Ryzen 7000 / Zen 4 Owner's Club

[Alex]

I want to use this thread as a place to discuss the new Zen4 CPUs from AMD, whether it be non-X, X or X3D CPUs as well as the relating motherboards. As this platform becomes more common and as we get our hands on them, I'll start to document and fill out my experiences with them and all the oddities and nuances that will inevitably come from a new platform like this.

 

This thread can serve as a place for owners to share their experiences, issues, overclocking, tips, and troubleshooting steps.

 

The initial announcement for the Zen 4 CPUs:

 

 

 

Zen 4 CPUs as of 2023:

	Cores / Threads	Boost Clock	TDP	Cache (L2+L3)	Launch Price (USD)
Ryzen 9 7950X3D	16C/32T	5.7 GHz	120W	144MB	$699
Ryzen 9 7950X	16C/32T	5.7 GHz	170W	80MB	$699
Ryzen 9 7900X3D	12C/24T	5.6 GHz	120W	140MB	$599
Ryzen 9 7900X	12C/24T	5.6 GHz	170W	76MB	$549
Ryzen 9 7900	12C/24T	5.4 GHz	65W	76MB	$429
Ryzen 7 7800X3D	8C/16T	5.0 GHz	120W	104MB	$449
Ryzen 7 7700X	8C/16T	5.4 GHz	105W	40MB	$399
Ryzen 7 7700	8C/16T	5.3 GHz	65W	40MB	$329
Ryzen 5 7600X	6C/12T	5.3 GHz	105W	38MB	$299
Ryzen 5 7600	6C/12T	5.1 GHz	65W	38MB	$229

 

 

 

 

Edited February 27, 2023 by Alex

[maddangerous]

I'm interested to see how this platform does (haven't fired up my sig rig yet).

 

I'm also interested to see what happens with the x3d parts, given the extra cache is only on one CCD. Hoping there isn't an issue similar to the scheduler problems on intel 12th gen.

 

Anyone here running Zen 4 on linux yet? How is that?

 

Also, nice S2K! I'll have to start a build thread for my car as well ha.

Edited February 26, 2023 by maddangerous

[bonami2]

@Alex Great idea   I wonder if you should add 7000 serie to the title. For some reason zen 4 make me think about 5000 serie. Damn number scheme. 

[Alex]

23 hours ago, bonami2 said:

@Alex Great idea   I wonder if you should add 7000 serie to the title. For some reason zen 4 make me think about 5000 serie. Damn number scheme. 

That's a very good idea, just updated it now and added a ton of tags too haha.

 

 

Just bought a X670E Hero board, already got 4x16GB DIMMs of DDR5 waiting - just waiting on the CPU now. Going to try and buy one ASAP so hopefully I don't encounter any stocking issues.

[bonami2]

30 minutes ago, Alex said:

That's a very good idea, just updated it now and added a ton of tags too haha.

 

 

Just bought a X670E Hero board, already got 4x16GB DIMMs of DDR5 waiting - just waiting on the CPU now. Going to try and buy one ASAP so hopefully I don't encounter any stocking issues.

Good idea probably going to be sold out fast on the x3d

[Alex]

Some early reviews coming out:

 

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D Vs Intel Core i9-13900K: Which Is Best For PC Gaming?

WWW.FORBES.COM

---

Today marks the release of AMD's Ryzen 9 7950X3D and Ryzen 9 7900X3D processors, which will be followed by the cheaper Ryzen 7...

 

[Alex]

And some more:

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D Review - Best of Both Worlds

WWW.TECHPOWERUP.COM

---

The Ryzen 9 7950X3D is the spearhead of the AMD Zen 4 X3D lineup. In our performance review we test AMD's new 16-core flagship with...

 

[J7SC_Orion]

11 hours ago, Alex said:

And some more:

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D Review - Best of Both Worlds

WWW.TECHPOWERUP.COM

---

The Ryzen 9 7950X3D is the spearhead of the AMD Zen 4 X3D lineup. In our performance review we test AMD's new 16-core flagship with...

 

 

I read that one over coffee at breakfast - quite an impressive summary, as usual for TPU.

[Fluxmaven]

So I have had both my AM5 setups for a while now.

 

Picked up a 7700X back in November and a 7900X in January. Due to the magic of Microcenter I picked them both up for just over what one 7950X3D will cost. ($348+418). Each came with a 32GB DDR5 6000 kit as well.

 

For motherboards I have a Crosshair X670E Gene and B650E-I Strix. 

