Is it true that 7950X3D suffers from stutter on games?

[equinox654]

Only game I noticed an issue with was Star Citizen. Turning off the 2nd ccd gave me a decent boost.

 

[bobzdar]

Even more reason to wait for a 16 core CCD

Why? 7950x3d is kind of best of both worlds, you get 8 cores with vcache but lower clock speed (but higher than a 7800x3d), 8 cores without vcache but higher clock speeds, so it can handle any workload nearly ideally. If you put vcache on all 16 cores you lose performance in apps that don't need the cache (ie most things that aren't games), but with no benefit to games as there are no games that can make use of more than 8 cores. Most high core productivity apps would take a hit in performance with nothing really gaining performance, and at a higher cost to boot. It'd be kind of pointless.

The 7950x3d is already fairly niche in that it's for those that want maximum gaming performance with close to maximum productivity performance. If you want maximum productivity performance with close to maximum gaming, get a regular 7950x. If you want maximum gaming but don't care about productivity, get a 7800x3d. There's literally no use case for a 16 core vcache product outside of some extremely esoteric use cases (which I've yet to see, but there are a handful of high core productivity apps that need cache over frequency out there, though in that case if you really need max perf, get a vcache epyc).

With latest chipset drivers and windows updates, there's pretty much no downside. The processes stay on the vcache die when gaming, and it clocks slightly higher, so it's the same to slightly faster than a 7800x3d in gaming and hugely faster in productivity, which prefer the non vcache cores for frequency.

 

[WilyKit]

Why? 7950x3d is kind of best of both worlds, you get 8 cores with vcache but lower clock speed (but higher than a 7800x3d), 8 cores without vcache but higher clock speeds, so it can handle any workload nearly ideally. If you put vcache on all 16 cores you lose performance in apps that don't need the cache (ie most things that aren't games), but with no benefit to games as there are no games that can make use of more than 8 cores. Most high core productivity apps would take a hit in performance with nothing really gaining performance, and at a higher cost to boot. It'd be kind of pointless.

The 7950x3d is already fairly niche in that it's for those that want maximum gaming performance with close to maximum productivity performance. If you want maximum productivity performance with close to maximum gaming, get a regular 7950x. If you want maximum gaming but don't care about productivity, get a 7800x3d. There's literally no use case for a 16 core vcache product outside of some extremely esoteric use cases (which I've yet to see, but there are a handful of high core productivity apps that need cache over frequency out there, though in that case if you really need max perf, get a vcache epyc).

With latest chipset drivers and windows updates, there's pretty much no downside. The processes stay on the vcache die when gaming, and it clocks slightly higher, so it's the same to slightly faster than a 7800x3d in gaming and hugely faster in productivity, which prefer the non vcache cores for frequency.

It really isn't the best of both worlds. It's a compromise on both. It more often then not performs worse in games than a 7800x3d and more often then not performs worse in productivity loads than a 7950x. The whole issue with dual CCD's is thread scheduling. The 7950x3d highlights those issues even more as it's vital that all the gaming threads are scheduled on the x3d CCD, which requires a piece of software to do and doesn't always get it right.

Best of both worlds would be having vcache on both CCD's along with the higher clocks. Best of both worlds+ would be a single 16 core CCD with v cache and the higher clocks.

 

[Vegas P11]

It really isn't the best of both worlds. It's a compromise on both. It more often then not performs worse in games than a 7800x3d and more often then not performs worse in productivity loads than a 7950x. The whole issue with dual CCD's is thread scheduling. The 7950x3d highlights those issues even more as it's vital that all the gaming threads are scheduled on the x3d CCD, which requires a piece of software to do and doesn't always get it right.

Best of both worlds would be having vcache on both CCD's along with the higher clocks. Best of both worlds+ would be a single 16 core CCD with v cache and the higher clocks.

You can't have the v-cache and higher clocks at the same time due to heat that the v-cache generates. It is one or the other.

 

[bobzdar]

It really isn't the best of both worlds. It's a compromise on both. It more often then not performs worse in games than a 7800x3d and more often then not performs worse in productivity loads than a 7950x. The whole issue with dual CCD's is thread scheduling. The 7950x3d highlights those issues even more as it's vital that all the gaming threads are scheduled on the x3d CCD, which requires a piece of software to do and doesn't always get it right.

