*Official Benchmark Thread* - Post it here or it didn't happen :D

[Papusan]

2 hours ago, Papusan said:

Btw. Going with AMD... Expect bugs.

See below.

2 hours ago, Etern4l said:

I do wonder though how many "average gamers" really game on desktop PCs as opposed to consoles, and frankly laptops. Just by the fact that someone built their own PC, they are no longer an average gamer in my book, even if they mostly use the PC for gaming. 

 

But what is the Ryzen 7 7800X3D actually? An explicit gaming CPU with a luxury premium for the 8 cores wrapped up by the huge stack cache "or maybe" even a smart all-rounder that can do gaming excellently, but not only (email/web browsing and social media)? When used outside of the gaming universe, partial dropouts did occur from time to time and the CPU repeatedly showed itself like a Janus head with two faces. 

 

The X3D chips is the Console equals but for those gamers that want desktops. Then you have the 3rd type gamers... The laptop jockey's. The  gaming on smartphones is when the gamers waqnt some free time from the desktops/laptops and consoles.

21 minutes ago, cylix said:

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D Review with Gaming and Workstation – Ultra-fast gaming with half the fuel of a Core i9-13900K

 

https://www.igorslab.de/en/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-in-gaming-and-workstation-test-ultra-fast-gaming-in-a-different-energy-dimension/12/

 

[Etern4l]

33 minutes ago, cylix said:

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D Review with Gaming and Workstation – Ultra-fast gaming with half the fuel of a Core i9-13900K

 

https://www.igorslab.de/en/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-in-gaming-and-workstation-test-ultra-fast-gaming-in-a-different-energy-dimension/12/

 

"An Intel Core i9-13900K needs almost twice as much electrical energy for a similar gaming performance, which is meanwhile tantamount to total humiliation. Even the slightly better variances and percentiles do not help much anymore, that is just the way it is and cannot be changed. "

 

Sponsored review, bad translation from German, or the guy is an AMD fanboy, alternatively an idiot. 

 

It can be changed fairly easily, and most people experienced with Intel CPUs know that. 

 

I welcome any AMD CPU owner to try and achieve 40500 in CB23 at 235W... very bench stable, but not heavy production stable (that required the power to be raised to 255W). Any gaming would be absolutely fine. 

 

 

[cylix]

7 minutes ago, Papusan said:

See below.

 

But what is the Ryzen 7 7800X3D actually? An explicit gaming CPU with a luxury premium for the 8 cores wrapped up by the huge stack cache "or maybe" even a smart all-rounder that can do gaming excellently, but not only (email/web browsing and social media)? When used outside of the gaming universe, partial dropouts did occur from time to time and the CPU repeatedly showed itself like a Janus head with two faces. 

 

The X3D chips is the Console equals but for those gamers that want desktops. Then you have the 3rd type gamers... The laptop jockey's. The  gaming on smartphones is when the gamers waqnt some free time from the desktops/laptops and consoles.

 

Don't forget the whole quote, its important. This CPU is for gaming and for that is doing an excellent job

 

"AMD has managed to create an equivalent to the Ryzen 9 7950X3D that is well suited for pure gamers with the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. Half the CPU, more interesting price and yet almost as fast or sometimes even a bit faster. I wouldn’t narrow it down so much here, because it really always depends on the game and in the end, as always, it’s a question of selection how big the gap becomes. Yes, it was not enough for the crown from my point of view because of the slightly worse percentile, but at least almost. But there is one category where it almost doesn’t matter how good or less suitable such a game is for the huge cache: the absolutely low power consumption.

This is exactly the point where you simply do not need to discuss further. An Intel Core i9-13900K needs almost twice as much electrical energy for a similar gaming performance, which is meanwhile tantamount to total humiliation. Even the slightly better variances and percentiles do not help much anymore, that is just the way it is and cannot be changed. The Ryzen 7 7800X3D is simply the better choice for gamers, even though the price is currently in line with the high vegetable and fruit prices and Intel rather serves the fraction of those who like to take peppers and apples with slight bruises at the bargain price. That I will write this again, I would have dismissed a few years ago with nonsense."

