Ryzen 7 7800X3D: Ahead of Core i9 for gaming at 40% power draw

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D in detail

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D in detail

It’s a bit of a Ryzen 7 5800X3D replay based on AMD’s AM5 platform and a new architecture (Zen 4, which also has the 5nm manufacturing node associated with it). The main role for the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is played by the same modification – the addition of a second piece of silicon on the CCD chiplet with the CPU cores, which transparently increases the L3 cache from the original 32 MB to 96 MB.

In terms of speed, the R7 7800X3D has the advantage (over the R7 5800X3D) of a higher IPC (according to selected AMD internal tests by an average of 13%) and also higher all-core boost clock speeds, depending on the load by 300–400 MHz. Single-core boost is also faster, increasing application performance across generations in tasks that use only a single thread. But the Ryzen 7 7800X3D still lags well behind models with “regular” L3 cache in this regard. This is because the technology used to connect the chiplet with the 3D V-cache cannot handle as high a voltage as could be used in the rest of the chiplet.

A greater, tighter maximum voltage limit naturally means lower clock speeds, but these are still higher than with the Ryzen 7 5800X3D at all levels, which also means higher bandwidth and lower L3 (but also L1 and L2) cache latencies, the benefits of which are mainly discussed around gaming. These access a large amount of data from RAM, for which the CPU waits longer than from the L3 cache, which usually cannot hold everything necessary though. In the case of Ryzen processors with 3D V-cache, the situation is better, the cache capacity is significantly larger.

If such a large cache is well implemented, the negative impact of lower clock speeds can be outweighed and ultimately higher gaming performance can be achieved. That’s why this processor is associated with the word “gaming” – it should have the upper hand in such an environment. And not just in terms of speed, but also in terms of efficiency, which was already a cut above with the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. With the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, the gaming performance per watt ratio is pushed to a higher level by both a more efficient manufacturing node – 5 nm (Zen 4/R7 7800X3D) vs. 7 nm (Zen 3/ R7 5800X3D), and the fact that AMD set more efficient clock speeds, which was kind of unavoidable as well.

The topic of cooling…

The Ryzen 7000s, including the R7 7800X3D, have a slightly smaller CCD chiplet area with a higher heat flux density. Combined with the poorer heat conduction properties of AMD Raphael processors’ IHS compared to older AM4 models, and the generally worse heat dissipation of X3D processors (through the extra cachce layer), a more powerful cooler is then needed at the same power draw to achieve the same temperature.

However, to make do with what you already have or to avoid having to buy very expensive coolers, AMD has significantly reduced power draw. So why is there a TDP increase stated in the parameters – 120 W (R7 7800X3D) instead of 105 W, which has a higher power draw?

… and TDP does not equal power draw

The increase in TDP of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is probably related to the worse heat dissipation. It’s possible that this is why AMD lists a higher TDP while reducing power draw. TDP (Thermal Design Power) is often mistakenly interchanged with the power draw value. TDP can be significantly higher. If heat dissipation from the chip is complicated (which is sort of the case with the Ryzen 7 7800X3D), then a cooler with a higher TDP than the electrical power of the device being cooled is needed.

While the maximum power draw of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is only around 80W, you’ll need a cooler that’s designed for at least 120W to keep it at bay. And for any fan speed reduction to achieve quiet operation, the TDP of the cooler will need to be even higher. Besides the higher voltage, higher temperature is perhaps harmful for X3D Ryzen 7000s, and it’s good to stay away from 95 °C (common for models with 32 MB cache). This is also indicated by the lowered maximum temperature for the Ryzen 7 7800X3D (in AMD’s specs) to 89 °C.

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Gaming tests

We test performance in games in four resolutions with different graphics settings. To warm up, there is more or less a theoretical resolution of 1280 × 720 px. We had been tweaking graphics settings for this resolution for a long time. We finally decided to go for the lowest possible (Low, Lowest, Ultra Low, …) settings that a game allows.One could argue that a processor does not calculate how many objects are drawn in such settings (so-called draw calls). However, with high detail at this very low resolution, there was not much difference in performance compared to FHD (which we also test). On the contrary, the GPU load was clearly higher, and this impractical setting should demonstrate the performance of a processor with the lowest possible participation of a graphics card.

At higher resolutions, high settings (for FHD and QHD) and highest (for UHD) are used. In Full HD it’s usually with Anti-Aliasing turned off, but overall, these are relatively practical settings that are commonly used.

