For a long time, the best gaming CPU you could buy was an AMD 5800X3D. Not the more powerful 5900X, nor Intel’s competitor, but a special edition of the 5800X with 3D V-Cache.
In a nutshell, the reason for this is the CPU cache, a small unit of memory physically located near the CPU that can be read quickly, which greatly influences the speed at which you can work with, for example, a game. There’s usually not enough cache space, as the processor is a thin square with a fairly limited footprint. However, AMD discovered that instead of extending the bezel sideways, it could be done vertically, hence the 3D designation. Essentially, it meant you could add three times more cache than normal to a processor, and was hailed by various media outlets as the biggest technological innovation of the decade. It must be said though that it is not something that is only used for gaming, servers and workstations can benefit from it as well.
This is why everyone was eagerly awaiting its arrival with AMD’s Ryzen 7000 series, especially since the 5800X and 5800X3D chips had no substitute, there was only a 7700X and a 7900X , but that magical middle ground wasn’t there at launch. , but now yes. There are currently three options: the 7950X3D, the 7900X3D and the highly anticipated 7800X3D, which won’t hit stores until early April. However, it should be at least $150 cheaper than the 7900X3D.
The price of the new 3D V-Cache editions is a bit higher than the normal editions:
- AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D: 809 euros
- AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D: 709 euros
Advertisement:
We got to take a look at the top model, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D. However, there is also a 3D version of the 7900X chip, which probably makes more sense to many, because 16 cores and 32 threads is actually a lot more than you need, and the technology boost AMD, very simplistically, simply increases processor speed until you reach certain heat limits.
But with the 3D V-Cache edition, we not only have 144MB of cache, and that’s a lot, but also a huge reduction in power consumption, from 170 watts to 120 watts, but with the same, if not better, performance. , and, therefore, better options for overclocking, or just keeping the chip cool in general, something I’m a big fan of. Graphics cards and processors are pretty damn expensive, but if you can accept them running instead of having to put tons of extra watts into them to get 2% more performance, then the system is generally stable and can last for many years.
The system is such that the CPU chip itself contains both a normal CCX and one with 3D V-Cache. A CCX is a unit called Basic complex containing four processor cores and their shared cache, the more CCX units, the more cores. Normally there is 16MB per CCX, but here is something else to get you up to 144MB. The point is that common tasks can be run normally and where high frequency is important, while 3D players V-Cache have extremely low latency thanks to a very high cache. This means you can keep production costs low and have a flexible and scalable system. Although it seems extremely complex and automated, you can actually decide for yourself, maybe not what I would recommend because the system analyzes in real time which core should do what, but the choice is yours.
Advertisement:
AMD has gone so far as to have a separate system that can automatically launch games on the higher performing CCX device, which is often the one with the most cache.
As many AMD users know, through the Ryzen Master software you can play around with the processor and the corresponding performance a bit. There are several different options, and one of them is the “curve optimizer” (optimization takes some time, but it’s worth it). Combine it with fashion Eco, where the processor is limited in the amount of power it can consume, and you’ll always get closer to 7-8% of what can be achieved at full power. Likewise, with Precision Boost Overdrive, you can overclock with just one click. It’s not that you get 15 or 20% more, the system is already pushing cores as much as it can on its own, but a small percentage can be earned for those who want it.
We ran the test, of course, on an AM5 motherboard with DDR5 6000Mhz RAM, an NVMe 4.0 drive and an RTX 4080 card. The reason is that we weren’t 100% sure if the Smart Access memory d ‘AMD works even better with 3D or “only” mods in the same way as regular X mods, thus introducing an additional variable. The numbers should therefore not be taken as absolute, had we paired it with one of the super tuned RX 7900 XTX cards which we also borrowed, but they give us a solid basis for comparison with the 7950X with the least of variables. possible.
We had no problem going over 5.7Ghz on half the cores, which makes a lot of sense since those are the ones without 3D cache, and more importantly, the temperature was low, under 74 degrees throughout the moment, whereas with the usual 7950X chip. it often exceeded 90 degrees under heavy load. Power consumption isn’t bad either, we measured 121.99 watts peak out of game, but I wonder if more performance can be achieved by freeing up the consumption. In general, 1080p and 1440p see the biggest changes, simply because the GPU is often the bottleneck in 4K games.
Overall, we saw improvements of 10-12% at 1080p and 7-10% at 1440p. Some games can use this cache much better than others: Far Cry 6 offered a 48% improvement at 1080p and a 49.51% improvement at 1440p; in comparison, the improvement in 4K was only 4.2%.
It costs more, but there’s also a noticeable improvement, which is offset by lower power consumption. Unfortunately we didn’t have time to play around with overclocking, but because of how there should be an extra 50 watts to play with, and therefore huge potential for even more performance. If you already have a 7950X, for example, there’s not much point in upgrading, especially if you like 4K resolution. But 12% more performance without a generation change is worth it, even if it costs more.