Our research indicates that this offer is $50.99 lower (6.7% savings) than the next best available price from a reputable merchant with prices starting from $749.99
This collaborative space allows users to contribute additional information, tips, and insights to enhance the original deal post. Feel free to share your knowledge and help fellow shoppers make informed decisions.
Our research indicates that this offer is $50.99 lower (6.7% savings) than the next best available price from a reputable merchant with prices starting from $749.99
The 9950x3d does have more power draw and heat then the 9800x3d when gaming. In all circumstances.
The main circumstance is to use software or bios settings to limit games to just 8cores (known as ccd 0 since they have 3d vcache) . The other 8 cores (ccd 1) do not. This improves game performance by up to 30% in some games under some settings and reduces heat and power draw drastically.
In rare cases also turning off hyper threading will help to reduce heat so there's more thermal headroom particularly in the 9950x3d variant. However the low 1% takes a hit in many games under many settings without hyperthreading
Where the 9950x3d shines is when you're running other things on the other 8 cores that you aren't gaming on such as streaming, or discord, or pretty much anything else.
Now the discussion about 240fps/480fps. I've been playing at 240hz for 6 months. And I tried to play at 120hz and now it looks like a slide show. My monitor also supports 480hz 1080p however on small maps I still get around 400fps on large maps 320fps with lows of 300fps, I can absolutely tell the difference between 320fps and 240fps. I was able to turn my sensitivity way up because I can see more visual updates while turning and see enemy changes as I'm turning. That's a huge win in modern gaming.
This issue didn't exist 10 years ago when 144hz was the new new, but close quarters, fast reactions benefit greatly in the 240 to 320fps range. However you'll be happy to know the 400fps range. I cannot tell the difference between 400 and 320. But when I turn on frame gen just to see 480. It looks like there is absolutely no images missing in between at all, however I pay the price in a minor latency cost. Which defeats the purpose. It's not THAT bad. Like it feels like I'm playing with 120hz latency but 480fps visuals.
But trust me. 320fps no latency is the good stuff. If you can get to 240hz it's probably the best of all worlds because the low 1% at 240 and average 240 and screen settings 240hz. All matching together is the smoothest possible gameplay with no variance. Im on a 4080 super with a 9950x3d. I hope the information helps.
32 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Would love it, but dont need it, will wait for an actual sale by end of year.
If I could see myself finding a descent video card at MSRP, I might be convinced to build a new computer and this would be the processor I get. I just do not see any MSRP video cards showing up any time soon.
2
Like
Helpful
Funny
Not helpful
3d ago
May 20, 2025 6:49 PM
19 Posts
Joined Jan 2022
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users.
3d ago
May 20, 2025 8:25 PM
615 Posts
Joined Jun 2012
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users.
If I could see myself finding a descent video card at MSRP, I might be convinced to build a new computer and this would be the processor I get. I just do not see any MSRP video cards showing up any time soon.
Too bad the only cards occasionally available for or near msrp are the 5060 ti 8gb and 5070
1
Like
Helpful
Funny
Not helpful
3d ago
May 20, 2025 10:45 PM
66 Posts
Joined Oct 2014
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users.
This is a really good price for this. But it's still overkill for almost everyone. What I find kind of odd is that this chip, which is normally $900-1000, is really only preferable over the 9950X (which is about $550 regularly) for 1080p gaming. Reason being that for high quality 1440p or 4K, the GPU is the bottleneck, not the CPU. Who is dropping this kind of money on a chip but still gaming at 1080p?
If I could see myself finding a descent video card at MSRP, I might be convinced to build a new computer and this would be the processor I get. I just do not see any MSRP video cards showing up any time soon.
The GPU market is so bad, it's pretty much turning people away from the PC hobby.
Like
Helpful
Funny
Not helpful
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
This is a really good price for this. But it's still overkill for almost everyone. What I find kind of odd is that this chip, which is normally $900-1000, is really only preferable over the 9950X (which is about $550 regularly) for 1080p gaming. Reason being that for high quality 1440p or 4K, the GPU is the bottleneck, not the CPU. Who is dropping this kind of money on a chip but still gaming at 1080p?
People who want to play CS:GO at 500fps at 1080p? I don't get it either. After a certain point the fps become meaningless. OTOH it may just be the way sites run benchmarks now, 1080p benchmarks allow the CPU to fly without relying on a beefy GPU like 4K would.
Top Comments
The 9950x3d does have more power draw and heat then the 9800x3d when gaming. In all circumstances.
The main circumstance is to use software or bios settings to limit games to just 8cores (known as ccd 0 since they have 3d vcache) . The other 8 cores (ccd 1) do not. This improves game performance by up to 30% in some games under some settings and reduces heat and power draw drastically.
In rare cases also turning off hyper threading will help to reduce heat so there's more thermal headroom particularly in the 9950x3d variant. However the low 1% takes a hit in many games under many settings without hyperthreading
Where the 9950x3d shines is when you're running other things on the other 8 cores that you aren't gaming on such as streaming, or discord, or pretty much anything else.
Now the discussion about 240fps/480fps. I've been playing at 240hz for 6 months. And I tried to play at 120hz and now it looks like a slide show. My monitor also supports 480hz 1080p however on small maps I still get around 400fps on large maps 320fps with lows of 300fps, I can absolutely tell the difference between 320fps and 240fps. I was able to turn my sensitivity way up because I can see more visual updates while turning and see enemy changes as I'm turning. That's a huge win in modern gaming.
This issue didn't exist 10 years ago when 144hz was the new new, but close quarters, fast reactions benefit greatly in the 240 to 320fps range. However you'll be happy to know the 400fps range. I cannot tell the difference between 400 and 320. But when I turn on frame gen just to see 480. It looks like there is absolutely no images missing in between at all, however I pay the price in a minor latency cost. Which defeats the purpose. It's not THAT bad. Like it feels like I'm playing with 120hz latency but 480fps visuals.
But trust me. 320fps no latency is the good stuff. If you can get to 240hz it's probably the best of all worlds because the low 1% at 240 and average 240 and screen settings 240hz. All matching together is the smoothest possible gameplay with no variance. Im on a 4080 super with a 9950x3d. I hope the information helps.
32 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Man, the computer business is in massive flux!
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
You can't get a FE
Too bad the only cards occasionally available for or near msrp are the 5060 ti 8gb and 5070
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.