AMD 5800X3D performance

Gamers Nexus MD Ryzen 5 5600 vs. i5-12400 & 5600X CPU Review & Benchmarks - Youtube.

Tell me the difference between the ryzen 5600, 5900x and the 5950x in Cyberpunk.

Seems pretty clear to me. Cyberpunk will use more cores. It doesn’t need more cores but will use the extra cores to help the 0.1 and 1% lows.

That bench is over a year old and the game is optimized to the point where there is basically no difference between the entire ryzen line. By the time games fully utilize the extra cores of the 5950x, it will be outpaced by lower core parts of the newest generation due to IPC gains.

Yet You fail to mention that yet still the 1 percent lows and overall frame rates are even more improved with the 5800x3d which is using less cores. (Source, Gamers Nexus review posted above)

I get the argument that your trying to make … but in a very good amount of gaming use cases … Cyberpunk included … The core count is secondary to the cache size.

I think what they’ve done with the 3D cache is really good. I just think it would be a lot better if they managed to do a 5900 or 5950X 3D.

That would destroy its value as a gaming chip. You would be paying 100-300 bucks more for the exact same performance in gaming.

1 Like

Thats fair… And i expected the same ( I wanted a 5900x3d)… However this is the first release of a chip of this design. I would expect an increase in both core counts and Cache size as the Chip core process size gets smaller and limitations get perfected.

But this chip as it stands is nothing to sneeze at

It clearly shows that the 5800X3D is simply the best processor for MSFS at this moment. (At 1080p)
MSFS still is CPU bound, so, I just pre ordered one… :wink:

2 Likes

Looks like a great CPU especially for someone who is already on AM4 platform with a RTX3080 or better. It will be interesting to see how will the 5800X3D and 3090 perform in VR.

3 Likes

If that combo won’t perform great, nothing else will…

I always thought that the extra cache memory would only be helpful for shooter games, which require high refresh rates and FPS.
Amazingly, it appears to do wonders for MSFS - I am keeping on eye on this CPU as I have a Ryzen 3600 on AM4 along with a 3080. I need to be sure that it also performs well in VR.
Apparently they won’t be making that many x3d chips as it is an end of line (AM4) product !

1 Like

Don’t care how good it is. Will always pair an Nvidia and Intel just because its been stable compared to my prior AMD machines.

1 Like

The 5800X3D is not the only oddity, I’m also surprised to see the 5600G PBO having really stable FPS, with 99th better than i9-11900K.

At over 100fps, the reviewer is using some unrealistic settings, so maybe take Tom’s benchmark as a grain of salt. Still interesting to MSFS performing very differently from other games on the market out there.

1 Like

In the Linus review the big cache significantly speeds up CPU operations such as AI behavior and physics.

I think with MSFS the big cache will bring major benefits for aircraft with glass cockpit displays and complex LNAV/VNAV autopilots, especially with complex addons such as the PMDG 737NG.

1 Like

That’s a big jump considering it’s a lot cheaper than 12th gen competition.

1 Like

Simulation code that runs a lot of calculations over data in memory is also an excellent candidate for more cache! :slight_smile:

1 Like

….aaaallrightythen! :joy:

1 Like

It does look great, but Linus tech Tips numbers need a healthy dose of salt. They’re also showing the 12700K out performing the 12900K, and the 12900KS having a ~15% bump over the 12900K. Neither of those things should happen, which lead me to suspect their methodology overall.

The French reviewers numbers look a little more rigorous, in which case the 5800X3D is indeed the king! Very interesting to see Cache overturn a clock speed deficit like that.

AMD do also have a habit of making CPUs like this ‘vaporware’. That is they appear in reviews and on the shelves for a week, then disappear forever (see also 3300X). This is a unique and hard to make product… I’d be amazed if they sit in stock!

Personally I don’t buy this testing in 1080p either.

They do it to push the CPU but imho it’s a load of blah, because it’s not how people play games anymore. The test isn’t representative, which is really what the buyer needs to see.

Here are 1440p and 4K benchmarks, courtesy of ChaoticBeauty @ Avsim and PCWatch. Top 3 benchmarks @ Ultra, bottom benchmark @ Medium.

Sources:

Massive gains in both 1080p and 1440p. 4K lead is only 3 fps (as expected with GPU bottleneck) but it still beats the 12900k at $150 less MSRP. MSFS simmers with AM4 motherboards will absolutely love this chip.

1 Like