AMD at CES 2023: 7950X3D, 7900X3D, 7800X3D - VCache Party In Here

It’s more like because some 12 year old in a Chinese sweat shop had a faulty pressure gauge so they couldn’t correctly fill a vapour chamber.
But yes.
Depends on which side,
Pull a vacuum to the right a mount (this would be pressure reading)
Most likely they use by weight and not pressure for the water, fill a tube with liquid to the right mass, open valve let the coolant fill the chamber. (weight sensor reading issue)

If there's not enough coolant, I would assume the second one, if not evaporate condensing properly, assume the first. Although honestly both could cause the same issue .

Wonder if I still have some manufacturing slides around for that stuff.
 
Depends on which side,
Pull a vacuum to the right a mount (this would be pressure reading)
Most likely they use by weight and not pressure for the water, fill a tube with liquid to the right mass, open valve let the coolant fill the chamber. (weight sensor reading issue)

If there's not enough coolant, I would assume the second one, if not evaporate condensing properly, assume the first. Although honestly both could cause the same issue .

Wonder if I still have some manufacturing slides around for that stuff.
The point is all this trouble because some place paying slave wages in a developing country doesn't have redundant QC, or possibly any QC.
I have a hard time imagining that many faulty parts being produced by a reputable firm and not getting caught before they make it out the door.
 
Really? I mean really really? How many bad memory chips did we see on RTX 2080 cards? Plenty of others worth citing as well in many industries.
I'm still not convinced that wasn't industrial sabotage but yeah, you do make a point I was perhaps a little harsh in that.
I find it strange that a bunch of barrels of tainted processing liquids made their way into Taiwanese facilities at the same time China was doubling down saying that the facilities they had within the Chinese mainland were better and more reliable... Coincidence I am sure.
 
There is no better WiFi than no WiFi at all.

Be it copper or fiber, for me it is wired or bust.

I'll save WiFi for devices that need to be mobile. (phones, tablets, laptops, etc.)
Additional later reply to this but: Another great thing about Intel wifi is it include very good bluetooth. Its nice to connect my Dual Sense controller to my PC, with bluetooth.

Much as I'd like to believe that, theory has a way of being unseated by reality.

I'll keep Process Lasso at the ready, just in case the default scheduling behavior doesn't work out.

What I really want to know is how this will affect overclocking, since now we'll have to overclock per CCD due to the V-Cached one hitting limits sooner. I'm not sure if the UEFI on AM5 boards is set up for that.

If the 7900X is 6+6, then that definitely pushes me toward either the 7800X3D (8+0, only cached CCD active) or 7950X3D (8+8) were I to do any Zen 4 builds. Eight homogeneous, performance-oriented cores is my minimum nowadays.
I was overclocking per CCD with a 3900x, on a B550 itx board. One CCD was clearly better than the other.
Overall, I wouldn't worry much about Zen4x3D. The scheduling for that should be even easier than Intel's P+E cores setup-----and that doesn't really have a lot of problems.

This heterogeneous cores on a single chip trend for desktop/workstation CPUs is retarded. The scheduling complexity alone with Intel's P+E config is bad enough (talking about the amount of bullshit workload movement and heuristics crap the kernel has to do to properly "balance" across the P+E cores) but now we're talking different logical cores have different perf characteristics? WTF. Have these companies not learned anything from how hard it is to properly optimize for NUMA/multi-socket/multi-node systems? I suspect they just don't give a shit and once again (except in regards to hardware architecture/design now too): https://tonsky.me/blog/disenchantment/.

I wonder how much performance is lost due to all the overhead of managing this garbage on a general purpose OS and the general software free-for-all (so not something largely vertically integrated like iOS/Android phones).

