The 7950x and by extension the 9950x are incredibly efficient. Remember, the 7950x is doing more in productivity with 180-200w than a 13900k is doing with 300+
@@h1tzzYT Intel: What is the Thermal Design Power (TDP)? TDP stands for Thermal Design Power, in watts, and refers to the power consumption under the maximum theoretical load.
It's interesting the way these CPU's are created. It seems there is only one chip but the way it performs in testing, whether everything on it works and how fast it will process with no problems, decides the name of the chip, In other words, if one performs poorly, then it's a lower price model number, if iit performs well, it's given the name of a more expensive chip. I think Intel does the same thing.
Dota 2 loves x3D cache. My 7800x3D hauls hella frames compared to my 13700k. I hope Intel 15th gen got an answer to this or maybe just bring it closer to x3D performance though since I prefer intel cause I do productivity on the side.
Have you turned off ecores and set the ring bus to like 4.8Ghz? And how slow ram are you running? The X3d cache is a fix to all of this on the Amd side, to its natural to focus on whats holding a cpu back.. I'm running 5Ghz on ring and 7800Mhz on ram, you do not have the same experience from your stock cpu as I have. I have most likely better frame pacing. Running 47ns on ram compared stock 60-70ns really nutors a cpu without cache. Going from 200 to 300fps you do not really notice the fps improvement as much, but everybody notices the frame pacing. If the frame pacing is superb on the X3d part pls let me know since I'm not biased towards any brand. If you just run stock setups the X3d cpus will probably be best for you. I've recently owned or built 10700k and 5800x3d (early days) the oc'd 10700k was better in my opinion. I have the 14900k oc now and its way better than those old systems.Am4 is a good value platform, but dont pair it with a 240Hz gaming screen in Pubg. A 7800x3d is way more future proof because of the ram bandwith (so much greater than AM4. But still nowhere close to 120Gb/s on fast ram 13/14 gen) and you'll get several more years of life out of it before its to old to play the newest games. Some of my pc upgrades earlier was because the games demanded more ram bandwith(not amount) to run without lagging. It'll be interesting to see if this will happen again, the Intel parts could have a longer lifespan because of the greater bandwith capability. Guess we'll have to wait and see.
@@impuls60 From leaks, one of the biggest improvements in zen 5 is ccd to ccd latency. The communication bus has been reworked to reduce latency internally. The x3d cpus have great frame pacing, the huge cache lets the cpu have a ton of breathing room requesting stuff from ram, that's why they're so good at gaming, which is often processing simpler instructions in bulk rather than continuously loading new complex datasets.
Definitely Intel fanboy 😅. Anywayz the 6 core like previous generations represent value for money but they have to make anyone getting 7700x or above feel better about spending all that extra, so they lower the 6 core a bit, the silicon isn't as binned too but it still performs 97% of the way of the 8 core for games... on top of that 8 core only adds another 2 MB of cache, pretty abysmal and the same problem last generation so everyone recommended the 6 core. Some people say games are going to be using more than 6 cores 12 thread and people have found that occur on some games. It's a naive and inexperienced statement, people have been saying that for a decade now and what it comes down to is poorer and poorer game optimisation, every new generation cpu closes those gaps coz they're that much faster and there's no difference with 6 core again. 7950x while can use high wattage, you're incorrect on how much, Intel designs its chips to be high wattage because they can't keep up with Amd in quality/efficiency, they're literally using newer technology. When you undervolt Amd chips they perform significantly better than when you undervolt Intel chips from the past few generations, particularly the latest. There's future upgradeability pathways on AM5 while Intel is just abysmal. There's also a little extra latency (variable?) going up to a 12+ core because It's split into two CCD's on one CCX. Now here's the nitty gritty of what really separates Amd and Intel that nobody talks about. Intel couldn't compete with Amd and this was clear, they became that bad a company. The decided to resort to marketing to beat Amd, so they strategised P+E cores. The idea is sound but the execution is poor, the E cores were supposed be efficient, but by the end of it even with all those cores they still couldn't beat Amd. So they boosted clocks and wattage lol. That's not even the worst thing. Besides all the issues with making seperate cores compatible (still big issues to this day), Intel also had to move the IO driver further away from the core. Techyescity has a series on this, where he details with evidence the effects of this, leading to annoying delay/stutter on spontaneous tasks that can lead to more complex and drastic anomalies with the most common side effect of random spikes of high latency. When the Yes Man spoke to Intel engineers they were quiet about it and they couldn't say it directly but the sacrifices they made were definitely issues they weren't happy with themselves that Intel pushed towards. Amd is solid however there is there is a few problems with win11 as opposed to win10. It most certainly has to with windows 11's thread director that they remade because of Intel, funny how Amd has to suffer some, but still no where near as drastic as Intel's problems. To top it off Intel has weird design quirks that effect the Mobos that can't seem to reconciled while AM5 has only gotten better. I've built three rock solid systems recently, I recommend Gigabyte.
The 7950x and by extension the 9950x are incredibly efficient. Remember, the 7950x is doing more in productivity with 180-200w than a 13900k is doing with 300+
Listening to him talk about the extreme power draw of the 9950X at 170W... doesn't the 14900K draw 253W?
You do realize that TDP is not power consumption?
@@h1tzzYT Intel: What is the Thermal Design Power (TDP)? TDP stands for Thermal Design Power, in watts, and refers to the power consumption under the maximum theoretical load.
