Power Testing
On this page, we are going to investigate the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D power draw. We are going to do this multiple ways, we are going to look at both the CPU Package Power, as well as the Total System Wattage (from the Wall) in Cinebench R23. We are going to look at full-load Wattage and temps in Cinebench R23, pushing all cores, and we are going to look at Wattage and temps while Gaming, measuring CPU package power. The Total System Wattage tests (from the Wall) are run with a KILL-A-WATT meter. CPU package power and temps are read with HWiNFO64.
CPU Package Power – Cinebench R23
In this graph, we are looking at full-load, all-core Cinebench R23 power utilization for 10 minutes reported by HWiNFO64. Remember, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D and Ryzen 7 9800X3D have the same TDP of 120W and the same PPT of 162W, but will differ in power utilization due to core frequency differences. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D is able to leverage higher frequencies and thus is able to utilize the socket power envelope that it is within more.
As you can see, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D comes in at 156W, which is technically 77% more power than the 7800X3D and 9700X (running at its default 65W TDP). At this power level, it is above the 7950X3D, and on par with the power utilization of the higher core count Intel Core Ultra 5 245K. However, it is lower than the 9900X, 9950X, and previous-generation Intel CPUs on power when all cores are running flat out. We are coming close to the 9800X3D’s maximum PPT, so we are achieving close to its power potential, but there is still more headroom to be had as well.
CPU Package Power – Gaming
Since the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is geared for a gaming CPU, this graph above is the most important, how much power does it pull while gaming? We can see that the Ryzen 7 9800X3D pulls 123W while gaming, which is 45% more power than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D and 23% more power than the 7950X3D as well as 40% more power than the Ryzen 7 9700X. Now, of course, consider the performance difference the Ryzen 7 9800X3D offers over all of these CPUs with that higher power.
While gaming, at this power level, it was interesting that the Ryzen 7 9800X3D used 19% more power than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, BUT, HUGE BUT, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K performed horrendously in gaming performance. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D beat it quite a lot, so do consider the performance differences seen on the previous pages that you are getting for that power difference. At this power level, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is also well under the power of the 9900X, 9950X, and Intel Core Ultra 9 285K while gaming. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D is more power efficient than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K while gaming.
CPU Package Power – Gaming
We also wanted to test total system power at the wall with all the CPUs, while running the all-core, full-load Cinebench R23 test. The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D pulls about 46% more power than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D and Ryzen 7 9700X. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D also pulled a bit more power than the Ryzen 9 7950X3D as well with overall system power. It was way, and I mean way under the power utilization of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K however, but did consume more power than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K.
Discussion (19 replies)
Join Discussion →Great review and the 9800X3D looks like a beast.
Yep, keeping my eye on this one and can't wait for the 9900X3D/9950X3D reviews to make my final decision for my 1st AM5 build.
After this review I am more excited about this gen than I have been before. The extra die space from these X3d's is having some add on benefit for performance that is hard to quantify (more space for heat?) but I don't care. This is kind of awaesome.
Just curious, what are you referencing here?
For pure gaming I'd still go with the 7800X3d, but the 9800X3D is better than the 9700X in every way. I don't really think we'll ever see a 9800X.
Hopefully we'll eventually see a 9700X3d or even a 7700X3d that's I would get myself.
I wonder what OC will bring to the table.
If going by recent rumors, anything from 200-400 MHz but so far as to how that will translate, added power draw, heat, etc., haven't heard anything credible yet.
I think he means this from Brent's review.
"In the 2nd Generation 3D V-Cache, AMD has re-designed the cache so that it is the same size as the CCD itself, eliminating the need for structural silicon."
@Brent_Justice
"In subsequent follow-ups, we will deep dive into gaming performance a lot more, with a very gaming-focused review with a lot more games, so stay tuned." - I bet you'll have a lot of fun doing this, very jealous!
Sorry if I missed mention of it, is there a separate review for that Trident mem kit coming up? I was doing some research on it this weekend as I prepare for the new build.
AMD is still using the same IOD - so 6000 C30 is basically it without tempting fate, same as at Zen 4 launch.
Some folks in the OC communities have been working on faster memory speeds but I haven't seen any real evidence of gains in effective performance.
Don't have one planned, but I've been using a similar kit since Zen 4 launched, it's my standard RAM kit for the AM5 platform, and I've been using it for every GPU review. Solid kit, no complaints, works perfectly great, it's the right configuration for the best Ryzen performance.
To be honest, I am quite looking forward to a 20 game performance roundup!
Done it before: https://www.thefpsreview.com/2023/11/20/intel-core-i9-14900k-vs-amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-gaming-performance-in-20-games/
Basically in the review it was noted that the 3dvcache space is the same as the die space. Meaning that there is heat dissipation that can come downward into the 3dvcache layer. Allowing the actual processors to be pushed further.
nice work guys!
It would appear that placing the 3D cache on the bottom is allowing it to boost closer to it's full potential. This is good news. Now I can only hope even more than the 9950X has dual 3D cache on both of it's CCDs.
That makes a little bit of sense; still, it isn't likely to have near as much of an effect as having just gotten the 3D V-cache out of the way of the heatspreader IMO.
Disappointed in the lack of 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 numbers. I've done a lot of this type of testing over the years and 1080P just doesn't tell the whole story. Conventional wisdom says that when your GPU bound the CPU doesn't really matter, but I found that wasn't always the case. Often you'd get averages that seemed pretty close but the lows were lower and the highs higher on some CPU's.
On games like Cyberpunk 2077 where a few frames can make the difference between a playable frame rates and not, (even on a 4090) the CPU might make a difference. It sure did with earlier Ryzen family CPU's I tested.