I also wonder how many more silly-named vulnerabilities lurk in this mountain of complexity.
Again, I wouldn't worry much about overhead. These CPUs make adjustments at insane speeds. Even if there were some overhead------I've been very impressed with Alder Lake. The performance is incredible and the heat output is very manageable. Raptor Lake is a little different. Feels more like an overclocked chip. Its definitely faster. But....it also runs noticeably hotter.
Still though, the performance of both Intel and AMD's new stuff is insane. I'm not sure what all the boohoo is about. I mentioned in another thread----Raptor Lake essentially doubles the single core Cinibench score of 10th gen Comet Lake. 13600k's 6 Pcores by themselves, scores about the same as a 10900k in multicore.
 
Yeah but the point is AMD made the same claims with their 5000 and 6000 series mobile lineups and in the 6000 series mobile launch claimed over 20h of battery life and none of it happened.
Yeah, it's a fair comparison until Apple gets the new silicon out which they claim was pushed back because of TSMC delays but it's an old comparison they have used for a while and never actually delivered on.
So AMD can put up all the slide shows they want on this but I want benchmarks that back it up and products on the shelves that actually deliver on their theoretical numbers presented there.
AMD's Rambrandt was really impressive. Not as good as Apple's battery performance but not too far off either. Not sure what claims you're referring to but it seems to perform very well.

 
AMD's Rambrandt was really impressive. Not as good as Apple's battery performance but not too far off either. Not sure what claims you're referring to but it seems to perform very well.


It does test well when plugged in, but when unplugged and on battery the AMD and Intel offerings fall off significantly. I’m looking forward to see if AMD delivers this time, hopefully something with Dell would be good as it makes bulk purchase easier.
Apple makes it too easy for me to bulk order but repair options for me are non existent so everything gets mailed out which pisses everyone off because it’s at best a 3 week turn around. And that of course only starts after the user is fed up with the machine so they are … perturbed at that stage. Dell just sends me parts and a YouTube live no to the repair instructions.
 
To bring us back on topic. The best chip this time will be the 7950x3d right? Full 8 cores for each of the compromise ccds. The 7900s 6+6 feels a bit of a step back on paper.
 
Since my PC is only for gaming, and I sometimes struggle to keep 240 FPS (CPU limit) in some modern FPS games with my 240 Hz monitor, I'm considering swapping out my 7950X with a 7800X3D. Anyone think I'm crazy?
 
Since my PC is only for gaming, and I sometimes struggle to keep 240 FPS (CPU limit) in some modern FPS games with my 240 Hz monitor, I'm considering swapping out my 7950X with a 7800X3D. Anyone think I'm crazy?
No, it will be faster. The 5800x3d keeping up with the first gen AM5 stuff in most games is evidence of the benefit of the cache.
 
Since my PC is only for gaming, and I sometimes struggle to keep 240 FPS (CPU limit) in some modern FPS games with my 240 Hz monitor, I'm considering swapping out my 7950X with a 7800X3D. Anyone think I'm crazy?

Only downside I can think of is slightly less future proofing, and future proofing is rarely a good way to spend your money, as that same performance will be cheaper in the future when it is needed.

Also, insert comment about 240hz being 100% pointless other than to cure FOMO. Yes, even for pro conpetitive gaming.
 
Last edited:
There was also that one time the biggest CPU company in the world mass produced a new CPU flagship that computed wrong.
You mean the P5 Pentium FDIV bug that forced many industries to recompute their results on non-bugged CPUs?

Didn't seem to set bsck the Pentium much in the grand scheme of things, though. Just think of the Quake framerates!

Since my PC is only for gaming, and I sometimes struggle to keep 240 FPS (CPU limit) in some modern FPS games with my 240 Hz monitor, I'm considering swapping out my 7950X with a 7800X3D. Anyone think I'm crazy?
Not me. You bought a new CPU expecting a performance target to be met, it doesn't quite meet the mark, but there's new stuff that might which still fits right into your existing AM5 platform.

So you buy that 7800X3D, verify that it works, and sell off your 7950X to recoup the cost if your games of choice perform better with the cache. If not, take the 7800X3D right back for a full refund and keep the 7950X.