The selection of games was made considering the diversity of genres, player popularity and processor performance requirements. For a complete list, see Chapters 7–16. A built-in benchmark is used when a game has one, otherwise we have created our own scenes, which we always repeat with each processor in the same way. We use OCAT to record fps, or the times of individual frames, from which fps are then calculated, and FLAT to analyze CSV. Both were developed by the author of articles (and videos) from GPUreport.cz. For the highest possible accuracy, all runs are repeated three times and the average values of average and minimum fps are drawn in the graphs. These multiple repetitions also apply to non-gaming tests.

Computing tests

Let’s start lightly with PCMark 10, which tests more than sixty sub-tasks in various applications as part of a complete set of “benchmarks for a modern office”. It then sorts them into fewer thematic categories and for the best possible overview we include the gained points from them in the graphs. Lighter test tasks are also represented by tests in a web browser – Speedometer and Octane. Other tests usually represent higher load or are aimed at advanced users.We test the 3D rendering performance in Cinebench. In R20, where the results are more widespread, but mainly in R23. Rendering in this version takes longer with each processor, cycles of at least ten minutes. We also test 3D rendering in Blender, with the Cycles render in the BMW and Classroom projects. You can also compare the latter with the test results of graphics cards (contains the same number of tiles).

We test how processors perform in video editing in Adobe Premiere Pro and DaVinci Resolve Studio 17. We use a PugetBench plugin, which deals with all the tasks you may encounter when editing videos. We also use PugetBench services in Adobe After Effects, where the performance of creating graphic effects is tested. Some subtasks use GPU acceleration, but we never turn it off, as no one will do it in practice. Some things don’t even work without GPU acceleration, but on the contrary, it’s interesting to see that the performance in the tasks accelerated by the graphics card also varies as some operations are still serviced by the CPU.

We test video encoding under SVT-AV1, in HandBrake and benchmarks (x264 HD and HWBot x265). x264 HD benchmark works in 32-bit mode (we did not manage to run 64-bit consistently on W10 and in general on newer OS’s it may be unstable and show errors in video). In HandBrake we use the x264 processor encoder for AVC and x265 for HEVC. Detailed settings of individual profiles can be found in the corresponding chapter 25. In addition to video, we also encode audio, where all the details are also stated in the chapter of these tests. Gamers who record their gameplay on video can also have to do with the performance of processor encoders. Therefore, we also test the performance of “processor broadcasting” in two popular applications OBS Studio and Xsplit.

We also have two chapters dedicated to photo editing performance. Adobe has a separate one, where we test Photoshop via PugetBench. However, we do not use PugetBench in Lightroom, because it requires various OS modifications for stable operation, and overall we rather avoided it (due to the higher risk of complications) and create our own test scenes. Both are CPU intensive, whether it’s exporting RAW files to 16-bit TIFF with ProPhotoRGB color space or generating 1:1 thumbnails of 42 lossless CR2 photos.

However, we also have several alternative photo editing applications in which we test CPU performance. These include Affinity Photo, in which we use a built-in benchmark, or XnViewMP for batch photo editing or ZPS X. Of the truly modern ones, there are three Topaz Labz applications that use AI algorithms. DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI. Topaz Labs often and happily compares its results with Adobe applications (Photoshop and Lightroom) and boasts of better results. So we’ll see, maybe we’ll get into it from the image point of view sometime. In processor tests, however, we are primarily focused on performance.

We test compression and decompression performance in WinRAR, 7-Zip and Aida64 (Zlib) benchmarks, decryption in TrueCrypt and Aida64, where in addition to AES there are also SHA3 tests. In Aida64, we also test FPU in the chapter of mathematical calculations. From this category you may also be interested in the results of Stockfish 13 and the number of chess combinations achieved per unit time. We perform many tests that can be included in the category of mathematics in SPECworkstation 3.1. It is a set of professional applications extending to various simulations, such as LAMMPS or NAMD, which are molecular simulators. A detailed description of the tests from SPECworkstation 3.1 can be found at spec.org. We do not test 7-zip, Blender and HandBrake from the list for redundancy, because we test performance in them separately in applications. A detailed listing of SPECWS results usually represents times or fps, but we graph “SPEC ratio”, which represents gained points—higher means better.

Processor settings…

We test processors in the default settings, without active PBO2 (AMD) or ABT (Intel) technologies, but naturally with active XMP 2.0.

