AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 Dual Edition Review: The Ultimate 3D V-Cache Chip for Creators, Not Gamers

In 2017, AMD adopted a "chiplet" design that it continues to use today on most of its processors. Chiplet processor designs use multiple silicon parts that work together as a single processor package. That differs from traditional "monolithic" processor designs that integrate all of the circuitry required for the processor into a single chip.

AMD builds its chiplets with a central I/O die and one or more core complex dies (CCDs). The I/O die contains the memory controller, a PCI Express controller, an AMD Radeon integrated graphics processor (IGP), and other bits of circuitry. The CCDs hold the actual CPU cores, as well as the processor’s L1, L2, and L3 memory caches.

Aside from AMD’s Ryzen Threadripper processors, which can have up to eight CCDs, all other consumer-grade AMD desktop CPUs typically have just one or two CCDs. (You’ll find a few exceptions to this, as AMD also produces some monolithic processors, mostly used in laptops.)

Similar Products

Our Current Picks for The Best CPUs for 2026

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X

4.0

Excellent

$196.69 at Amazon

$196 at Amazon Read Our Review

Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus

4.5

Outstanding

$219.99 at Newegg

$219 at Newegg Read Our Review

AMD Ryzen 7 9700X

4.0

Excellent

$339.00 at Amazon

$339 at Amazon Read Our Review

Intel Core Ultra 7 265K

4.0

Excellent

$319.99 at Best Buy

$319 at Best Buy Read Our Review

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X

4.5

Outstanding

$536.00 at Amazon

$536 at Amazon Read Our Review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

4.0

Excellent

$509.99 at Amazon

$599.00 Save $89.01

$509 at Amazon Read Our Review

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D

4.5

Outstanding

$621.00 at Amazon

$699.00 Save $78.00

$621 at Amazon Read Our Review

Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus

4.5

Outstanding

$308.00 at Amazon

$308 at Amazon Read Our Review

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X

4.5

Outstanding

$5,312.35 at Best Buy

$5,312 at Best Buy Read Our Review

AMD’s 3D V-Cache technology works by attaching a 3D V-Cache chip to a CCD. AMD’s 3D V-Cache chips each contain 64MB of cache, often referred to as the L3 cache. This is not an accurate description, as it technically exists separate from the L3 cache integrated into the CCD. Referring to it as a Last-Level Cache (LLC) or Static Random-Access Memory (SRAM), both of which AMD has also done before, is more accurate. According to AMD, however, 3D V-Cache provides performance similar to the L3 cache on the CPU, which would make it similar to additional L3 from a performance perspective, even if it isn’t actually part of the L3 cache.

All of AMD’s 3D V-Cache processors released to date have been equipped with just a single 3D V-Cache chip, but the 9950X3D2 takes this to the next level with two 3D V-Cache chips. (This is the current theoretical limit I teased above.) Two such chips give the processor 128MB of SRAM in addition to the 64MB of L3, which is far more cache than any other previous consumer desktop CPU. AMD’s similar 9950X3D is also equipped with 3D V-Cache, but it has just one of these chips, and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X doesn’t have any.

This large amount of cache comes with a few trade-offs, but they are minor. The X3D2 chip is clocked 100MHz lower at boost than the 9950X and 9950X3D, at 5.6GHz. It also has a slightly higher 200-watt thermal design power rating, which can push up the processor’s operating temperature and power consumption, but also boost performance.

To test the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2, I installed it on a Gigabyte X870E Aorus Master motherboard that I use to test all AMD AM5 processors. The motherboard is equipped with two 16GB DDR5 RAM sticks set to run at the processor’s officially supported maximum memory speed, 5,600MHz for the 9950X3D2. The test system also has a 1TB PCI Express 4.0 SSD and an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 graphics card. The RTX 5090 was employed for all the tests here except those focused on integrated graphics performance.

In addition to these components, a SilverStone Hela 1650R Platinum ATX3.1 power supply powers the system, Corsair's iCue Link Titan 360 RX LCD does the CPU cooling, and everything sits on a Praxis Wetbench open-air chassis. All tests were conducted using Windows 11 with the latest updates installed.

The 9950X3D2 faces a lot of competition among high-end processors. Typically, the highest-end processors of each generation from AMD and Intel compete directly with each other, but not much else, due to their top-tier performance. This would be true for the X3D2 chip, too, if not for its near-identical brethren, the 9950X and the 9950X3D. The only major differences among these three CPUs are their number of 3D V-Cache chips and their asking prices, which make them competitive with each other. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, both much cheaper, will also bring fierce competition to the 9950X3D2.

The 9950X3D2 competes with the best consumer processors on the market. The large amount of additional cache gave the X3D2 chip a performance boost in select tests such as Cinebench 2024. This is evident compared with the 9950X3D and 9950X, both of which are essentially the same processor with just 128MB and 64MB of L3 cache, respectively. These CPUs are also clocked a negligible 0.1GHz higher than the 9950X3D2, which means anytime the X3D2 processor scored higher than the 9950X3D and 9950X, it was due to the difference in cache. Overall, in Cinebench 2024’s multi-threaded test, the 9950X3D2 was 11% faster than the 9950X, enough to overtake Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K.