Best of both worlds would be having vcache on both CCD's along with the higher clocks. Best of both worlds+ would be a single 16 core CCD with v cache and the higher clocks.

Heat won't let them have high clocks with v-cache, unfortunately. I think your statement gaming wise was true a year ago when the 7800x3d was released but things have moved on from then and most games no longer ccd hop and stay on the vcache die giving the 7950x3d a small edge almost across the board, but if you run into an edge case there are tools to mitigate (and if you're frame chasing that much it's trivial effort). If they can figure out how to get the same clocks with or without vcache, then obviously 16 cores with it would be ideal, but they can't so the 7950x3d strikes a very good balance. I'd take +20% gaming and -5% productivity vs. the opposite with a 7950X. Compared to a 7800x3d it's like +1% gaming +60% productivity...

 

[WilyKit]

Heat won't let them have high clocks with v-cache, unfortunately. I think your statement gaming wise was true a year ago when the 7800x3d was released but things have moved on from then and most games no longer ccd hop and stay on the vcache die giving the 7950x3d a small edge almost across the board, but if you run into an edge case there are tools to mitigate (and if you're frame chasing that much it's trivial effort). If they can figure out how to get the same clocks with or without vcache, then obviously 16 cores with it would be ideal, but they can't so the 7950x3d strikes a very good balance. I'd take +20% gaming and -5% productivity vs. the opposite with a 7950X. Compared to a 7800x3d it's like +1% gaming +60% productivity...

I understand the reason behind lower clocked vcache CCD. However, "best of both worlds" means "best of both worlds" which means you have a high clocks and vcache and it doesn't matter which CCD the process executes on. +20 gaming -5 productivity is a compromise, perhaps a compromise with more benefits than drawbacks for your use case, but a compromise nonetheless.

 

[Tsumi]

Even more reason to wait for a 16 core CCD

Unless something massively changes in game coding, I don't see a 16-core Vcache CPU making sense. It might make some sense if you're running several virtual computers on the same machine as a host and have thin clients, but that really only works in a home scenario and not many people would go through the trouble of setting something like that up. At that point, you might as well just go Threadripper, especially since only Threadripper on the AMD side has the lanes to support multiple GPUs.

AMD bet on things becoming much more massively threaded about 15 years ago when they designed and released Bulldozer. Games have remained stubbornly 1 or 2 primary threads being the main bottleneck since then and the consolidation of game engines doesn't seem likely to change that anytime soon.

 

[chameleoneel]

I understand the reason behind lower clocked vcache CCD. However, "best of both worlds" means "best of both worlds" which means you have a high clocks and vcache and it doesn't matter which CCD the process executes on. +20 gaming -5 productivity is a compromise, perhaps a compromise with more benefits than drawbacks for your use case, but a compromise nonetheless.

7950X3D even at launch, wasn't really a compromise. Its a little bit slower in some apps, a little bit faster than others, and then some are more/less margin of error.
And it uses quite a bit less power. Blender = 140W stock. 165W with PBO. Vs. 7950X 220W stock.

average power usage over TPU's 47 app suite:

79W stock 88W PBO Vs. 117W 7950X


Have a look through Techpowerup's suite of tests:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d/

And now that AMD have updated the chipset drivers a few times, it ought to be a slightly tighter race in the areas it was slower.

 

[bobzdar]

Unless something massively changes in game coding, I don't see a 16-core Vcache CPU making sense. It might make some sense if you're running several virtual computers on the same machine as a host and have thin clients, but that really only works in a home scenario and not many people would go through the trouble of setting something like that up. At that point, you might as well just go Threadripper, especially since only Threadripper on the AMD side has the lanes to support multiple GPUs.

AMD bet on things becoming much more massively threaded about 15 years ago when they designed and released Bulldozer. Games have remained stubbornly 1 or 2 primary threads being the main bottleneck since then and the consolidation of game engines doesn't seem likely to change that anytime soon.

There are a few glimmers of hope - CP2077 with path tracing really flies in the 7950x3d compared to the 7800x3d, meaning the extra cores help. As we get more path traced and RTX remixed stuff, we may start to see 8 cores bottleneck. A few edge cases now, but by AM6 16 cores might be the new 8....

