AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D Review

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D launched in November 2024 and has remained the best gaming processor ever since. So, when AMD quietly announced the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D, a slightly faster version of the 9800X3D at CES 2026, it seemed like a no-brainer. After all, this new chip takes the successful gaming chip and lifts the max turbo speed by 400MHz, what could go wrong?

Well, it turns out that it’s such a small overclock that it barely impacts performance, and even leads to slightly worse multi-core performance over the original 9800X3D. I’ve spent most of the week testing this processor asking myself why AMD felt the need to even release the Ryzen 7 9850X3D. The only answer I can think of is that it costs slightly more and people are going to buy it just to have a higher number in CPU-Z.

Specs and Features

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D is practically the same processor as the 9800X3D, only with a slightly higher boost clock. You still get 8 Zen 5 cores, 16 threads and 96MB of L3 Cache, only now it boosts up to 5.6GHz instead of 5.2GHz. That’s a decent boost, but the real magic of the Ryzen 9850X3D is the same magic that makes the 9800X3D great – the 3D-stacked V-Cache.

Cache is essentially memory that’s built into your processor, and it’s a lot faster than system memory, or RAM. Essentially, the more of it is there, the more efficient your CPU is in workloads that demand rapid access to data – like gaming. What makes AMD’s X3D processors, like the 9850X3D, special is that instead of having it on the same physical layer of the chip as the CPU cores, it’s printed on its own layer.

Not only does this allow the Ryzen 7 9850X3D to have more cache than other processors, but it also cuts down on the latency. Because by having the cache located right above the CPU cores, the data simply has less physical distance to travel. This is why the 9850X3D is a great gaming processor, because it can load more game data at any given time, which leads to better performance, especially when paired with a powerful graphics card.

There’s only one problem, though. The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D already exists with the same exact cache configuration and core layout. So unless you’re playing a game that solely relies on single-core performance – which is becoming rare – you don’t really gain anything by shelling out an extra $30 for the Ryzen 7 9850X3D.

Of course, there is the higher boost clock, but it’s important to keep in mind that the processor will only ever hit those speeds in lightly threaded workloads. In anything that uses many cores at the same time, the clock speeds will even out to a much lower limit in order to control temperatures and power consumption.

Throughout my testing, I found that the Ryzen 7 9850X3D reaches the same peak power of 161W as the 9800X3D. That does mean that temperatures stay under control, only peaking at 85°C, but it does mean that when all the cores are being used, there isn’t much that the processor can do to get extra performance over the 9800X3D.

It is important to keep in mind, though, that because the 9850X3D comes out of the box with a higher clock speed, while keeping the same power consumption and temperatures as the original chip, it likely means it has more headroom for overclocking. That’s not something I test here at IGN, but if that’s something you’re into, this might be the chip to grab.

AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D – Benchmarks

View 10 Images

Performance

Because the Ryzen 7 9850X3D and 9800X3D are so similar, I was expecting the performance difference between the two chips to be small, but I was still surprised by how little that 400MHz boost clock increase matters. Throughout most of my test suite, the two processors were extremely close, trading blows depending on how heavily threaded the workload is.

The most disappointing bit, though, is that despite the higher asking price, the Ryzen 7 9850X3D turns out to be a little slower than the 9800X3D in multi-threaded workloads like Cinebench and Blender. It’s not a huge gap, to be sure, but it’s a gap that, if anything, should be the other way around.

Specifically, in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, the 9850X3D gets 22,404 points, compared to 23,195 points from the Ryzen 9800X3D. That’s about a 3% lead for the slightly cheaper processor. This is flipped, however, in the single-core test, where the 9850X3D outperforms the 9800X3D with a score of 2208 to 2082. That’s where that single-core boost increase shows itself.

Likewise, in the 3DMark CPU Profile test, the 9850X3D gets a multi-core score of 10186, compared to 10274 from the 9800X3D. That’s another tiny gap in favor of the 9800X3D. But, again, just like Cinebench, the 9850X3D pulls ahead slightly in the single-core test, with 1265 points to the 9800X3D’s 1210.

Blender repeats the multi-core performance pattern. In the Monster workload, the Ryzen 7 9850X3D is able to manage 153 samples per second, compared to 157 from the 9800X3D. That’s a difference so small that it’s within the margin of error, to be fair, but it still leans in the wrong direction for a CPU that AMD is charging more for.

In Adobe, the 9850X3D beats the 9800X3D in Premiere, getting 13773 points in the Puget benchmark, compared to 13025. However, that’s reversed in Photoshop, with the older 9800X3D getting 12929 points, compared to 12167 points from the 9850X3D.

When it comes to real-world gaming, the 9850X3D disappoints again. In Cyberpunk 2077, at 1080p, with the Ultra preset, with no ray tracing or upscaling, the 9850X3D gets 231 fps, compared to 231 from the 9800X3D.

Total War: Warhammer 3 is no different. In this CPU-heavy game, the 9850X3D squeezes 261 fps out of the RTX 4090, compared to 265 fps with the 9800X3D. Another win for the cheaper chip.

I’ve been racking my brain trying to make sense of this performance. I re-ran the tests across the 9800X3D and 9850X3D multiple times, and each time got the same results. There are likely games out there where the 9850X3D does pull ahead of the 9800X3D, particularly in older single-threaded games. But in the games I’ve tested here, the 9850X3D consistently fell short – however small that gap might be.

Even according to AMD’s claims, which you should take with a grain of salt, the Ryzen 7 9850X3D is only expected to boost performance by as much as 6% in some esports games. And, then we’re probably talking about the difference between 300 fps and 318 fps in something like Counter-Strike 2. I don’t think that’s worth the extra $30.

Jackie Thomas is the Hardware and Buying Guides Editor at IGN and the PC components queen. You can follow her @Jackiecobra