It may not be the most optimal use of funds, but I don't think anyone building AM5 with a 7950X right now is concerned with cost-effectiveness, only pure performance.
 
It does test well when plugged in, but when unplugged and on battery the AMD and Intel offerings fall off significantly. I’m looking forward to see if AMD delivers this time, hopefully something with Dell would be good as it makes bulk purchase easier.
Unlikely AMD will have the same performance plugged and unplugged. The 30% performance increase is likely plugged in.
Apple makes it too easy for me to bulk order but repair options for me are non existent so everything gets mailed out which pisses everyone off because it’s at best a 3 week turn around. And that of course only starts after the user is fed up with the machine so they are … perturbed at that stage. Dell just sends me parts and a YouTube live no to the repair instructions.
Remember those SSD's I predicted would brick Apple products and make them unrepairable? Even if Apple sends you parts there's no part Apple has to solve this problem.
 
Unlikely AMD will have the same performance plugged and unplugged. The 30% performance increase is likely plugged in.

Remember those SSD's I predicted would brick Apple products and make them unrepairable? Even if Apple sends you parts there's no part Apple has to solve this problem.

The issue with the performance is the M1 and the M2 doesn’t really change between when it is plugged in and unplugged.

But I’ve also got well over 150 m1 devices in the field so far haven’t seen that failure yet <knock on wood> lots of double double failures though. No recovery options for data so thank you Microsoft for O365.
 
To bring us back on topic. The best chip this time will be the 7950x3d right? Full 8 cores for each of the compromise ccds. The 7900s 6+6 feels a bit of a step back on paper.
I think it is a full 8+4. It is a must that it be on parity with the 7800 and 79503d. Also the 79003d has a very high total cache so IMO it must have the full 8x3d cores or it wouldn't get that total cache size.
 
I just did the math.
7800= 96+8x cores(1MB per core) =104 total cache
79003d=chiplet a (96+8x cores(1MB per core)+ chiplet b (32+4x cores(1MB per core) =140 total cache
79503d=chiplet a (96+8x cores(1MB per core)+ chiplet b (32+8x cores(1MB per core) =144 total cache

*edit* okay by the numbers Randall might still be right.
79003d= chiplet a (96+6x cores(1MB per core)+ chiplet b (32+6x cores(1MB per core) =140 total cache
same total.
My reason why I think they went 8+4 is for parity between 7800/79003d/79503d. 79003d can't shit the bed so I think they would mass produce 8 core 3d chiplets to be used for all. Then just castrate the cheaper non3d chiplet. Of course there could be a binning where a 6core might work for using faulty chips but I doubt that. We know AMD went chiplets because of the massive decrease is faulty chips and surely we would have seen a first gen 56003d if that was the case.
 
Last edited:
I just did the math.
7800= 96+8x cores(1MB per core) =104 total cache
79003d=chiplet a (96+8x cores(1MB per core)+ chiplet b (32+4x cores(1MB per core) =140 total cache
79503d=chiplet a (96+8x cores(1MB per core)+ chiplet b (32+8x cores(1MB per core) =144 total cache

*edit* okay by the numbers Randall might still be right.
79003d= chiplet a (96+6x cores(1MB per core)+ chiplet b (32+6x cores(1MB per core) =140 total cache
same total.
My reason why I think they went 8+4 is for parity between 7800/79003d/79503d. 79003d can't shit the bed so I think they would mass produce 8 core 3d chiplets to be used for all. Then just castrate the cheaper non3d chiplet. Of course there could be a binning where a 6core might work for using faulty chips but I doubt that. We know AMD went chiplets because of the massive decrease is faulty chips and surely we would have seen a first gen 56003d if that was the case.

Too tired to follow/TDLR the math here. Per AMD's Scott Stankard (Director of Product Management for AMD Client) who I met with last Friday stated that the 7950X 8X3D+8 CCD, 7900X is 6X3D + 6 CCD and 7800X is a single 8X3D CCD.
 