 

[Tsumi]

There are a few glimmers of hope - CP2077 with path tracing really flies in the 7950x3d compared to the 7800x3d, meaning the extra cores help. As we get more path traced and RTX remixed stuff, we may start to see 8 cores bottleneck. A few edge cases now, but by AM6 16 cores might be the new 8....

While that could be true, the other trend I've seen is anything that can be massively paralleled ends up getting offloaded to the GPU or something similar. We might end up seeing embedded chiplets in the CPU package, motherboard, or auxiliary card for the sole purpose of AI upscaling, path tracing, etc.

 

[sblantipodi]

We are saying the same thing. One CCD has 3D VCache - one does not. So you need to validate that everything is working fine:

1) Xbox Game Bar
2) AMD Drivers

This is why I monitor it to make sure it is always working. You never know when an update borks something.

I highly recommend the 7800X3D to anyone in the market today. The 7950X3D is not worth the money. I now have 3 rigs running 7800X3D - we're gamers and password crackers (purely GPU) so no need for the extra cores.




https://hardforum.com/threads/is-it...rom-stutter-on-games.2030731/#post-1045742138d


TLDR yes the 7950X3D suffers from stutter - or rather, more stutter than a 7800X3D. Buy that instead if you are worried about stutter.

7950X3D not worth the money if you use a PC like a console but PC is not a console, for my use cases it's well worth the money

Every titles I played does not suffer from any stutter.

 

[sblantipodi]

Why? 7950x3d is kind of best of both worlds, you get 8 cores with vcache but lower clock speed (but higher than a 7800x3d), 8 cores without vcache but higher clock speeds, so it can handle any workload nearly ideally. If you put vcache on all 16 cores you lose performance in apps that don't need the cache (ie most things that aren't games), but with no benefit to games as there are no games that can make use of more than 8 cores. Most high core productivity apps would take a hit in performance with nothing really gaining performance, and at a higher cost to boot. It'd be kind of pointless.

With latest chipset drivers and windows updates, there's pretty much no downside. The processes stay on the vcache die when gaming, and it clocks slightly higher, so it's the same to slightly faster than a 7800x3d in gaming and hugely faster in productivity, which prefer the non vcache cores for frequency.

I can confirm this. Agreed on everything here.

 

[bobzdar]

7950X3D not worth the money if you use a PC like a console but PC is not a console, for my use cases it's well worth the money

Every titles I played does not suffer from any stutter.

Yeah, exactly, 7950x3d isn't a gaming chip, it's a gaming+productivity chip when you're ok to trade a little bit of productivity performance for maximum gaming performance. That is a pretty niche market tbh, basically gamers that have hobbies or side gigs that can use the extra cores but that aren't reliant on it for money, where you'd just get a 7950X or build a separate gaming system. It's small but that pretty well describes [H].

 

[sk3tch]

7950X3D not worth the money if you use a PC like a console but PC is not a console, for my use cases it's well worth the money

Every titles I played does not suffer from any stutter.

I want 16 cores with vcache or no vcache at all. IMO, the 7950X is a better CPU than the 7950X3D, just like the 7800X3D is a better CPU than the 7950X3D. The implementation is somewhat half baked. I'm confident the next 16 core+ X3D will be better setup and not reliant upon software.

 

[equinox654]

I want 16 cores with vcache or no vcache at all. IMO, the 7950X is a better CPU than the 7950X3D, just like the 7800X3D is a better CPU than the 7950X3D. The implementation is somewhat half baked. I'm confident the next 16 core+ X3D will be better setup and not reliant upon software.

I wouldn't say its better, its a bit faster in non gaming work loads. Gaming wise though the 7950X3D is quite a bit faster.

 

[sk3tch]

I wouldn't say its better, its a bit faster in non gaming work loads. Gaming wise though the 7950X3D is quite a bit faster.

My experience with all three CPUs makes me rank them 7800X3D, 7950X, 7950X3D. It's just that software component for the non-vcache cores that causes some headaches.

 

[sblantipodi]

My experience with all three CPUs makes me rank them 7800X3D, 7950X, 7950X3D. It's just that software component for the non-vcache cores that causes some headaches.

From what you say it's clear that you have no experience at all xD

 

[sk3tch]

From what you say it's clear that you have no experience at all xD

Haha. Sorry, not a fanboy with the products that I purchase. They serve a purpose, that's it.

