Huh? Intel chips use less wattage during idle and general tasks, than AMD. 125 watts can be expected. Even while gaming it doesn't even go that high. Only when doing the types of tasks where you would want that kind of power.
you know, I don't really mind AMD trying to make cpu prices lower, I just wish something would happen to make gpu prices go back down to something relatively more normal.
"The 4060 offers about the same performance as a 1080Ti, which had a MSRP of 700$. With its 300$ MSRP, the 4060 is clearly much cheaper. Obviously GPU prices are completely normal, the inflation is just in your head!" - Nvidia marketing team, probably
@@DingleBerryschnapps Actually they do. Feel free to google the number of Cores. I remember both releases very well. The Intel 9000 series has no Hyper-Threading, 10000 series brought back HT and added 2 Cores, 11000 series was often beat out due to heat issues by the 10000 series, and 12000 series was the introduction of E-Cores. 7000 series was the highest single-thread IPC, 8000 series introduced Spectre fixes which gave the CPU a rather sizable speed hit. Frankly Intel needs to give 16 P-Cores, and 32 E-Cores if they expect to pull themselves out of this Meme-tier bad market Hurricane their in right now.
What do you mean made to only have? E cores are actual cores. They are just meant for light tasking work loads. They are also superior to hyper threading as well.
Good for gaming ... pretty sure that's their goal. Trying to compete with X3D at bang for buck. It's not a bad idea ... I'm not an Intel fan but it's not a bad idea ...
@@ZackSNetwork"superior to hyperthreading" alright then. My 7900x was 40% faster in compiling than my old 12700k. Both have the same cores. Both used 12 cores for compilation
If those turn out to not set on fire at 5 TDP, they could satiate the market they created with their craptor lake chips. I didn't plan on upgrading my CPU anytime soon, but now I kinda have to think about it. I'd much rather not have to get a new mobo as well.
E-cores are the biggest flop of this decade. Only thing its useful at is inflating benchmark numbers and high temperature and high power consumption. Aint no way 8 cores of 14900k are the only cores sucking 300w when 8 cores of 7800x3d barely use 80w.
@@arbernuka3679 currently on 5800x3d and benchmarking at stock goes 135W and uv (-30 negative all cores) as 120W. when gaming I hit up to 90W when all cores undervolted from PBO -30 all cores but its cool goes up to 66C when gaming and 77C when benchmarking for hours
@@vinyvinycocopuffpassittomenow Honestly, if you game at 4k,it makes almost no diffenece what modern cpu you use. I mean it won't stop me from replacing my 7950x with zen 5,but I know it's worthless. Lol
@@AdamBrackney your 7950x would be more future proof than my 7800x3D anyways. Id only imagine it would be for local AI at that point if its going beyond 7950x3D. Ive only noticed a good gap with 3dcache when running Unreal engine games. But thats just my speculation cause stats are all over the place. I bought a 4070 ti super and it runs warzone about 30 fps less than my former 6800xtx or xt. Cant remember.
It does make sense both in mobile and desktops. The mobile landscape vastly changed ever since companies started this mixed-core approach. It's highly efficient in all scenarios, but Intel has a history of bad power consumption and temperature.
Mobiles devices make sense because you want energy efficiency, but a desktop can just throttle down, it's not a battery issue if your plugged into the mains.
@@dcikaruga well so just because it's not run from a battery it could use 1000000W for all you care? People have electricity bills to pay and heat to dissipate. A more efficient product means spending less, especially on servers and data centers where you spend ungodly amounts of money in power and cooling.
@@fksllil4068 windows never know how to use zp or E cores. tester many times in different light task and still windows very often start perfomance cores for no reason
Tell it to all programming course creators. I'm learning in the evening and use then dark mode and... HERE COMES THE WHITE DEATH from Udemy/Pluralsight/etc.
For me im just w8ing to see 3rd party benchmarks in the r7 9800x but prices of last gen might drop so if performance is kinoff the same as the 7800x3d ill just get that one instead
There won't be a Ryzen 7 9800x, only a 9800x3d. The 7000 series prices are amazing right now ($369 for a new 7800x3d), but yeah I'd wait for 3rd party benchmarks for everything and then decide. You might get 15% better performance for $30-$100 more with the 9800x3d, depending on the price (but only if you have a very high-end GPU that can keep up). If your GPU is mid range to mid-high and you aren't upgrading it anytime soon then I'd go with the cheaper but still great 7800x3d and upgrade everything later
@@sethobrien8523 The 9800X3D is what I'm waiting for. (Disappointed the top CPU isn't getting dual X3D dies, or I'd go for that instead :( (Currently sitting on a Ryzen 1600, and have the money to upgrade...))
@@phillippatryndal4255 Yeah the 9800x3d will most likely be the best unless they changed the way the CPU cores can acces the 3DV cache. If you want top-tier performance honestly I'd wait until you at least see AMDs benchmarks for the X3D chips. But dude if you're still on a 1st-gen Ryzen any kind of upgrade you do will be unbelievably massive, like insane. The 7800x3d will still be one of the best gaming chips for years to come. Whatever u choose your upgrade will be epic
@@sethobrien8523 I have a £2k 7800x3d system listed on Amazon (I already have a case for it (Fractal Define 7 I got on discount earlier this year)) but since I have the money to buy something decent for once (maybe as much as £3k) I'm holding off until I see what the next gen is like - (and I prefer the motherboards I've seen for the next gen too).
I recently upgraded from an i7 4790K to a Ryzen 5950X, so I'll stick with that for a while. However, my GPU will be what I upgrade next as my RX 5700 XT isn't cutting it in some games for what I want to do. Depending on when and the price of the RX 8000 series, I might wait for whatever is the 8900 XT, but if later in the year there is a good sale on a 7900 XT, I might just get that instead. I'm only doing 1440p gaming and not 4K, but I want to get a card that will last me for some time (including that extra VRAM).
