Support NeoGAF

[winjer]

AMD Preps a Cheaper Ryzen 7 7700X3D CPU Below the 7800X3D, Keeping All 8 Cores and 96 MB of 3D V-Cache Intact

AMD's Ryzen 7 7700X3D features 8 cores, 96MB cache, and prices between $299-$349, offering great gaming performance for AM5 gamers.

wccftech.com

Ryzen 7 7700X3D vs Ryzen 7 7800X3D:

• Same 8-Cores based on Zen 4 CPUs
• 4.2 GHz vs 4.5 GHz Base Clock
• 4.5 GHz vs 5.0 GHz Boost Clock
• Same 96 MB L3 Cache
• TDP Yet To Be Determined (Should be 105-120W)
• $299-$349 US Expected Price

A cheaper option to the 7800X3D is a welcome one.

 

[Bojji]

Interesting.

 

[RoboFu]

No one cares.. we want new gpus.

 

[Bojji]

No one cares.. we want new gpus.

This CPU could be a good entry point for people switching to AM5.

Of course DDR5 prices are the most problematic (still).

 

[winjer]

This CPU could be a good entry point for people switching to AM5.

Of course DDR5 prices are the most problematic (still).

Or a good upgrade for people with a 7600.

 

[Magic Carpet]

No one cares.. we want new gpus.

New is nice.
Cheap is better.

 

[LavitzSlambert]

Could be a new value king, 3D cache is going to be here for the long haul (for gaming).

 

[bbeach123]

Make more 5700x3d/5800x3d please.

 

[Diseased Yak]

Nice, more options are always welcome.

 

[MCH2024]

The 3D lineup pricing is the most overrated part of PC gaming. just look at the pricing:
9850X3D $460 / 9800X3D $420 / 7800X3D $380 / 7500X3D $330

Factor in 9600X at $170 and the whole lineup is comically overpriced. This keeps working because AMD and their influencer orbit (MLID, AMDUB etc.) have successfully pushed two horrendous ideas:

1. Your CPU's actual performance (ST/MT/nT) doesn't matter
2. Your CPU's "gaming performance" does matter

So people buy garbage-core CPUs as long as they have big low-latency caches because that's what most of the "CPU gaming performance" benchmarks measure, running a 5090 at 1080p to show any gap.

And that's with Nvidia disabling the GPU's Graphics System Processor on Windows to save VRAM. You can enable it in the registry to meaningfully increase your CPU's "Gaming Performance".

The 7700X3D is a substantial clock cut (5.0 => 4.5 GHz), per-core drops from ~2750 to ~2450 GB6. That's below budget smartphone territory, and definitely below PS6 per core. That's low enough to become a real bottleneck going forward, even in gaming. So let's not even talk about Zen3 (3D) in 2026.........

Gaming is a GPU affair 95% of the time, not a CPU affair. Only a clown buys a 9800X3D / 5060 Ti (8G) or a 7600X3D / 5060 Ti (16G) over a 9600X / 5070. And yet people appear to be doing precisely that.

No one buying a dGPU below the 5070 Ti (899$) has any reason to go above a 9600X for gaming.

 

[LordCBH]

I REALLY should upgrade off my 7600 at some point now that I've upgraded past my 2080 Super.

 

[londontko]

The 3D lineup pricing is the most overrated part of PC gaming. just look at the pricing:
9850X3D $460 / 9800X3D $420 / 7800X3D $380 / 7500X3D $330

Factor in 9600X at $170 and the whole lineup is comically overpriced. This keeps working because AMD and their influencer orbit (MLID, AMDUB etc.) have successfully pushed two horrendous ideas:

1. Your CPU's actual performance (ST/MT/nT) doesn't matter
2. Your CPU's "gaming performance" does matter

So people buy garbage-core CPUs as long as they have big low-latency caches because that's what most of the "CPU gaming performance" benchmarks measure, running a 5090 at 1080p to show any gap.

And that's with Nvidia disabling the GPU's Graphics System Processor on Windows to save VRAM. You can enable it in the registry to meaningfully increase your CPU's "Gaming Performance".

The 7700X3D is a substantial clock cut (5.0 => 4.5 GHz), per-core drops from ~2750 to ~2450 GB6. That's below budget smartphone territory, and definitely below PS6 per core. That's low enough to become a real bottleneck going forward, even in gaming. So let's not even talk about Zen3 (3D) in 2026.........

Gaming is a GPU affair 95% of the time, not a CPU affair. Only a clown buys a 9800X3D / 5060 Ti (8G) or a 7600X3D / 5060 Ti (16G) over a 9600X / 5070. And yet people appear to be doing precisely that.

No one buying a dGPU below the 5070 Ti (899$) has any reason to go above a 9600X for gaming.

 

[MCH2024]

https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/enable-gsp-firmware-on-windows.455714/

Nvidia has a GPU System Processor (GSP) on the GPU die which can be used to handle GPU initialization and management tasks. When it's disabled the Driver offloads those tasks to the CPU.