 

[sblantipodi]

Haha. Sorry, not a fanboy with the products that I purchase. They serve a purpose, that's it.

You are comparing apples with monkeys and even in that comparison you are wrong, it's clear that you are not a fanboy, you are just confused.

 

[sk3tch]

You are comparing apples with monkeys and even in that comparison you are wrong, it's clear that you are not a fanboy, you are just confused.

I question whether you even know how X3D works on the 16 core 7950X3D.

You do understand there are several software dependencies required in order for it to function optimally?

If there are any issues with that software, you will have performance issues.

7950X has two identical CCDs and costs less than the 7950X3D.

7800X3D has one CCD with vcache - so no software issues can affect it. All 8 cores have vcache.

For these reasons - I prefer them over the 7950X3D.

I don’t want to have to use ParkControl and Process Lasso to monitor that everything is working. I want it to “just work”.

 

[sblantipodi]

I question whether you even know how X3D works on the 16 core 7950X3D.

You do understand there are several software dependencies required in order for it to function optimally?

If there are any issues with that software, you will have performance issues.

7950X has two identical CCDs and costs less than the 7950X3D.

7800X3D has one CCD with vcache - so no software issues can affect it. All 8 cores have vcache.

For these reasons - I prefer them over the 7950X3D.

I don’t want to have to use ParkControl and Process Lasso to monitor that everything is working. I want it to “just work”.

This proves that you talk just for what you understood and you understood it bad.

Start from an assumption, Intel thread director does something more in hardware but windows scheduler is strictly related to how thread director works, so even Intel has a software part.
Intel is using game bar like AMD for its latest optimizations on 14th gen.

You don't need park control and process lasso.
Unless you play games no one knows all the load is moved to vcache cores and it's very easy to check it with rivatuner osd for example since all the load is on the first 8 cores. When you run a game the non vcache core has 0% load.

If the app is not recognized as a vcache app, you can use game bar to say that that app is a game and problem solved. Full stop.

Since I bought the 7950x3d I never had to manually instruct the game bar to inform that a game is a game. Never.

It just works.

 

[sk3tch]

This proves that you talk just for what you understood and you understood it bad.

Start from an assumption, Intel thread director does something more in hardware but windows scheduler is strictly related to how thread director works, so even Intel has a software part.
Intel is using game bar like AMD for its latest optimizations on 14th gen.

You don't need park control and process lasso.
Unless you play games no one knows all the load is moved to vcache cores and it's very easy to check it with rivatuner osd for example since all the load is on the first 8 cores. When you run a game the non vcache core has 0% load.

If the app is not recognized as a vcache app, you can use game bar to say that that app is a game and problem solved. Full stop.

Since I bought the 7950x3d I never had to manually instruct the game bar to inform that a game is a game. Never.

It just works.

Thanks for proving my point that it’s software dependent.

 

[WilyKit]

This proves that you talk just for what you understood and you understood it bad.

Start from an assumption, Intel thread director does something more in hardware but windows scheduler is strictly related to how thread director works, so even Intel has a software part.
Intel is using game bar like AMD for its latest optimizations on 14th gen.

You don't need park control and process lasso.
Unless you play games no one knows all the load is moved to vcache cores and it's very easy to check it with rivatuner osd for example since all the load is on the first 8 cores. When you run a game the non vcache core has 0% load.

If the app is not recognized as a vcache app, you can use game bar to say that that app is a game and problem solved. Full stop.

Since I bought the 7950x3d I never had to manually instruct the game bar to inform that a game is a game. Never.

It just works.

To be fair, I don’t think he implied Intels big-little approach is any better.

 

[Tsumi]

Thanks for proving my point that it’s software dependent.

Why in the hell is that a problem? It's not like the software is adding overhead like DRM does.

And if you think about it, everything a human uses in modern computing requires underlying software to run it. You have the bios software that tells the OS what it's interacting with. Drivers tell software the hardware functions and how to use them. Drivers have bugs and requires updates all the time.

A 16-core v-cache CPU is for a person whose wallet is bigger than their brain. No game will benefit from more than 8 cores outside of extremely niche scenarios or a revolution in game engines.

 

[sk3tch]

Why in the hell is that a problem? It's not like the software is adding overhead like DRM does.