The additional cache was also beneficial in Blender, where the 9950X3D2 achieved the highest score that we’ve recorded from a desktop processor (excluding AMD’s workstation-focused Ryzen Threadripper chips). The X3D2 processor held a small advantage in HandBrake as well.

The 9950X3D2 didn’t perform quite as well in POV-Ray or Adobe, though. In POV-Ray, the 9950X3D2 showed worse single-threaded performance than the 9950X3D and 9950X. This is also the first test that showed Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K and Ultra 7 270K Plus ahead of the X3D2 chip.

As for the Adobe creative software tests, the 9950X3D2 performed slightly better than the 9950X. It was also faster than the 9950X3D in Photoshop, but the 9950X3D was quicker in Premiere Pro. Intel’s Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and Ultra 5 250K Plus were also faster than the 9950X3D2 in Premiere Pro, but like the 9950X3D, they were slower than the X3D2 chip in Photoshop.

AMD processors equipped with 3D V-Cache technology are often marketed as gaming CPUs, but the 9950X3D2 is really designed for content creators. The X3D2 chip excels at running games, too, but it doesn’t distinguish itself in games compared with the other Ryzen 9000-series X3D processors with 3D V-Cache enough to justify buying it for games alone. You have little reason to pay the 9950X3D2’s higher price when you won’t see better performance than the 9950X3D, or potentially the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D.

The 9950X3D2 outperformed the 9950X3D in Cyberpunk 2077 with low settings, but only by a small amount. The 9850X3D outpaced the X3D2 processor to a similar degree, except when the resolution was increased to 4K, which pushed the two processors into a near tie. The 9950X3D2 and 9950X3D performed similarly to each other in F1 2024 while using the ultra-low preset, and both traded blows with the 9800X3D and 9850X3D at 1080p and 1440p—just not at 4K.

In Black Myth: Wukong with low settings, the 9950X3D2 performed worse than the 9950X3D. Then in Total War: Three Kingdoms, the X3D2 chip was faster than the 9950X3D at 1080p, and the two performed similarly at 720p. Both the 9850X3D and 9800X3D were faster at 720p. The 9950X3D2 was a little slower in Shadow of the Tomb Raider at 720p, too, but all four of the 3D V-Cache processors performed close to each other in this game.

In all of these tests using low graphics settings, the Intel processors were behind the AMD competition. While this is a win for AMD and its 3D V-cache chips, the Intel processors still ran games at hundreds of frames per second. Most ordinary monitors have a max refresh rate of 60Hz, and while gaming monitors can refresh way faster, you’re likely to hit your monitor’s refresh-rate ceiling before the CPU hits its limit in these particular situations.

The 3DMark test scores showed only a minor difference among the 9950X3D2, the 9950X3D, and the 9950X. Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K and Ultra 7 270K Plus also performed roughly on par with the X3D2 processor in 3DMark.

The 9950X3D2 did achieve the highest score that I’ve recorded to date in Cyberpunk 2077 at 1080p on the game’s Ray Tracing Ultra preset. It was only slightly ahead of the other 3D V-Cache processors, however, and with the resolution set to 1440p, the X3D2 chip was the slowest of the 3D V-Cache processors by a smidge. At 1440p and 4K resolutions, all of the processors were close together, though, which means you would be almost just as well served by any of the chips in the list.

AMD’s 3D V-Cache processors all excelled in F1 2024, but the 9950X3D2 was the "slowest" of the bunch by a small margin. All of the processors were essentially tied in Black Myth: Wukong with the Cinematic graphics setting.

Overall, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 performed similarly in games at high and low settings. While it is a very capable gaming CPU, it simply doesn’t offer a big enough advantage in this area that justifies its cost for games alone versus the rest of the AMD X3D crew.

AMD employs the same Radeon graphics IGP on all of its AMD Ryzen 7000- and 9000-series processors. This IGP consists of two RDNA 2 compute units, each with 64 shaders, clocked at 2,200MHz. You can see the telltale identical IGP in the scores for all the AMD chips below.

The integrated graphics inside Intel’s processors are much faster and a better choice if you intend to play games with the IGP. You can still run games with the AMD IGP, but you’ll need to stick to older titles and lower graphics settings. AMD’s IGP is fine for non-gaming tasks, but if you’re buying this chip to play games with, you must pair it with a high-end GPU for maximum benefit.

I used a Kill-a-Watt wall meter to measure the overall power consumption of the CPU testbed while each processor ran the Blender and Cinebench tests. The 9950X3D2 proved to be a bit power-hungry during the Blender benchmark, consuming more power than any other AMD processor here. Its power draw in Cinebench was closer to the 9950X and 9950X3D, not to mention the Ultra 7 270K Plus.

The 9950X3D2 also ran fairly hot during both tests. This isn’t a surprising result for one of the fastest processors on the market, though. Intel’s competing processors stayed a bit cooler during these tests, but only by a rather small margin. Liquid cooling with a large AIO cooler is likely the way to go with this chip; as mentioned, our testbed uses a 360mm AIO.