AMD Ryzen 9 5900X: What Real Users Actually Think

The X3D's have more cache which some games benefit heavily from. There's no reason to go up higher in the 5000 series unless you need the extra cores (production level work).

I remember fist fighting people at Micro Center for the chance to buy one of these at $550 when they came out. Feels like it's been ages.

For production work... more cores more better. Plus, 5900x boosts high for zen 3, and runs fairly cool.

The 5800x3d claps the 5900/50x in games.

5800x is a single ccx with a full 8 cores, and it runs hot. 5900x has two ccx with 6 cores each (2 disabled), so the heat is spread across the heatspreader more evenly. If you're trying to upgrade an AM4 board for a workload that can use more cores (ie, not games) the 5900x at $200 is a good deal.

I think the 5800x3d is about 13% faster than the 5900x in CS:Go. The thing is, that specifically the non AAA games most often benefit the most from the 3D cache. Often the average isn't even much better, but the 1% lows are a lot higher resulting in a smoother gaming experience.

12 cores and 24 threads at 4Ghz for $200 is actually insane. Nearly 1TFLOP in a single chip FOR $200?!

That depends if you're using your PC for gaming. I'd get the 5800x3d if gaming is the priority, and if you're using it for more than gaming go with the 5900x.

It was a great cpu when it came out and its still good today.

I would only recommend the 5800x3d if you're a big time MMO player or pure gamer who does little else. In other games that are properly optimized or more modern, there is little discernible difference between the 5900x and the 5800x3d for performance.

One of my least favorite parts of this subreddit is how many people only look at 'number bigger' and completely forget that people use computers for lots of different things and play lots of different games and depending on which software you run, there are genuinely like four different CPUs that would be 'the best in socket' for you personally.

Use this for Lightroom and dxo pureraw. Though the GPU gets the lions share of the load it's nice not having the whole computer screech to a halt.

For gaming a 5800X3D, with all 8 cores on one CCD and a load of cache, would've been a better gaming CPU choice.

Be careful about how old the advice is, 5800X3D destroys the 5900X in gaming.

What are your primary uses for your PC? Gaming? Get the 5800X3D. Thread-heavy professional work? 5900X.

I paid $550 for this on release year. It's been fantastic for processing stuff like media, photos, videos, etc. At this price, it's pretty much a steal to me but I don't recommend this if all you are doing is gaming. I really like the low temperatures this thing puts out in idle.

5800X3D doesn't just have higher average frames, it has better 1% lows and more consistent frame times. Those are things that are arguably more important for gaming.

The 5900X is plenty for the games you listed, I have it as well and it delivers very good performance in more demanding games (Cyberpunk, Battlefield 2042, Baldurs Gate 3 at 1080p). It's still a very good part, just keep it.

It's not the best choice for gaming, you should have got 5800X3D since its only for gaming, 5900x is slower than both for gaming.

For gaming definitely go with x3D. 5900x just a higher clocked 5600x in most games.

As someone that had a 5900x and went to a 5800X3D, it greatly depends on the games you personally play. I did not have a need for the extra threads and a lot of the games I play see huge performance gains from the extra cache. This is at 1440p using a 3080 TI.

For gaming, the fastest AMD CPU for gaming is the 5800X3D. The 5900X doesn't do much for gaming over the 5800X.

5950x has better single core (although it is basically the same) and 5800x3d is better for gaming 100% of the time.

Multi CCD CPUs have higher latency when communicating across CCDs which can introduce micro stutters. It's gonna be fine but a 8 core CPU would have been a better option when it's just for gaming, even without the X3D part.

The 5900X is probably the single least logical gaming CPU on AM4. The 5800X3D is vastly faster, the 5950X is slightly faster, the 5800X is the same speed or faster due to not having inter-CCD latency, and the 5600 is 95% of the gaming performance for about 1/3rd the price.

Cancelled my 5800x3D order for this. I do lots of video editing as well as gaming, would prefer the shorter render times.

I use the 5900x with my rx9070xt and I can run literally every game I play with maxed out graphics as well as ray tracing maxed out. For example I can run Cyberpunk with everything set to ultra and ray tracing set to psycho and still hit upwards to 100fps+ in most situations.

Made a massive difference for me, moving from a 5900x to the 5800X3D, though I do VR sim racing so it's a bit exaggerated (massive frame rate gains and even more importantly, way fewer frame drops).

I had a 4090 + 5900x up until this time last year when I upgraded to a 9800x3D (keeping the 4090) and also play at 4k - the performance improvements really were not big or impressive in most cases. A few, more CPU dependent, games saw some improvements but the gains were mostly unimpressive otherwise IMO.

The 5900x, 5950x, 5800x3D, 5700x3D can and will run anything in the coming decade. I can not see that change. If you pair it with good enough RAM (3200/3600+) You're set.

The 5900x is pointless if all you do is game. Either save a ton of money and get the 5600, or if you want to max out am4 gaming performance, get the 5800x3d.

12 cores will just age better, and zen 3 cores are good ones.

5800x3d for gaming, 5900x for production, if you do both then you need to start researching specific apps and games or weigh if you play more or work more.

I have a 5900x with a 3060ti. It runs everything I play at average 60fps with 1%lows at 40fps @1440p and games settings maxed. If you are not a pure gamer and use it for production or some multitasking, I think the extra cores will end up helping you.

No, the difference is not that big in gaming in general. There are few titles that benefit from the 5800x3D cache by a lot, but on the other hand some games don't care at all. For production it's quite clear that 5900x have the advantage. Single core is also higher due to frequency.

Consider getting a better performing cooler. The Pure Rock 2 will be marginal if the 5900x is under full load; the Dark Rock Pro 4 will keep temps much lower.

Pure Rock 2 isn't enough for the 5900X. If you want a cheap cooler that's black, buy a Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120mm Black.

The biggest difference should be on the 1% Lows. You can expect the 5800X3D to be much faster in there, like at least 20%, up to 40% in extreme cases. On the average frames, the difference should be less extreme, like ~10% on average, but up to 25% in some outliers. Would I be happy to have a 5900X? Absolutely. But would I choose it over a 5800X3D for gaming? Nope.

I use a 5900x and 7900 xtx combo and have yet to play a game that really stretched the 5900x's legs. I play at 2160p.

I played with my 5900x and 4090 for almost 3 years and while some graphically intensive single player titles were fine, I was constantly met with CPU bottleneck in almost every online game in existence. Sometimes it was so bad, that the 4090 was running at 30/40% usage, even with all the graphics cranked up.

For pure gaming 5800x3d is better but 5900x is overall a better cpu if you do things apart from gaming. Performance wise 5900x is only slightly behind 5800x3d, and that too in few games.

My 5900X's CPU usage is quite low in all games in my library. Nothing used more than say 40% CPU per core. Even Forza Horizon runs fine at 110fps on 4K ultra. As long as you don't play CSGO or other competitive games at 400fps+ then you're safe.

I never ran into any problems in productivity, but I know those CPUs get hot, so I bought me an Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360 rev 4 with the offset brackets using Arctic MX-6 thermal paste and it runs real cool. Ran a Cinebench r23 30-minute throttle test and scored 23,238 mc.