… and app updates

The tests should also take into account that, over time, individual updates may affect performance comparisons. Some applications are used in portable versions, which are not updated or can be kept on a stable version, but this is not the case for some others. Typically, games update over time. On the other hand, even intentional obsolescence (and testing something out of date that already behaves differently) would not be entirely the way to go.

In short, just take into account that the accuracy of the results you are comparing decreases a bit over time. To make this analysis easier for you, we indicate when each processor was tested. You can find this in the dialog box, where there is information about the test date of each processor. This dialog box appears in interactive graphs, just hover the mouse cursor over any bar.

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Methodology: how we measure power draw

Measuring CPU power consumption is relatively simple, much easier than with graphics cards. All power goes through one or two EPS cables. We also use two to increase the cross-section, which is suitable for high performance AMD processors up to sTR(X)4 or for Intel HEDT, and in fact almost for mainstream processors as well. We have Prova 15 current probes to measure current directly on the wires. This is a much more accurate and reliable way of measuring than relying on internal sensors.
The only limitation of our current probes may be when testing the most powerful processors. These already exceed the maximum range of 30 A, at which high accuracy is guaranteed. For most processors, the range is optimal (even for measuring a lower load, when the probes can be switched to a lower and more accurate range of 4 A), but we will test models with power consumption over 360 W on our own device, a prototype of which we have already built. Its measuring range will no longer be limiting, but for the time being we will be using the Prova probes in the near future.

The clamps are properly reset before each measurement and connected to a Keysight U1231A multimeter, which samples the current values during the tests via the IR-USB interface and logs them to a spreadsheet at one-second intervals. From this we can then create line graphs of power draw curves. However, we always write the average values in the bar graphs. Measurements are taken in different load modes. The lowest one is idle Windows 10 on the desktop. This measurement takes place on a well “cooled down” system.

   

Audio encoding (FLAC) represents a higher load, but processors use only one core or one thread for this. Higher loads, where more cores are involved, are games. We test power consumption in F1 2020, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Saga: Troy in 1920 × 1080 px. In this resolution, the power consumption is usually the highest or at least similar to that in lower or higher resolutions, where in most cases the CPU power draw rather decreases due to its lower utilization.

Like most motherboard manufacturers, we too ignore the time limit for “Tau”, after which the power consumption is to be reduced from the PL2 boost limit (when it exceeds the TDP) to the TDP/PL1 value, recommended by Intel, in our tests. This means that neither the power draw nor the clock speed after 56 seconds of higher load does not decrease and the performance is kept stable with just small fluctuations. We had been considering whether or not to respect the Tau. In the end, we decided not to because the vast majority of users won’t either, and therefore the results and comparisons would be relatively uninteresting. The solution would be to test with and without a power limit, but this is no longer possible due to time requirements. We will pay more attention to the behavior of PL2 in motherboard tests, where it makes more sense.

We always use motherboards with extremely robust, efficient VRM, so that the losses on MOSFETs distort the measured results as little as possible and the test setups are powered by a high-end 1200 W BeQuiet! Dark Power Pro 12 power supply. It is strong enough to supply every processor, even with a fully loaded GeForce RTX 3080, and at the same time achieves above-standard efficiency even at lower load. For a complete overview of test setup components, see Chapter 5 of this article.

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Methodology: temperature and clock speed tests

When choosing a cooler, we eventually opted for Noctua NH-U14S. It has a high performance and at the same time there is also the TR4-SP3 variant designed for Threadripper processors. It differs only by the base, the radiator is otherwise the same, so it will be possible to test and compare all processors under the same conditions. The fan on the NH-U14S cooler is set to a maximum speed of 1,535 rpm during all tests.

Measurements always take place on a bench-wall in a wind tunnel which simulates a computer case, with the difference that we have more control over it.

System cooling consists of four Noctua NF-S12A PWM fans, which are in an equilibrium ratio of two at the inlet and two at the outlet. Their speed is set at a fixed 535 rpm, which is a relatively practical speed that is not needed to be exceeded. In short, this should be the optimal configuration based on our tests of various system cooling settings.

It is also important to maintain the same air temperature around the processors. Of course, this also changes with regard to how much heat a particular processor produces, but at the inlet of the tunnel it must always be the same for accurate comparisons. In our air-conditioned test lab, it is currently in the range of 21–21.3 °C.

