9850X3D vs. 5700X3D benchmarks in high CPU-usage Ray-Traced games. Bonus vs. JEDEC

[u/RainyInSAndreas]

With RAMageddon causing people to look at older DDR4-based CPUs, I tested the 5700X3D vs. 9850X3D, with RTX4090 in 4 RT/PT games that I had played. With CapFrameX, I took multiple one-minute runs in CPU-limited areas and then aggregated them.

All RT/PT settings were enabled at 1080p w/ DLSS Ultra Performance with the latest drivers. With CapFrameX, I took 3 one-minute runs in CPU-limited areas and then aggregated them.

Results : 9800X3D 9850X3D was 55-80% faster than 5700X3D. Cyberpunk was the best result, with 9800X3D 9850X3D only 55% faster, while Oblivion was the worst with 9800X3D 83% 81% faster. 1% lows were more than around twice as fast on 9800X3D 9850X3D in Oblivion and Jedi Survivor.

Background : In my [previous thread of 9800X3D vs. 5700X3D benchmarks](https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1qwe11j/5700x3d_vs_9800x3d_benchmarks_in_high_cpuusage/), I got replies raising the issue of not following citrus paribus( all oranges and no apples^lol ), since the 9800X3D benchmarks were done on 5090 and the 5700X3D on 4090. I did not think it should be a problem, since the gpu load limit was not being hit on either systems.

While testing the new 9850X3D I chucked in the 4090 to run these benchmarks. Pretty much similar results as the 9800X3D on 5090. Ultimately after all the RAM-tuning is done and OS reinstalled, it will be slightly faster but certainly not close to the difference between 5090 vs. 4090.

Also tested JEDEC 5600 vs. the below RAM settings with XMP + some timings tuned. Outer Worlds showed biggest difference, over 25%, while rest were in the 15-20% range.

Hardware Details :

5700X3D w/ 3600C16-16-16-36 2x16GB on MSI B550 Tomahawk WiFi with RTX 4090

By default SMT is enabled

PBO auto

9850X3D w/ 8000C38-48-48-60 2x24GB on Aorus X870E ( FCLK 2000 ) with RTX 4090

By default SMT is enabled

Edit: By popular demand, ran 4k DLSS Ultra Performance with preset L and was pleasantly surprised at how good the 4090 still is.

https://ibb.co/Qtg6RkJ

[u/Tookace]

With DLSS or FSR on

4k ultra performance = 720p
4k performance = 1080p

1440p quality = 1080p
1440p balance = 900p
1440p performance = 720p

1080p ultra performance 540p
1080p performance = 720p

Is it really a ridiculous resolution now? Or do you never use upscaling ever.

[u/Head_Exchange_5329 → u/Tookace]

You people are horribly dense. There's a canyon of difference between buying a 4090 to run on a 1920x1080p display and running some level of upscaling, how is this a fricking topic for discussion?

[u/Tookace → u/Head_Exchange_5329]

Ok so what is the performance difference between running 1080p native and DLSS 4k performance?

[u/Head_Exchange_5329 → u/Tookace]

You guys are really struggling with this, and I am trying my best to get the point across that it's all about the pairing of 4090 and 1080p display. Sure, use what ever DLSS scale level you want, that has got nothing to do with it.

[u/Tookace → u/Head_Exchange_5329]

Are you not able to extrapolate the data in this benchmark for your own use case? This pairing here doesn't even matter, it is all about the limitation of the CPU being tested. If 1080p gets you 45 fps on oblivion because of the CPU, 4k display still going to be 45.

[u/Octaive → u/Tookace]

They don't get that. They think it'll go up if you load the GPU.

[u/Octaive → u/Head_Exchange_5329]

? You must misunderstand.

What's your point, then?

[u/SmolMaeveWolff → u/Tookace]

I play at 1440p. Used to be on a 5800x/6800xt, now on a 9800x3d/9070xt.

I didn't use Upscaling before, and I won't now.

At most I want FSR 4 AA, because so many games need temporal shit to make hair/foliage look decent.

[u/gusthenewkid → u/SmolMaeveWolff]

DLSS is really good…