Support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/hardwareunboxed
YT Membership: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCI8iQa1hv7oV_Z8D35vVuSg/join
Buy relevant products from Amazon, Newegg and others below:
AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: https://geni.us/a44Ec
AMD Ryzen 5 9600X: https://geni.us/FyvXbeW
AMD Ryzen 7 9700X: https://geni.us/M27J3o
AMD Ryzen 9 9900X: https://geni.us/dBsxB
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X: https://geni.us/FeMg
AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D: https://geni.us/FxBWD
AMD Ryzen 5 7600: https://geni.us/qGJVbZ7
AMD Ryzen 7 7700X: https://geni.us/fAfH
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X: https://geni.us/Rjlq
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X: https://geni.us/lTmCsO
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K: https://geni.us/b839wEU
Intel Core Ultra 7 265K: https://geni.us/FDXe
Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: https://geni.us/rbBBP
Intel Core i9-14900K: https://geni.us/f5Ge
These videos all explain why CPU limited CPU benchmarking is the only way:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy3w-VZyoiM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98RR0FVQeqs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkKQ4VCDL7M
Video Index
00:00 – Welcome to Hardware Unboxed
00:35 – The topic in question, 4K Benchmarks
02:39 – What sort of gamer are you?
05:36 – “We want real world results”
10:22 – What to do if you actually need to upgrade?
14:04 – Star Wars Jedi Survivor
16:07 – The Last of Us Part 1
17:58 – Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty
18:48 – Hogwarts Legacy
20:12 – Assetto Corsa Competizione
20:59 – Remnant II
21:32 – Homeworld 3
22:18 – A Plague Tale: Requiem
22:53 – Counter-Strike 2
25:04 – Starfield
25:27 – Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2
26:16 – Hitman 3
26:41 – Watch Dogs: Legion
27:07 – Star Wars Outlaws
27:20 – 14 Game Average [1080p + 4K]
29:05 – CPU Longevity Test [3950X, 5800X, 5800X3D]
29:14 – Watch Dogs Legion [2022]
30:14 – Shadow of the Tomb Raider [2022]
30:44 – Horizon Zero Dawn [2022]
31:04 – 3 Game Average [2022 Titles]
32:04 – Starfield [2023]
32:43 – Warhammer 40,000 Space Marine 2 [2024]
33:04 – Star Wars Jedi Survivor [2024]
33:34 – 3 Game Average [2024 Titles]
34:26 – Final Thoughts
Ryzen 7 9800X3D, Really Faster For Real-World 4K Gaming?
Disclaimer: Any pricing information shown or mentioned in this video was accurate at the time of video production, and may have since changed
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. We may also earn a commission on some sales made through other store links
FOLLOW US IN THESE PLACES FOR UPDATES
Twitter – http://twitter.com/hardwareunboxed
Facebook – http://facebook.com/hardwareunboxed
Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/hardwareunboxed/
Outro music by David Vonk/DaJaVo
source
I'd also like to thank Gamers Nexus Steve who wrote this for me, but we didn't end up adding it to the video. So please watch their review to support them if you haven't already: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-lFgbzU3LY
From Gamers Nexus:
We currently run tests at 1080p and 1440p for CPU gaming benchmarks, though we mostly rely on 1080p results for comparison. Although we didn't bother for the 9800X3D review, we typically publish 1-3 1440p charts in games that are still mostly CPU-bound for perspective.
There are a lot of ways to approach reviews. We view bottleneck testing as a separate content piece or follow-up, as it also starts getting into territory of functionally producing a GPU benchmark.
What matters is a consistent philosophy: Our primary philosophy is to isolate components as much as possible, then as standalone or separate feature pieces, we run 'combined' tests that mix variables in ways we wouldn't for a standardized reviews. For us, reviews are standardized, meaning all parts (more or less) follow the same test practices. Introducing more judgment calls introduces more room for inconsistency in human decision making, so we try to avoid these wherever possible to keep comparisons fair. Choosing those practices is based upon ensuring we can show the biggest differences in components with reasonably likely workloads.
A few things to remember with benchmarks that are borderline GPU-bound:
– You can no longer fully isolate how much of the performance behavior is due to the CPU, which can obscure or completely hide issues. These issues include: poor frametime pacing, inconsistent frametime delivery, in-game simulation time error due to a low-end CPU dropping animation consistency despite good frame pacing, and overall quality of the experience. This is not only because it becomes more difficult to isolate if issues such as micro stutters are caused by the CPU or GPU, but also because the limitation may completely sidestep major issues with a CPU. One example would be Total War: Warhammer 3, which has a known and specific issue with scheduling on high thread count Intel CPUs in particular. This issue can be hidden or minimized by a heavy GPU bind, and so 4K / Ultra testing would potentially mean we miss a major problem that would directly impact user experience.
