Ryzen 7 9800X3D reportedly delivers up to 8% higher gaming performance than Ryzen 7 7800X3D — alleged leaked AMD slide also claims up to 15% better multi-threaded performance

News
By
published

Ryzen 7 9800X3D is seemingly en route to becoming the fastest gaming CPU in the world.

Ryzen 9000 CPU
(Image credit: AMD)

An alleged AMD slide containing marketing material for AMD's upcoming Ryzen 7 9800X3D processor has leaked online. Videocardz shared the slide, which claims the Ryzen 7 9800X3D will offer up to 8% higher gaming performance and up to 15% faster multi-threaded performance compared to its predecessor—and one of the best CPUs, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D.

The slide states that the Ryzen 7 9800X3D leverages the Zen 5 CPU architecture, which was already known. The Zen 5 chip, based on TSCM'0s 4nm process node, offers a 16% IPC increase over Zen 4 chips, such as the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. The chip will come with 96MB of L3 cache, the same capacity as all AMD's previous Ryzen 7000X3D parts, including its first CPU with 3D V-cache, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. For optimal performance, AMD recommends combining the Ryzen 7 9800X3D with AMD EXPO-certified memory.

One intriguing feature AMD allegedly touts of the Ryzen 7 9800XD is that it will come with better thermal performance than the previous generation — an attribute from the Zen 5 architecture. Strangely, clock speeds don't seem to have been improved to compensate. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D reportedly has a peak boost clock of 5.2 GHz, which is noticeably below the Ryzen 7 9700X's 5.5 GHz boost clock. This is still better than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D's 5 GHz peak boost clock, but the clock speed disparity between the Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 7 9800X3D is wider than even the Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs the Ryzen 7 5800X.

Ryzen 7 9800X3D Leaked Slide

(Image credit: Videocardz)

AMD has confirmed that a Ryzen 9000X3D chip will arrive on the retailer market on November 7. Although the chipmaker didn't delve into specifics, recent leaks all point to the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. As usual, AMD has more Ryzen 9000X3D SKUs up its sleeves, but those are rumored to hit the market next year. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D holds the fort against Intel's recently launched Core Ultra 200S (codenamed Arrow Lake) processors.

Two U.S. retailers have already listed the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. The pricing varies between $484 and $525, so we don't have a concrete MSRP yet. For comparison, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D launched at $449, the same as the Ryzen 7 5800X3D that it was replacing. Expecting that the Ryzen 7 9800X3D will retain the same MSRP is unrealistic. Given the recent listings, it's more feasible to think that AMD could unleash the Ryzen 7 9800X3D at $499. With just a few weeks away from launch day, it won't be long until we see what AMD brings to the table with the Ryzen 7 9800X3D.

See more CPUs News
Aaron Klotz
Aaron Klotz
Contributing Writer

Aaron Klotz is a contributing writer for Tom’s Hardware, covering news related to computer hardware such as CPUs, and graphics cards.

16 Comments Comment from the forums
  • CaptRiker
    ie no reason for owners of a 7950x3d to upgrade *sighs*
    Reply
  • DavidLejdar
    Will be around +50% increase for me (under certain conditions), upgrading from a 7600X. And an even bigger increase, for many with CPUs older than 2 years - albeit the difference between 5800X3D and 9800X3D may for gaming perhaps not be that convincing to upgrade, I suppose.

    Personally, I like the PCIe 5.0 connectivity. And I want to go 4K eventually - for which the X3D CPUs make not a difference currently. But technically possible, that with the next gen of GPUs, CPU will once again become a bottleneck. Like, as is now, running a current-gen GPU at 1080p, gives a lot of frames - but even the 4090 can not really do that many frames at 4K. Whereas next-gen GPUs may perhaps see more frames at 4K, where the demand on CPU involvement would increase as well, from what I understand. Also, multi-screen setup, currently up to 6000x1440 pixels, with second screen on the iGPU of the CPU.