And if you think about it, everything a human uses in modern computing requires underlying software to run it. You have the bios software that tells the OS what it's interacting with. Drivers tell software the hardware functions and how to use them. Drivers have bugs and requires updates all the time.

A 16-core v-cache CPU is for a person whose wallet is bigger than their brain. No game will benefit from more than 8 cores outside of extremely niche scenarios or a revolution in game engines.

It's a problem based on the point that I am trying to make. I have 1x 7950X3D rig, 3x 7800X3D rigs - there is not much point for 16 cores that are gimped with only half with vcache. It's software dependent so inherently, there is a level of reliability that isn't there with other CPUs. If you need 16 cores - save money and get a 7950X. If you need gaming - save money and get a 7800X3D. Win, Win.

 

[WilyKit]

Why in the hell is that a problem? It's not like the software is adding overhead like DRM does.

And if you think about it, everything a human uses in modern computing requires underlying software to run it. You have the bios software that tells the OS what it's interacting with. Drivers tell software the hardware functions and how to use them. Drivers have bugs and requires updates all the time.

A 16-core v-cache CPU is for a person whose wallet is bigger than their brain. No game will benefit from more than 8 cores outside of extremely niche scenarios or a revolution in game engines.

Has little to do with how many cores games use. Has more to do with not having to worry about which cores the game is executing on, or depend on Xbox game bar to do the job effectively.

 

[Tsumi]

It's a problem based on the point that I am trying to make. I have 1x 7950X3D rig, 3x 7800X3D rigs - there is not much point for 16 cores that are gimped with only half with vcache. It's software dependent so inherently, there is a level of reliability that isn't there with other CPUs. If you need 16 cores - save money and get a 7950X. If you need gaming - save money and get a 7800X3D. Win, Win.

And games are dependent on good graphics card drivers to make them run smoothly and efficiently. I don't see the problem here for that niche gamer that has a hobby on the side and doesn't want multiple systems. The 7950X3D also serves as the halo product for gamers for AMD. It might not matter to us educated folk, but never underestimate the importance of the halo product for the general public.

Has little to do with how many cores games use. Has more to do with not having to worry about which cores the game is executing on, or depend on Xbox game bar to do the job effectively.

He stated earlier in the thread he wanted a 16-core v-cache CPU. In the current and near-future gaming landscape, it makes zero sense to have one. As far as I know, there aren't even any gaming tech demos that effectively utilize more than 8 cores. If we ever do get to that point, better CPUs will be out by then and it will make more sense to upgrade then.

Might AMD release a 16-core v-cache model next gen? Maybe, and once again, primarily as a halo product. It would probably sell worse than the split core equivalent as it's guaranteed to be more expensive for negative gain- almost no gaming benefit with a meaningful productivity loss.

 

[WilyKit]

And games are dependent on good graphics card drivers to make them run smoothly and efficiently. I don't see the problem here for that niche gamer that has a hobby on the side and doesn't want multiple systems. The 7950X3D also serves as the halo product for gamers for AMD. It might not matter to us educated folk, but never underestimate the importance of the halo product for the general public.

He stated earlier in the thread he wanted a 16-core v-cache CPU. In the current and near-future gaming landscape, it makes zero sense to have one. As far as I know, there aren't even any gaming tech demos that effectively utilize more than 8 cores. If we ever do get to that point, better CPUs will be out by then and it will make more sense to upgrade then.

Might AMD release a 16-core v-cache model next gen? Maybe, and once again, primarily as a halo product. It would probably sell worse than the split core equivalent as it's guaranteed to be more expensive for negative gain- almost no gaming benefit with a meaningful productivity loss.

Yes I know what he said. You get your 16 cores for productivity and you have vcache on all of them for gaming and not have to worry about scheduling.

As far as how many cores games use, that is largely dictated by console hardware limitations, and those are due for an update in the next year or two.

 

[Tsumi]

Yes I know what he said. You get your 16 cores for productivity and you have vcache on all of them for gaming and not have to worry about scheduling.

As far as how many cores games use, that is largely dictated by console hardware limitations, and those are due for an update in the next year or two.

You'll get worse productivity than the split core version and worrying about scheduling is largely a thing of the past. Despite how many times that's been repeated in this thread you still don't seem to get it.

