AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D Game Performance
On the following pages, we are going to review the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D CPU in gaming performance, focused on game performance only, at 1080p with the highest in-game graphics settings. We will be using an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Founders Edition video card with each CPU, and our comparison CPUs are the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X, AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D, and Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. A manual run-through is being used in each game being tested below for real-world gaming performance data, and the games are listed in alphabetical order. All data in this review has been benchmarked fresh on each CPU for this review with updated drivers, BIOS, and game versions.
Alan Wake 2
In Alan Wake 2 we are running at 1080p with the highest in-game settings, using a manual run-through. We can see that the new AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D performs at the top of the charts in performance, beating all over CPUs and matching performance with the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Zen 5 CPU as well. Compared to the previous generation, the new AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is 10% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D for a generational uplift from Zen 4. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D also offers faster performance than the Zen 5 Ryzen 9 9950X, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is 17% faster than the Ryzen 9 9950X non-X3D part. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is also 26% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K.
Cyberpunk 2077
In Cyberpunk 2077, we are running at 1080p Ultra settings and are using a manual run-through for testing. In this game, the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D single-CCD X3D part does slightly beat out the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D by 2%, but that is very, very close. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is still at the top of the charts, beating every other CPU here with ease. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is 9% faster than the previous generation AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D for a generational uplift. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D has a very big performance jump over the non-X3D 9950X, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D offers 26% more performance than the Ryzen 9 9950X in gaming performance here, which also means it is 26% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K as well. Surprisingly, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has the same performance in this game now compared to the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X.
Dying Light 2
In Dying Light 2 we are running at 1080p with the high-quality option and DX12 enabled with ASYNC turned on using a manual run-through. In this game, the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D takes the performance lead, it’s interesting how it can offer more performance over the 9950X3D, here by 7%, which is a pretty decent lead. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D still wins compared to every other CPU of course, offering a 13% performance uplift from the previous generation AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D in gaming performance. It is also a whopping 33% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X and 40% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K.
F1 24
In F1 24, we are running at 1080p and Ultra settings, but for this game we did use the built-in benchmark. The results are much closer in this game compared to all other games, but take note that this was done with the built-in benchmark, not a manual run-through, so that could make a difference. The AMD Ryzen Zen 5 CPUs are packed kind of close together, but the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D does match the Ryzen 7 9800X3D in performance and is at the top of the chart. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is 18% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K.
Hogwarts Legacy
In Hogwarts Legacy, we are running at 1080p with the Ultra quality preset, and we are using a manual run-through in this game. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is clearly at the top of the charts once again, taking a commanding lead over every other CPU. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is very close to Ryzen 7 9800X3D CPU performance once again, with the Ryzen 7 9800X3D taking a slight 1.4% performance lead. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is a pretty big 20% faster than the previous generation AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, showing a big generational uplift, and that CPU was no slouch either in this game until now. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is 31% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D non-X3D part, which really shows how great that X3D cache is. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is 38% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K.
Horizon Forbidden West
In Horizon Forbidden West we had some interesting results, to say the least. Firstly, we are running this game at 1080p with the highest settings, and we are using a manual run-through. It seems the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K really likes this game, with performance matching that of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D. Now, this is completely an outlier, as this is the only game that this happened out of our 12-game testing suite. It was a consistent result, for whatever this game does, and the Intel CPU does, it just really gells with that CPU and thus in this game, and this game only, they match performance, but this was unique.
Otherwise, the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D takes the performance lead by a good bit; the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is 7% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D. Now, it is possible that there needs to be some kind of core parking or X3D optimization in this game because we do see the X3D working to an advantage here, but maybe it can be optimized further on the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D.
The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is 9% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D for a generational uplift, so it is faster but maybe not as high of an uplift as some other games. We actually see the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X outperforming the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, which is unusual and could indicate again some sort of core parking or X3D issue where it isn’t throwing the game over to the CCD with the cache. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is, therefore 8% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X.
Discussion (19 replies)
Join Discussion →Thanks for the review. Just the take i was looking for!
Good review, thanks!
Looks exactly like I suspected.
The multi CCD penalty in gaming is still real, so it consistently performs lower than the 9800x3d in games, but on average the penalty seems less than in the past, maybe because of slightly higher clocks.
It would be interesting to see how it performs in games with one of the CCD's disabled.
I wonder how much better a 9950x3d with one CCD disabled would perform compared to the 9800x3d...
Based on the clock speeds (5.7Ghz vs. 5.2Ghz) the upper bound should be 9.6% at stock clocks, but in reality it will likely be lower, as RAM bandwidth/latency will likely hold it back.
Lets not forget that overclocking is now possible with x3D CPU's. I'm going to presume that the CCD's in the 9950x3d are higher bins to hit the 5.7Ghz clocks, but the question to me is this:
If you are a gaming extremist and overclocker, and want the best gaming performance bar none....
Is it better to buy a 9950x3d for $699 (compared to the $479 9800x3d) and disable one CCD (to get rid of the CCD penalty)?
Or, if you are going to overclock both anyway, are you likely to be limited at about the same clocks/performance.
In other words, can you get higher by overclocking a one CCD 9950x3d than by overclocking a 9800x3d.
