Thx for that 
. I’m including a screenshot below with my PC/9950x3d sitting idling essentially just running HWinfo64 along with basic Win 11 tasks along with my cpu temps. The current core effective clock rate is the actual rate the cores are running at.
I don’t use one of these dual CCDs CPUs, just the lowly 9800X3D, but just out of curiosity, is there an easy way in HWINFO to know which of the cores are using the X3D cache?
Documentation of the CPU states CCD0 uses the cache but can we assume CCD0 is core 0-7?
Yes, those are the x3d cores with the extra L3 cache on the 9950x3d.
More accurately, the 9800 has 1 CCD, which has 8 cores. It’s the CCD which has access to 32 MB of native L3 cache + 64 MB 3D V-cache position on top of the CCD.
(Corrected, L3 cache is MB, not GB, and as @WingWarper1 corrected, CCD sits on top of V-Cache so that the CCD heat dissipates directly to the heat sink above)
It’s on the bottom of the CCD in the 9000 series cpu’s which is a better implementation as the extra cache doesn’t smother the cpu and make it run hotter…
Something interesting - I assumed the 9950X3D2 is essentially 2 9800s joined together. Not quite - the 2 CCDs are defined slightly differently from each other.
CCD0 and CCD1 both have 3D V-Cache, but CCD0 is predefined to boost 200 MHz higher than CCD1 (5.6 vs 5.4 GHz). It turns out CCD0 is a better quality unit than CCD1…
Therefore, even though it appears to be 2 identical CCDs, you would still want your games / MSFS to run on CCD0.
And as Skatterbencher points out in his review, AMD figured out how to sell some of the mediocre CCDs (ie, CCD1) for more money by putting a 3D V-cache on them, and pairing them with a better unit on the X3D2… They otherwise would have been packaged as a lower tier chip. He backs up the assertion with measurements. (Both CCDs are still very good, but the 2nd just can’t boost as high).
I wish these reviewers like GamersNexus and Jay2Cents would add MSFS to their list of benchmarks, but I can understand why they don’t because there are so many different variables in this sim every time it launches to get a solid base line (for example always online connection, mandatory patch downloads, etc.)
I agree jmbgator. The only review of the 9950X3D2 for MSFS I saw was a chart on Tom"s Hardware review of that cpu.
I don’t trust their benchmarks for MSFS24. They show the 9950X3D performing 20% below the 9850X3D and 9800X3D and cite that they can’t get it to run on the correct core. I’ve read lots of user experiences and reviews over the last few weeks as I just ordered a new PC and virtually no one else seems to have the issue. General consensus seems to be that the 9950X3D (with the latest drivers) delivers pretty much the same FPS as the 9800/9850X3D and delivers a bit more smoothness in demanding situations.
As the tomshardware benchmark put the X3D2 pretty much on par with the 9850X3D, I would deduct that it performs the same as the 9950X3D when it runs on the correct cores (which seems to be the case for 99% of users apart from tomshardware). When I first saw that graph I was concerned I made the wrong CPU choice and should have gone with the X3D2 but reading their justification for the poor performance of the X3D on their benchmarks put my mind at rest somewhat. Will be interesting to hear some hands on experiences with the X3D2 in MSFS24 in the coming weeks though.
The 9800X3D is a single 8-core CCU. All 8 cores share 96MB of L3 cache. This 96MB consists of 32MB of standard L3 cache plus 64MB of stacked 3D V-Cache.
Since MSFS is going to run on 1 CCD, which is almost the same across the 9800, 9850, 9950, and 9950X3D2 - I believe other factors have a much bigger effect on performance of MSFS: RAM timings, subtimings, and… version of MSFS itself. Even boost clock has less impact than tightening memory subtiming (usually a preset in BIOS once you enable EXPO)
To be able to actually verify whether it’s better in MSFS 2024 than the 9800X3D or my current 9850X3D, I’d basically have to buy it and run my own tests.
Sure, I could buy it, test it, and just return it without giving a reason, but honestly… I’m not sure I even feel like going through all that hassle 
And honestly, the 9850X3D is probably enough anyway, especially for a gaming PC with an RTX 5090 and 64GB of RAM - I don’t really need a CPU meant for heavy multitasking beyond gaming.
If you bought CPU for anything beyond just gaming, like multitasking, you made the right choice.
Speedbird217, thank you for your reply. Most of the MSFS reviews for the 9950X3D seem to show it close to the 9800X3D and slightly behind the 9850X3D.
MS recommends the Balanced power setting to assure the Vcache CCD is being access during games.
I bought the 9950X3D when it first came out in early April of last year because I wanted to and have been VERY pleased with it’s performance in MSFS.
Time marches on, thus the 9950X3D2 is out.
I wonder how long it will be before we start hearing about the Zen 6 chips?
According to Google Gemini (so take it with a huge grain of salt ofc, since based on leaks/rumors) , Zen 6 will include a 12-core, single CCD, 6GHZ+ CPU, with IPC improvements in the 10-15% range. That combination would be beyond epic for FS2024! Can’t wait for 2027.
Interesting, based on the rumours:
| CPU | Cores | Threads | Boost | L3 = | Native + | 3D |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9800X3D | 8 | 16 | 5.2 | 96 = | 32 + | 64 |
| 10800X3D | 12 | 24 | 6.0 | 144 = | 48 + | 96 |
Now that’s a monster but I’m sure the price tag will be one as well. Still an AM5 socket.
Yeah, probably. But if it turns out as predicted, will be a “shut up and take my money” situation for sure 
It’s basically a 9800X3D + 1/2 more on the same CCD instead of 2 CCDs.
FYI for AMD CPUs, new AMD Chipset driver released today (for at least a few boards)
On the AMD downloads page, scroll down and click on Chipsets in the Search or Browse list, then AM5, and choose your board type to get a directly link to the driver.