The math also works out with 2x6 core CCDs: 96+6 + 32+6.
My apologies for the slow edit. I realized as soon as I posted. Additionally to my above explanations for 8+4 is that I suspect that there might be issues with a 8core 3d chiplet
Too tired to follow/TDLR the math here. Per AMD's Scott Stankard (Director of Product Management for AMD Client) who I met with last Friday stated that the 7950X 8X3D+8 CCD, 7900X is 6X3D + 6 CCD and 7800X is a single 8X3D CCD.
Interesting as it would put the 7900x3d at a disadvantage. Of course it does jump up (cache wise) in the non-3d cores.
I can't name drop like you, but feel something aint right here. I feel very suspect that AMD makes a "special" x3d core just for the 7900x.
 
Interesting as it would put the 7900x3d at a disadvantage. Of course it does jump up (cache wise) in the non-3d cores.
I can't name drop like you, but feel something aint right here. I feel very suspect that AMD makes a "special" x3d core just for the 7900x.
AMD is too cheap to develop a unique piece of silicon for a mid tier part. If they did that where would they sell their defective silicon that they have to disable a core or a memory block too. That would be wasteful.
 
My apologies for the slow edit. I realized as soon as I posted. Additionally to my above explanations for 8+4 is that I suspect that there might be issues with a 8core 3d chiplet

Interesting as it would put the 7900x3d at a disadvantage. Of course it does jump up (cache wise) in the non-3d cores.
I can't name drop like you, but feel something aint right here. I feel very suspect that AMD makes a "special" x3d core just for the 7900x.
Disadvantage is relative - X3D cores are good at gaming but not necessarily at much else, and most games don't get a significant performance bump going from 6 to 8 cores (even then, if more than 6 are needed for gaming there's still the other 6 standard cores).

I figure the 7900X3D is more a way to unload 8 core X3D chiplets that are partially defective by turning off the affected cores.

Name dropping is only to give a source for the information that's not me making up something :) (especially if reality ends up differing from what I've been told).
 
I would love to go back to that time.

Give me nothing on board, and instead give me 8 expansion slots.

Let me customize my experience with the expansion cards I want instead of picking and choosing from a series of on board motherboard bundles, none of which ever seem to align with my preferences.

This whole concept of putting everyhting on board has absolutely killed the joy in the hobby. There is no customizing my build to my preferences anymore. I just have to deal with whatever Asus, Gigabyte or MSI have chosen for me. IN many cases this results in me searching desperately for boards with more expansion so I can install at least ONE component of my choosing, and then disable a ton of stuff on board that I will never use. It is a colossal waste.

I love the good old 286 days when boards looked like this:

View attachment 539644

There was no sound on board. No networking. The most you'd ever get on board was a serial port, and even that wasn't a guarantee.
If you wanted anything, like a floppy controller, or a hard drive controller, a video card or a sound card, you added them all yourself, and you got to pick exactly which ones you wanted, and if you didn't want a certain component you just omitted it.

It resulted in diverse and interesting builds customized to the desires of their builders.

I want this back.
No, what you want is every 6 months for a new CPU and GPU to come out that is twice as fast as what you just bought. I think we could all get behind this.

Just buy a good mobo, typically the higher end ASUS. The OnBoard audio rivals Creative cards, even has high-end expensive socketed DAC's. Onboard nic is good enough as CPU's are fast enough to easily handle even the software based nics (PHY types), and these more expensive boards have good nics (10G even) on them with low cpu utilization. OnBoard sata is good enough for a bluray burner. M2 can't be beat as a OS boot device. OnBoard USB 3 is fine and gets power delivery thru the mobo, addin usb3 requires supplemental power.
A mobo like this goes for $500 to $900. You get what you pay for.

I still use an add-in card for a raid 5 pcie3 controller. Not as fast as M2 but redundant. I've tried using the Creative X-Fi card, but it doesn't sound any better. Maybe if I used the pc as an HTPC, a soundcard might come in useful for Dolby Atmos support. But for gaming, no need.

