Hearing the 7950X3D is MSRPing at $699 usd … drool
I’m surprised with that pricing as the 7950x was $699 when it was first introduced. You’d think there’d be some uplift for the extra cache.
The 7950X needed a price adjustment after the 13900K was released, as the 13900K outperformed the 7950X in many scenarios while being around $100 cheaper.
The time has come.
Available February 28
Ryzen 9 7950X3D - $699
Ryzen 9 7900X3D - $599
Available April 6
Ryzen 7 7800X3D - $449
2 Likes
I had been waiting for the 7000 series X3D chips release date but yesterday decided to pull the trigger on the 7600X. Why would I purchase the low end part now rather than waiting a few weeks?
1 - I ruled out the Intel LGA 1700 platform early on as I see it as a dead end.
2 - I’m primarily concerned with MSFS performance rather than productivity and I’m not convinced the dual CCD 7900X3D or 7950X3D will be better for MSFS than the 7800X3D which is likely to be very difficult to obtain when it finally releases in April.
3 - At just $230, I can get a dramatic improvement over my venerable 9700K system now and then swap in one of the 7000 series X3D parts if benchmarks indicate they offer dramatic MSFS improvements once they become widely available.
I kind of view it like I view expedited shipping, I’m paying an a little extra to get something now rather than waiting another 2+ months to see how the 7800X3D performs. I can always sell the 7600X to recoup some of the cost should I decide to upgrade.
4 - I was shocked to discover the lowly 7600X really is a fantastic choice for MSFS with it being very competitive with the 13900K and 7950X and often even beating those parts in benchmarks.
If you ignore peak performance and focus on the much more important (IMO) 1% lows the 7600X begins to look like a steal. And the 7600X looks even better as resolutions increase.
At 4K, the 7600X is the fastest AMD part on the market and just 1fps shy of the 13900K.
Intel Core i9-13900K CPU Review - Page 7 of 9 - The FPS Review
7600X beating every Intel part and within 10% of AMD’s best.
Page 2 | Intel Core i9 13900K and Core i5 13600K review: an effective redoubt against AMD’s Ryzen 7000 advances | Eurogamer.net
[Best $300 CPU? Intel Core i5-13600K vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X - YouTube]
Taken together, the two charts above paint an interesting picture. Granted these are from two different reviews so the testing methology may have changed but the point is - the lowly $230 7600X is punching WAY above its weight class.
https://youtu.be/kTroSyZEUw8?t=486
With PBO enabled, 7600X ranks 5th on this chart for 99th percentile performance.
Gaming Benchmarks Intel Core i9-13900K and Core i5-13600K - Intel Core i9-13900K and Core i5-13600K Review: Raptor Lake Beats Ryzen 7000 | Tom’s Hardware (tomshardware.com)
1 Like
Interesting post. I think I might actually do the same as you. You make a very good argument there, on lots of fronts.
So the 7600X still uses AM5 and DDR5 parts, yes? Would a 4080/90 work well with that or better to stick to say some kind of 3080/90?
I thought they are all releasing on 28th February?
The 7900X3D and 7950X3D are February 28th, we have to wait until April 6th for the 7800X3D.
Yes, the 7600X is still on AM5 platform with DDR5, so you’re still getting great upgradability. I’m planning to bring my 3090 over to the new system and then I’ll look at video card upgrades next.
The 4090 should rock with the 7600X or better yet, wait until the 4090Ti is released…with any luck it will be available in April along with the 7800X3D!
1 Like
Thanks for the info. I got some planning to do! I don’t really want to wait until April so will need some kind of graphics card too (building system from scratch here) even if it’s semi-temporary. What would you say is the minimum if I only need it for 3440x1440 ultra-wide? No VR.
Great question! I’m on the 3090 now and have never tried anything else. Hopefully someone else can answer.
If you’re interested, what I purchased is below. I’ll be using my 3090 unitl the 4090Ti is released so I just threw in the cheapest video card iBuyPower offered…
Words of advice - if you’re buying AM5 platform for longevity, don’t skimp on the motherboard!
I settled on the MSI MPG X670E CARBON because it has a gen 5 PCIe x16 slot for future video cards along with and 2 GEN 5 M.2 slots which do not share PCIe lanes with the PCIe slots.
A great deep dive technical review of this motherboard is here:
I had initially considered the ASUS ROG STRIX X670E-E GAMING WIFI which is also nice architecturally but steered clear after reading many posts about the NIC being unreliable.
This is what I was looking at, with a view to swapping in an 7X3D later, but sounds like I would be fine with that cheaper CPU for now at least - or maybe that will be enough for me full-stop! I will price up a system based on 3090 instead, but then I can’t take advantage of the “Frame Generation” doubling?
I think the MB is good - has the gen 5 and 3 M2 slots.
Timely post! I was initially favoring that motherboard as well, but then started to see tons of complaints about the NIC having problems with disconnections even with the latest firmware updates.
Yeah I see you added that after I posted. Random! I’ll see if they offer the MSI.
The leaked data for the 7950X3D looks promising (about what we were all expecting).
I’m going in that direction. Hopefully, they will actually be available next week!
Shame they’re not testing on MSFS yet though 
First MSFS video.
TL/DR/DW
Average FPS slightly higher than 13900K
But 1% FPS much higher on the new AMD chip.
And another one here. Results are encouraging. General gaming benchmarks seem to go either way to AMD or Intel, with a firm but modest lead for AMD overall. But MSFS seems to be very clear, as expected. On 4090 in Reverb G2 VR I seem to be heavily CPU-limited, and suffering from significant stutters in the otherwise buttery-smooth experience. So more me the hope is to get those stutters (probably caused bu low 1% dips) under control and bring CPU/GPU loads to more balance.
I suspect the 7900X3D will be the best deal in terms of value for money between the 13900K, 7950X3D, and 7900X3D. The 7900X3D only clocks 100mhz lower than the 7950X3D. Everthying else is the same -apart from the cores, of course.
But, as we all know, MSFS basically only uses only one core anyways (I know I am exaggerating, but you know what I mean; 12 or 16 cores does not matter for MSFS).
So, I assume the 7900X3D will have roughly the same performance as a 13900K, but with much less power consumption and better 1% lows. Also, I will be able to upgrade once more on AM5 without having to upgrade my mobo again. I will upgrade to a 7900X3D with 5600Mhz CL28 DDR5. I rather spent the 100 bucks on low latency ram than on 4 more cores that won’t be utilised.
What do you guys think? you going X3D, if so wich one; or you opting for the 13900K?
If the 7900 performs on par or even better than the 13900k at the same or lower price I might go for that one. OR wait until April for 7800X3D. But I am tired of waiting lol
1 Like