AMD Readies Ryzen 5 9600X3D to Spice Up the Mid-range

[btarunr]

AMD is giving finishing touches to the Ryzen 5 9600X3D processor, which could improve the company's standing in the mid-range, against Intel's Core i5-14600K and Core Ultra 5 245K. This came to light when AMD inadvertently leaked the SKU in its processor support list for the recently launched Radeon AI R9700 graphics card. The Ryzen 5 9600X3D will likely be a 6-core/12-thread processor based on the "Granite Ridge" silicon with 3D V-Cache memory. The processor is based on the latest "Zen 5" microarchitecture.

3D V-Cache is 64 MB of stacked cache on top of the 32 MB on-die cache, for a total of 96 MB last-level cache. Clock speeds of the 9600X3D could end up similar to those of the 9600X, given that AMD has changed the way the L3D (3D V-Cache die) stacks with the CCD (CPU complex die), inverting them, such that the L3D serves as a base tile for the CCD on top, giving the 9600X3D similar thermal and overclocking characteristics to the regular 9600X. The introduction of 3D V-Cache could significantly improve the gaming performance of the 9600X3D over the 9600X, giving gamers in the sub-$300 processor market segment a compelling alternative to the i5-14600K and the 245K.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[_roman_]

The interesting parts always come late from AMD.

 

[Falck]

This could be a nice drop-in upgrade for my son. Curious about reviews vs 7600x.

 

[mb194dc]

They're barely selling any chips that don't have 3D in the title due to misleading reviews showing edge use cases...When in real world usage the much cheaper non x3d chips are going to be identical or even better. It'd be nice to see blind play-test videos in real world conditions with different CPUs rather than "canned benchmarks" which aren't necessarily representative of real world usage.

 

[csendesmark]

The interesting parts always come late from AMD.

Personally I am not interested buying lower core count CPU-s - but the 9800X3D came quite early in the 9000 series product line
But it is nice that AMD still providing this

 

[beautyless]

Oh! please, where are Ryzen 3 and Athlon 7000G?

 

[Denver]

They're barely selling any chips that don't have 3D in the title due to misleading reviews showing edge use cases...When in real world usage the much cheaper non x3d chips are going to be identical or even better. It'd be nice to see blind play-test videos in real world conditions with different CPUs rather than "canned benchmarks" which aren't necessarily representative of real world usage.

They're selling well, much more than X3D.
Don't let DYI fool you, the bulk of CPU sales are with OEMs.


The reason for launching a X3D hexa-core (in limited quantities) is that obviously the stacking process generates its share of defective dies. AMD is putting an end to something that was accumulating unused, no problem in my opinion.

 

[AggressiveCombo]

Oh! please, where are Ryzen 3 and Athlon 7000G?

I heard somewhere that they don't do Ryzen 3 anymore because their yields have gotten good enough that it wouldn't be profitable for them

 

[Denver]

I heard somewhere that they don't do Ryzen 3 anymore because their yields have gotten good enough that it wouldn't be profitable for them

AMD Ryzen 3 8300G Specs

Phoenix2, 4 Cores, 8 Threads, 3.4 GHz, 65 W

www.techpowerup.com

They release Ryzen 3 APUs to close this gap, but I think it's limited to OEMs and MSRP looks pretty bad. What fills this low-end space is AM4 tbh.

 

[Prime2515102]

So Borderlands 4 pre-ordering was announced recently revealing an 8-core requirement for the minimum specs. Are <8-core CPU's like this about to become obsolete for gaming, or is Gearbox just trying to make sure their game runs well?

 

[napata]

They're barely selling any chips that don't have 3D in the title due to misleading reviews showing edge use cases...When in real world usage the much cheaper non x3d chips are going to be identical or even better. It'd be nice to see blind play-test videos in real world conditions with different CPUs rather than "canned benchmarks" which aren't necessarily representative of real world usage.

They'll be identical in GPU limited scenarios but CPU limited scenarios really aren't "edge use cases". Pleny of games are extremely CPU limited. Even in GPU limited scenarios the better the CPU the better the frametimes often are.

 

[Hyderz]

So Borderlands 4 pre-ordering was announced recently revealing an 8-core requirement for the minimum specs. Are <8-core CPU's like this about to become obsolete for gaming, or is Gearbox just trying to make sure their game runs well?

Nah 8 cores will be fine, but I think in a year or two me might start to see 6 cores hitting 90% cpu usage on more titles… currently starfield has 75% cpu usage amd has to up its core count for next gen cpu and i think intel is readying more than 8p cores

 

[Chrispy_]

I'll be curious to see which games the 9600X3D is slower than the 9700X.

We're still at the point where 6 cores is enough for most games, but depending on the selection of games tested, the 9600X3D gaming advantage over models with less cache and more cores could be dwindling.

I'm interested not because I'm trying to build a 6-core gaming rig, but to see which games are using >6 cores. It's an indicator of how soon we need Zen 6 and the equivalent single-CCD 12-core X3D variant.

 

[cyberloner]

long life am4

 

[Phayzon]

The reason for launching a X3D hexa-core (in limited quantities) is that obviously the stacking process generates its share of defective dies. AMD is putting an end to something that was accumulating unused, no problem in my opinion.