06:08 Unfortunately you can't directly compare those performance increase numbers directly to an RDNA4 GPU. The PS5 Pro should have not only a chipset upgrade, but also a 66.7% increase to the CU count, plus small increases to memory bandwidth and CPU performance too. Also keep in mind that this is a jump from RDNA 1 + 2 to a supposed 3.5 + 4 architecture as well, so RDNA 3 to 4 won't be nearly as big a jump. The "2x" here should be considered like the 4x is for the Pro, a theoretical best case scenario. Don't expect more than 2x, and probably more like 1.5-1.6x in many cases
Agreed, GamerMeld is unfortunately creating hype, which will ultimately dash a lot of gamers hopes, when it comes to ray tracing performance. This is AMD, they always under deliver when it comes to their GPU department.
@@Kneedragon1962Jim Keller also invented rentable cores for Intel. But he left Intel years ago. That’s why Intel’s CPU business is in such chaos right now.
RDNA is just gonna be a bug fix generation? More like it's an excuse for an opportunity to focus entirely on re-designing ray tracing. Which isn't bad by any means, in fact I think this might be the edge they need for more successful ray tracing GPUs down the line in a fight to catch up with Nvidia on feature support quality and performance wise.
They have to address the Ray Tracing issue cuz every god damn Nvidia user kept saying "well i didnt buy AMD GPU cuz I want Ray Tracing" so AMD going to have to focus on that to get market share from Nvidia. They already addressed the gaming performance for their CPU against Intel with X3D CPU line with Vcache. Just wondering what performance we going to get with AMD's 9000 series GPUs.
I have a dinky old Ryzen 9 3900x with a GeForce 3070. I'm definitely looking forward to upgrading my whole rig come Black Friday, especially if these prices are anywhere close to real!
CUDA and Raytracing improvements gradually make AMD really convincing to me as a creator. They just need Optix replacement and a couple more major generations of FSR. And Video upscaler
What the hell is going on with Intel? Does this confirm that the e-core design was faulty in its design? I can't really think of a good reason why Intel would regress in core count without a legit reason.
Keep up the good work man 🗣️📣. Also, did someone ever thought about the fact thag the 9600X 105W TDP profile might outperform the 7800X3D (we've seen that the 9000 chip behave really really good when more W is allowed unlike the 7000). Knowing the 9700X 105W was meant to beat the 7800X3D. Now that the chip use 65W. The 9600X 105W might actually achieve that. And I'm all for it (for imagine the X3D version of the line up with the 3D V-cache behavior reworked 💀).
False they are stable just go in bios and set all cores to sync and those problems will not happen at all. Tuning the voltage of the first and second cores also works as well.
@@ZackSNetwork umm no, there's a secondary problem that will require a BIOS update the Intel hasn't released yet. What your saying is a temp fix that isn't 100% effective. I've even heard of 13400F running into this problem (though less common atm).
@@ZackSNetwork they are not stable not just because of voltages or temperatures but also because of other problems within the actual CPU microcode of 13th and 14th gen processors.
As a fellow AM5 early adopter, I'm not upgrading from my 7700X until 2028 at the very earliest, when AM5 has been retired for at least a couple of years and the best possible chip for the platform is on sale. When I built this rig in 2022 I paired my CPU with 32GB of DDR5 6000 RAM, one of the fastest NVMEs on the market (WD SN850X), and a 4090; needless to say, this machine has *more* than enough power to get me through most of the 2020s before I'll ever feel the need to upgrade. Hell, unless some major technological advancement happens, this PC will easily last me *well* into the 2030s once I upgrade in 2028-2029. Couldn't have picked a more perfect time to ditch Intel.
Hey Gamer Meld, I've been coming here for the news on newer tech and want to say thank you for providing it. It's very clear AMD just makes massive steps in improving the Gaming/Productivity experience. I'm currently running a 5900X but planning on upgrading to 9000 Series after release.
Which CPU would I buy? None! I'm broke! We'll not really but I don't have extra money to upgrade nor is my system too slow for what I like to do or any games I play.
Nvidia doubled the triangle intersect of ray tracing between 2000 and 3000 series. But big issue with ray tracing is that ray's hit random pixels, and it's run GPU compute that's used in raster graphics that do 16 same operations at a time, which works well when you have 16 pixels doing exactly same thing. But if you have 1 ray hitting one thing and another ray hitting other thing and both running different operations you will spend 16 "cores" worth of operations doing that 1 thing. In early ray tracing benchmarks ray tracing was ~10% of time while slowing down 2X by reducing efficiency of rest of the pipeline. 4000 series added sorting step to move those hitting same shader program to same SM. And then there's issue of data moved in cache line sized blocks so LOTS of bandwidth is wasted when you hit pixel and don't need data around that pixel because other ray's in that ray group don't hit a pixel around the target pixel. Basically RAY-CASTING part can be 2-3X faster, but it's still only a fraction of total slowdown caused by ray tracing, and Nvidia already has made that kind of improvement in it, and has worked on other part of ray-tracing slowdown also. GDDR7 should also help with bandwidth issue.
THE ONLY CPU COMPERISION's MOST GAMERS REALY CARE ABOUT NOWDAYS, THAT MAKE A major SELLING POINT FOR USERS INTERESTED IN HIGH END CPU'S , IS THIS, (WHICH NO UA-camR DOES ) ---> 4k vr test , in a simulator like DCS (MSFS much less ai taxing) for exp, place many ground and air assets in and over a big city , and fly a plane over it , and use quadviews that blowup your cpu frame times (this is major), NOW, when we see a cpu that accel in this , and releases more headroom for our gpu's, well, thats the ULTIMATE selling point for most of us who seek a high end cpu nowadays, most of us dont buy high end equipment to play 1080/1440p,
I don't believe it. AMD has been in the industry of discrete graphics for a long time now and is always playing catch up, Intel is in it for very little time yet delivered more than AMD in a much shorter period. If Intel continues like that they will be second to Nvidia and leave AMD completely behind. I don't understand why AMD struggles so much in graphics while having top notch CPUs. AMD needs to overhaul their graphics engineering team. They do have good products but they lack way too much in other areas of graphics.
