this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2026
127 points (100.0% liked)
Hardware
8059 readers
12 users here now
All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.
Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:
- Augmented Reality
- Gaming Laptops
- Laptops
- Linux Hardware
- Linux Phones
- Monitors
- Raspberry Pi
- Retro Computing
- Virtual Reality
Rules (Click to Expand):
-
Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about
-
Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.
-
No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.
-
Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.
-
Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).
-
If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.
Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There’s nothing outdated about it. It outruns most AM5 CPUs where you actually need the speed, it supports plenty of IO, it supports AVX2 and all sorts of platform features.
And it’s not that expensive if you can re-use RAM. Especially not expensive if you can re-use the mobo.
Full disclosure: I have a 7800X3D now. But I wouldn’t notice the difference if I had an 5800X3D 97% of the time; there’s literally one my sibling has that does all the same things, running a 7900 XTX GPU no problem.
I would certainly prefer a 5800X3D to a 7600 or even a 7700.
I don’t really see a point on upgrading it till AM6 either.
There are certain things RAM bandwidth disproportionally helps with, but these are pretty niche.
Nothing other than the date? And the platform?
Nope.
What exactly are you running (or hope to run) that you think a 5800X3D is too outdated for?
DDR5
That is not an application.
What do you need DDR5 for? Like what program, specifically?
It's nothing to do with what I "need". I don't "need" anything more than my laptop. I can play Baldurs Gate 3 on a Steam Deck but it looks and runs like balls. The later hardware I can get, the better it will run. Its about maximizing value and longevity.
Then a 5800X3D is maybe what you need.
AMD’s 3D cache is demonstrated to compensate for slower RAM. Tightened timings or lower bandwidth have proportionally less of an impact than non X3D CPUs because, in games, they are accessing RAM less, as more of it fits in cache. You can look up benchmarks proving this if you don’t believe me, or how the 5800X3D smacks 7000 series AM5 CPUs around in CPU-heavy simulation games.
It’s better than low-end AM5.
That, and the actual latency of high end DDR4 isn’t that different from DDR5.
Now. If you are encoding AV1? If you are trying to run llama.cpp hybrid inference? Yeah, raw RAM bandwidth starts to get important. But that niche does not include most games; games freaking love X3D cache.
…Though, honestly? On a Steam deck, or your desktop, RAM capacity and the 2060 are the big bottlenecks.
I used to game on a very similar system (laptop 4900HS CPU, 16GB DDR4, 2060 GPU), and my biggest problems in new games were:
GPU power
6GB RAM/16GB VRAM being too small, especially with background programs.
The only times my CPU felt insufficient was in games that wanted raw simulation performance, like modded Rimworld, Stellaris, Parkitect and such. But it was plenty for huge RPGs.
There was never a time I lamented “ugh, I wish I had DDR5.” It’s just low on the totem pole, especially now.
You're still not getting it. I won't lament anything. I still want to maximize my dollar. And that doesn't mean investing hundreds of dollars in a last-gen platform. Even if its "almost as good" now, what will it be in the future?
Future proofing isn't generally worth it, IMHO. I doubt the difference in performance between a top end am4 CPU and a top end am5 system will be great enough that one can play a game well and the other can't.
And high-end CPU power is generally only really taken advantage of by a small number of games, or at lower resolutions where the game can become CPU bound and push high framerates for high refresh rate monitors.
If you use a 1440p or 4k monitor, then an old CPU is usually more than adequate and won't be the limiting factor; it's the GPU that'll be the bottleneck.
I find it's better to wait until there's a significant enough jump in performance to where the upgrade will provide a truly meaningful benefit, and there are games on the market that truly require that extra performance.
Are you often encountering games that your currenct CPU is not able to handle?
Buying a current gen processor is not the same thing as "future proofing".
The difference is simply not whether it does or does not work. I've already explained this twice now.
Which is the opposite of what you're trying to tell me I should do...
I'm not sure I understand, you said before you were prioritizing value and longevity. AM4 is the value king, and will last for many years into the future, especially as you have an affordable upgrade path to the AM4 X3D CPUs.
AM5 would only be a meaningful upgrade if you had fairly specific requirements, which would be if you prioritize low resolutions for high FPS monitors (with at least a 180hz refresh rate or above), and were able to also afford a top end GPU so that the CPU and RAM actually become the limiting factor for what the framerate will be.
Is the above scenario what you are targeting? Because if not, an average or good value AM5 system paired with the same GPU you have now would result in very little difference in actual performance, since most games will max out your GPU long before the CPU or RAM speeds can even come into play, and that will hold true going forward as well, since future games are going to be pushing the GPU harder and harder, meaning that is almost always going to be your bottleneck unless you lower the resolution to like 720p and put the graphics on low.