Maintaining a constant inlet temperature is necessary not only for a proper comparison of processor temperatures, but especially for unbiased performance comparisons. Trend of clock speed and especially single-core boost depends on the temperature. In the summer at higher temperatures, processors may be slower in living spaces than in the winter.

For Intel processors, we register the maximum core temperature for each test, usually of all cores. These maximum values are then averaged and the result is represented by the final value in the graph. From the outputs of single-threaded load, we only pick the registered values from active cores (these are usually two and alternate during the test). It’s a little different with AMD processors. They don’t have temperature sensors for every core. In order for the procedure to be as methodically as possible similar to that applied on Intel processors, the average temperature of all cores is defined by the highest value reported by the CPU Tdie sensor (average). For single-threaded load, however, we already use a CPU sensor (Tctl/Tdie), which usually reports a slightly higher value, which better corresponds to the hotspots of one or two cores. But these values as well as the values from all internal sensors must be taken with a grain of salt, the accuracy of the sensors varies across processors.

Clock speed evaluation is more accurate, each core has its own sensor even on AMD processors. Unlike temperatures, we plot average clock speed values during tests in graphs. We monitor the temperature and clock speed of the processor cores in the same tests, in which we also measure the power consumption. And thus, gradually from the lowest load level on the desktop of idle Windows 10, through audio encoding (single-threaded load), gaming load in three games (F1 2020, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Saga: Troy), to a 10-minute load in Cinebench R23 and the most demanding video encoding with the x264 encoder in HandBrake.

To record the temperatures and clock speed of the processor cores, we use HWiNFO, in which sampling is set to two seconds. With the exception of audio encoding, the graphs always show the averages of all processor cores in terms of temperatures and clock speed. During audio encoding, the values from the loaded core are given.

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Test setup

* We use the following BIOSes on motherboards. For ASRock B650E Taichi v1.24, MSI MEG X670E Ace v1.10NPRP, for Asus ROG Strix Z790-E Gaming WiFi v0502, for MEG X570 Ace v1E, for MEG Z690 Unify v10, for MAG Z690 Tomahawk WiFi DDR4 v11, for MEG Z590 Ace v1.14 and for MEG Z490 Ace v17.

Note: The graphics drivers we use are Nvidia GeForce 466.77 and the Windows 10 OS build is 19045 at the time of testing.

Intel processors are tested on MSI MEG Z690 Unify, MAG Z490 Tomahawk WiFi DDR4, Z590 Ace and Z490 Ace motherboards. Kingston Fury Beast DDR5 memory (2×16 GB, 5200 MHz/CL40) is used with the MSI MEG Z690 Unify.

On platforms supporting DDR5 memory, we use two different sets of modules. For more powerful processors with “X” (AMD) or “K” (Intel) in the name, the faster G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo (2×16 GB, 6000 MHz/CL30) memory. In the case of cheaper processors (without X or K at the end of the name), the slower Kingston Fury Beast (2×16 GB, 5200 MHz/CL40) modules. But this is more or less just symbolism, the bandwidth is very high for both kits, it is not a bottleneck, and the difference in processor performance is very small, practically negligible, across the differently fast memory kits.

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

3DMark

We use 3DMark Professional for the tests and the following tests: Night Raid (DirectX 12), Fire Strike (DirectX 11) and Time Spy (DirectX 12). In the graphs you will find partial CPU scores, combined scores, but also graphics scores. You can find out to what extent the given processor limits the graphics card.

---

---

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: low; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Borderlands 3

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Very Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: None; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Counter-Strike: GO

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; lowest graphics settings and w/o Anti-Aliasing, API DirectX 9; test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; high graphics settings and w/o Anti-Aliasing, API DirectX 9; test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; high graphics settings; 4× MSAA, API DirectX 9; test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; very high graphics settings; 4× MSAA, API DirectX 9; test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

   

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Cyberpunk 2077

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

DOOM Eternal

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: off, Motion Blur: Low, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: on; test scene: custom.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra Nightmare; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: on; test scene: custom.

   

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

F1 2020

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Ultra Low; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off, Anisotropic Filtering: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Metro Exodus

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Extreme; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Disclaimer: The performance of this game changes and improves frequently due to continuous updates. We verify the consistency of the results by re-testing the Ryzen 7 5900X processor before each measurement. In case of significant deviations, we discard the older results and start building the database from scratch. Due to the incompleteness of the MFS results, we do not use MFS to calculate the average gaming performance of the processors.