@@TheBob3269 got em
@@h1tzzYT Your on some cooked crack with that opinion. Try having 600w's of power draw through your room constantly.
@@h1tzzYT any response?
It's interesting the way these CPU's are created. It seems there is only one chip but the way it performs in testing, whether everything on it works and how fast it will process with no problems, decides the name of the chip, In other words, if one performs poorly, then it's a lower price model number, if iit performs well, it's given the name of a more expensive chip. I think Intel does the same thing.
Lol, thatbia just the way it has always been...poductiin defects decide which category the chip will be. Have u been living unde a rock?
Dota 2 loves x3D cache. My 7800x3D hauls hella frames compared to my 13700k. I hope Intel 15th gen got an answer to this or maybe just bring it closer to x3D performance though since I prefer intel cause I do productivity on the side.
That's exactly what the 7950x3d is for.
Have you turned off ecores and set the ring bus to like 4.8Ghz? And how slow ram are you running? The X3d cache is a fix to all of this on the Amd side, to its natural to focus on whats holding a cpu back.. I'm running 5Ghz on ring and 7800Mhz on ram, you do not have the same experience from your stock cpu as I have. I have most likely better frame pacing. Running 47ns on ram compared stock 60-70ns really nutors a cpu without cache. Going from 200 to 300fps you do not really notice the fps improvement as much, but everybody notices the frame pacing. If the frame pacing is superb on the X3d part pls let me know since I'm not biased towards any brand. If you just run stock setups the X3d cpus will probably be best for you. I've recently owned or built 10700k and 5800x3d (early days) the oc'd 10700k was better in my opinion. I have the 14900k oc now and its way better than those old systems.Am4 is a good value platform, but dont pair it with a 240Hz gaming screen in Pubg. A 7800x3d is way more future proof because of the ram bandwith (so much greater than AM4. But still nowhere close to 120Gb/s on fast ram 13/14 gen) and you'll get several more years of life out of it before its to old to play the newest games. Some of my pc upgrades earlier was because the games demanded more ram bandwith(not amount) to run without lagging. It'll be interesting to see if this will happen again, the Intel parts could have a longer lifespan because of the greater bandwith capability. Guess we'll have to wait and see.
@@impuls60 From leaks, one of the biggest improvements in zen 5 is ccd to ccd latency. The communication bus has been reworked to reduce latency internally. The x3d cpus have great frame pacing, the huge cache lets the cpu have a ton of breathing room requesting stuff from ram, that's why they're so good at gaming, which is often processing simpler instructions in bulk rather than continuously loading new complex datasets.
Definitely Intel fanboy 😅. Anywayz the 6 core like previous generations represent value for money but they have to make anyone getting 7700x or above feel better about spending all that extra, so they lower the 6 core a bit, the silicon isn't as binned too but it still performs 97% of the way of the 8 core for games... on top of that 8 core only adds another 2 MB of cache, pretty abysmal and the same problem last generation so everyone recommended the 6 core. Some people say games are going to be using more than 6 cores 12 thread and people have found that occur on some games. It's a naive and inexperienced statement, people have been saying that for a decade now and what it comes down to is poorer and poorer game optimisation, every new generation cpu closes those gaps coz they're that much faster and there's no difference with 6 core again. 7950x while can use high wattage, you're incorrect on how much, Intel designs its chips to be high wattage because they can't keep up with Amd in quality/efficiency, they're literally using newer technology. When you undervolt Amd chips they perform significantly better than when you undervolt Intel chips from the past few generations, particularly the latest. There's future upgradeability pathways on AM5 while Intel is just abysmal. There's also a little extra latency (variable?) going up to a 12+ core because It's split into two CCD's on one CCX.
Now here's the nitty gritty of what really separates Amd and Intel that nobody talks about. Intel couldn't compete with Amd and this was clear, they became that bad a company. The decided to resort to marketing to beat Amd, so they strategised P+E cores. The idea is sound but the execution is poor, the E cores were supposed be efficient, but by the end of it even with all those cores they still couldn't beat Amd. So they boosted clocks and wattage lol.
That's not even the worst thing. Besides all the issues with making seperate cores compatible (still big issues to this day), Intel also had to move the IO driver further away from the core. Techyescity has a series on this, where he details with evidence the effects of this, leading to annoying delay/stutter on spontaneous tasks that can lead to more complex and drastic anomalies with the most common side effect of random spikes of high latency. When the Yes Man spoke to Intel engineers they were quiet about it and they couldn't say it directly but the sacrifices they made were definitely issues they weren't happy with themselves that Intel pushed towards. Amd is solid however there is there is a few problems with win11 as opposed to win10. It most certainly has to with windows 11's thread director that they remade because of Intel, funny how Amd has to suffer some, but still no where near as drastic as Intel's problems. To top it off Intel has weird design quirks that effect the Mobos that can't seem to reconciled while AM5 has only gotten better. I've built three rock solid systems recently, I recommend Gigabyte.
They’re also using horrific ram to make the intel chip look bad. Would love to see the comparison to a competent person’s 14900k running 8000+
Lol, intel chips can't even RUN nowadays!😅😅😅
Wait for x3d version and arrow lake
Funny intro 😂
Nice video.
Is it not 9800x3d ?
X3d coming later this year
Yeah i got ya, but what models ?
9700x3d ,9800x3d, 9900x3d, 9950x3d ? What you gonna pick ? 🫡
@@J.king87 the 9800x3d would be the best cause most likely single ccd
@@J.king87 Likely wont be a huge boost over 7800x3d