 

:😁

[Etern4l]

25 minutes ago, cylix said:

Don't forget the whole quote, its important. This CPU is for gaming and for that is doing an excellent job

 

"AMD has managed to create an equivalent to the Ryzen 9 7950X3D that is well suited for pure gamers with the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. Half the CPU, more interesting price and yet almost as fast or sometimes even a bit faster. I wouldn’t narrow it down so much here, because it really always depends on the game and in the end, as always, it’s a question of selection how big the gap becomes. Yes, it was not enough for the crown from my point of view because of the slightly worse percentile, but at least almost. But there is one category where it almost doesn’t matter how good or less suitable such a game is for the huge cache: the absolutely low power consumption.

This is exactly the point where you simply do not need to discuss further. An Intel Core i9-13900K needs almost twice as much electrical energy for a similar gaming performance, which is meanwhile tantamount to total humiliation. Even the slightly better variances and percentiles do not help much anymore, that is just the way it is and cannot be changed. The Ryzen 7 7800X3D is simply the better choice for gamers, even though the price is currently in line with the high vegetable and fruit prices and Intel rather serves the fraction of those who like to take peppers and apples with slight bruises at the bargain price. That I will write this again, I would have dismissed a few years ago with nonsense."

 

:😁

 

As above. Only true regarding stock. For some reason, probably because they have super-stringent stability requirements, far beyond what's needed for gaming, or even serious work, Intel have time and again decided to ship power hungry CPUs that can be immediately undervolted and transformed into very different devices (I don't believe I ran my 13900K on stock settings even once). 

 

A 13900K after tuning is an unrecognisable beast scoring 40K+ in CB23 at 85C or so (OK, with a slightly spruced up AIO lol) 

[Papusan]

2 hours ago, Etern4l said:

Intel will probably address the voltage issues by re-enabling the new voltage regulator in RPL (such that things run better out of the box, although the potential for gains from manual tuning will likely be reduced) and calling it a groundbreaking 2023 refresh 🙂

Yep. Intel can't do much in gaming vs the new v-cashe chips from AMD. The Raptor refresh for Z690/790 boards is meant to reduce market shares loss. Nothing more. But how many game in 1080P nowadays? And then you have... How many will benefits from the new Ryzen X3D chips with 3000 series mid tier cards or coming 4050 and 4070? 

 

How will this looks like if you pair the new 7800X3D with etc 4060/4070? 

[Etern4l]

14 minutes ago, Papusan said:

Yep. Intel can't do much in gaming vs the new v-cashe chips from AMD. The Raptor refresh for Z690/790 boards is meant to reduce market shares loss. Nothing more. But how many game in 1080P nowadays? And then you have... How many will benefits from the new Ryzen X3D chips with 3000 series mid tier cards or coming 4050 and 4070? 

 

Yes, the areas where the X3D CPUs test ahead of Intel is a reasonable argument to me, although in practice I would ask how overclockable/tunable those AMD chips are. I would assume not very much, but I really don't know.

The 13900K on the other hand can run 8%+ faster in CB23 with just an undervolt, although not sure if that would translate to gains in gaming, and of course overclocks are achievable as well. I also see good Igor did not include 13900KS in his benchmarks, which is both telling and disappointing. 

[cylix]

34 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

As above. Only true regarding stock. For some reason, probably because they have super-stringent stability requirements, far beyond what's needed for gaming, or even serious work, Intel have time and again decided to ship power hungry CPUs that can be immediately undervolted and transformed into very different devices (I don't believe I ran my 13900K on stock settings even once). 

