That’s a fake benchmark video. Please delete it. That whole channel is fake. You realize how big you have to be to get review samples? All that channel has are fake comparison videos that never actually show the product or say a single word. Use some common sense guys.
2 Likes
I’m not a betting man, but that’s one I’d take.
I am still waiting for someone to benchmark at 400 LOD Ultra 4K TAA.
From the videos I’ve seen on YouTube, the non-3D 7950x was struggling and 40-45fps, sometimes dropped to 3x fps, while the 13900k was comfortably around 60fps and above.
I wonder what the situation will be with the 7950x3D (or 7800x3D), sure, they have much more cache, but the 3D-Vcache cores run at much lower frequencies than normal cores, so their computational power is not that great, and 400 LOD is just brutal, is it a niche situation that may behave very differently.
3 Likes
Have to agree. Looking for an upgrade soon with a 4090 and 13900 or 7xxx x3d cpu.
Im on an almost 4k (5120×1440) monitor. Looks like a much closer tie at that res - due gpu limitation.
But sorely miss info at what TLoD setting is used. At 4k and TLoD 250+ you will be CPU limited, not GPU.
Which one will perform best at those settings: 4k, TLoD 400, FSLTL, fs2crew, APL2, Volanta, FSRealistic etc?
I don’t think there is any reason to believe it will behave differently at 400LOD. If anything the more CPU hungry the scenario the better it should perform compared to the competition.
The problem is MSFS is hard to benchmark, so few sites/reviewers bother. Easier to use use titles that come with a benchmark tool they can just hit go, plus audiences seem more interested in weather you get 810.7 or 812.32 FPS in CS:GO.
For those thinking about the 7900x3d, I think that’ll be the worst of them all, for pure gaming use the 7800x3d, and for those of us that can use the horsepower use the 7950x3d. The 2x6 cores seem a compromise that won’t excel at either task, especially since the non 3d CCD get’s parked, so you end up with a 6 core cpu in games which seems low, but I dunno. Will have to wait a bit.
1 Like
Impressive as the new CPU is, the amazing 5800X3D still keeps up at 4K, even though it uses DDR4 RAM.
Paul’s Hardware review with a 4090.
4 Likes
Very nice CPU, gains are what I expected.
Said this, the only interesting thing will be seeing some stuttering decrease. Because for the “general flight” in 4K or, even more, VR, you will be always be GPU-dependant as main factor.
I just looked at the channel stats, it’s been around since 2013, so 10 years and +16M views.
Also, these SKUs are available for pickup in stores on Feb 28th.
The results at 1440p are pretty much consistent with other reviews out there.
Please feel free to disregard if you feel the number of subscribers makes it less interesting than say, LTT, Gamers Nexus and the likes.
Its not about “interesting” lol. Its clearly a FAKE channel with clickbait fake videos. Intel, Nvidia, AMD are not going to send review samples to a low quality channel that small, that doesn’t even show the product, say a single word, and the “review” is just some b-roll in the background.
You really have to use common sense here. Unless of course you are the owner of the channel and just promoting it.
2 Likes
No I am not. And other than your bold impressions, I have no reason to doubt it.
Given the results are consistent with other reviews, and Youtube has kept the channel around for such a long time, I’d rather not jump to conclusions.
As I said, feel free to disregard if you don’t like it.
Wish someone from the simming community would benchmark these in typical use case scenarios such as, “7950X3D benchmarked Fenix A320 EGLL to EHAM full AIG or FSLTL traffic”. While these graphs are good, it doesn’t take into account what we all do in the sim.
7 Likes
A good argument of why MSFS needs a benchmark built-in to the sim.
7 Likes
I have ordered a 7950x3d today to pair with my 4090, looking forward to test it, specially in VR. Currently running 3700x so should be a good update…
5 Likes
Only if MSFS would actually make full use of all the 8 cores the 5800X3D offers, which it doesn’t. Eeven with Process Lasso, MSFS only 2-4 cores get more or less maxed out while the others receive far less workload. So I would expect that to be similar with the 7900X3D. And even though the second CCD has no extra V-Cache, that doesn’t mean the second CCD is parked. Also the 7900X3D and 7950X3D have the same amount of L3 Cache: 128MB.
Since I couldn’t get a hold on the 7950X3D I got myself a 7900X3D. Let’s see how it compares to the 5800X3D.
1 Like
This will be interesting to see put to the test since the 7950x3d does park the cores during gaming, and I would suspect the 7900x3d to do the same.
Really? Hadn’t heard that before. Sorry.
I keep seeing people indicating the sim does not make full use of the AMD 5xxx (pick one) cores. This is not the case for my 5900x as work is fairly evenly spread across all 24 of my threads (ok, the sim probably uses 13-15 threads and other processes such as FSLTL, performance monitors, Win 11, etc use the remaining threads).
I’m using DX12 so maybe I get a few less fps but things run much smoother.
1 Like
No worries, but yes. The 7950x3d essentially transforms into the coming 7800x3d when gaming. At least that’s the idea, assuming everything is up to date, you have AMD’s extra scheduling programs installed, letting the Xbox Game Bar run in the background to detect gaming activity (and that it detects properly). This is why for gaming, most people are steering clear of this CPU. Sure, it’s currently the “fastest gaming CPU” by most accounts, but why spend the money on it when the 7800x3d is due out with the same expected performance, no need for core scheduling concerns/overhead, and for $250 less?
Thanks.
So I am currently wondering whether ordering the 7900X3D was such a bright idea after all …
I do care for desktop performance so the extra cores are welcome but I am asking myself whether this will be a significant improvement over the 5800X3D worth the investment
I can only speak for myself. Aside than the sim, my other games are older and not at all demanding. For production work, I’m a hobby photographer, so I don’t care much about how fast it performs in programs like GIMP (basically a free Photoshop alternative). My i5-8400 works fine for those uses and other stuff. In my case, the 7900x3d would be a huge step up, but not optimal for my uses.