 

As far as issues go, just the slow boot times that AMD typically has on new platforms. I remember when I switched from a 4790K to a 3900X being shocked by the boot times. Eventually was mostly cleared up by BIOS updates. 

 

The big reason I was interested in picking up more AyyyMD platforms is the power efficiency. I had the 7700X running on the test bench in eco mode paired with a 6950XT and had no problems running it on an SF600.

 

I'm interested in the X3D chips, but probably wont pick one up till the next refresh. 

[J7SC_Orion]

28 minutes ago, Fluxmaven said:

So I have had both my AM5 setups for a while now.

 

Picked up a 7700X back in November and a 7900X in January. Due to the magic of Microcenter I picked them both up for just over what one 7950X3D will cost. ($348+418). Each came with a 32GB DDR5 6000 kit as well.

 

For motherboards I have a Crosshair X670E Gene and B650E-I Strix. 

 

As far as issues go, just the slow boot times that AMD typically has on new platforms. I remember when I switched from a 4790K to a 3900X being shocked by the boot times. Eventually was mostly cleared up by BIOS updates. 

 

The big reason I was interested in picking up more AyyyMD platforms is the power efficiency. I had the 7700X running on the test bench in eco mode paired with a 6950XT and had no problems running it on an SF600.

 

I'm interested in the X3D chips, but probably wont pick one up till the next refresh. 

  

How do you like the Asus CH X670E Gene ?

If I decide to split the next work + play build more than I originally planned (add a new work-dedicated HEDT), then I could focus a 7950X/3D 'play build' on s.th. like the X670E Gene with 2x 32GB DDR5 sticks...if I do not split the hardware re. functions, then it likely will be the Asus X670E ProArt (dual networking, 2.5 & 10 gb).

[Fluxmaven]

2 minutes ago, J7SC_Orion said:

  

How do you like the Asus CH X670E Gene ?

If I decide to split the next work + play build more than I originally planned (add a new work-dedicated HEDT), then I could focus a 7950X/3D 'play build' on s.th. like the X670E Gene with 2x 32GB DDR5 sticks...if I do not split the hardware re. functions, then it likely will be the Asus X670E ProArt (dual networking, 2.5 & 10 gb).

I love it.

I honestly didn't plan on getting a 2nd AMD setup, I wanted a Raptor Lake setup to keep on the test bench. However when I saw the Gene I just had to have it. Something about a smaller board packed with features lol. I haven't really had time to push either of the setups much but I do want to play with the Gene more. The ITX rig will just be a set it and forget it build. 

 

Being that it's going to live on the test bench it does have some nice convenience features. The Dimm.2 is nice since you don't have to pull GPUs to swap SSDs. It also has a remote push button to pop the PCIe latch which makes it so much easier to swap GPUs around. 

 

We used an X570 ProArt board in my roommates rendering PC. It's been a great board and I'm sure the X670E variant is very nice as well. Also have a couple of the Monitors from the ProArt lineup that I love as well.  

[J7SC_Orion]

22 minutes ago, Fluxmaven said:

I love it.

I honestly didn't plan on getting a 2nd AMD setup, I wanted a Raptor Lake setup to keep on the test bench. However when I saw the Gene I just had to have it. Something about a smaller board packed with features lol. I haven't really had time to push either of the setups much but I do want to play with the Gene more. The ITX rig will just be a set it and forget it build. 

 

Being that it's going to live on the test bench it does have some nice convenience features. The Dimm.2 is nice since you don't have to pull GPUs to swap SSDs. It also has a remote push button to pop the PCIe latch which makes it so much easier to swap GPUs around. 

 

We used an X570 ProArt board in my roommates rendering PC. It's been a great board and I'm sure the X670E variant is very nice as well. Also have a couple of the Monitors from the ProArt lineup that I love as well.  

 

Thanks for that info. I saw DerBauer ogle the Gene when it was introduced and it has been in the back of my mind ever since. A nice set of Dual Rank 2x 32 GB low timing DDR5 would go well with it (or the ProArt). Decisions, decisions...

[neurotix]

I was going to get the 7900x3d for benching and gaming, and bought a Crosshair X670E Hero and G.skill Flare X DDR5 6000 cas 36. Found out the Hero board had like over one inch tall heatsinks on the top VRMs that would not fit in my case (midtower with a thick AIO) returned the Hero board, will be waiting a month to get nearly $700 back from Amazon

 

Now that reviews are out, and it's only 6% faster than Intel, but from what I understand the review guidelines from AMD told them to sandbag the Intel and only run 6000MHz memory on it (correct me if I'm wrong), yet users on this site like Bastiaan_NL are running Intel with memory speeds approaching 8000MHz, it means Intel is still faster with more highly clocked memory.