I don't care about opinions, amd is objectively better as of this date. Intel has way too many problems and amd outperforms it anyways for less TDP. Truth is intel wont be able to compete with the new X3D CPUs
AMD do fine enough , it's just that Nvidia is also crushing it and has so much more resources. Plus NVidia has always had addons. AMD can not beat Nvidia at the monstrosity game . and unlike CPUs, GPUs can be made more powerful just throwing more stuff on them . I think AMD is after low end one solutions is PC space and ARM space where competition will be stiff, Plus exceptional performance in midrange and PS5/6 Uboxone/two etc. If RTX on a AMD midrange card gets a 3x boost , plus already great bang for bucks normal rendering. I mean if you don't need CUDA or RTX , then the current years top end AMD cards are a no brainer for bang for bucks. I don't want a 5090 or 5090 titan AI, many of us don't - so it's really 5080 and lower vs AMD . Yes I truly have no desire for stupid monstrosity cards at ever increasing stupid prices - gaming is only part of my PC use.
Intel arc was dead on arrival, what you on about? Amd radeon might be in massive trouble only if battlemage is good price and performance. As for Nvidia, they compete with themselves.
Well if they do change the pricing that would be great news, currently we was told it was going to be maybe closer to 649, 499, 359, 279 for the 9950x, 9900x ,9700x, 9600x. . If that is the case, then that would better match a refresh price. With that said, I Would rather wait for the 3D version as thats where you are going to get the most bang for your buck at least for gamming. IF you are building still though, I would still look at the 7000s cpus as those are still cheaper than what is posted in your best buy pricing.
C cores on desktop don't really make much sense unless you are trying to get denser cores for higher count like they did for the server chips. AMD's standard cores are already leagues ahead in efficiency compared to intel. It would be pretty beast if AMD tried for a 32 core am5 but at that point it's a server chip.
Consumers might not want to buy intel processors because of the failure issues and exorbitant prices. Hopefully this generation’s failure will drive their prices down to reasonable levels
Gosh I hope AMD really goes the extra mile to get better performance/watt ratio for this next gen. If it’s up to snuff I will buy one to replace my 7900XT.
I already ordered strix halo laptop. moving from 6y old gaming laptop, I basically doubled my single, tripled multi core, doubled gpu output, while being at 65W instead of 240W. (looking at geekbench 6 and r23 numbers) That's not bad for skipping 2 generations only. I will post my numbers when I get it up and running. if only that thing would have second/third nvme slot, and 40 or 48GB or ram, it would be perfection for me. Good enough I guess, nobody would sell something that good, not making it as pro-graphic workstation for $5000.
For those who don't know, the PS5 still won't match Nvidia's Lovelace cards' ray tracing performance. The PS5 Pro will calculate two ray-triangle intersections per clock, but Lovelace can already do four.
lots of people avoid buying intel processors now. so people flock to amd processors and so it is possible that amd will sell 9000 series at a higher price. there is a big demand, so amd has no reason to sell cheap, as amd is already winning intel because of intels troubles, so amd does not need to compete intel at the moment.
but if they were smart they'd take the risk and try to crush intel's stranglehold on the prebuilt market...now is a better time than ever to get into the corporate and typical user demographic rather than going after enthusiasts and gamers...they need a good commercial with a nice jingle which is what put intel over the top
Let me be honest, Don't really care about raytracing at all, pathtracing on the other hand? that looks amazing, sadly we are years away from having a playable one that's not old doom.
I've been done with Intel for a long time now. Between Zen performance and Intel's shenanigans with VROC, socket of the day, and now the self-immolating processors, I don't see any reason to return any time soon.
I'm rocking an 3700x right now so if I was to upgrade it would be the 9700x as I don't really need more horse power to what I'm doing. Heck even the 9600x would do the trick.
Yeah but then you need to get a new motherboard and possibly a new cooler depending how old yours is and if you can’t get the faceplate for the new socket for the cooler
@@arbernuka3679 I'm only playing old games anyway. I don't have time to play newer games so I'm good, but I agree. If I were to upgrade. 5800x3d would be the best and cheapest choice.
I'm not really playing any really demanding games and haven't for years so even though I could upgrade to 5800x3d (which would be the cheapest) I might never do. I bought the 3700x back in 2019 and the PC before that was form 2010 so I'll properbly first upgrade again i 2025+.
7:50 I was not at all motivated by Epyc 4004, because there were no options with Zen4C. Give me a 32 core 4954 with a 3.2Ghz all core boost, an 80w TDP, and just under $1000
I was an early adopter of AM5 bought a 7700x and then AMD released 7700 with a lower price + Prism cooler. Lesson learned I will not be an early adopter. But I'm targeting the Ryzen 7 9800/9700 once released.
Seems like having 65 cores and only 6 of them being p cores seems to backfired. All those extra e and p cores are only good for bumping up benchmarks, and they fooled everyone into buying intel.
@@GyornD you get better gains from a better CPU than MOBO. AM5 mobo are still expensive, best to invest money in better CPU. Just check the power phases of the board before buying if you planning on using a higher core count cpu and OCing.
TSMC is facing low utilization of all their cutting-edge processes for more than a year. To explain the low price of Zen 5. Of course that leaves us with a question how much should GPUs cost then...
Maybe I'm just being overly sensative, but there was something odd about the video/audio syncronization. It seemed off. BTW, I'm hearing imparied and I'm used to reading lips to help understand what I'm hearing.
