安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
If you're on neither platform, AM5 generally makes a lot more sense from many standpoints (unless you're specifically after a really low cost budget build or something where you wouldn't be looking at the 5800X3D to begin with), but if you're already on AM4, the 5800X3D definitely has its merit.
It pretty much has an even cost/price reduction relative to the 7800X3D so even in a vacuum the 5800X3D makes sense, so it definitely does to a lot of people already on AM4. Not everyone wants to change board/RAM and take a hex core over an octo core, and one that is going to win some against Zen 3 due to the higher IPC but lose others when the v-cache is beneficial. DDR5 pricing is down but it's still higher, and some people already have a lot of RAM on DDR4 and it'd be costly to replace. AND good AM5 boards are still rather pricey. The 5800X3D is priced well for what it is; it's just not for everyone. Personally, I'd only shift platforms if I'm getting an upgrade I can't get on my current one.
£289 for 5800x3D
£364 for 7800x3D
£213 for 7600 non x with cooler.
7600 has similar gaming performance on average to 5800x3D
If building new you can get on 7600 build for less than 5800x3D one or you can have 32GB or RAM instead of 16 and match the price of 5800x3D.
5800x3D is an amazing CPU that had perfect reviews but it holds the price too high for too long and price to performance is not that great in my opinion. Not even as an upgrade option when DDR5 and AM5 mobos dropped in price so heavily.
Very often the 5800X3D vs 7800X3D is the difference between being able to afford a higher end GPU and not, opting for AM5 at this stage is just too early because there isn't enough justification yet. The performance is there, but not the value. The only justifiable reason to go higher than the 5800X3D is the RTX 4090, essentially.
- The upgrade cost to the 5800x3D is about £300.
- the 5800x3D + B550 mobo + 32GB DDR4 3600MHz RAM = £460
- 7600 + B650 mobo + 32GB DDR5 5600MHz RAM = £450.
I recently faced this decision and couldn't justify the price of the 5800x3D when, for just £150 more, I could transition to a new platform and have the flexibility to upgrade to the 8800x3D and/or 9800x3D in the future. Both options are viable but it just felt bad to spend £300 for such a small upgrade and to not have any option for further upgrades.
Cheers mate
It's even better value if you're already on the AM4 socket, and a lot of people are these days because the last few years have seen more system upgrades than ever because of AMD bringing back the competition.
We also don't know where the future of AM5 is headed, since there's a possibility that this socket may only last 2 or 3 generations before they have to change it again, all depends on where the direction of the industry goes as Windows 12 is going to be baked with AI, which Intel is preparing for with Meteor Lake's NPUs.
AMD hasn't confirmed nor actually promised how far socket AM5 will go yet, and depending on how things go it could require a whole new socket and leave you in the same situation as Intel 12~14th gen users.
My 10850K will probably be running until the day it croaks.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html
And that's underselling the 5800X3D if anything, as they don't have an undervolted result in there (if you're wondering how much that does, check the 7000 series X3D results which show stock and undervolt), and almost all 5800X3Ds undervolt very well.
The 7600X isn't far behind it, mind you, but it's not the same, let alone better. And you have two less cores. To some people, changing something they already have to spend more on RAM and do the same on board (or get a lesser one) since boards are also more costly for a slight downgrade isn't as attractive of an option.
The Ryzen 5s in the Zen 4 family are great for those looking to get in the door on the newest platform who aren't on either AM4 or AM5. But I highly disagree with the 5800X3D being too costly for those on AM4.
As I said, I (and probably, most people) generally change platforms when you get a sizable uplift, not the moment a sometimes a downgrade but maybe sometimes better becomes slightly better in terms of pricing. All that means is outsiders (those on neither platform) are better off buying into the newer one over the older one. Not that every AM4 owner should be ditching their stuff for AM5. The day I can get an upgrade on my AM4 stuff that is sizable enough and cheap enough is when I'll do that. And AM5 still higher board costs, higher RAM prices, and more difficulty running higher RAM capacities at high frequencies. Not all of us on AM4 only have 16 GB. I haven't had that little RAM since DDR3 days.