 

I won't be upgrading. I was hoping for a 10% IPC improvement clock for clock, possibly more over my 5900x because it boosts higher, and an additional 25% performance improvement in games and benches. Making it at minimum 35% faster than what I have. But since that is not the case, and you also can't manually or per-CCX overclock it for benching, I'll continue to wait.

 

How much improvement would I get going to a 7900x factoring in it can boost to 5.6GHz vs 5.15GHz on my 5900x?

 

Pics of the beautiful board I had to return. I have also looked at Asus other X670 boards and seen a few B650 boards and they all look like they have too tall VRM heatsinks on the top to be able to clear my rad fans.

[Nikado7]

This is my concern.  What I love about my 5800X3D that I noticed compared to my 12700k was it was so consistent.  I was always looking at the fps overlay on intel cause it was slowing down, but with the amd I never was, it was so consistent.   Looking at this chart though.........yeah I really don't wanna go back to that life.   Even if its just one game, its not what I wanna see for $700.  

Edited February 28, 2023 by Nikado7

[Alex]

6 hours ago, neurotix said:

I was going to get the 7900x3d for benching and gaming, and bought a Crosshair X670E Hero and G.skill Flare X DDR5 6000 cas 36. Found out the Hero board had like over one inch tall heatsinks on the top VRMs that would not fit in my case (midtower with a thick AIO) returned the Hero board, will be waiting a month to get nearly $700 back from Amazon

 

Now that reviews are out, and it's only 6% faster than Intel, but from what I understand the review guidelines from AMD told them to sandbag the Intel and only run 6000MHz memory on it (correct me if I'm wrong), yet users on this site like Bastiaan_NL are running Intel with memory speeds approaching 8000MHz, it means Intel is still faster with more highly clocked memory.

 

I won't be upgrading. I was hoping for a 10% IPC improvement clock for clock, possibly more over my 5900x because it boosts higher, and an additional 25% performance improvement in games and benches. Making it at minimum 35% faster than what I have. But since that is not the case, and you also can't manually or per-CCX overclock it for benching, I'll continue to wait.

 

How much improvement would I get going to a 7900x factoring in it can boost to 5.6GHz vs 5.15GHz on my 5900x?

 

Pics of the beautiful board I had to return. I have also looked at Asus other X670 boards and seen a few B650 boards and they all look like they have too tall VRM heatsinks on the top to be able to clear my rad fans.

Spoiler

 

This is like deja vu, I also just got this motherboard to pair along with my 7950X3D. Barely managed to snag one before they went out of stock at Newegg

[bonami2]

The only thing i hate currently is 99% of game use less than 2 core. I wonder if a big open world that would be tuned to use all core would perform better on a 7950x 7950x3d or 13900ks

[J7SC_Orion]

20 minutes ago, bonami2 said:

The only thing i hate currently is 99% of game use less than 2 core. I wonder if a big open world that would be tuned to use all core would perform better on a 7950x 7950x3d or 13900ks

 

...yeah, prime candidate for hammering just a few cores is my fav, MSFS 2020. Graph below (originally from ComputerBase.de) seems to show edge cases such as MSFS 2020 w/ RTX 4090, but I am not sure about the resolution. That sim / app also loves both fast core AND tons of cache.

 

Note the inclusion of DDR5 7200 for the Intel 13900KS...

 

 

 

[bonami2]

23 minutes ago, J7SC_Orion said:

 

...yeah, prime candidate for hammering just a few cores is my fav, MSFS 2020. Graph below (originally from ComputerBase.de) seems to show edge cases such as MSFS 2020 w/ RTX 4090, but I am not sure about the resolution. That sim / app also loves both fast core AND tons of cache.

 

Note the inclusion of DDR5 7200 for the Intel 13900KS...

 

 

 

 

 

That a real benchmark! Thank you!  13900ks perform better for once instead of being slower than the 13900k in most reviewer because their cooling is crap 

Not sure if it really multithreaded as a game. But at least we see the ram benefit and that both 7950x3d and 13900k perform about the same except for power consumption.

Edited March 1, 2023 by bonami2

[Alex]

13 hours ago, bonami2 said:

The only thing i hate currently is 99% of game use less than 2 core. I wonder if a big open world that would be tuned to use all core would perform better on a 7950x 7950x3d or 13900ks

I'm very interested to see how this impacts my performance in VR, that's my main reason for wanting to go 3D V-cache and a beefier CPU.

 

Right now I am (weirdly) CPU limited in most things with my 9900K / 1080 Ti. It'll be almost comical having a 7950X3D and 1080 Ti but I am still very interested in seeing how/what changes in terms of frame times.