If the AMDs CPU prices are true, Intel really is in trouble. If the poricing will be at least close to the rumor, Im getting 9900X or wait for the X3D version.
Never thought I'd see a company like Intel that brought competitive and capable CPU's go so low with it's E-core / P-core scam. Give us cores like real manufacturers do or rebrand towards toasters or whatever. But I guess they do that because they just can't go with smaller nm lithography. And don't get me started on their pathetic Plundervolt incompetency
I'm sorry but how exactly are they planning on competing against Zen 5 without massive price cut and if Zen 5 anything close to the benchmarks we've seen so far 9600X would undercut their whole i7 and i9 lineup
@@ZackSNetwork Eh, depends on the work load, sometimes my quad core N100 is worse than my dual core-quad thread 6th gen i3 6300, sometimes its better than my i7-6700T(35w) I think the N305 which has double the cores and higher clocks may be better than the 6 core i5-8500T but i dont think its faster than say, the quad core i5-8350u due to the hyperthreading. The E cores are far ahead in performance per watt though. My guess is that the atom based i3-N305 has similar performance per wattt to the i9-10900T(10 core 20 thread 35w) or at least the 9900T(8c-16t 35w)
If 9950x sells at around $500-600, I might upgrade from my 7950x. Otherwise I don't see the point. It's nothing groundbreaking compared to current gen Ryzen.
125 intel watts is 253 watts in real life.
Who knows, maybe this time they learned from AMD :)
lol, the systems they are designed for would vaporize the moment the power button was pressed at that wattage.
125 PL1?🤔
@@voorkobserve4716wouldn't be this bad if they did ;)
Huh?
Intel chips use less wattage during idle and general tasks, than AMD. 125 watts can be expected. Even while gaming it doesn't even go that high. Only when doing the types of tasks where you would want that kind of power.
you know, I don't really mind AMD trying to make cpu prices lower, I just wish something would happen to make gpu prices go back down to something relatively more normal.
Nobody does mind that, what people should be minding about is amd pricing their cpu higher since they're the best options
"The 4060 offers about the same performance as a 1080Ti, which had a MSRP of 700$. With its 300$ MSRP, the 4060 is clearly much cheaper. Obviously GPU prices are completely normal, the inflation is just in your head!" - Nvidia marketing team, probably
@@lyxsmintroducing 96 bit 4gb 5060 with dlss 4 that upscales from 144p!!
Nothing is ever going back to "normal" and i aimt just talking about PCs
@@rodiculous9464😂😂😂real
8 core 14900K LMAO 🤣 the 10900K had 10 core... and those were real P-cores! Shintel reversing back to their 4 core era 😂😂
You don't even know what you're talking about 😂
@@DingleBerryschnapps Actually they do. Feel free to google the number of Cores. I remember both releases very well. The Intel 9000 series has no Hyper-Threading, 10000 series brought back HT and added 2 Cores, 11000 series was often beat out due to heat issues by the 10000 series, and 12000 series was the introduction of E-Cores. 7000 series was the highest single-thread IPC, 8000 series introduced Spectre fixes which gave the CPU a rather sizable speed hit. Frankly Intel needs to give 16 P-Cores, and 32 E-Cores if they expect to pull themselves out of this Meme-tier bad market Hurricane their in right now.
@bogartwilley I feel like 32e cores is a little excessive the die size would probably have to get bigger to compensate
You do know that an 8 core Raptor Lake is superior to 10th Gen right?
No shitel in my pc😂
A current-gen i9 literally made to have like 24 cores but only having 8 is crazy😭
And they have non overclockable I9's what a joke 😂
@@NeededByNobody yeah like what's the point anymore?💀💀💀💀
What do you mean made to only have? E cores are actual cores. They are just meant for light tasking work loads. They are also superior to hyper threading as well.
Good for gaming ... pretty sure that's their goal. Trying to compete with X3D at bang for buck. It's not a bad idea ... I'm not an Intel fan but it's not a bad idea ...
@@ZackSNetwork"superior to hyperthreading" alright then. My 7900x was 40% faster in compiling than my old 12700k. Both have the same cores. Both used 12 cores for compilation
Like anyone is going to buy an Intel 14th Gen Products!
If those turn out to not set on fire at 5 TDP, they could satiate the market they created with their craptor lake chips.
I didn't plan on upgrading my CPU anytime soon, but now I kinda have to think about it. I'd much rather not have to get a new mobo as well.
E-cores are the biggest flop of this decade. Only thing its useful at is inflating benchmark numbers and high temperature and high power consumption. Aint no way 8 cores of 14900k are the only cores sucking 300w when 8 cores of 7800x3d barely use 80w.
If the 7800x3d uses 80w what would the 5800x3d use?
@@Ziyoblader usually 5800x3d uses more power lol
It uses 30 to 60 watts max with curve optimizer
14901KE will draw like 150W in gaming when 7800x3d at 90W
@@arbernuka3679 currently on 5800x3d and benchmarking at stock goes 135W and uv (-30 negative all cores) as 120W.
when gaming I hit up to 90W when all cores undervolted from PBO -30 all cores but its cool goes up to 66C when gaming and 77C when benchmarking for hours
9950x for $499🤣 I've got some sand I'd like to sell you.
Makes sense that AMD drop prices on the Zen 5 CPUs. $699 will be reserved for the 9950X3D with V-cache on top of both CPU dies.
@@tringuyen7519 Def not, it's already been confirmed by AMD that both dies won't have v cache.
@@AdamBrackneypossibly down the road. But the 7800x3D can handle so much already. It will have to wait until a GPU requires it.
@@vinyvinycocopuffpassittomenow Honestly, if you game at 4k,it makes almost no diffenece what modern cpu you use. I mean it won't stop me from replacing my 7950x with zen 5,but I know it's worthless. Lol
@@AdamBrackney your 7950x would be more future proof than my 7800x3D anyways. Id only imagine it would be for local AI at that point if its going beyond 7950x3D.