 

A 13900K after tuning is an unrecognisable beast scoring 40K+ in CB23 at 85C or so (OK, with a slightly spruced up AIO lol) 

Well they are testing stock vs stock. I  know you can undervolt the intels, but in my opinion thats not ok to have on a desktop where you have room for every cooling possible. I understand it on the laptops, i undervolted my i9900 on the clevo chassis for that reason, there was a constraint of space for thermal room, but on a desktop and on a high cpu i dont  like it. Its like ill buy a ferrari but i need to tuned in a garage after to suit my need. Intel needs to stop with the power hungry cpus and innovate  how they used , right now they are just throwing Power.

 

 

[Reciever]

22 minutes ago, Papusan said:

Yep. Intel can't do much in gaming vs the new v-cashe chips from AMD. The Raptor refresh for Z690/790 boards is meant to reduce market shares loss. Nothing more. But how many game in 1080P nowadays? And then you have... How many will benefits from the new Ryzen X3D chips with 3000 series mid tier cards or coming 4050 and 4070? 

 

How will this looks like if you pair the new 7800X3D with etc 4060/4070? 

 

I game at 1080p144hz, been debating a 1440p144hz but havent pulled the trigger on anything.

[Etern4l]

22 minutes ago, cylix said:

Well they are testing stock vs stock. I  know you can undervolt the intels, but in my opinion thats not ok to have on a desktop where you have room for every cooling possible. I understand it on the laptops, i undervolted my i9900 on the clevo chassis for that reason, there was a constraint of space for thermal room, but on a desktop and on a high cpu i dont  like it. Its like ill buy a ferrari but i need to tuned in a garage after to suit my need. Intel needs to stop with the power hungry cpus and innovate  how they used , right now they are just throwing Power.

 

I mean I am not sure you need to undervolt any Intel CPUs for gaming at stock with a reasonable AIO.

The main reasons to do so would be being power efficiency conscious, planing to put the CPU under heavy sustained load, or benching on an AIO lol

 

BTW Interesting to see the 13900KS score above 13900K in some 1080p games, I guess many are still single-thread heavy.

 

https://www.anandtech.com/show/18728/the-intel-core-i9-13900ks-review-taking-intel-s-raptor-lake-to-6-ghz/9

 

Regardless, it looks like the mega-cache is really hard to beat, although people made good points in the comments section - those tests were conducted using ridiculous memory:

 

SK Hynix
2x16 GB
DDR5-5600B CL46

 

I didn't know such a slow memory was a thing. A typo? At any rate the slower the RAM, the more exaggerated the benefit of V-Cache will be. In practice, most gamers these days can run 7000+ RAM, on an Intel system at least, and this would go some way towards reducing the benefit of the large L3 cache.

[Papusan]

1 hour ago, cylix said:

Well they are testing stock vs stock. I  know you can undervolt the intels, but in my opinion thats not ok to have on a desktop where you have room for every cooling possible.

My son's i9 spend most of its time in low 50C in 1440P gaming. 

1 hour ago, Reciever said:

 

I game at 1080p144hz, been debating a 1440p144hz but havent pulled the trigger on anything.

1440P is in raise on Steam. Up near 9% since last survey. And it will continue grow. 

 

And if you go with 4K. You trade in 4-5 more FPS for worse or lacklustre content creation performance. Not so sure this is a great deal. And this with an 4090 that most gamers don't have. Most of them will get an 4060/4070 cards forwards.

 

+50% less performance for 4 FPS. Not so sure this deal would be so very appealing for bro @Mr. Fox <if> he still wanted a full AMD setup. 

 

2 hours ago, Etern4l said:

A 13900K after tuning is an unrecognisable beast scoring 40K+ in CB23 at 85C or so (OK, with a slightly spruced up AIO lol) 

You would need an proper AIO also if you went for an 7950/7950X3D. It would still run +90C in full load. But none of these chips run this sorts temps in games. 

[Reciever]

9 minutes ago, Papusan said:

My son's i9 spend most of its time in low 50C in 1440P gaming. 

1440P is in raise on Steam. Up near 9% since last survey. And it will continue grow. 

