Opt for 9950x3d instead of 9800x3d when playing games and creating custom builds.
Opt for 9950x3d instead of 9800x3d when playing games and creating custom builds.
Hello everyone, hope you're all well. Stay safe and healthy! Your thoughts matter a lot to me. We're aware that AMD has released several powerful CPUs designed for gaming. Their efforts have helped them surpass Intel, particularly with their 3D V-Cache technology. I've also heard about the 9950X3D, which offers more cores and better 3D V-Cache compared to the 9800X3D in some games. However, benchmarks show that the 9800X3D still performs very well in certain titles. But there might be some misleading information. Since many of you have a good understanding of PCs, I thought it would be helpful to share this with you. Based on your knowledge and experience, please let me know which option you'd prefer for gaming and if you're interested in overclocking. Feel free to share your opinions!
Gaming runs at 9800x3D and the visuals clearly show what’s happening. If certain metrics stay flat even when others rise, another factor likely plays a role: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-r...3d/19.html The 9950x3D still uses just a 3D cache on one of the two CCDs, and each CCD can have multiple cores—like eight per chip. This setup can occasionally slow things down because data from the opposite side on the larger 3D CCD must be fetched, adding extra delay compared to using its own cache. It’s good to review the benchmarking results, since 9800x3D doesn’t always outperform it; its design aims for speed in about 80% of scenarios by turning on PBO and possibly a slight undervolt.
The 9950X3D contains two chips, but only one holds the 3D V cache. It mainly features a 9800X3D and a 9700X that are fused together through advanced engineering. Currently, operating systems struggle to automatically select the V cache cores from the others. There are workarounds, but the 9800X3D remains the top choice for gaming performance. The 9950X3D is designed for more cores, boosting productivity tasks. The slight edge between 98 and 99 comes mainly from extra cores consuming power and generating heat, which can affect performance. Even when you disable those extra cores, the heat isn’t directly under the cooler’s center, making it harder to dissipate. If you play games, opt for the 9800X3D instead.
Gaming isn't really about the CPU much. It's enough to use a pretty expensive GPU at very low settings to notice any difference. There are some cases where CPUs could count, like in MMORPGs or Factorio, but neither is as sensitive to frame rate as a fast FPS game. You might get a bit more value if you want 3D graphics on a high-end rig, though that's debatable. If your GPU is the main limiting factor instead of your CPU, performance will be almost identical. ----- If your graphics card is the real bottleneck rather than a 4090 at 4K resolution (for example, if you only have a 4070), then results will be nearly the same. The fastest CPU here performs similarly to a model from six years ago that cost around $100-150 when it first launched.
9800x3D works well when you keep things simple and avoid heavy background tasks. You'll likely need fewer than 16 cores for basic gaming or light multitasking.
It doesn't matter much. A mid-range processor from five years old won't completely ruin your experience. Anything beyond that is just extra perk – and honestly, it's pleasant to have nice features. If you're saving a lot each month and don't have big commitments, go for whatever you want. A 9700x9800x3D or a u7 265 will all be fairly similar. For a system focused on earning money (like compiling or rendering), you might even argue for a better CPU.