 

Here's my previous session in HL2VR via FPSVR for example:

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

fpsVR Report:
App: Half-Life 2: VR Mod HMD: Index (120.000 Hz, IPD 63.2)
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (31.0.15.2849, Tavg 35.3, Tmax 38)
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-9900K CPU @ 3.60GHz (Tavg 47.7, Tmax 60)
Battery charge of controllers - @end: LC 26% RC 19%

Delivered fps: 102.07  Duration: 164.7min. Headset was active: 100%

GPU Frametimes:
Median: 5.1 ms
99th percentile: 10.3 ms
99.9th percentile: 12.3 ms
frametime <8.3ms(vsync): 94.7%

CPU frametime:
Median: 6 ms
99th percentile: 14.3 ms
99.9th percentile: 18 ms
frametime <8.3ms(vsync): 83.2%
 

Reprojection Ratio: 21.6%
Compositor Frames Dropped: 1523 or 0.1%
Max. SteamVR SS during the session: 150%
Render resolution per eye: 2468x2744(by SteamVR settings, Max. during the session)
HMD driver recommended resolution (default for SteamVR at 100%): 2016x2240)

 

 

 

 

[bonami2]

1 hour ago, Alex said:

I'm very interested to see how this impacts my performance in VR, that's my main reason for wanting to go 3D V-cache and a beefier CPU.

 

Right now I am (weirdly) CPU limited in most things with my 9900K / 1080 Ti. It'll be almost comical having a 7950X3D and 1080 Ti but I am still very interested in seeing how/what changes in terms of frame times.

 

Here's my previous session in HL2VR via FPSVR for example:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think VR is really different from 4k Same as eyefinity or TRACKIR.   Ran Half Life Alyx on my 1050ti and i5 8300h a few years ago and it ran fine.

Ported game or game that run with VORPX have often really bad performance on my end with the 6800xt

[Sir Beregond]

Still though, the AMD X3D parts have a huge efficiency win over Intel for similar performance even if the Intel still beats it with proper cooling/memory config. I'm really kinda tired of runaway power usage just to maintain "top performer" status.

 

That said, these two CCD X3D parts seem very weird to me with how they've done it. I think clearly if gaming is the main concern here, the 7800X3D is going to be the one to get, otherwise it's a waste of money unless you have other non-gaming uses for the non X3D cores, but even then, you might be better with a regular 7950X where all the cores can boost higher. 

 

I don't know, maybe just me, seems a strange release to me. Perhaps will get better similar to how Alder Lake was when it first released with the P and E cores, and there will be growing pains still on the Windows scheduler with these. A problem the 7800X3D won't have.

Edited March 1, 2023 by Sir Beregond

[bonami2]

4 minutes ago, Sir Beregond said:

Still though, the AMD X3D parts have a huge efficiency win over Intel for similar performance even if the Intel still beats it with proper cooling/memory config. I'm really kinda tired of runaway power usage just to maintain "top performer" status.

 

That said, these two CCD X3D parts seem very weird to me with how they've done it. I think clearly if gaming is the main concern here, the 7800X3D is going to be the one to get, otherwise it's a waste of money unless you have other non-gaming uses for the non X3D cores, but even then, you might be better with a regular 7950X where all the cores can boost higher. 

 

I don't know, maybe just me, seems a strange release to me. Perhaps will get better similar to how Alder Lake was when it first released with the P and E cores, and there will be growing pains still on the Windows scheduler with these. A problem the 7800X3D won't have.

I can only agree if i was building from scratch those x3d lower power usage would be welcome  

I think the mobile chip will destroy intel for sure if they release x3d mobile 8 core.

Now let pray next gen of gpu will have 150-200w tdp with 4090 performance.

[Alex]

hype

 

[J7SC_Orion]

11 hours ago, Alex said:

hype

 

 

Nice - congrats ! Now, all you have to do is optimize memory...

 

 

 

[Alex]

Lots of ups and downs. Got 4 DIMMS of DDR5 @ 6000Mhz to work just fine at 1.4v - so pretty pleased with that as the Internet seemed to lead me to believe that might be a struggle. However I have had some weird microstuttering when enabling PBO and/or curve optimizer in the BIOS (0922, the latest so far). I've just done an offest of -0.0150V to reduce the temps a bit. So far so good, running 8 hours of y-cruncher all test got the DRAM to 79c so I stopped it there. CPU max temps are super close to throttling but they don't luckily - maxes out at ~85c, ~155w and ~1.075v.