The PC industry is always going to try to push a sense of FOMO onto you for not having the latest system, but in practice old systems last a long time now that Moore's law is effectively dead, and the pace if improvements has stagnated. We're now in an era of computing where systems can effectively last virtually a decade between upgrades, and prioritizing the latest and most 'future proof' system now may only put off the need to upgrade by a year or two at most, meaning it may last 11 or 12 years instead of 10.
AM4 is not longevity. Its last-gen technology. AM5 debuted 4 years ago. What "last" means to you obviously does not seem to be the same to me, because you seem to think it means "still functions", which the same could be said about a Commodore 64.
No one ever mentioned upgrading to AM5. This conversation was about AM6. Its about investing in a platform that has the potential to be upgraded 1 or 2 more times over the next 7-10 years instead of one that is already dead and can never be upgraded again.
I was using the term upgrade just in reference to the relative performance delta between the two platforms from the perspective of someone deciding between which one to invest in. When I personally am making a buying decision between different tiers of equipment, I think of the more expensive option in terms of 'if it's worth the upgrade', even before any purchase has been made, if that makes sense.
You mentioned that you regret buying into a dead platform, AM4. AM6 does not yet exist, so your only other option when building/buying a new PC was AM5, and I'm pointing out that had you gone that route, it wouldn't have made a monumental difference in most average gaming scenarios. It only would've made a large-ish difference unless you were also able to afford a top of the line GPU and/or stuck with lower resolutions.
Did you mean that you wish you had stuck with whatever you had before you built your AM4 system and waited until AM6?
You should scroll up and read again. My original comment was about when AM6 would be available.
No, I meant that I wish I had just bought into AM5 originally when it debuted, as is my current intention for AM6.
I'm aware you started it asking about AM6, but I was responding to your comment farther below about regretting going with AM4.
I'm basically just making the case that you didn't really make that big a mistake going with AM4, is all.
Duuuude running an AM4 DDR4 system IS the most value for your money right now. They just announced the retirement of AM5 in three years. Its most efficient to buckle in with the best parts of the last couple year till we wait for the next series of hardware
DDR5 AM5 The 50 series RTX cards
All not fucking worth it for compute/price
Im not poor poor but I'm not rich and I always shop saavy
I maintain my AM4 socket 5700x3d RTX 4070s system is the most you can max out your system for gaming without dropping money you don't need to drop.
If you want to be efficient with your dollar you will always be picking up the parts that came out last year.
That's why I'm not upgrading.
I'm hoping to get a lot more than a couple of years out of my parts. I would much rather wait another 3 years and get something actually upgradeable...
AM5 came out 4 years ago!
Fair enough! I got 7 years out of my 2700x setup so it served me well and I never buy the latest and greatest so it was time for an upgrade for my life!
with my 5700x3d I figure I won't be upgrading for another 6 years or so
Also though just putting this out there. The prices of computer parts are highly volatile right now. Its honestly a bit of a gamble to expect the computing market to march forward as predicted. Part of the reason I upgraded now is because there's a chance that prices and manufacturers shift so much that it makes building a PC prohibitively expensive. The powers that be are pushing for a compute by subscription model after all. And with the way consumer tech is progressing the older tech could still be "faster". they might try to offload "power" into more ai gimmicks. The 50 and 90 series of RTX cards are a joke. The 4070super blows most of those cards away still.
The 2700x is obsolete RIGHT NOW IMO so just thoughts to consider
But hey maybe you just play Minecraft and balatro so it really doesn't matter :p
It'll still be very fast?
Time isn't going to make it any worse. Games will still love X3D cache. Games won't be hamstrung by DDR4, just like they aren't now. But I think I understand you better: you don't want to buy anything, and hold out for AM6.
...But that's a loong wait.
If it's in the budget, you shouldn't skip out on an AM4 refresh you can enjoy in the intervening years. It's not going to be obsolete 3-4 years from now, but its affordable enough that upgrading to AM6 from it would still make sense.
It will become outdated. This is just the natural progression of technology that's been happening for the last 40 years. I don't see it suddenly ending.
I guarantee you, a 5800X3D will last longer than a 7600X. Or a 9600. They will age the same, and the 5800X3D will perform better than the 7600, or ~roughly match the 9600, the whole time.
And there's no feature or specification AM5 CPUs have over AM4 that games will need in 4 years.
Again, this might be different if we were talking some specific software outside of games, but that's how games are.
You're comparing it to currently available options and I am comparing it to future options.