For gaming and a bit of productivity, 7900x3d or 7700 works well.
For gaming and a bit of productivity, 7900x3d or 7700 works well.
7900x3D performs worse than the 7800x3D, so I’d pick the 7800x3D instead. Many users handle productivity tasks smoothly on an 8c/16t processor. The 12c/24t Ryzen chips aren’t built for gaming, so you’re likely choosing a single R5/R7 or the 16c/32t model. Stick with the 7800x3D. Its popularity makes sense.
In my experience, I’d pay more for a 7800x3D than a 7900x3D. The latter is a specialized item aimed at users who need additional L3 cache beyond gaming needs—it’s currently on sale for a specific reason. Unless you’re heavily relying on CCD1, you’ll see much weaker gaming performance since the benefits of 3D v-cache disappear when games use more than 6c/12t with the 7900x3D. I personally tested this with a 7950x3D and adjusted it to 6+6.
some cores are disabled to mimic a 7900x3d setup which led to poor gaming performance versus a standard 7900x configuration. or maybe I misinterpreted something? should a program/game utilize the ccd2 when its cores are idle, or will it only operate with 6 cores? sorry for the unclear English, but the 7900x version really seemed to lag significantly if you manually adjusted core affinity using process_laso. i’m open to experimenting to improve the results. Edited August 23, 2024 by CasoF13
They're CCD0 and CCD1 in context; the R9 7000x3D's CCD0 is a modified 3D cache version. Turning off the second CCD when not needed would be much more effective in most situations, though many modern titles still require more than just 6c/12t, especially with powerful GPUs and ray tracing. This explains why the 7900x3D remains a niche item, if not a poor choice, and why a 7600x3D might have been a better option. I tested down to 2c/4t on CCD0 to check for alternatives, but with the IHS installed, the chip hit a thermal ceiling that stopped it from reaching 5.25GHz. The only solution was direct-die cooling using an NH-D15. I disabled CCD1 because in several cases processor affinity or lasso causes it to switch back to using both CCDs. Another concern came up during tests with Warframe and Diablo 4, where Zen4 3D boosted performance by about half compared to standard Zen4. A 7950x3D simplifies testing since it behaves like an R7 7700 or 7800x3D on the same chip, which you can swap with a restart or processor affinity settings. Outside of that, a direct-die cooled 7800x3D is clearly superior for gaming. Those thinking about R9 3D v-cache CPUs should carefully weigh whether they truly need the extra multicore, as the challenges of multiple CCDs—especially when one is 3D v-cache modified—don’t justify the gains. Multi-CCD Ryzen processors are no longer suited for gaming anymore, especially after the Ryzen 5000 era, where IPC improvements made the downsides obvious. Before that, the performance benefits didn’t match the complexity and stability issues of dual CCD setups. The 5600x proved competitive with the 5950x, unlike the 3600x or 3950x. With ray tracing becoming more common, the 8c/16t variant leads the market at least until larger caches appear on consumer chips. The reason R9 CPUs sometimes outperform games is they’re often rated higher in benchmarks, while most titles don’t require such high IPCs. Otherwise, the cost of extra latency from switching CCDs can let single-CCD options win every time. TLDR: A 7800x3D gives noticeably better gaming results than a 7900x3D, and you likely don’t need the extra multicore for that. The R7 7700 is not worth it if you’re eyeing a 7000x3D for performance.
sorry for the late reply i had some stuff todo. i only looked into the x3d because the 7900x3d is on sale. so here is the question (currency €). i want to do multiply stuff gaming/prod by beeing power efficient. so wher i life i can get a 7700 tray non x for 227 while all other options cost around 374 (7900x3d,7800x3d,7900x ...) is the 7700 really so bad comparaed to the xed stuff ?
The selling price matches the 7800x3d value when not in sale.