 

And if you go with 4K. You trade in 4-5 more FPS for worse or lacklustre content creation performance. Not so sure this is a great deal. And this with an 4090 that most gamers don't have. Most of them will get an 4060/4070 cards forwards.

 

 

Nothing releasing now interests me in terms of CPU products. I just run with my 10850K and Am4 system. If there is something I would pickup it would be the 5800X3D for my daily driver type system and the 10850k would remain the bench system. Though its still hovering around 300+ at the moment on ebay.

[Etern4l]

20 minutes ago, Reciever said:

If there is something I would pickup it would be the 5800X3D for my daily driver type system

 

Unless daily driver is meant to primarily drive gaming, a CPU with more cores would be of benefit, says Steve: 

 

 

Looks like the oversized cache works well just in gaming, and seemingly little else, where the precious die space is much better spent on extra cores.

 

  

20 minutes ago, Reciever said:

Nothing releasing now interests me

 

That's just how I feel about the latest laptop offerings lol

 

  

34 minutes ago, Papusan said:

You would need an proper AIO also if you went for an 7950/7950X3D. It would still run +90C in full load. But none of these chips run this sorts temps in games. 

 

Right, but would I be able to significantly UV an AMD chip?

[Papusan]

37 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

Unless daily driver is meant to primarily drive gaming, a CPU with more cores would be of benefit, says Steve: 

 

 

Looks like the oversized cache works well just in gaming, and seemingly little else, where the precious die space is much better spent on extra cores.

 

  

 

That's just how I feel about the latest laptop offerings lol

 

  

 

Right, but would I be able to significantly UV an AMD chip?

13600K for $300 USD and the cheapest platform you can find. All way. The X3D chips can't be bird and fish. Just one of them (an expensive gaming chips). In short... The 7800X3D should be priced between an 13600K and 13700K. Not a cent above.

 

 

You can undervolt the Ryzen chips but they will try reach max boost all time before you get significant power reduction. 

 

Edit... Then you have this.... The usual from AMD (buggy software/drivers and firmware. it just works, LOOL

 

Specifically with X3D I ran into another issue. After swapping from the 7950X3D to the 7800X3D I assumed that it would just work after installing the new chipset drivers. Nope.. while benchmarks like Cinebench showed the proper numbers, games were running slower than expected. Not "stutter" slow, still very fast, but "only" at levels comparable to the 7950X3D—the 7800X3D must be faster though. After some digging I found out that several CPU cores get parked during gaming, for no apparent reason. Uninstalling the AMD chipset drivers, reinstalling the newest ones, resetting power settings, copying the power plan from another PC all made no difference—I was missing around 10% in gaming performance. In their reviewer's guide AMD recommends to start with a fresh Windows installation when switching from the 7950X3D to the 7900X3D: ".. may encounter low scores when switching directly from the 7950X3D to the 7800X3D without reinstalling a fresh version of Windows OS. This is likely a result of the AMD PPM provisioning file driver still being applied to the 7800X3D processor, which was not its intended use. This performance issue is not a typical end user scenario and is only a result of switching CPUs without installing a fresh version of Windows OS." So I invested a few hours to reinstall Windows and set up my benchmarks, and oh surprise, performance numbers were in-line with expectations.

While I can understand that such things might happen, especially with a new release, it's completely unacceptable to ship a driver package that can't be fully uninstalled or that changes the OS in a permanent way, so that a fresh installation is required. I hope AMD can figure out what's going on and that they will provide updated drivers and proper guidance how to detect and fix the problem.

[Etern4l]

13 minutes ago, Papusan said:

13600K for $300 USD and the cheapest platform you can find. All way. The X3D chips can't be bird and fish. Just one of them (an expensive gaming chips). In short... The 7800X3D should be priced between an 13600K and 13700K. Not a cent above.

 

 

You can undervolt the Ryzen chips but they will try reach max boost all time before you get significant power reduction. 