They have it disabled on Windows (it's force enabled on Linux) for a few reasons, Mostly:
1. Save like 200-350MB VRAM
2. Frees up a slight amount of power for GPU (it makes it slightly more efficient)
3. CPU is doing barely anything in 99% of games.

But all Nvidia GeForce RTX GPUs have it on the die. Nvidia's "driver overhead problem" is just Nvidia having this disabled. You can enable it yourself with a registry edit lmao. If AMDUB was a serious review outlet, they'd have known of it or asked Nvidia about it instead of inventing a "problem" out of their ass to make RDNA4 look better.

If they eventually enable it on windows or if someone manually enables it, it makes higher end "gaming" CPUs even more meaningless.

 

[Haint]

The 3D lineup pricing is the most overrated part of PC gaming. just look at the pricing:
9850X3D $460 / 9800X3D $420 / 7800X3D $380 / 7500X3D $330

Factor in 9600X at $170 and the whole lineup is comically overpriced. This keeps working because AMD and their influencer orbit (MLID, AMDUB etc.) have successfully pushed two horrendous ideas:

1. Your CPU's actual performance (ST/MT/nT) doesn't matter
2. Your CPU's "gaming performance" does matter

So people buy garbage-core CPUs as long as they have big low-latency caches because that's what most of the "CPU gaming performance" benchmarks measure, running a 5090 at 1080p to show any gap.

And that's with Nvidia disabling the GPU's Graphics System Processor on Windows to save VRAM. You can enable it in the registry to meaningfully increase your CPU's "Gaming Performance".

The 7700X3D is a substantial clock cut (5.0 => 4.5 GHz), per-core drops from ~2750 to ~2450 GB6. That's below budget smartphone territory, and definitely below PS6 per core. That's low enough to become a real bottleneck going forward, even in gaming. So let's not even talk about Zen3 (3D) in 2026.........

Gaming is a GPU affair 95% of the time, not a CPU affair. Only a clown buys a 9800X3D / 5060 Ti (8G) or a 7600X3D / 5060 Ti (16G) over a 9600X / 5070. And yet people appear to be doing precisely that.

No one buying a dGPU below the 5070 Ti (899$) has any reason to go above a 9600X for gaming.

Biggest issue is the price differences are completely meaningless and inconsequential. Literally nobody buying X3D parts is concerned about saving $20 - $40 on a build.

 

[MCH2024]

Biggest issue is the price differences are completely meaningless and inconsequential. Literally nobody buying X3D parts is concerned about saving $20 - $40 on a build.

The issue is the people. People feel like they need to get a 3D CPU. That's why a 5500X3D costs like >100$ over 9600X.


AMDUB has bricked people's brains.

There are two layers of this bullshit:
1. Alluding Zen5 (3D) "gaming performance" leadership position to Zen4 (3D) and Zen3 (3D).
2. Assuming that "CPU Gaming Performance" actually matters in games beyond not bottlenecking your GPU. (Which isn't that hard to do).

I feel like I need to overcompensate to just get people to snap out of it.

 

[Brucey]

The issue is the people. People feel like they need to get a 3D CPU. That's why a 5500X3D costs like >100$ over 9600X.


AMDUB has bricked people's brains.

There are two layers of this bullshit:
1. Alluding Zen5 (3D) "gaming performance" leadership position to Zen4 (3D) and Zen3 (3D).
2. Assuming that "CPU Gaming Performance" actually matters in games beyond not bottlenecking your GPU. (Which isn't that hard to do).

I feel like I need to overcompensate to just get people to snap out of it.

Well fairly sure many have you on ignore so you aren't converting anybody with your "truths".

Aren't you sucking on the same coolaid when you believe rdna 5 is going to be 10x efficient versus previous rdna etc and deep future gazing where Helix has already "won" against ps6 and sony has failed?

 

[winjer]

The issue is the people. People feel like they need to get a 3D CPU. That's why a 5500X3D costs like >100$ over 9600X.


AMDUB has bricked people's brains.

There are two layers of this bullshit:
1. Alluding Zen5 (3D) "gaming performance" leadership position to Zen4 (3D) and Zen3 (3D).
2. Assuming that "CPU Gaming Performance" actually matters in games beyond not bottlenecking your GPU. (Which isn't that hard to do).

I feel like I need to overcompensate to just get people to snap out of it.

You talk so much bullshit, it's impressive.

 

[LordCBH]

You talk so much bullshit, it's impressive.

Hasn't this dude been crashing out in a GPU thread too?

 

[winjer]

Hasn't this dude been crashing out in a GPU thread too?

Yes, I think so.
And on the DRAM thread, something about these prices now being permanent or something....

 

[MCH2024]

Well fairly sure many have you on ignore so you aren't converting anybody with your "truths".

Don't care.

Aren't you sucking on the same coolaid when you believe rdna 5 is going to be 10x efficient versus previous rdna etc and deep future gazing where Helix has already "won" against ps6 and sony has failed?

I never made that claim on RDNA5?

And I wasn't glazing Helix. It's just a fact based on the announced Specs, Helix is to PS6 what PS5 Pro is to the PS5.

Personally both of them are DOA for me. But that's just me.