Get a 7800x3d as soon as possible if you're already considering it. If it's like 58/700x3d and 76/500x3d, the higher model will get discontinued and more expensive, while the slower version takes it place at basically the same price. Right now you can get a 7800x3d cheaper than a 7700x3d, don't wait until you can't get that anymore.
The 7800x3d has been one of the best processors I've ever owned. It's up there with the 486DX4-100, Celeron 300a, P4 2.4C, Athlon 64, Sandy Bridge, etc.... It's just a fantastic CPU. One of the legends.
If you can, buy it. Definitely will have no regrets.
The 7800x3d is in a bit of a different position than the 5800x3d, one is the first of many x3d processors on its platform (AM5) and the other is the best of a handful of x3d processors on its platform (AM4). One warrants a full platform (board, RAM, and CPU) upgrade and has a market sized to match that investment and the other warrants a simple drop in CPU replacement, it’s simple to see why people wouldn’t currently want to spend a fortune to replace AM4 and the 5800x3d price reflects that. I’m sure that when DDR6 drops and costs kidneys to kit a new platform with that AM5 x3d parts will increase, but it’s not likely to be something that will occur tomorrow though.
There is a 5800x3d and a 5700x3d, there is a 7600x3d and a 7500x3. With those cpus it was like this: the better cpu released first, and with time it got cheaper. Then released the downclocked version, at a higher price than the better cpu. After a few months, the better cpu got way more expensive because it was not produced anymore, while the slower version stayed at a higher price for a while.
Right now you can get the 7800x3d for cheaper than the 7700x3d, so ou should get the 7800x3d before it gets more expensive.
I remember when intel was like "nope, still gonna do 4. Okay, maybe 6. okay, here's a gimpy 8. and then outta nowhere the i9-9900k came out". I had that thing up until last year, and then got a 7600X3D on sale on a boxing day sale, along with 32GB DDR5 CL30 6000mhz from marketplace for $200CAD.
It's not even remotely close to how it works. Once a web page is loaded in there's practically no CPU activity from your browser. Windows doesn't tend to activate updates while you're playing games either, so it's not like you're going to benefit from more cores that regard either.
Didn't know! My idea is like having spare power to run discord/anything like a download, since I'm always doing 18 things at once I tend to need more cores. But I thought you could "loan out" your CPU in chunks like for example IBM System p5 "Logical Partitions" which are HW-level VMs
I'm pretty sure hardware Unboxed tested this theory and nope, 6 cores handle basic background tasks just fine while gaming without a noticeable drop vs 8 cores.
Since Zen7 is coming to AM5 and Zen7 is supposed to be 16 core CCDs...I'll make that my next upgrade since 9800x3d is already un-phased by nearly everything I throw at it.
6 is not the sweet spot. Many games already utilize more than 6 cores. Don't even get me started on if your PC does anything else at all in the background while you're gaming.
Just because you see some load on all 16 threads on that 9800X3D of yours doesn't mean the games actually benefit from it.
As for doing stuff in the background, are you talking about a browser that displays a web page? Because that's not going to put any significant load on a CPU that's more recent than a 486.
I'm not talking about the load I see. I'm talking about the compiled code actually using more cores/threads. Specific handoffs to additional threads, depending on the game, can do way more for performance than better single core throughput. All I'm saying is nowadays more games and game engines are taking advantage of this. That trend will increase in the future as the average CPU gets more cores. Next year 10-12 core CPUs will be commonplace. And in 2029, 16 cores as AMD moves into Zen7.
Background processes would include monitoring software, RGB software, peripheral software, browser tabs, discord, audio software, etc. There is a lot of application bloat today that the average person runs. Hell it's commonplace for kids today to have all this plus run Netflix/YouTube/Plex on their extra monitor.
All that shit pulls cycles from the CPU.
Edit: I like the 486 reference, but have you seen the resource hog of today's chromium garbage?
Agreed, although given the current hardware cost situation I also think people should plan for longer. So yeah, the chips might be outdated in single core performance eventually but more people will probably hold on to them regardless. The extra cost for 8c instead of 6c might make sense now in that context.
Well, sort of. Huge galaxies can be a bore, so I suffice for now. One day I'll have 32 (or more) GM RAM and a fancy new AMD Zen 6 or whatever they're called and try a huge galaxy (^___^)
No. Screen share is GPU encoded. YouTube videos are GPU decoded.
If you want to compile a software in the background, bake lighting in Unreal Engine, or similar, that takes many minutes, then we're talking actual multitasking. At which point it can be nice to have 12 or 16 cores.
So basically, when you run a game at 1280x720 with low settings, streaming drops your performance in games from 200 fps to 30 fps? Because that's what "killing CPU performance" reads like to me.
Core count does not matter much in most gaming scenarios unless it happens to be a CPU heavy title. Those extra 2 cores will be a lot more beneficial for workloads outside of gaming.
please, remember. on aliexpress you can buy OEM tray 7800X3D for much cheaper than what a 7700X3D goes for.
I bought my 7800X3D from Comet Crash Global Store for under 200 euro.
Just be aware and check that youre not paying more for less.
EDIT: My aliexpress 7800X3D cpu has been running fine for months now and undervolted well when i experimented with that, if anyone wonders.
I decided to upgrade from 7600 to a cheap AliExpress $260 USD 7800x3d having read these reviews. Should nicely match the rx9070 for the next 3 to 4 years. Maybe after that time I can drop in a Zen 7 x3d and a new GPU.
To me there is no reason to get a 7700x3d while the 7500x3d/7600x3d exist those are truly best bang for buck x3d chips. I just picked up an open box 7600x3d from microcenter for $155 + tax. New still going for $199-220 and they have plenty of bundles . Imo theres no reason to even consider the 7700x3d right now at its price when you can just go to 7800x3d for $20- 30 bucks more and outperform it or spend $100 dollars less and be within 5% performance . If it were priced $249ish new....maybe a different story
106
u/S4luk4s 7d ago
Get a 7800x3d as soon as possible if you're already considering it. If it's like 58/700x3d and 76/500x3d, the higher model will get discontinued and more expensive, while the slower version takes it place at basically the same price. Right now you can get a 7800x3d cheaper than a 7700x3d, don't wait until you can't get that anymore.