 

Well, that's kind of what Intel chips do as well, rigtt? They will try to achieve max boost freq, unless ratios are dialed down. Is it not possible to reduce max turbo clocks on the Ryzen platform?

[Papusan]

7 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

Well, that's kind of what Intel chips do as well, rigtt? They will try to achieve max boost freq, unless ratios are dialed down. Is it not possible to reduce max turbo clocks on the Ryzen platform?

I'm not very well into Ryzen platform. But both Intel and AMD chips is meant to max out boost close to thermal limits. You can use Dell's way to cripple the chips. Use TCC Offset. You don't lose much with stock clocks and cap it at 90C. 

 

8 cores Ryzen chips with 360mm AIO and max fans.

 

[Etern4l]

1 minute ago, Papusan said:

I'm not very well into Ryzen platform. But both Intel and AMD chips is meant to max out boost close to thermal limits. You can use Dell's way to cripple the chips. Use TCC Offset. You don't lose much with stock clocks and cap it at 90C.  

 

Played around with that, and people elsewhere seem to recommend, but I don't need it. Best results so far with just straight up voltage overrides, not really seeing temps above 80C unless in CB23. Not ideal for single core use though, which I don't care about.

[Papusan]

18 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

Played around with that, and people elsewhere seem to recommend, but I don't need it. Best results so far with just straight up voltage overrides, not really seeing temps above 80C unless in CB23. Not ideal for single core use though, which I don't care about.

The $290 13600K offer 6-10% more application performance. And the 7800X3D is locked. You can still get +5% more performance from the 13600K  with undervolt/oc'ing. Undervolt an 7800X3D won't gain you more clock speed. You are stuck with what you already have at +100$ USD more. For me... A very bad value. And not a fun chips play with (I don't talk about thinkering for gaming).

 

[Etern4l]

One more thing: there was a time when some strategic purchasing of AMD CPUs was kind of required to maintain the balance of power... well, this time around I would say the good folks at Intel need all the help they can get :)

[tps3443]

7 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

One more thing: there was a time when some strategic purchasing of AMD CPUs was kind of required to maintain a balance of power, well at this time I would say the good folks at Intel need all the help they can get 🙂

It’s always cat and mouse with AMD and Intel. I’m really loving my Intel chips though (Both of them K and KS. Especially being able to run frequencies of 6.4Ghz on (4) cores is just ridiculous. 2500 in R23 single. 🤯

[Reciever]

3 hours ago, Etern4l said:

 

Unless daily driver is meant to primarily drive gaming, a CPU with more cores would be of benefit, says Steve: 

 

 

Looks like the oversized cache works well just in gaming, and seemingly little else, where the precious die space is much better spent on extra cores.

 

  

 

That's just how I feel about the latest laptop offerings lol

 

  

 

Right, but would I be able to significantly UV an AMD chip?

 

Primarily gaming, browsing and the odd document or two. Larger cache has always only been a benefit to only gaming. This was shown in Broadwell and crystalwell but even then it's not whole sale across the board. It does tend to improve minimums and reduce stutter that may otherwise be present. 

 

It would be replacing a 2700x on an itx x570 aorus wifi. I just don't have the time lately to be swapping parts on my primary pc and still have it be useful in a daily driver. 5800x3d will take care of me for quite some time, while letting me tinker without need ING to rebuild due to a time constraint. If I had to buy a motherboard as well then there wouldn't be any interest at all. Just record my timings on the ram and swap it out when I'm not tinkering :) 

[tps3443]

I’m trying so hard to make this Z690 Apex work for me… And I just can’t find the reason. I cannot stabilize anything with it! Power usage at 6Ghz and temps to even get through R23 are absolutely stupid. I don’t get it.. I can barely manage 5.9-6.0Ghz stability on this thing, and it can’t even run games stable.
 

I spend all of my hours of the day inside the bios tuning around my tail and back again. Then I’m still on the same unstable system haha! The board is beautiful! And It also has really nice features. But I’m done with it. 