Boards with the built in components are more efficient use of space and better airflow. Those pc's with 10 add in cards also used CPU's that didn't need a fan, or some didn't even need a heatsink! Those days are gone, CPU's are much too powerful for that.
 
Boards with the built in components are more efficient use of space and better airflow. Those pc's with 10 add in cards also used CPU's that didn't need a fan, or some didn't even need a heatsink! Those days are gone, CPU's are much too powerful for that.

I use many expansion cards in my systems, and I have no problems with airflow. You just have to put some thought into your build.
 
I was overclocking per CCD with a 3900x, on a B550 itx board. One CCD was clearly better than the other.
Overall, I wouldn't worry much about Zen4x3D. The scheduling for that should be even easier than Intel's P+E cores setup-----and that doesn't really have a lot of problems.

Again, I wouldn't worry much about overhead. These CPUs make adjustments at insane speeds. Even if there were some overhead------I've been very impressed with Alder Lake. The performance is incredible and the heat output is very manageable. Raptor Lake is a little different. Feels more like an overclocked chip. Its definitely faster. But....it also runs noticeably hotter.
Still though, the performance of both Intel and AMD's new stuff is insane. I'm not sure what all the boohoo is about. I mentioned in another thread----Raptor Lake essentially doubles the single core Cinibench score of 10th gen Comet Lake. 13600k's 6 Pcores by themselves, scores about the same as a 10900k in multicore.

I saw something similar on some ARM chips a while back... I believe they called it "Little Big Architecture". https://www.arm.com/technologies/big-little

This makes sense on a mobile platform... I'm not sure about it on a desktop. The market will decide.
 
Disadvantage is relative - X3D cores are good at gaming but not necessarily at much else, and most games don't get a significant performance bump going from 6 to 8 cores (even then, if more than 6 are needed for gaming there's still the other 6 standard cores).

I figure the 7900X3D is more a way to unload 8 core X3D chiplets that are partially defective by turning off the affected cores.

Name dropping is only to give a source for the information that's not me making up something :) (especially if reality ends up differing from what I've been told).

Seems like a waste of the v-cache to put it on a 6 core CCD though. The whole thing with only putting v-cache on half of the upper tier chips doesn't interest me at all though. I grabbed a 7950x today while Microcenter still was giving away 32GB of DDR5 with them for the time being. I'll upgrade down the line when something better comes around.
 
Eh, we live in different realities, I see those things as conveniences that (other than ancient Windows maturity issues preventing them from doing so) tend to just work. Sound makes sound, LAN/WIFI connects.....I used to be the type who spent hours trying to get slightly faster throughput from my registry settings until I realized everything was already "kinda just working fine if I didn't F with it....". Yes, yes, a little bit of the nerd of yore died in me that day but ultimately I only have so many clocks left and you ask yourself at some point "Do I really want to spend 3 hours
tweaking WiFi configuration settings to get an additional 50mbps of download or is the real answer DIGAF?"..........


View attachment 539655
I...see what you did there......



USB DAC.....on LINUX.....dude what are you up to, seriously :D You aren't running those high bitrate audio files through a 2.1 Cambridge Soundworks setup are you? Are you messing with us? :D

(all kidding aside, enjoy, I just grew tired of that tweaking world but I totally get the desire to keep making the most of what you can, even if the only person who will ever notice was you. Don't get my wife started on my old ISF Calibration woes for my Rear Projection TV's....same animal).
"Look, Do you see that speed-bump? God Damnit this is a $3000 TV and the frickin Pincushion on that tube STILL can't be properly negated....look that scanline is mis-aligned..") and so on and so on.....

Not the guy you're responding to, but don't diss my 2.1 Cambridge Soundworks setup! It's 25 years old and Will. Not. Die.