I've already seen many 9800x3d overclocks it 5.7Ghz, so we know it can tie the stock 9950x3d, but the question is, is that 9950x3d right at its limit, or will that higher bin allow it to go even higher?
...and if it does go even higher, (6+Ghz?) will it even matter, or will AMD's fabric/memory controller design hold it back anyway?
This would be a really cool test, especially if a few different memory configurations are thrown in for good measure. Which would be faster for games on an AMD system when really pushing the clocks like this? DDR5-6400 in a 1:1 MCLK to UCLK configuration, or DDR5-8000 in a 2:1 MCLK to UCLK configuration.
The DDR5-8000 will get slightly less top level memory bandwidth due to a slightly lower UCLK, but on the flip side, with the RAM running at 4000Mhz (8000MT/s) penalties from things like refreshes are going to be much smaller, as those don't use memory controller bandwidth, and instead operate at the speed of the RAM. Of course, timings and submitting will likely make a difference too.
I have yet to see a really good review that combines all of these complexities of overclocking X3d chips, multiple CCD's and RAM settings when pushed to the limit.
Most sites have been getting hit with back to back launches since CES.....
It's interesting. I've seen some reviewers where the 9950x3d is steadily trading blows with the 9800x3d. Yet the reviews here are showing it largely a step below for gaming. (Well more a 1/2 step really.) Not discounting it mind you.
What resolutions are being looked at in those reviews? Our numbers are at 1080p where CPU bound is more anything. 4k testing is probably going to be within margin of error...
Game Selection, Manual In-Game Run-Through vs Benchmark, Area used within game for manual run-through, length of run-through, Resolution, Game Settings, System Configuration, BIOS version used, BIPO settings used, Memory used and type and speed, Windows Updates applied, Game Bar Updated, Chipset Drivers used, GPU used, System resource minimization, VBS on or off, FPS capture method, Number of run-throughs performed, Fresh data or old data, Clean install of Windows or not, verification of results, etc... name your variable.
Well, the 9900x3d is 679€ and the 9950x3d is 789€ around here, not as bad as the GPU's, still not good though.
Picked up my 9950x3d at Microcenter this morning. Wheee... FOMO skipped! ;)
As of 1:15pm EST, my local Micro Center has 25 in stock. Newegg and Amazon have none. A friend of mine grabbed one from Newegg and said they sold out in 9 minutes. He also got one from Micro Center. He's gonna return the one he got from Newegg.
This morning the Dallas Microcenter had 380 9950x3d's. Currently.. maybe out I don't know.
I'm having a hard time deciding which one I want now. 9800x3d or 9950x3d. Considering I'll have a separate workstation, and my AM5 system will pretty much only be used for games, I'm leaning towards the 9800x3d, but the draw is strong.
I have to admit, your results seem a bit different than most others I am seeing now.
Did you guys confirm that you had proper core parking working during the game tests?
Our results make sense compared to the other CPUs used in our comparison, specifically the 9800X3D and 7950X3D, and the advantages over the 9950X that we saw. The results make sense when you compare our own data to itself. The 9800X3D has the overall advantage, and that makes sense, if core-parking wasn't working, then the results would be far far worse for the 9950X3D, and it isn't. BTW, the 9950X3D was the first CPU we installed with a fresh install of Windows and drivers, and updates, so there is literally nothing getting in the way of the PPM drivers, and other chipset driver optimizations.
Cross-comparing versus other review sites can be misleading due to the myriad of variables I described above, that I will copy below. Game selection and where you benchmark in the game makes a big difference, including if it's a game benchmark or manual run-through. we use manual run-throughs that emphasize CPU-dependency; I cannot speak for other reviews.
Please specify which games you think are questionable.
Compared to Gamers Nexus while graphical settings are different you went with Ultra and they went with Medium. Theirs is showing the 9950x3d = to the 9800x3d. Where yours is reflecting a nearly 5fps difference. That could easily be a margin of error.
F1 24, Gamers nexus running 1080p/High as opposed to Ultra again puts them at equal AS DOES yours. So that lines up.
Hardware unboxed CP 2077 shows a 3fps lead for the 9800x3d over the 9950x3d. Not bad.
(I'm not sighting these to prove or disprove, you asked I'm just doing a bit of research because I'm a nerd.)
Hardware unboxed results for The last of us Part 1 had a 2fps lead over the 9800xed, same effectively as yours.
Hardware unboxed Starfield results are effectively = with a 1 FPS lead for the stock clock 9950x3d. 1080p Ultra.
So your tests are largely the same or margin of error differences in results. It seems other review sites are leaning slightly toward the 9950x3d being the better for gaming depending largely on the game itself. :)
Sorry, didn't mean to sound like I was making accusations or anything. I don't have enough information to say one way or another.
Just that most review sets out there I have seen have the two trading blows, and maybe even having the 9950x ahead by one or two percent on average. Most conclusions out there are along the lines of "wow, isn't it amazing. AMD has solved the split CCD performance penalty issue". Your review leads to a different conclusion, so I was just curious what might be different.
Overall game selection in the test suite can certainly be a possible explanation.
Yours seems to be a little bit of an outlier, and outliers are always interesting :) You can learn from them. Understanding the "why" the general conclusion is different can lead to a better understanding of the two CPU's comparative performance.