMD will actually have a clear winner on its hands ... so I find myself asking "how are they going to screw this up" ... it should be a slam dunk 😉
No, its not gonna change anything.
if true not worth $450+ needs to be $329.99 usd for me to buy oterh wise ill stay oon 7800X3D
did he just say hardware unboxed is incompetent? LMAO XD
I don't recall saying that exactly, but they definitely don't test CPU's the right way.
@@blackbirdpctech How so? They are my go to channel for reviews
Check out my 9700X versus 7800X3D video, I go into detail showing what the issue is. Basically they test at 1080p but at ultra settings, which means they are offloading the cpu in most of the games they test. That’s why, for example, in BG3 they showed a 2 fps difference between the 7700X and 9700X. GN showed a much larger difference. I tried reaching out to Steve to let him know but he’s pretty arrogant. I do however like the other guy and his monitor reviews.
@@blackbirdpctechYou made me curious, I'll take a look at it later, although of course it makes sense to test a cpu in the cpu limit and not in the gpu limit.
It's like I'm testing a seat belt (CPU), because the fastening loop and the holding mechanism (GPU and other components) have to be significantly stronger than the belt, otherwise I can't make any statements about the belt load limit.
Exactly
im coming from a 14900k
That’s a good performing chip, just incredibly inefficient … the 9800X3D will be much easier to cool and tweak. That said, I am working on a Raptor Lake optimization guide.
@@blackbirdpctech I usually upgrade my cpu and gpu every generation but you know know how this past 2 generations been so imma go with AMD this generation
I think that’s a smart choice
Well like this last time amd had benchmarks it was BS so that said I don't believe anything in till we have it in our hands and that's a fact😅
That’s fair, but I’m pretty confident that the gaming benchmarks are going to be accurate. There is a big difference between rumors, guessing and using a robust technical approach.
@blackbirdpctech sorry wasn't saying anything bad about what u was doing but amd can mess it up badly worse than we can imagine lol but I see what u mean .
I agree … this should be a slam dunk for them … they finally have a clear winner on their hands … I really hope they don’t screw it up this time.
@@blackbirdpctech me to by the way love ur videos!!
Thanks!
9950x is out of stock though😂
Did you mean to say the 9800X3D is out of stock?
@@blackbirdpctechVery nice video, btw. 98x3d is not released. 😅 I put my bet on arrow lake for this one. I want productivity improvement from Intel and I don't usually play game at 1080p with 300+ fps which is where the x3d cpus really shine.
Take a look at the F1 2023 results from my recent 9950X video ... when Ray Tracing is turned on at 4K Ultra, the load on the CPU can go up to 75%, so CPU's will start to matter more even at high resolutions when features like RT become more popular.
@@blackbirdpctech 9800x3d is confirmed releasing data at 23th/24th of this month. It's a war!😂
Are you sure? The last rumor I saw was that it would be announced next Thursday but not available to buy until November
call me stupid or whatever, but 15 minutes of straight configs that i don't understand at all makes me realize i should probably just buy an intel cpu
The reason PC's are great is that you can choose to simply run your system at stock settings and not worry about tweaking it. That said, I would argue that Intel systems are much more difficult to tweak and get stable, so keep that in mind if you do plan to go Intel.
@blackbirdpctech i'd appreciate straight stock out of the box benchmarks, doesn't help that AMD themselves tells reviewers to use overclocked RAM and shit for their tests
Most reviewers consider XMP/EXPO settings to be "stock" even though it is overclocking the RAM. AMD is not alone in suggesting that reviewers use overclocked memory, Intel has been doing this for many years. For example, I test Raptor Lake CPU's with 7200 MT/s memory. That said I always show what the difference is with slower memory.