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

   

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Lowest; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Highest; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: built-in benchmark.

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Total War Saga: Troy

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

strong>Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Overall gaming performance

To calculate average gaming performance, we normalized the Intel Core i7-11900K processor. The percentage differences of all other processors are based on this, with each of the games contributing an equal weight to the final result. To see exactly what the formula we use to arrive at each value looks like, see „New average CPU score measuring method“.

---

---

---

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Gaming performance per euro

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

PCMark

Geekbench

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Speedometer (2.0) and Octane (2.0)

Test environment: We’re using a portable version of Google Chrome (91.0.472.101) 64-bit so that real-time results are not affected by browser updates. GPU hardware acceleration is enabled as each user has in the default settings.

---

Note: The values in the graphs represent the average of the points obtained in the subtasks, which are grouped according to their nature into seven categories (Core language features, Memory and GC, Strings and arrays, Virtual machine and GC, Loading and Parsing, Bit and Math operations and Compiler and GC latency).

---

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Cinebench R20

Cinebench R23

---

Blender@Cycles

Test environment: We use well-known projects BMW (510 tiles) and Classroom (2040 tiles) and renderer Cycles. Render settings are set to None, with which all the work falls on the CPU.

---

LuxRender (SPECworkstation 3.1)

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Adobe Premiere Pro (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe Premiere Pro is 15.2.

---

---

---

---

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

DaVinci Resolve Studio (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests, test type: standard. App version of DaVinci Resolve Studio is 17.2.1 (build 12).

---

---

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Graphics effects: Adobe After Effects

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe After Effects is 18.2.1.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

HandBrake

   

Test environment: For video conversion we’re using a 4K video LG Demo Snowboard with a 43,9 Mb/s bitrate. AVC (x264) and HEVC (x265) profiles are set for high quality and encoder profiles are “slow”. HandBrake version is 1.3.3 (2020061300).

x264 and x265 benchmarks

---

SVT-AV1

Test environment: We are encoding a short, publicly available sample park_joy_2160p50.y4m: uncompressed video 4096 × 2160 px, 8bit, 50 fps. Length is 500 frames with encoding quality set to 6 which makes the encoding still relatively slow. This test can make use of the AVX2 i AVX-512 instructions.

Version: SVT-AV1 Encoder Lib v0.8.7-61-g685afb2d via FFMpeg N-104429-g069f7831a2-20211026 (64bit)
Build from: https://github.com/BtbN/FFmpeg-Builds/releases
Command line: ffmpeg.exe -i “park_joy_2160p50.y4m” -c:v libsvtav1 -rc 0 -qp 55 -preset 6 -f null output.webm

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Audio encoding

Test environment: Audio encoding is done using command line encoders, we measure the time it takes for the conversion to finish. The same 42-minute long 16-bit WAV file (stereo) with 44.1 kHz is always used (Love Over Gold by Dire Straits album rip in a single audio file).

Encoder settings are selected to achieve maximum or near maximum compression. The bitrate is relatively high, with the exception of lossless FLAC of about 200 kb/s.

Note: These tests measure single-thread performance.

FLAC: reference encoder 1.3.2, 64-bit build. Launch options: flac.exe -s -8 -m -e -p -f

MP3: encoder lame3.100.1, 64-bit build (Intel 19 Compiler) from RareWares. Launch options: lame.exe -S -V 0 -q 0

AAC: uses Apple QuickTime libraries, invoked through the application from the command line, QAAC 2.72, 64-bit build, Intel 19 Compiler (does not require installation of the whole Apple package). Launch options: qaac64.exe -V 100 -s -q 2

Opus: reference encoder 1.3.1, Launch options: opusenc.exe –comp 10 –quiet –vbr –bitrate 192

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Broadcasting

Test environment: Applications OBS Studio and Xsplit. We’re using the built-in benchmark (scene Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle) in F1 2020, in a resolution of 2560 × 1440 px and the same graphics settings, as with standard game performance tests. Thanks to this, we can measure the performance decrease if you record your gameplay with the x264 software encoder while playing. The output is 2560 × 1440 px at 60 fps.

---

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Adobe Photoshop (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe Photoshop is 22.4.2.

---

---

---

Adobe Lightroom Classic

Test environment: With the settings above, we export 42 uncompressed .CR2 (RAW Canon) photos with a size of 20 Mpx. Then we create 1:1 previews from them, which also represent one of the most processor intensive tasks in Lightroom. The version of Adobe Lightroom Classic is 10.3.

