WYP
News Guru
The Ryzen 7 7800 X3D will beat the new 9700X in games, but its closer than expected.
Read more about AMD's gaming plans for Ryzen 9000.
Read more about AMD's gaming plans for Ryzen 9000.
Last edited:
X3D remains king of gaming despite Ryzen 9000 series launch - AMD confirms
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
Not really surprising. It'll take the 9700X3D or 9800X3D or whatever they call it to flat out beat the 7800X3D.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
It's hard to beat that extra cache. Games are just incredibly memory intensive. That said if it's close in performance that's a pretty big jump from non x3d,. Can't imagine what that means for 9000x3d!
Last edited:
AngryGoldfish
Old N Gold
It's understandable to do it the way they do it. The X3D parts are top-tier gaming parts. 99% of people would be fine with a cheaper CPU. Most people would be fine with a 9600, not even the X version.
I also think some people are still not savvy to the X3D variants and what they do. Some might see the same core count and lower clock speeds and be a bit confused because it's more expensive.
And enthusiasts still have a choice. They know these parts are on the way. All they have to do is wait. If AMD never said they were coming out with X3D parts and then suddenly dropped them on everyone at the same price as the standard versions just a couple of months later, yeah, that would suck. But this is just the release cycle AMD have chosen. People know it by now. How many people are going to buy a 9800X and then a 9800X3D 3-4 months later? They'll either be happy with a 9800X (and you should be unless it sucks) or wait 3-4 months and buy the better CPU. It's not like a GPU where you're losing out on 3-4 months of noticeably better gaming.
I personally don't care whether a CPU has 3D cache or not. I just want the CPU that fits my needs. And AMD have consistently offered good CPUs across the board for years now. The choice is good for gamers in my opinion.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
The regular CPUs are better CPUs. The x3D are better gaming CPUs and for other niche tasks. They are already segregated markets.
Dawelio
Active member
I don't see this really... I mean, the X3D variants just have more cache that is better for gaming. But if that's the only difference, how come they are essentially "worse" than their non X3D counterparts. Since you just said that the non X3D are better CPUs.
AlienALX
Well-known member
Indeed. The only thing so far worse on the X3D is lower clocks.
I just don't understand his logic though. He is saying that their latest brand new product (and thus the most expensive) is worse than their last gen (and much less expensive) CPU.
Now sure, it will only be worse in gaming but then most of the people buying them are into gaming.
I was correct. What they are doing is getting extremely arrogant like Nvidia, and releasing lower tier products at high prices and then the 3D parts. Hoping they will get two sales.
The landscape for that is now gone, though.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Look at benchmarks I'm not doing it for you. X3D is the best for gaming. They are not generally as good at other tasks.
Dawelio
Active member
I'm not doing it either, I'm simply asking you since you're the one that made the claim.