I have and use that same speaker system! I think it sounds great, and haven't wanted to get another system because I like their sound, and the only speakers I personally compared them to (newer Creative Labs ones) didn't sound as good. I have the 4.1 system, but I only use 2 of the speakers. The other 2 have been sitting unused in storage for, well, almost always.

I noted the capacitors the subwoofer uses, and I think I might have bought the caps to recap the unit with a couple of years ago, maybe longer, but haven't gotten around to installing them yet.

Edit: I've now recapped my Cambridge Soundworks subwoofer. It's helped the sound quality, gotten rid of a bit of low-frequency hum it had before, and solved an issue it had with making a loud buzzing noise (until I powered off and on the subwoofer again) if I powered on or off another device from the same outlet.

This is the capacitor list:

3x 100 uf 16v
3x 10uf 35v
4x 1uf 50v
4x 0.22uf 50v
1x 0.1uf 50v
6x 470uf 16v
1x 4700uf 25v


Four of the 470uF 16v capacitors are under the metal shield that's shown around 4:00 in the first video here. To access them, the subwoofer volume knob needs to be pulled off, and the nut underneath it needs to be removed. And the screw between the RCA connectors on the subwoofer also needs to be removed.





I still use the 5.1 version of that (Creative Labs MegaWorks 5.1 THX 550)
Purchased ~2003, still going strong
View attachment 540007


Re: the talk about the Cambridge Soundworks speaker system in this thread: ebay - Cambridge Soundworks PC Works Henry Kloss Speakers RARE FIND BRAND NEW

I replaced the electrolytic capacitors in the speaker hub of mine, and now the hum and buzz are gone. I also cleaned all the connectors with Deoxit. And after some searching, found and pulled-out the two unused speakers from the 4.1 version I have, and will clean them up and see how they sound compared to the ones I've been using for maybe 2.5 decades now.

I also just A/B'd the Cambridge speakers with speakers from a Creative Labs Inspire 5200 5.1 system that's lying around, and I think the Cambridge speakers blow them away. The Inspire speakers are significantly darker and a bit muddy sounding, while the Cambridge ones have fantastic clarity and still sound full. That was my impression of the difference back in their release-day, and I heard it again as soon as I compared them.

I think the Cambridge setup that's in the eBay link (mine is the same system, but the 4.1 edition - and the 4 speakers are all the same) is a gem, and I expect I might not like an alternative I try as much. But if anyone wants to recommend a good set of modern PC speakers to compare them to, I'm interested to try out something newer that might be better.
 
Last edited:
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
I was looking at one on the Shelf in Microcenter. But I'm waiting on 8000 series to come out since we're so close.
 
Last edited:
I was looking at one on the Shelf in Microcenter. But I'm waiting on 8000 series to come out since we're so close.
Based on TSMC availability your probably looking at a 2025 availability on that… unless AMD intends to have no node change for their next gen.

2024 might see the rumoured RDNA 3.5 but I’m not so sure that’s a real thing.

If AMD can keep to their normal 18 month cadence we should see the next gen in the second half of 2024 but it wasn’t too long ago that AMD was telling investors that it may not be able to keep that pace due to external limitations.

It would be nice though, I think we can all agree that this current gen is massively underwhelming.
 
Based on TSMC availability your probably looking at a 2025 availability on that… unless AMD intends to have no node change for their next gen.

2024 might see the rumoured RDNA 3.5 but I’m not so sure that’s a real thing.

If AMD can keep to their normal 18 month cadence we should see the next gen in the second half of 2024 but it wasn’t too long ago that AMD was telling investors that it may not be able to keep that pace due to external limitations.

It would be nice though, I think we can all agree that this current gen is massively underwhelming.
https://hothardware.com/news/amd-shares-ryzen-8000-roadmap

AMD put out a roadmap with 3.5 a month ago.
 
2024 is 5+ months away, unless there’s some new calendar without August, September, October, November and December.
I mean we're close enough to August to count as being there. Even still we're over halfway through the year and 2024 is right around the corner.
 
Back
Top