    That already goes into quite specific circumstances though. If I were to set up just a 1080p gaming rig, 5700X3D and modern GPU would be plenty, coming in at under $1,000 for the entire rig.
    Reply
  • Elusive Ruse
    CaptRiker said:
    ie no reason for owners of a 7950x3d to upgrade *sighs*
    AMD with another disappointing product I was hoping for at least a30% uplift in 4K, gen on gen. 😤
    Reply
  • phxrider
    CaptRiker said:
    ie no reason for owners of a 7950x3d to upgrade *sighs*
    Not unless they solve the dual CCD issues so 9950X3D performs as well as the 9800X3D in games, and/or drastically improve the V-Cache speeds for better multithreaded performance closer to the 9950X.

    But right, probably no reason. I have a 7950X3D as well, and that's my outlook.
    ---------
    EDIT: The more I think about this, maybe for someone like me, there could be a reason. I went from a 7800x3d to 7950x3d to get faster non-gaming performance (and because they were stupid cheap during Amazon days). I really don't need 16 cores, but I benefit from the faster non-V-Cache cores, which are prioritized when not playing a game (for people who don't really understand how this works, this is the entire reason for core parking, because otherwise windows will prioritize the fastest cores, which are the ones without the V-Cache. By parking the uncached cores, it forces Windows to use the cached ones for the game.) However, there IS a gaming hit from my 7800x3d in games I play. If the 9800x3d has better app performance, it would be a way to regain the gaming performance without losing any or much app performance. By apps, I'm not talking about workstation loads, i.e. rendering, transcoding, scientific calculations or 7-zipping a giant file, which benefit from a massive number of cores, I mean normal apps that most of us use many times a day, in which there is a felt difference between the 7800x3d and 7950x3d. Depending on how the 9800x3d does in those vs the 7950x3d, there could be a reason for people like me who don't need the high core count. And because I'm an idiot nerd who just likes changing things up for curiosity's sake.
    Reply
  • usertests
    phxrider said:
    Not unless they solve the dual CCD issues so 9950X3D performs as well as the 9800X3D in games, and/or drastically improve the V-Cache speeds for better multithreaded performance closer to the 9950X.

    But right, probably no reason. I have a 7950X3D as well, and that's my outlook.
    Even if both chiplets clock the same, there may still be scheduling issues that necessitate core parking, which is a huge mess for them.
    Reply
  • PrazVT
    No reason for anyone doing 4k gaming to buy. But I guess there's some slice of consumers who will pay for these but still game at 1080p??
    Reply
  • Pemalite
    CaptRiker said:
    ie no reason for owners of a 7950x3d to upgrade *sighs*
    There has never really been a reason to upgrade every year.

    You get more bang for your buck waiting a couple of generations anyway... It's the Ryzen 1000/2000/3000 users who should be eyeballing the Ryzen 9000 series.
    Reply
  • TeamRed2024
    Elusive Ruse said:
    AMD with another disappointing product I was hoping for at least a30% uplift in 4K, gen on gen. 😤

    Well if it makes you feel any better I read the same thing about my 9950X when compared to the 7950X. Given both were priced within $50 of each other I went Zen 5.

    Pemalite said:
    There has never really been a reason to upgrade every year.

    You get more bang for your buck waiting a couple of generations anyway... It's the Ryzen 1000/2000/3000 users who should be eyeballing the Ryzen 9000 series.

    Just like phones. From 2011-2015 I upgraded every year. Then it went 2-3 years between upgrades... and I'm expecting 5 years out of my new 16 Pro Max 1TB.
    Reply
  • phxrider
    usertests said:
    Even if both chiplets clock the same, there may still be scheduling issues that necessitate core parking, which is a huge mess for them.
    I have no issues with core parking. Maybe it was problematic when these CPUs were released, but today, if someone can't get it to work, they should probably stick to a PlayStation.
    Reply
  • P.Amini
    PrazVT said:
    No reason for anyone doing 4k gaming to buy. But I guess there's some slice of consumers who will pay for these but still game at 1080p??
    AKA competitive and Esports players.
    Reply