Current gen consoles are 8 cores utilizing Zen 2 architecture. Why haven't we fully saturated 8 cores yet? Or better yet, why does the 8-core 5800X generally perform worse than the 6-core 5600X3D in gaming? Surely the 25% core deficit of the 5600X3D can't be made up by V-cache alone. The fact that the 5600X3D is on average 6% slower than the 5800X3D with only a few games being 20% slower on the 6-core shows we're only just reaching the point of saturating 6 cores in very specific scenarios.

If anything, future consoles will be more into minimizing CPU usage. The power budget has to be split between the CPU and GPU. Gamers are now demanding 8k and 144+ hz, guess where the power priority is going to go.

 

[sk3tch]

You'll get worse productivity than the split core version and worrying about scheduling is largely a thing of the past. Despite how many times that's been repeated in this thread you still don't seem to get it.

Current gen consoles are 8 cores utilizing Zen 2 architecture. Why haven't we fully saturated 8 cores yet? Or better yet, why does the 8-core 5800X generally perform worse than the 6-core 5600X3D in gaming? Surely the 25% core deficit of the 5600X3D can't be made up by V-cache alone. The fact that the 5600X3D is on average 6% slower than the 5800X3D with only a few games being 20% slower on the 6-core shows we're only just reaching the point of saturating 6 cores in very specific scenarios.

If anything, future consoles will be more into minimizing CPU usage. The power budget has to be split between the CPU and GPU. Gamers are now demanding 8k and 144+ hz, guess where the power priority is going to go.

You’re agreeing with my thoughts just in a different way. 24 cores, 32 cores, 16 cores, 8 cores - that’s not relevant. I just don’t want half to not have vcache and be dependent on full, optimal performance on AMD drivers, clean OS install, and Xbox Game Bar. That’s it. Full stop.

So 7950X or 7800X3D is my preference based on the babysitting that I need to do with my 7950X3D.

 

[bobzdar]

You’re agreeing with my thoughts just in a different way. 24 cores, 32 cores, 16 cores, 8 cores - that’s not relevant. I just don’t want half to not have vcache and be dependent on full, optimal performance on AMD drivers, clean OS install, and Xbox Game Bar. That’s it. Full stop.

So 7950X or 7800X3D is my preference based on the babysitting that I need to do with my 7950X3D.

There is no babysitting needed, I don't get where this is coming from. For my use, the 7950x3d is superior to either the 7800x3d or 7950X, which is that I game in VR on heavily single thread dependent games and then run 3d photogrammetry and GenAI as a hobby/R&D which need cores. So I get the superior gaming performance of a 7800x3d along with the power of 16 cores. For my uses it goes 7950X3d>7800X3d>7950X. But I don't have any babysitting to do on the 7950x3d, at least at this point in software maturity there's no manual work or tuning needed, just load amd chipset drivers and game bar (which is on by default) and it works. I didn't do a clean OS install and it's all working perfectly fine.

What you describe, AMD drivers, clean OS install, XBox game bar (which is on by default so nothing to do there) is what any system needs to perform optimally, anyway, so what is the extra work you have to do?

 

[WilyKit]

Lots of people getting defensive about their Frankenstein CPUs. You’re happy with it that’s great. I’m sure if a 16 core x3d becomes available you’ll object and say “NO! I only want 8 of them to have vcache!!!”

 

[Tsumi]

Lots of people getting defensive about their Frankenstein CPUs. You’re happy with it that’s great. I’m sure if a 16 core x3d becomes available you’ll object and say “NO! I only want 8 of them to have vcache!!!”

I don't have one and for my use case (primarily gaming, no productivity) I would get a 7800X3D. But I do recognize the benefits of a 7950X3D and your primary criticism of it is a non-issue at this point in time. It just doesn't make sense to me why you (and others) hate the idea of using software/drivers that run transparently in the background with mininal overhead or intervention needed to optimize the CPU usage.

 

[WilyKit]

I don't have one and for my use case (primarily gaming, no productivity) I would get a 7800X3D. But I do recognize the benefits of a 7950X3D and your primary criticism of it is a non-issue at this point in time. It just doesn't make sense to me why you (and others) hate the idea of using software/drivers that run transparently in the background with mininal overhead or intervention needed to optimize the CPU usage.