And personally, considering:
- The issue with X3D CPUs being damaged on ASUS and Gigabyte motherboards earlier this year due to AMD's BIOS issues and lack of control over what their partners are doing with it
- My own experiences with Gigabyte's rather poor AM4 motherboard BIOS that I had displeasure with on 2 different motherboards with different systems
- Intel on the way to fixing performance issues with E-cores
I wouldn't really consider AM5 at all until AMD actually does something about their firmware, because I haven't had any issues at all with firmware since switching back to Intel a few years ago, and the X3D issue was a catastrophic blunder that could've been prevented if AMD did what needed to be done.The most important thing is that the hardware works, and they're still having issues with firmware on AM4, exactly why I believe that Intel's way of keeping support shorter than they do can make things a lot easier for their partners to make their BIOS work consistently better without unnecessary bugs, but they won't because it's a major selling point over Intel to convince people that you can use the same motherboard for 5 years and it'll still work, but they're putting all the pressure on the people who actually have to make that work. They further forced them to extend support on 300 series boards to 5000 series and I've seen a few posts online about people not having 5000 series CPUs POST in a system with a BIOS that's supposed to support it, and AM4 BIOS updates usually take months with the older boards because most of the focus is on 500 and 600 series motherboards.
TL;DR for that last chunk -- AMD needs to do more than just pander to the end user for attention, they need to actually deliver something solid. Generational support is taking too much priority over the quality of their firmware.
The X3Ds, on average, perform a generation higher in gaming terms. Outside gaming that obviously doesn't apply, but in gaming it absolutely does. You will likely see this when the 9000 series launches and the 7800X3D (and 7900X3D/7950X3D) trade victories with the non-X3D parts. It won't be until the 9800X3D launches that there's a firm victor on AMD's side.
Anyway, since C1REX said "average", then I figured the bigger the suite of stuff involved, the better. Because that's how averages work. And as far as I know, Tom's Hardware has about the largest suite of things tested to arrive at its CPU rankings.
Even most other outlets in smaller suites of stuff tested (such as in single part reviews) paint a rather similar picture anyway, where the5800X3D is generally seen as rather similar to the 7000 series non-X3D in gaming on average. Saying it's similar to a 7600 isn't entirely wrong... but the thing is the higher SKUs in the 7000 series (sans the X3Ds) are only marginally faster so the whole series may as well be similar. And so is the 5800X3D to the entire series.
It's all splitting hairs. Whether the 5800X3D is slightly faster than the 7600 or merely equal, you wouldn't change from AM4 where you can get a 5800X3D alone to AM5 where you need a new board and RAM with the CPU just to get...a 7600. At least, I sure wouldn't. The 5800X3D is such a good value the only thing I'd even move to AM5 for is the 7800X3D... and that's only 14% faster than the 5800X3D, for more than 14% of the increased cost. It's why I'm waiting for the Zen 5 X3D at earliest.
This adds some perspective.
See, the 7800X3D makes sense for you. It's a bigger gain than the AM4 platform can give you. I agree with this as it's the only thing I'd move to AM5 right now for (unless you had a need for the high core counts of the Ryzen 9s, which is another place AM5 is viable). But if I'm on AM4, none of the Ryzen 5s or Ryzen 7s that aren't an X3D look attractive when the 5800X3D can match them and do it on my current platform.
Also, I had a 3700X and moved to a 5800X3D. Massive, massive difference in Minecraft, and the 3700X wasn't even a slouch but it was a clear difference. Other CPU heavy games should be similar. You'll probably love your 7800X3D. Zen 2 was great, and it's still more than enough, but the new stuff is also definitely faster.
If these two CPUs do release, I don't think I see the point of the 5700X3D in particular though. It's actually going to lose to the 5600X3D a lot, and probably not cost much less than the 5800X3D. So why would anyone want it? But if the 5500X3D is 65W or more specifically if it's available globally, it will have a point despite the 5600X3D existing.