OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

AMD Ryzen 7 3800X review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£170PassMark multi-core score:22983N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.5 GHzCPU socket:AM4TDP (Thermal design power):105 W

AMD Ryzen 7 3800X Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 25 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen 7 3800X
7.4/10

Overall score

Score
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 74% of models
Score components

40%

6.7

Technical score

25%

8.0

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

8.5

Sentiment score

â–²Better than 74% of processors
8.1

Value for money

Value for money
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 90% of models
Score components

70%

7.4

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

★Better than 90%
6.7

Technical score

Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 63% of models
Score components

60%

6.6

Performance

18%

6.4

Architecture

10%

7.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 63%
8.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 72% of models

80%

7.6

Average grade

20%

9.3

Popularity

Grades by review (25)
12 reviews: 6 with a printed score, 6 estimated from the review. 13 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 72%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • amd-ryzen-7-3800x
amd-ryzen-7-3800x
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X

Based on 9 · 13

Reviewers praise its strong multi-core power, but many feel gaming falls short and it adds little over the 3700X.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X

Based on 152 owners sharing their experience in online comments

65%positive10%mixed25%negative

Owners chiefly praise strong performance and overclocking headroom, while high temperatures and the extra cost frustrate some.

What owners dislike

  • With the bundled cooler, owners see around 40–60°C at idle and up to 90°C or more under heavy load.10
  • The stiff plastic lever is hard to lock, and owners say it can snap off, especially when pushed hard.10
  • Some owners find it shows limits in heavy 1440p games, with FPS drops, stutters during scene changes, and frame dips.9
  • Owners report boot problems, a lit DRAM light, and RAM stuck below rated speed, especially 3600 kits on B450 boards.8
  • Some owners' chips top out around 4.2 GHz, don't reach the 4.5 GHz boost they expected, or gain little from manual overclocking.7
  • The bundled fan can be loud, spin up and down often, or fail early, with some owners needing a warranty claim.6
  • Owners say the 3800X's small speed edge over the 3700X is not worth the extra money for normal use.4
  • The cooler's RGB lighting can flicker or restart its colour cycle, and some owners cannot get the lighting software to work.4

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 7 3800X

Technical score
Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 63% of models
Score components:

60%

6.6

Performance

18%

6.4

Architecture

10%

7.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

6.7
Reviews score
8.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 90% of models
Score components:

70%

7.4

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

8.1
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
AM4
This processor uses the AM4 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 75.1% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Chipset
X570, B550, A520, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320
This processor supports X570, B550, A520, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 74.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 54.5% of processors and equal to that of 3.5% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
N. of physical cores
8
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% of processors.
CPU threads
16
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 16 CPU threads, which is more than 69% of processors and equal to 14.6% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.5 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.5 GHz which is higher than that of 53.9% of processors and equal to that of 5.5% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 3.9 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x3.9 GHz which is higher than that of 86.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
22,983
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 22,983 in PassMark, which is higher than 76.1% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
7 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 7 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 70.4% of processors and equal to that of 10.5% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 7 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 7 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 55.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L3 cache
32 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 32 MB which is larger than that of 89% of processors and equal to that of 2.7% of processors.
L2 cache
4 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 4 MB which is larger than that of 53.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L1 cache
512 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 512 KB which is larger than that of 62.8% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
3,200 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 3,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 49.8% of processors and equal to 8.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-3200 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-3200 MHz, which is higher than that of 46.1% of processors and equal to 9.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
3,800 MHz
This processor supports XMP/EXPO memory speeds up to 3,800 MHz, which is higher than that of 93.4% of processors.
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
105 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 105 W which is higher than that of 89.7% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
105 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 105 W which is higher than that of 89.9% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

AMD Ryzen 7 3800X vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,983 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,983 vs 11,469
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 80.2% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (5,054 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    5,054 vs 2,804.5
  • 58.2% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,239 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,239 vs 5,209
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.9 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.9 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 19.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 72% of models

    80%

    7.6

    Average grade

    20%

    9.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (25)
    12 reviews: 6 with a printed score, 6 estimated from the review. 13 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.0 vs 6.7
  • 18.1% higher sentiment score
    8.5 vs 7.2
  • 10.6% better value for money
    AMD Ryzen 7 3800X has better value for money than the average processor (8.05 vs 7.3).
    8.05 vs 7.29
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (AM4 vs FP5).
    AM4 vs FP5
  • 2x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,983 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,983 vs 11,469
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 80.2% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (5,054 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    5,054 vs 2,804.5
  • 58.2% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,239 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,239 vs 5,209
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.9 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.9 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    8 vs 6
  • 19.5% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,834 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,834 vs 1,535
  • 53.1% faster classroom rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (520.7 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    520.7 vs 340.075
  • 11 higher clock multiplier
    This processor has a higher clock multiplier than the average processor (39 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    39 vs 28
  • 5.9% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,710 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,710 vs 2,558
  • 2.16x more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (4 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    4 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 3.56x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (32 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    32 MB vs 9 MB
  • 58.2% smaller die size
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (74 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    74 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 41.7% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (7 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    7 nm vs 12 nm
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Matisse vs Kaby Lake).
    Matisse vs Kaby Lake
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 7 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 7 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 33.3% larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (512 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    512 KB vs 384 KB
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4.0 vs 3.0
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • 5 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.33x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (105 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    105 W vs 45 W
  • 56.9% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (171.6 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    171.6 vs 398.015
  • 2.33x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (105 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    105 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, SME, TSME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, SME, TSME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, SME, TSME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, SME, TSME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 56.9% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (171.6 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    171.6 vs 398.015
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.33x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (105 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    105 W vs 45 W
  • 2.33x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (105 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    105 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
Reviewing Playing & More RPM
≈ estimated
12/07/2020
Hands-on review · temperature and gaming FPS tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X keeps temperatures respectable and runs games well, a pleasant surprise even with the stock cooler.
6.0
WhatNow?
≈ estimated
22/05/2020
Hands-on review · benchmarks, gaming tests and overclocking
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is a fine CPU, but it is not worth paying extra over the 3700X; spend the money on RAM instead.
9.0
LukeLiterally
≈ estimated
14/05/2020
Hands-on review · game benchmarks and editing tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is an excellent chip for the price, recommended for gaming and editing, and should last a long time.
9.5
Blade
≈ estimated
22/12/2019
Hands-on review · gaming benchmarks and single-core test
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X now matches and surpasses Intel at a good price.
9.0
Reviewing Playing & More RPM
≈ estimated
15/09/2019
Hands-on review · temperatures, stress test and benchmarks
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X delivers strong performance and good cooling with no real problems, though its stock cooler is loud.
9.0
TheAngryHoneyBadger
≈ estimated
14/07/2019
Hands-on review · gaming and synthetic benchmarks
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is a solid upgrade from older Ryzen chips, though it costs more than the 3700X.
4.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
24/08/2019
Comparison review · benchmarks against Ryzen 7 3700X
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is decent, but the cheaper 3700X delivers essentially the same performance for less money.
4.0
Gamers Nexus
≈ estimated
20/07/2019
Comparison review · benchmarks against Ryzen 7 3700X
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is not recommended, since the cheaper 3700X delivers the same performance.
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Shop video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