Why would they go unused? The 9900X3D exists.

 

[Daven]

I heard somewhere that they don't do Ryzen 3 anymore because their yields have gotten good enough that it wouldn't be profitable for them

Core 3 is also gone maybe for the same reason.

Why would they go unused? The 9900X3D exists.

Sometimes there can be one or more defective cores on a die. Rather than throw them in the trash, a company can stock pile these defective parts for a later lower core count part release. Since chips don’t go bad like food, companies can take their time doing this.

 

[authorized]

So Borderlands 4 pre-ordering was announced recently revealing an 8-core requirement for the minimum specs. Are <8-core CPU's like this about to become obsolete for gaming, or is Gearbox just trying to make sure their game runs well?

There's no way it will run better on 2700x than on 7600x

 

[Legacy-ZA]

6 Cores is not a number I wish to be stuck on, in many cases 6 cores have become saturated. I don't see how X3D can save 6 cores going forward, I would pay $200 at most for this. Even $350 for an 8 core today is pushing it, in some scenarios they too are being saturated.

 

[Fatalfury]

could be another china only or microcenter exclusive just like ryzen 5 7600x3d which isn't even mentioned in the list.

 

[JustBenching]

I'll be curious to see which games the 9600X3D is slower than the 9700X.

We're still at the point where 6 cores is enough for most games, but depending on the selection of games tested, the 9600X3D gaming advantage over models with less cache and more cores could be dwindling.

I'm interested not because I'm trying to build a 6-core gaming rig, but to see which games are using >6 cores. It's an indicator of how soon we need Zen 6 and the equivalent single-CCD 12-core X3D variant.

Are there really any aaa games that don't use more than 6 cores?

 

[Onasi]

Are there really any aaa games that don't use more than 6 cores?

Most games on newer engines are at least capable of using more than 6 cores, sure, but, firstly - we are talking 12 threads here via SMT as well and, secondly, the better question is how many of those games have a noticeable performance delta between 6 and 8 (or more) core CPUs when using entry to mid-tier GPUs. After all, nobody is pairing chips like this one with a 5090. I reckon for it’s intended purpose it’s just fine It’s especially a banger for people who want a budget-ish setup for esports titles since those don’t really hit many cores hard, but the 3D cache will help with mins and overall stability, which is important there.

 

[JustBenching]

the better question is how many of those games have a noticeable performance delta between 6 and 8 (or more) core CPUs

Yeap,that's where I was going. But that cannot really be tested cause we don't have any CPUs with more than 8P cores in a single die. Best approximation would be ecores - in which case im seeing around a ~10% extra performance by having ecores on in core heavy games.

 

[LastDudeALive]

So Borderlands 4 pre-ordering was announced recently revealing an 8-core requirement for the minimum specs. Are <8-core CPU's like this about to become obsolete for gaming, or is Gearbox just trying to make sure their game runs well?

That's not how it works. IPC improvement gen-on-gen adds more multithreading power.

For instance, the Ryzen 5 5600X matched the Ryzen 7 3700X in multithreading benchmarks, despite having two less cores. The IPC improvement from Zen 2 to Zen 3 more than made up for it. Same thing happened from Zen 3 to Zen 4 (Ryzen 5000 to Ryzen 7000).

With the minimum specs being a Ryzen 7 2700X and the recommended being a Ryzen 7 5800X, a Ryzen 5 5600X or up will be more than enough.

Also, system requirements should always be taken with a grain of salt. Game devs typically don't have 15 different CPUs and 20 different GPUs of different generations they can test their game on.

 

[jaszy]

Will be better than non 3D in alot of stuff (IE: esports), but games that leverage cores will prob still be better off with dual CCD.

I used to saturate a non 3D 5800x before swapping to a 12900k combo that I got for a really good price brand new back in 2023.

5800X would end up dipping FPS with multiple programs open. Feel like it was due to single CCD memory data path and single rank config. The 3900X I had prior was more stable (dual CCD sharing memory) but obviously less FPS. More akin to a Skylake CPU.

If I go back to AMD, its 100% going to be dual CCD.

 

[Squared]

The introduction of 3D V-Cache could significantly improve the gaming performance of the 9600X3D over the 9600X, giving gamers in the sub-$300 processor market segment a compelling alternative to the i5-14600K and the 245K.

I think it's competing against the 265K which is available for well under $300.

Intel's Core Ultra 7 265K and 265KF CPUs Dip Below $250

Intel's high-end "Arrow Lake" processors have just become significantly more affordable, with the Core Ultra 7 265K and 265KF now priced below $250 US at major American retailers. In recent weeks, Intel has officially reduced its suggested retail prices from $399 to $309 and from $384 to $294...

www.techpowerup.com

I get that these are the fastest gaming cores, and for only gaming on only games available today it's a reasonable value, but outside of gaming the Intel cores compete pretty well and it's likely future games will try to use more cores. This is 6/12 cores threads, against the much cheaper 245K with 6+8 P+E cores or the 265K with 8+12 P+E cores. Below $300 it'd be very difficult to sell me an AMD CPU. Even the 9700X is $305 and without V-cache it doesn't have a single-threaded edge over Intel to make up for the lack of multithreaded performance.