安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
If possible go with one of AMDs "3D" chips. Specifically I am going to recommend the 7800X3D, it sits in the same priceclass as the 7900X and delivers significantly better IPC due to its massive amount of L3 cache which can make a massive impact on gaming performance. The 7900X has 4 additional cores but they provide little or even no value for most games.
Any questions in particular?
I like that it has a built in igpu thing, but I do have a feeling the radeon drivers kind of mess with things. I can elaborate later on I suppose if you're interested.
It's still worth keeping on and I think it's still worth having.
It does get hot, so be prepared to hear your fans kick in often as soon as it gets working, unless you're good at configuring your fan curves. I am on air btw.
Not much else comes to mind really at the moment.
Gamers have no reason to buy newer Ryzen 9s or Core i9s. There's just no real benefit that makes sense, there's no logic in spending an extra 20 or so percent on a CPU that loses in games that benefit from cache and has a minor lead in games that don't. The only really large jump is CS:GO.
And the video they played at 1080p with a 4090 for benchmark purposes, it's not fully representative of the real experience that a system like that would have unless they used a 1080p 240+ Hz monitor, which would be stupid, coming from someone that used to have one of those monitors. It's a best case scenario, things even out at resolutions that people actually use the 4090 for.
I didn't know that either lol. I wonder why I haven't really heard much about them?. I'm assuming it's three main reasons.
One, because of the fallout from the 7800x3d and am5 melting cpu's thing?
Two, most people on am4 doing smarter moves and sticking with a 5800x3d or 5900x?
Three, it's usually a cores vs strictly gaming thing for a lot of people in which you'd either just go for a 7800x3d or a regular 7900x or 7950x not paying for the x3d premium?
Even now, when I hear 7800x3d I like almost immediately get this "not good" feeling that rushes over me because of that whole thing. I can't shake it. I'm not sure if it's all good now, but I'm assuming they might be safe but still not a good thing if they had to screw it's performance a bit with a bios updates as the solution.
At that point, the 7800X3D is a better gaming performer on average, while the 13700K is a better all around performer, and may perform better in some games, too.
If you're not familiar with the X3D CPUs, here's how I like to look at it. Treat them as "anywhere equal to baseline architecture performance" to "anywhere above it". Right now, generational baseline IPC performance is roughly something like this...
Intel 13th generation > Ryzen 7000 series > Intel 12th generation > Ryzen 5000 series
...But the extra cache of the X3D CPUs, when the software is cache limited, allows those CPUs to perform above their baseline performance, so in games, it's more like this on average...
Ryzen 7000X3D > Intel 13th generation > Ryzen 5000X3D > Ryzen 7000 series > Intel 12th generation > Ryzen 5000 series
How the X3D CPUs in particular perform (whether it's "only at baseline" or "above baseline") depends on whether the software is cache bottlenecked or not. Not everything is. Games sometimes are. Typical software usually is not. So a worst case scenario might look like this...
Intel 13th generation > Ryzen 7000 series > Ryzen 7000X3D > Intel 12th generation > Ryzen 5000 series > Ryzen 5000X3D
If a few games have importance to you, I would suggest trying to find benchmarks that include those games to let you see if the X3D CPUs do their magic in it. If not, the Intel route might be the easier or lazier way to go. They'll still be great in games, and better outside games too.
If I were buying a higher end gaming CPU on one of the latest platforms today, I would be looking at the 7800X3D and then cross checking it with the 13700K. The latter seems to be a bit cheaper (~$440 to ~$410 from what I'm seeing?) so I'd probably be going that way. I'm not sure what board costs are like. Both I would treat as needing top end air cooling or better. And I think intel is okay with 5,600 MHz whereas with AMD I wouldn't want to pair it with less than 6,000 MHz so as to let the IF clock run at 3,000 MHz 1:1.
It's close. If board costs favor AMD they're basically equal in cost so look at performance then to decide. If board costs favor Intel I'd probably go with the 13700K at that point for being a better value/all around performer.