Ive only noticed a good gap with 3dcache when running Unreal engine games.
But thats just my speculation cause stats are all over the place. I bought a 4070 ti super and it runs warzone about 30 fps less than my former 6800xtx or xt. Cant remember.
P and E cores were a stupid idea anyway, makes sense for mobile devices but not a desktop, they just did it for lack of a better idea.
Not really, it was the most efficient way to get CPU power. I'm assuming you're a qualified engineer, yes?
It does make sense both in mobile and desktops. The mobile landscape vastly changed ever since companies started this mixed-core approach. It's highly efficient in all scenarios, but Intel has a history of bad power consumption and temperature.
Mobiles devices make sense because you want energy efficiency, but a desktop can just throttle down, it's not a battery issue if your plugged into the mains.
@@dcikaruga well so just because it's not run from a battery it could use 1000000W for all you care? People have electricity bills to pay and heat to dissipate. A more efficient product means spending less, especially on servers and data centers where you spend ungodly amounts of money in power and cooling.
@@fksllil4068 windows never know how to use zp or E cores. tester many times in different light task and still windows very often start perfomance cores for no reason
For the love of The Force, can people PLEASE use Dark Mode, it makes me not want to watch the video when my entire house is lit up by the pricing.
Unless some smart filters appear (which might actually be a task AI can actually do) I'm afraid you're out of luck.
Tell it to all programming course creators. I'm learning in the evening and use then dark mode and... HERE COMES THE WHITE DEATH from Udemy/Pluralsight/etc.
@Winnetou17 there really is zero reason to use AI for that. A browser extension to automatically turn websites into dark mode has been out for years
Buy sunglasses.
For me im just w8ing to see 3rd party benchmarks in the r7 9800x but prices of last gen might drop so if performance is kinoff the same as the 7800x3d ill just get that one instead
There won't be a Ryzen 7 9800x, only a 9800x3d. The 7000 series prices are amazing right now ($369 for a new 7800x3d), but yeah I'd wait for 3rd party benchmarks for everything and then decide. You might get 15% better performance for $30-$100 more with the 9800x3d, depending on the price (but only if you have a very high-end GPU that can keep up). If your GPU is mid range to mid-high and you aren't upgrading it anytime soon then I'd go with the cheaper but still great 7800x3d and upgrade everything later
@@sethobrien8523 The 9800X3D is what I'm waiting for. (Disappointed the top CPU isn't getting dual X3D dies, or I'd go for that instead :( (Currently sitting on a Ryzen 1600, and have the money to upgrade...))
@@phillippatryndal4255 Yeah the 9800x3d will most likely be the best unless they changed the way the CPU cores can acces the 3DV cache. If you want top-tier performance honestly I'd wait until you at least see AMDs benchmarks for the X3D chips. But dude if you're still on a 1st-gen Ryzen any kind of upgrade you do will be unbelievably massive, like insane. The 7800x3d will still be one of the best gaming chips for years to come. Whatever u choose your upgrade will be epic
@@sethobrien8523 I have a £2k 7800x3d system listed on Amazon (I already have a case for it (Fractal Define 7 I got on discount earlier this year)) but since I have the money to buy something decent for once (maybe as much as £3k) I'm holding off until I see what the next gen is like - (and I prefer the motherboards I've seen for the next gen too).
@@sethobrien8523 alr thx for the tips man
I recently upgraded from an i7 4790K to a Ryzen 5950X, so I'll stick with that for a while.
However, my GPU will be what I upgrade next as my RX 5700 XT isn't cutting it in some games for what I want to do. Depending on when and the price of the RX 8000 series, I might wait for whatever is the 8900 XT, but if later in the year there is a good sale on a 7900 XT, I might just get that instead. I'm only doing 1440p gaming and not 4K, but I want to get a card that will last me for some time (including that extra VRAM).
06:08 Unfortunately you can't directly compare those performance increase numbers directly to an RDNA4 GPU. The PS5 Pro should have not only a chipset upgrade, but also a 66.7% increase to the CU count, plus small increases to memory bandwidth and CPU performance too. Also keep in mind that this is a jump from RDNA 1 + 2 to a supposed 3.5 + 4 architecture as well, so RDNA 3 to 4 won't be nearly as big a jump. The "2x" here should be considered like the 4x is for the Pro, a theoretical best case scenario. Don't expect more than 2x, and probably more like 1.5-1.6x in many cases
Agreed, GamerMeld is unfortunately creating hype, which will ultimately dash a lot of gamers hopes, when it comes to ray tracing performance. This is AMD, they always under deliver when it comes to their GPU department.
I thought Jim Keller was the father of Zen?
Success has many fathers. Failure is always an orphan.
Yeah Keller was the engineer who spearheaded Zen 1 development, unsure why he's not getting props
He himself said he where more like an uncle. Ref: interview by TechTechPotato
@@StarDollar do you remember which interview
@@Kneedragon1962Jim Keller also invented rentable cores for Intel. But he left Intel years ago. That’s why Intel’s CPU business is in such chaos right now.
Everyone is going AMD, it’s Beautiful
I suddenly have an urge to go play Flappy Bird.
RDNA is just gonna be a bug fix generation? More like it's an excuse for an opportunity to focus entirely on re-designing ray tracing. Which isn't bad by any means, in fact I think this might be the edge they need for more successful ray tracing GPUs down the line in a fight to catch up with Nvidia on feature support quality and performance wise.
This is sounding pretty good for something that's suppose to be a refresh.
They have to address the Ray Tracing issue cuz every god damn Nvidia user kept saying "well i didnt buy AMD GPU cuz I want Ray Tracing" so AMD going to have to focus on that to get market share from Nvidia. They already addressed the gaming performance for their CPU against Intel with X3D CPU line with Vcache. Just wondering what performance we going to get with AMD's 9000 series GPUs.