– Drawing upon this: We don't test for the experience in only that game, but we use it as a representative of potentially dozens of games that could have that behavior. In the same example, we want that indicator of performance for these reasons: (1) If a user actually does just play in a CPU bind for that game, they need to know that even a high-end parts can perform poorly if CPU-bound; (2) if, in the future, a new GPU launches that shifts the bind back to the CPU, which is likely, we need to be aware of that in the original review so that consumers can plan for their build 2-3 years in the future and not feel burned by a purchase; (3) if the game may represent behavior in other games, it is important to surface a behavior to begin the conversation and search for more or deeper problems. It's not possible to test every single game — although HUB certainly tries — and so using fully CPU-bound results as an analog to a wider gaming subset means we know what to investigate, whereas a GPU bind may totally hide that (or may surface GPU issues, which are erroneously attributed to the CPU).
One thing to also remember with modern 1080p testing is that it also represents some situations for DLSS, FSR, or XeSS usage at "4K" (upscaled).
A great example of all of this is to look at common parts from 4-5 years ago, then see how they have diverged with time. If we had been GPU-bound, we'd have never known what that divergence might be.
Finally: One of the major challenges with GPU-bound benchmarks in a CPU review is that the more variable ceiling caused by intermittent GPU 'overload' means CPU results will rarely stack-up in the hierarchy most people expect. This requires additional explanation to ensure responsible use of the data, as it wouldn't be odd to have a "better" CPU (by hierarchy) below a "worse" CPU if both are externally bound.
We still think that high resolution testing is useful for separate deep dives or in GPU bottleneck or GPU review content.
joke!! total miss leading benching at 1080p.. Steve please do a benchmark at 4k ultra and please do one @8k when the 5090 comes out, just to prove that not everyone needs to upgrade from 7800x3d to a 9800x3d.. its concerning..
was about to buy the 9700x in my new build, i tipically play AAA games at 4k everything maxxed out for visual fidelity instead on high fps, do you think that's a good choice?
Thanks Steve. 😊
Over twice as many people voted in your poll for quality upscaling over the combined balanced or performance category (25% vs 11%), yet you chose balanced.
Mate, thank you for this! I have a 7800x3d and play shooters (BF2042/BO6 etc) and moded Skyrim, Cyberpunk … I play many titles exclusively on 3440x1440p.
I appreciate this review because it's good to know whether an upgrade is needed.
4k upscaled😂
I want to see it against 7800x3d not 7700x.
Upscaling is not NATIVE 4K brother……. sorry but this whole video is a wash.
Although it was discussed, I think it wasn't stressed enough that what really matters is the target frame rate. It doesn't really matter what the resolution or settings or GPU are. On the GPU side it's possible to reduce settings and resolution to get to that. On the CPU it normally isn't. 1080p on a fast GPU is an approximation (though not a perfect one) of the maximum frame rate one can expect in a game. Testing with a GPU bottleneck offers very little extra information about that, and testing only with a GPU bottleneck only offers information to people interested in a frame rate lower than was achieved in the test.
Online open world gaming benchmarks needed
I love this channel thanks for the awesome content mate.
You might have defeated your own argument slightly, but not because you're wrong in the way you test. It's just that data on Hogwarts is pretty interesting in terms of the 9800X3D showing atypical scaling behaviour. That said as this content shows you usually go back and give us more info, which is understandable given the review window
Benchmarking high-end CPUs on high resolutions and trying to determine which one is faster is like giving two powerlifters barbell with only 50kg on it to benchmark and trying to figure out who's stronger between them. You simply aren't pushing them enough for differences to show
Now show us the real real…4k without upscaling
ADD EMULATION TESTING PLEASE. Half the PC gamers I know use their PC as an advanced emulator box lol.
I honestly get a lot of crap for me Intel 285k and 4090. But it does fine for me
well.. a higher cpu may not be required for those with less requirements. It will make it "last longer" as far as future proofing.
I am pretty much aware of why reviews of CPUs are done on 1080p and I appreciate your hard work and vigorous testing, but in this video I would have liked to see some comparison between 7800x3d and 9800x3d in 1440p gaming and how viable would it be to upgrade or not. Maybe in upcoming one?!
OMG, stop explaining and show us 1440 benchmarks on the same games!.
To be fair, I totally understand where you are coming from, but as an avid 4k gamer (at least when im gaming on my personal rig) understanding what kind of performance uplift id get from upgrading from my 7800x3d to the 9800x3d in 4k even if its only a few fps is helpful
Funny. There wasn't so much discussion about that topic, when Intel CPU was on top of the charts. Maybe, because it was so long ago.
can you please compare it with 14900KS at 4K on high DRAM freq?
is 4k (balanced upscaling) rendering at 1080p or 1440p? , is this different in each game ? my sweet spot is 4k native 120 fps for single player and native 1440p at 240 fps.
360p DLSS ultra performance please!😜
I fully agree that CPU testing should be done at 1080p, but I can't help but wonder why 4K balanced was chosen to prove the point. The input resolution is closer to 1080p than it is to 4K, why not quality mode?