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Affinity Photo (benchmark)

Test environment: built-in benchmark.

---

Topaz Labs AI apps

Topaz DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI. These single-purpose applications are used for restoration of low-quality photos. Whether it is high noise (caused by higher ISO), raster level (typically after cropping) or when something needs extra focus. The AI performance is always used.

Test environment: As part of batch editing, 42 photos with a lower resolution of 1920 × 1280 px are processed, with the settings from the images above. DeNoise AI is in version 3.1.2, Gigapixel in 5.5.2 and Sharpen AI in 3.1.2.

XnViewMP

Test environment: XnViewMP is finally a photo-editor for which you don’t have to pay. At the same time, it uses hardware very efficiently. In order to achieve more reasonable comparison times, we had to create an archive of up to 1024 photos, where we reduce the original resolution of 5472 × 3648 px to 1980 × 1280 px and filters with automatic contrast enhancement and noise reduction are also being applied during this process. We use 64-bit portable version 0.98.4.

Zoner Photo Studio X

Test environment: In Zoner Photo Studio X we convert 42 .CR2 (RAW Canon) photos to JPEG while keeping the original resolution (5472 × 3648 px) at the lowest possible compression, with the ZPS X profile ”high quality for archival”.

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

WinRAR 6.01

7-Zip 19.00

---

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

TrueCrypt 7.1a

Aida64 (AES, SHA3)

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Y-cruncher

---

Stockfish 13

Test environment: Host for the Stockfish 13 engine is a chess app Arena 2.0.1, build 2399.

Aida64, FPU tests

---

FSI (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Kirchhoff migration (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Python36 (SPECworkstation 3.1)

SRMP (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Octave (SPECworkstation 3.1)

FFTW (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Convolution (SPECworkstation 3.1)

CalculiX (SPECworkstation 3.1)

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

RodiniaLifeSci (SPECworkstation 3.1)

WPCcfd (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Poisson (SPECworkstation 3.1)

LAMMPS (SPECworkstation 3.1)

NAMD (SPECworkstation 3.1)

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Memory tests…

… and cache (L1, L2, L3)

---

---

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Processor power draw curve

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Average processor power draw

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Performance per watt

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Achieved CPU clock speed

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

CPU temperature

The most popular Ryzen 7000 with 3D V-cache obliterates competition in its targeted environment. Intel doesn’t measure up to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in a comparable price range in terms of speed, and even if someone disregards price and sees the Core i9-13900K(S) as a an apt competitor, when comparing power draw, everyone’s appetite for Intel will go away. Their efficiency is… incomparable, as each is at a different end of the spectrum.

Conclusion

When it comes to which processor is best suited for a more powerful gaming PC, the answer is quite clear – the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D. Our regular readers are well aware that we don’t look at things in black and white and try to look at them from as many angles as possible using “but” (top speed, but at the cost of this or that…), however, in this case we found virtually no advantages to the competing options when it comes to using them in the environment the R7 7800X3D is designed for.

Compared to the Core i7-13700K, in gaming the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is not only faster, but also has around half the power draw. The latter only reaches around 50 W, while the Ci7-13700K climbs almost to 100 W and the Ci9-13900K goes even beyond 120 W. With the Ci9-13900KS Intel is pushing the envelope (clock speeds) even harder, so even if this processor’s gaming performance catches up to the R7 7800X3D, it will be at roughly triple the power draw. These are already really dramatic differences and AMD deserves praise for such a leap – they did it well, cleverly, although, of course, Intel processors have some room for undervolting and making the operating characteristics more attractive.

You may recall that we didn’t praise the Ryzen 7 5800X3D to high heavens, it stood out significantly less from the faster-clock-speed 5800X without the 3D V-cache than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D now does compared to the R7 7700X. We don’t know what exactly is most important for such success and why the difference between the R7 5800X3D and R7 5800X is smaller than that of the R7 7800X3D and R7 7700X, although the bigger difference in clock speeds is between the Ryzen 7000s, but there’s definitely a reason there, it comes out similarly (with the R7 7800X3D having a bigger edge over the 8-core X model) in other reputable tests, such as on TechPowerUp! It’s probably going to be about architectural details and some optimizations for Zen 4 and with respect to the 3D V-cache, which we don’t see enough into. The higher bandwidth and lower latency of this cache in the Ryzen 7 7800X3D will probably also be beneficial to some extent.