I have a dinky old Ryzen 9 3900x with a GeForce 3070. I'm definitely looking forward to upgrading my whole rig come Black Friday, especially if these prices are anywhere close to real!
It’s a great build that CPU and GPU pair well.
"dinky old Ryzen 9 3900x with a GeForce 3070"
Looks at my R7 2700 (non-X) and Readeon VII....
There no way those are that cheap, that would so nuts to get a 9900 for like 550 cad
intel's 9900K was $499 when it came out... so prices are cheap cuz 9950X should be higher than $499.
CUDA and Raytracing improvements gradually make AMD really convincing to me as a creator. They just need Optix replacement and a couple more major generations of FSR. And Video upscaler
Waiting for the 9800X3D or 9900X3D for my next system.
Rx8000 RT is next level. Real world results show you get 20fps with RT on vs the 10fps with 7000 series!
I’m glad I subscribed to your channel. A lot of great details. Very informative. Keep
It up 👍🏼
😂
Sometimws it's just a bunch of clickbait tbh lmao
What the hell is going on with Intel? Does this confirm that the e-core design was faulty in its design? I can't really think of a good reason why Intel would regress in core count without a legit reason.
probably binning. These are probably dies with faulty E-Cores.
No it doesn’t because 15th gen still uses e cores and gets rid of hyper threading.
@@ZackSNetworkwhich is pretty dumb. CPU instruction stalls incoming.
Finaly some low watt usage on my main desktop , finaly no more fans needed , finzly no heat on my house !
Keep up the good work man 🗣️📣.
Also, did someone ever thought about the fact thag the 9600X 105W TDP profile might outperform the 7800X3D (we've seen that the 9000 chip behave really really good when more W is allowed unlike the 7000). Knowing the 9700X 105W was meant to beat the 7800X3D. Now that the chip use 65W. The 9600X 105W might actually achieve that. And I'm all for it (for imagine the X3D version of the line up with the 3D V-cache behavior reworked 💀).
According to AMDs OWN benchmarks the 9700x is ~12% faster than the 5800x3d. The 7800x3d is around 20% faster assuming it is a CPU bound game.
As 14th gen cpu are not stable will removing the e cores improve stability and increase the life of 14th gen cpus
False they are stable just go in bios and set all cores to sync and those problems will not happen at all. Tuning the voltage of the first and second cores also works as well.
@@ZackSNetwork umm no, there's a secondary problem that will require a BIOS update the Intel hasn't released yet. What your saying is a temp fix that isn't 100% effective. I've even heard of 13400F running into this problem (though less common atm).
@@ZackSNetwork they are not stable not just because of voltages or temperatures but also because of other problems within the actual CPU microcode of 13th and 14th gen processors.
@@ZackSNetwork your statement is False
@@nickelwrangler446 true this is the problem
I wont upgrade my 7950X to 9950X unless 9950X is 50 percent faster in 7Zip compression.
won't be so you can stop waiting
it's easy...make your own chip
As a fellow AM5 early adopter, I'm not upgrading from my 7700X until 2028 at the very earliest, when AM5 has been retired for at least a couple of years and the best possible chip for the platform is on sale.
When I built this rig in 2022 I paired my CPU with 32GB of DDR5 6000 RAM, one of the fastest NVMEs on the market (WD SN850X), and a 4090; needless to say, this machine has *more* than enough power to get me through most of the 2020s before I'll ever feel the need to upgrade. Hell, unless some major technological advancement happens, this PC will easily last me *well* into the 2030s once I upgrade in 2028-2029. Couldn't have picked a more perfect time to ditch Intel.
@@marshabrightly1307 no. I need x86 and a lot of cores and memory channels for Unity and 7Zip. I need to buy dual socket flagship EPYC.
@@Psythik youre a gamer so you dont need more. Im a game developer.
Hey Gamer Meld, I've been coming here for the news on newer tech and want to say thank you for providing it. It's very clear AMD just makes massive steps in improving the Gaming/Productivity experience. I'm currently running a 5900X but planning on upgrading to 9000 Series after release.
Which CPU would I buy? None! I'm broke! We'll not really but I don't have extra money to upgrade nor is my system too slow for what I like to do or any games I play.
oh dang we get perspective shifts with crazy arms. I'm hyped for this video. please throw in a wink or two with the camera changes.
ah yeah that one shouldve numbered
it was bad though lol
Nvidia doubled the triangle intersect of ray tracing between 2000 and 3000 series. But big issue with ray tracing is that ray's hit random pixels, and it's run GPU compute that's used in raster graphics that do 16 same operations at a time, which works well when you have 16 pixels doing exactly same thing. But if you have 1 ray hitting one thing and another ray hitting other thing and both running different operations you will spend 16 "cores" worth of operations doing that 1 thing. In early ray tracing benchmarks ray tracing was ~10% of time while slowing down 2X by reducing efficiency of rest of the pipeline. 4000 series added sorting step to move those hitting same shader program to same SM. And then there's issue of data moved in cache line sized blocks so LOTS of bandwidth is wasted when you hit pixel and don't need data around that pixel because other ray's in that ray group don't hit a pixel around the target pixel.
Basically RAY-CASTING part can be 2-3X faster, but it's still only a fraction of total slowdown caused by ray tracing, and Nvidia already has made that kind of improvement in it, and has worked on other part of ray-tracing slowdown also. GDDR7 should also help with bandwidth issue.
E-cores only exist to inflate Cinebench scores.
That's it!