I don't mind using software, if it's the OS scheduler. I don't want to depend on yet another layer of instructions that needs periodic updates for it to work right, lengthening the pipeline, adding latency. You make it seem like it's free. It isn't, and it's yet another thing to troubleshoot when having performance related issues.

 

[bobzdar]

I don't mind using software, if it's the OS scheduler. I don't want to depend on yet another layer of instructions that needs periodic updates for it to work right, lengthening the pipeline, adding latency. You make it seem like it's free. It isn't, and it's yet another thing to troubleshoot when having performance related issues.

It is free, there is no measurable performance impact, at least wrt to a 7800x3d, which is marginally slower in games due to lower boost. So even if there is overhead it's less than the speed improvement of the higher clocks.

As to troubleshooting....I mean what is there to troubleshoot? Are chipset drivers installed and is game bar on? That's it, there's nothing else to troubleshoot and you'd do the former with any modern AMD processor. So yeah, if that's more effort for you than running two separate systems, I guess sure, stay away from the 7950x3d. For me that would be way more work (not to mention money).

This is less a defensive thing than trying to help people avoid misinformation. I think for most folks, a 7800x3d would be better if they're mostly into gaming, or a 7950x if they're mostly into productivity. It's only if you do both and are gaming performance first that the 7950x3d. It's niche for sure. You obviously don't fall into that niche, and it's fine, but you're just making up issues now.

 

[WilyKit]

It is free, there is no measurable performance impact, at least wrt to a 7800x3d, which is marginally slower in games due to lower boost. So even if there is overhead it's less than the speed improvement of the higher clocks.

As to troubleshooting....I mean what is there to troubleshoot? Are chipset drivers installed and is game bar on? That's it, there's nothing else to troubleshoot and you'd do the former with any modern AMD processor. So yeah, if that's more effort for you than running two separate systems, I guess sure, stay away from the 7950x3d. For me that would be way more work (not to mention money).

This is less a defensive thing than trying to help people avoid misinformation. I think for most folks, a 7800x3d would be better if they're mostly into gaming, or a 7950x if they're mostly into productivity. It's only if you do both and are gaming performance first that the 7950x3d. It's niche for sure. You obviously don't fall into that niche, and it's fine, but you're just making up issues now.

You want to avoid misinformation while at the same time you're saying there's nothing to troubleshoot then you should probably stop posting to avoid misinformation.

 

[bobzdar]

You want to avoid misinformation while at the same time you're saying there's nothing to troubleshoot then you should probably stop posting to avoid misinformation.

I said there's nothing else to troubleshoot. Are chipset drivers installed and game bar enabled. Lots of work there I guess, way more than building 2 systems.

 

[Tsumi]

I don't mind using software, if it's the OS scheduler. I don't want to depend on yet another layer of instructions that needs periodic updates for it to work right, lengthening the pipeline, adding latency. You make it seem like it's free. It isn't, and it's yet another thing to troubleshoot when having performance related issues.

Please, let me know how well your system runs without graphics card drivers. They should just work with the OS and DirectX or OpenGL, right? They shouldn't ever need to be updated to resolve performance issues.

That's how ridiculous your argument is. You're making a mountain out of a molehill with regards to latency and performance.

 

[sk3tch]

Please, let me know how well your system runs without graphics card drivers. They should just work with the OS and DirectX or OpenGL, right? They shouldn't ever need to be updated to resolve performance issues.

That's how ridiculous your argument is. You're making a mountain out of a molehill with regards to latency and performance.

So let me get this straight - you want Intel and AMD to start releasing CPU drivers to address things like vcache on only half the cores? You’re so determined to defend the setup of the 7950X3D you won’t admit to the potential performance issues?

You’re not comparing apples to apples. CPUs should just work.

 

[Tsumi]

So let me get this straight - you want Intel and AMD to start releasing CPU drivers to address things like vcache on only half the cores? You’re so determined to defend the setup of the 7950X3D you won’t admit to the potential performance issues?

You’re not comparing apples to apples. CPUs should just work.

You mean performance issues that existed and has since been resolved? Performance issues that has come up time and time again ever since the advent of Hyperthreading and logical cores? When Hyperthreading and Bulldozer were released, there was a need for drivers to tell the scheduler to fill independent cores/modules before scheduling things on the same core/module. That was before Microsoft baked it into the OS. You're speaking as if this is a problem unique to the 7950X3D but it is not.