The lower power draw is achieved by a more efficient manufacturing node and less pressure on core clock speeds. But remarkably, the difference in power draw is greater than the difference in temperatures. Considering the always relatively low power draw, even in the AVX Cinebench workload, 82 °C is quite a lot. And this temperature still corresponds to operating with the relatively powerful Noctua NH-U14S cooler at an ambient air temperature of only 21.0–21.3 °C. In less favourable conditions, with a weaker cooler or in a warmer environment (this can also be caused by poorer system cooling), there will already be a large disparity between power draw and temperature. However, this is due to the fact that all the performance takes place within a single chiplet on a relatively small area and the situation is also not improved by the too thick IHS. In addition, the efficiency of heat transfer from critical locations is obviously reduced to some extent by the 3D V-cache layer, as X3D Ryzens have a higher temperature of CPU cores per unit of power draw than non-X3D models.

Because of the low power draw, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D also encourages pairing with low-cost A620 chipset motherboards (A good, test-proven choice is, for example, the Gigabyte A620M Gaming X). These do have weaker connectivity, but that’s what a typical gaming computer may not lack so much. Even the simplest power delivery can always handle the R7 7800X3D’s current load with ease, which is not the case for competing Intel Raptor Lake processors. These will also work on cheap H610 boards, but alongside bigger or smaller power limits. With the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, you don’t have to worry about anything like that. You don’t even have to worry about hybrid complications like with the Ryzen 9 79x0X3D.

The Ryzen 7 7800X3D achieves top-notch efficiency even outside of gaming, but multi-threaded computing performance is already inherently worse than a number of other processors for “only” eight cores with sixteen threads. Because of the lower clock speeds and the very small benefit of 3D V-cache in such a (workplace) environment, even the R7 7700X is faster with +500–600 MHz/core. The Core i7-13700K, thanks to its little cores, is somewhere else multi-threaded-wise, it is significantly faster, and also has a significantly more favourable price/performance ratio.

The R7 7800X3D is weaker compared to the Ci7-13700K or R7 7700X, even in single-threaded tasks. This is due to significantly lower clock speeds, which are limited by the safe supply voltage for the 3D V-cache. The improvement over the R7 5800X3D is there, but still the R7 7800X3D is only somewhere on par with the R7 5800X in terms of speed, albeit at roughly two-thirds the power draw.

But this is a processor primarily for a gaming PC, where the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, like a shark among small fish, dominates in every aspect you can think of. But even here, the higher the resolution and graphics detail settings, the less impact the CPU has on performance. At high resolutions (e.g. UHD), it’s practically just about the performance of the graphics card. When gaming with Nvidia DLSS or AMD FSR, however, the benefit of the R7 7800X3D will show up even next to a slower mid-range GPU. Also, don’t overlook the smaller drops in minimum fps with this processor. And what else about the Ryzen 7 7800X3D? Only the editorial award „Top-notch“.

English translation and edit by Jozef Dudáš

We would like to thank Datacomp e-shop for their cooperation in providing the tested hardware

Special thanks also to Blackmagic Design (for DaVinci Resolve Studio license), Topaz Labs (for licenses to DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI) and Zoner (for Photo Studio X license)

• Contents
• AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D in detail
• Methodology: performance tests
• Methodology: how we measure power draw
• Methodology: temperature and clock speed tests
• Test setup
• 3DMark
• Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla
• Borderlands 3
• Counter-Strike: GO
• Cyberpunk 2077
• DOOM Eternal
• F1 2020
• Metro Exodus
• Microsoft Flight Simulator
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider
• Total War Saga: Troy
• Overall gaming performance
• Gaming performance per euro
• PCMark and Geekbench
• Web performance
• 3D rendering: Cinebench, Blender, ...
• Video 1/2: Adobe Premiere Pro
• Video 2/2: DaVinci Resolve Studio
• Graphics effects: Adobe After Effects
• Video encoding
• Audio encoding
• Broadcasting (OBS and Xsplit)
• Photos 1/2: Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom
• Photos 2/2: Affinity Photo, Topaz Labs AI Apps, ZPS X, ...
• (De)compression
• (De)encryption
• Numerical computing
• Simulations
• Memory and cache tests
• Processor power draw curve
• Average processor power draw
• Performance per watt
• Achieved CPU clock speed
• CPU temperature
• Conclusion