THE ONLY CPU COMPERISION's MOST GAMERS REALY CARE ABOUT NOWDAYS, THAT MAKE A major SELLING POINT FOR USERS INTERESTED IN HIGH END CPU'S , IS THIS, (WHICH NO UA-camR DOES ) ---> 4k vr test , in a simulator like DCS (MSFS much less ai taxing) for exp, place many ground and air assets in and over a big city , and fly a plane over it , and use quadviews that blowup your cpu frame times (this is major), NOW, when we see a cpu that accel in this , and releases more headroom for our gpu's, well, thats the ULTIMATE selling point for most of us who seek a high end cpu nowadays, most of us dont buy high end equipment to play 1080/1440p,
I don't believe it. AMD has been in the industry of discrete graphics for a long time now and is always playing catch up, Intel is in it for very little time yet delivered more than AMD in a much shorter period. If Intel continues like that they will be second to Nvidia and leave AMD completely behind. I don't understand why AMD struggles so much in graphics while having top notch CPUs. AMD needs to overhaul their graphics engineering team. They do have good products but they lack way too much in other areas of graphics.
I don't care about opinions, amd is objectively better as of this date. Intel has way too many problems and amd outperforms it anyways for less TDP. Truth is intel wont be able to compete with the new X3D CPUs
@@TheRealName7 Bro, he was talking about GPUs not CPUs..
@@dominikheinz2297 their GPUs suck donkey balls too. so idk why u defending it
AMD do fine enough , it's just that Nvidia is also crushing it and has so much more resources. Plus NVidia has always had addons. AMD can not beat Nvidia at the monstrosity game . and unlike CPUs, GPUs can be made more powerful just throwing more stuff on them . I think AMD is after low end one solutions is PC space and ARM space where competition will be stiff, Plus exceptional performance in midrange and PS5/6 Uboxone/two etc. If RTX on a AMD midrange card gets a 3x boost , plus already great bang for bucks normal rendering. I mean if you don't need CUDA or RTX , then the current years top end AMD cards are a no brainer for bang for bucks. I don't want a 5090 or 5090 titan AI, many of us don't - so it's really 5080 and lower vs AMD . Yes I truly have no desire for stupid monstrosity cards at ever increasing stupid prices - gaming is only part of my PC use.
Intel arc was dead on arrival, what you on about? Amd radeon might be in massive trouble only if battlemage is good price and performance.
As for Nvidia, they compete with themselves.
499 is highly unlikely for a dozen reasons. 579 or 650 is more realistic
Well if they do change the pricing that would be great news, currently we was told it was going to be maybe closer to 649, 499, 359, 279 for the 9950x, 9900x ,9700x, 9600x. . If that is the case, then that would better match a refresh price. With that said, I Would rather wait for the 3D version as thats where you are going to get the most bang for your buck at least for gamming. IF you are building still though, I would still look at the 7000s cpus as those are still cheaper than what is posted in your best buy pricing.
C cores on desktop don't really make much sense unless you are trying to get denser cores for higher count like they did for the server chips. AMD's standard cores are already leagues ahead in efficiency compared to intel. It would be pretty beast if AMD tried for a 32 core am5 but at that point it's a server chip.
I'm pretty sure that Mike Clark isn't the father of Zen because I'm pretty sure that Jim Keller is.
Consumers might not want to buy intel processors because of the failure issues and exorbitant prices. Hopefully this generation’s failure will drive their prices down to reasonable levels
Good for AMD working on SPECIAL hardware targeted at getting RT/PT performance up because pure compute method was not working. Clearly.
Gosh I hope AMD really goes the extra mile to get better performance/watt ratio for this next gen. If it’s up to snuff I will buy one to replace my 7900XT.
Your over the top news anchor voice is super distracting from your phenomenal info
Swear it was Jim Keller who is the father of Zen....
I already ordered strix halo laptop.
moving from 6y old gaming laptop, I basically doubled my single, tripled multi core, doubled gpu output, while being at 65W instead of 240W. (looking at geekbench 6 and r23 numbers)
That's not bad for skipping 2 generations only. I will post my numbers when I get it up and running.
if only that thing would have second/third nvme slot, and 40 or 48GB or ram, it would be perfection for me. Good enough I guess, nobody would sell something that good, not making it as pro-graphic workstation for $5000.
the audacity intel have to launch refresh 14th gen cpus after the recent incident with their cpus
For those who don't know, the PS5 still won't match Nvidia's Lovelace cards' ray tracing performance. The PS5 Pro will calculate two ray-triangle intersections per clock, but Lovelace can already do four.
lots of people avoid buying intel processors now. so people flock to amd processors and so it is possible that amd will sell 9000 series at a higher price. there is a big demand, so amd has no reason to sell cheap, as amd is already winning intel because of intels troubles, so amd does not need to compete intel at the moment.
but if they were smart they'd take the risk and try to crush intel's stranglehold on the prebuilt market...now is a better time than ever to get into the corporate and typical user demographic rather than going after enthusiasts and gamers...they need a good commercial with a nice jingle which is what put intel over the top
Personally if they could raise the TDP to gain more performance from the 9000 series ryzen, that'd be great.
Let me be honest, Don't really care about raytracing at all, pathtracing on the other hand? that looks amazing, sadly we are years away from having a playable one that's not old doom.
I've been done with Intel for a long time now. Between Zen performance and Intel's shenanigans with VROC, socket of the day, and now the self-immolating processors, I don't see any reason to return any time soon.
I'm rocking an 3700x right now so if I was to upgrade it would be the 9700x as I don't really need more horse power to what I'm doing. Heck even the 9600x would do the trick.
Yeah but then you need to get a new motherboard and possibly a new cooler depending how old yours is and if you can’t get the faceplate for the new socket for the cooler
3700x = power of a 2015 CPU aka 6700k you missing 30fps on average in cpu games you can upgrade to a 5800x3d = 12700 to get 30fps+ on AM4
just get 5800x3d dude
@@arbernuka3679 I'm only playing old games anyway. I don't have time to play newer games so I'm good, but I agree. If I were to upgrade. 5800x3d would be the best and cheapest choice.