10
guru3d.com
✓ explicit
16/08/2019
Launch review · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is an 8-core, 16-thread desktop chip with AMD's new 7nm design and PCIe 4.0 support, but Intel still has faster per-core clocks.
5.0
rockpapershotgun.com
≈ estimated
18/09/2019
Gaming test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X runs games almost exactly like the Ryzen 7 3700X and trails the Core i7-9700K, so it mainly suits heavy multi-core work such as video editing.
9.0
cgmagonline.com
✓ explicit
23/09/2019
Benchmark review · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is a strong 8-core chip for heavy multi-core work and quick single-core tasks, but gaming gains over the Ryzen 7 2700X are small.
8.0
hardwareluxx.de
≈ estimated
08/11/2019
Lab test · High-end desktop chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is a power-hungry 8-core chip whose 105 W rating and only slightly higher boost clock make it a gap-filler between the 3700X and 3900X.
9.7
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
12/09/2019
Benchmark comparison · Sister chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is nearly a Ryzen 7 3700X with higher clocks and more power draw, so its edge may look bigger on paper than in real use.
9.6
geeknetic.es
✓ explicit
26/08/2019
Lab test · Overclocking review
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X overclocks best in the tested Ryzen 3000 range, reaching a stable 4.4 GHz on all cores at moderate voltage.
9.0
hwready.it
≈ estimated
05/09/2019
Hands-on test · Overclocking focus
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X holds higher clocks than the 3700X without tuning, but leaves little overclocking headroom and needs slower RAM for best results.
10
rehwolution.it
✓ explicit
23/08/2019
Hands-on review · Intel comparison
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X roughly matches the Core i9 9900K, pulls slightly ahead with Spectre and Meltdown fixes applied, and draws less power, though its boost clock fell short.
6.0
hardware.info
≈ estimated
15/08/2019
Quick test · Chip comparison
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X looks very close to the 3700X on paper, with a slightly faster base and turbo clock, so the extra speed is modest.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 7 3800X

  • Excellent multi-threaded performance, making it highly capable for productivity tasks like video rendering and photo editing.
  • Native support for PCIe 4.0, which allows for significantly faster storage throughput compared to previous generations.
  • Higher binned silicon compared to the 3700X, often resulting in slightly better overclocking potential and higher sustained boost clocks.
  • Includes a capable Wraith Prism RGB stock cooler, reducing the immediate need for an aftermarket cooling solution for standard use.
  • Strong generational IPC (Instructions Per Clock) improvements over the Ryzen 2000 series.
  • Broad compatibility with a wide range of AM4 motherboards, including older X470 and newer X570 chipsets.

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 7 3800X

  • Poor value proposition relative to the Ryzen 7 3700X, which offers nearly identical gaming performance for a significantly lower price.
  • High 105W TDP makes it less energy-efficient than its 65W sibling (3700X) without providing a proportional performance increase.
  • Often fails to reach advertised 4.5 GHz boost speeds consistently under standard cooling conditions.
  • Lacks an integrated GPU (iGPU), requiring a dedicated graphics card for any display output.
  • In gaming-focused tasks, it still generally trails Intel's contemporary competitors like the Core i7-9700K.
  • Minimal performance gains in gaming compared to cheaper Ryzen 3000 series models.

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is a high-performance desktop processor based on the Zen 2 architecture and a 7nm manufacturing process, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads. It operates at a base clock speed of 3.9 GHz with a max boost frequency of 4.5 GHz, supported by 32MB of L3 cache and a 105W TDP. Main characteristics include support for PCIe 4.0, an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, and compatibility with the AM4 socket. Its primary pros are strong multi-threaded performance for gaming and content creation, high power efficiency compared to previous generations, and the inclusion of the capable Wraith Prism RGB cooler. However, notable cons include limited overclocking headroom, higher heat output under load, and a perceived lack of value compared to the nearly identical but cheaper Ryzen 7 3700X.

Compare AMD Ryzen 7 3800X with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Ryzen 7 3800X and other processors

No results found