Conclusion
The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D and AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D CPUs are the next generation Zen 5 AM5 CPUs launching from AMD with 2nd Gen AMD 3D V-Cache. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D and Ryzen 9 9900X3D are geared as gaming CPUs with content creation in mind and will be available on March 12th, 2025. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D will have an MSRP of $699, and the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D will have an MSRP of $599.
As the names suggest, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is the flagship CPU, sporting 16-cores/32-threads at up to 5.7GHz with a whopping 144MB total cache (128MB L3) using the new 2nd Gen 3D V-Cache technology, which flips the 3D V-Cache upside down for better clock speeds and thermals. The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is next down the line, sporting 12-cores/24-threads at up to 5.5GHz with 140MB total cache (128MB L3) using the new 2nd Gen 3D V-Cache technology as well. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D has a higher TDP of 170W, while the Ryzen 9 9900X3D has a TDP of 120W.
Performance
In our gaming-focused review, we put the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D through its paces in a suite of 12 games, focusing purely on the gaming aspect of the CPU. We do need to stress that the Ryzen 9 9950X3D is also a great content creation CPU for everything, but our initial review today was focused purely on the gaming aspect of it, we will have further follow-up in the future with synthetic benchmarks. We tested the CPUs at 1080p because this is a CPU review, and we need to compare the CPUs against each other to find out performance and how they differ, this is not a GPU test, and thus we focus on 1080p for this reason.
The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D still holds the lead as the faster CPU, outperforming the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D mostly. It is interesting that there are games where they are equal in performance and games where the Ryzen 7 9800X3D does take a more commanding lead. In all instances, the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D was on par to faster than the Ryzen 7 9950X3D, but the Ryzen 9 9950X3D did actually beat the Ryzen 7 9800X3D a couple of times by some small percentages. For the most part, both CPUs have similar performance while gaming, which is great to see.
When looking at the previous generation AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, we saw the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D take a very commanding lead in performance. There were some pretty big gen-on-gen performance uplifts with the new Ryzen 9 9950X3D in gaming performance. We experienced anywhere between 10-20% performance uplift from the Ryzen 9 9950X3D versus the Ryzen 9 7950X3D in gaming performance. The Ryzen 9 7950X3D was already a great gaming CPU, but the Ryzen 9 9950X3D improves upon it in every way. It almost seems like a worthy upgrade in fact, if you have money to burn, it might actually be worth the upgrade if you have a fast GPU like an RTX 4090 or RTX 5090.
When looking at performance compared to the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X, we find that the new Ryzen 9950X3D offers an impressive uplift in performance thanks to the 3D V-Cache on board. That 3D V-Cache greatly helps the Zen 5 architecture in our results. We saw some pretty huge increases in performance just from this 3D V-Cache, despite the fact that the Ryzen 9 9950X3D is running 100MHz lower than the Ryzen 9 9950X in clock speed. We experienced between a 20%-30% performance uplift from the Ryzen 9 9950X3D versus the Ryzen 9 9950X. This came in varying degrees, depending on the game, some had really high differences, and some not as much; it is very game-dependent as usual.
When looking at the performance of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D versus the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, yeah… no.
Final Points
What is there to say? We kind of knew how this would turn out. AMD is absolutely killing it on the Ryzen side. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is truly the best all-arounder for both gaming and content creation. The 2nd Gen 3D V-Cache is a huge win, even if it is only on one CCD. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D improves upon the Ryzen 9 7950X3D as a gaming CPU by allowing a higher sustained clock speed while gaming and being based on the newer Zen 5 architecture. It seems Zen 5 benefits well from the extra L3 cache for gaming. We have yet to test content creation, but we will get to that in a follow-up. It does seem, though, that the Ryzen 9 9950X3D is poised to be the best of both worlds.
If you are building a PC for the sole purpose of being a gaming PC, and you are doing nothing but gaming, the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is still the best option for this purpose. If, however, you do more than just gaming with your PC, if you do other things, and still want a great gaming experience, then the Ryzen 9 9950X3D is your best option. It is worth the $50 premium over the 9950X for gaming if you want gaming and you actually want to get work done.
The Ryzen 9 9950X3D will offer the best 16-core/32-thread multi-threading performance, the best single-thread performance, and the best gaming experience you can get, all in one package. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D offers a truly no-compromise experience, you get awesome gaming and the capability for doing more than just gaming on your PC, and when you want to have fun gaming, well, you can do that as well.
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.