I'm not really playing any really demanding games and haven't for years so even though I could upgrade to 5800x3d (which would be the cheapest) I might never do. I bought the 3700x back in 2019 and the PC before that was form 2010 so I'll properbly first upgrade again i 2025+.
If AMD 8000GPU doesn’t have a better price to performance then there’s really no real point to buy it rather than 7000 other than RT
AMD "little" cores aren't that little - just removal of AVX instructions sets and reduced cache, at slightly lower clocks. More like "medium" cores.
Ryzen 9000 prices: TRUST ME BRO
Rumors are that new 14th series Intel CPUs will not degrade! 🤣
7:50 I was not at all motivated by Epyc 4004, because there were no options with Zen4C. Give me a 32 core 4954 with a 3.2Ghz all core boost, an 80w TDP, and just under $1000
Ray-triangle intersect? More like "Really awesome; sounds like AMD's set!" 👍
I was an early adopter of AM5 bought a 7700x and then AMD released 7700 with a lower price + Prism cooler.
Lesson learned I will not be an early adopter.
But I'm targeting the Ryzen 7 9800/9700 once released.
You've got current gen, why not wait for the x3d version which launches only a few months later
9900X
Seems like having 65 cores and only 6 of them being p cores seems to backfired. All those extra e and p cores are only good for bumping up benchmarks, and they fooled everyone into buying intel.
Do you need anything over B650 for basic gaming and some hobby UE5 work? Or it's better to save a buck and bump the processor?
Which b650 motherboard paired with which cpu to be exact
@@the_golden_s5682 asrock PG Lightning + for example 7700/9600x
@@GyornD you get better gains from a better CPU than MOBO. AM5 mobo are still expensive, best to invest money in better CPU. Just check the power phases of the board before buying if you planning on using a higher core count cpu and OCing.
TSMC is facing low utilization of all their cutting-edge processes for more than a year.
To explain the low price of Zen 5. Of course that leaves us with a question how much should GPUs cost then...
Maybe I'm just being overly sensative, but there was something odd about the video/audio syncronization. It seemed off. BTW, I'm hearing imparied and I'm used to reading lips to help understand what I'm hearing.
If the AMDs CPU prices are true, Intel really is in trouble. If the poricing will be at least close to the rumor, Im getting 9900X or wait for the X3D version.
so INTEL 14901TE vs 7800X3D - 8 core vs 8 core in games or productivity. Or even better 9800X3D (when it comes out)
I was more excited that you read that entire chart than the release. Can you read Goodnight Moon next?
im waiting for x3d to drop, either that or to be able to get a 7950x3d for about 400-450 USD
These new TE CPUs will be good in home servers in a couple years when my 12500T needs an upgrade :P
Never thought I'd see a company like Intel that brought competitive and capable CPU's go so low with it's E-core / P-core scam. Give us cores like real manufacturers do or rebrand towards toasters or whatever.
But I guess they do that because they just can't go with smaller nm lithography.
And don't get me started on their pathetic Plundervolt incompetency
I've always thought e-cores were the dumbest idea for desktops and embedded. That won't save Intel, though.
That pricing for the 9k series is nuts!!!!! however, I'm waiting for them to release the x3d models
We need 4 to 6 times RT performance improvement
I'm sorry but how exactly are they planning on competing against Zen 5 without massive price cut and if Zen 5 anything close to the benchmarks we've seen so far 9600X would undercut their whole i7 and i9 lineup
When does the new AMD Motherboard come out to be able to use the new Zen6?
Intel is going to start shipping puberty blockers with every cpu for the wokies.
defective e cores been disabled
If those prices are correct, I'm curious to see what the 9800x3d will be priced at.
I really wanted a 14930TE with 0 P cores, and 56E cores and a 65w TDP.
E cores I believe are equivalent to 8th gen Intel CPU’s.
@@ZackSNetwork Eh, depends on the work load, sometimes my quad core N100 is worse than my dual core-quad thread 6th gen i3 6300, sometimes its better than my i7-6700T(35w)
I think the N305 which has double the cores and higher clocks may be better than the 6 core i5-8500T but i dont think its faster than say, the quad core i5-8350u due to the hyperthreading.
The E cores are far ahead in performance per watt though. My guess is that the atom based i3-N305 has similar performance per wattt to the i9-10900T(10 core 20 thread 35w) or at least the 9900T(8c-16t 35w)
Your content/ quality is getting better. Keep it up!
Sony steps in to fix AMD's Radeon architecture, in other words?
finally normal cores without small bullshit that even windows didn't know how to use.
Going from 5700X to 9700X.
Maybe from 6800 XT to 8x00 XT.
Next cpu i will buy is when amd updates the 780m to something better.
I'll wait and see how it can really compete.
I want a 9800X3D and will likely be waiting for that. Otherwise I'd probably get a 9900X just for the extra cores.
If 9950x sells at around $500-600, I might upgrade from my 7950x. Otherwise I don't see the point. It's nothing groundbreaking compared to current gen Ryzen.
why on earth do intel need so many 6 core cpus? Looking at getting the 9950x.
i don't want small cores, give me regular cores.
So Sapphire RX 7900 XTX Nitro+ Vapor-X 24GB GDDR6 will be remained as flagship?
Intel getting them RMA's ready.
the new p core cpus are not public accessible products
Amd beating to intel from every point from prices from technologies. But intel deseverd this.
9950x will be on my list for any price south of $550
So the new 14000 intel chips are big phonies? Got it
Don't really care what Intel is up to anymore - I'm staying in my ZEN space 😁
Does the brilliant discount work with group memberships?
Anyone still buying Intel after their latest Fiasco?
AMD giving final nails on Intel's coffin is madddddd...
hardly...until Dell or someone like them switches over corporations only know intel because they have a commercial
Its not worth it for intel to make anything lower than a 6/12 its not profitable. They just break even.
For those pricing!? 9950x is my take on!