[Papusan]

2 hours ago, Etern4l said:

One more thing: there was a time when some strategic purchasing of AMD CPUs was kind of required to maintain the balance of power... well, this time around I would say the good folks at Intel need all the help they can get 🙂

Not so sure about that. Look at this mess. Reviewers tried to oc the 8 core gaming chips with BCLK clock. 90°C despite a 480 mm radiator and max allowed stock voltage. Imagine this kids toy with 300W load and unlocked voltage to male it possible. This X3D chips would boil to steam within a couple of seconds and you would smell a nasty electronic smell if not the chips have died directly when you dialed in the needed voltage. We talk about 120-150W power and even a 480mm ain't enough to cool it. This is not the tech I want.

 

[Reciever]

24 minutes ago, Papusan said:

Not so sure about that. Look at this mess. Reviewers tried to oc the 8 core gaming chips with BCLK clock. 90°C despite a 480 mm radiator and max allowed stock voltage. Imagine this kids toy with 300W load and unlocked voltage to male it possible. This X3D chips would boil to steam within a couple of seconds and you would smell a nasty electronic smell if not the chips have died directly when you dialed in the needed voltage. We talk about 120-150W power and even a 480mm ain't enough to cool it. This is not the tech I want.

 

 

I'd imagine direct die would drop it significantly just like it did for the non 3d chips. Issue would be that the solution is typically not sought out by the "casual gamer" types and also kind of defeats the appeal of a turn key chip if you're considerating that hypothetical. 

[electrosoft]

49 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

I’m trying so hard to make this Z690 Apex work for me… And I just can’t find the reason. I cannot stabilize anything with it! Power usage at 6Ghz and temps to even get through R23 are absolutely stupid. I don’t get it.. I can barely manage 5.9-6.0Ghz stability on this thing, and it can’t even run games stable.
 

I spend all of my hours of the day inside the bios tuning around my tail and back again. Then I’m still on the same unstable system haha! The board is beautiful! And It also has really nice features. But I’m done with it. 

 

Might be the board itself? Check to see what else everyone is achieving on 2022 Apex boards >5.8ghz. If they are doing good, time for an RMA. If not then sell it off. How is the memory OC on it versus your Unify?

 

 

 

 

[Mr. Fox]

1 hour ago, tps3443 said:

I’m trying so hard to make this Z690 Apex work for me… And I just can’t find the reason. I cannot stabilize anything with it! Power usage at 6Ghz and temps to even get through R23 are absolutely stupid. I don’t get it.. I can barely manage 5.9-6.0Ghz stability on this thing, and it can’t even run games stable.
 

I spend all of my hours of the day inside the bios tuning around my tail and back again. Then I’m still on the same unstable system haha! The board is beautiful! And It also has really nice features. But I’m done with it. 

Yeah, I am really sorry to hear that. When you get a good ASUS product they are truly amazing. When you get one that is not, they are garbage. That is why I try to avoid the brand... total crapshoot. It's really unfortunate because they were once the best. Now they are only the best sometimes... randomly. QC lottery is worse than the silicon lottery. I suspect you know now why you got a good deal on it. Someone lost in the ASUS QC lottery and you inherited their abortion. Makes me feel sick for you, bro. I am well acquainted with drawing short straws on flagship ASUS motherboards that turn out to be trash. It is unfortunate that their less expensive models are more reliable. Prime and Strix are generally consistent, but not great for any kind of hardcore overclocking.

 

If you can convince ASUS that it needs to be replaced  (and that is iffy) you might have a good replacement in 4 to 8 weeks. Good luck convincing them it's not trash. Be sure to take very high resolution photos of the CPU socket and everything else or they'll find something obscure to void the warranty and make it your fault, even going as far as sending you pictures of someone else's bent CPU socket pins. They are extremely dishonest.

 

I have even heard that having thermal paste on the motherboard has been used as an excuse to deny warranty, and it fits with the lousy experiences I have had dealing with the imbeciles in their tech support department.