Meet Maggie, PCMag'sAMD's Ryzen 7 7700X3D is its newest gaming-centric desktop processor, and at $329, it's destined to compete head-on with the glowing-value Intel Core Ultra 270K Plus. The 7700X3D's introductory price is $10 below the latest pricing for the 270K Plus. (Intel recently boosted its price guidance on the 270K Plus upward, from its $299 price at launch to $339.) As the chip's name suggests, AMD equipped the 7700X3D with its 3D V-Cache technology, which should boost gaming performance.
However, with only eight CPU cores based on an older architecture, is this enough to attract mainstream PC gamers? Perhaps, but you can find better-value options if you use your PC for more than just gaming. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus remains our Editors' Choice pick, the processor we would recommend to most people in this price range, assuming they're not already bound by a motherboard to one platform or another.
AMD built the Ryzen 7 7700X3D on its Zen 4 microarchitecture, which makes its 2026 release rather peculiar. The Zen 4 architecture landed as the basis for AMD’s Ryzen 7000 series of processors back in 2023. While Ryzen 7000-series chips may still be recommendable today as a range for budget-friendly CPU options, AMD’s faster Ryzen 9000 series has superseded it.
In some ways, the 7700X3D is a budget processor. I wouldn’t consider $329 particularly affordable for a CPU, but that is a "budget" price compared with AMD’s newer Ryzen 9000-series 3D V-Cache chips that cost way more. I also suspect that the 7700X3D might be a reaction to Intel’s handful of Core Ultra 200S Plus processors that launched in April. The 270K Plus launched at $299, and AMD doesn’t have much at this price point to counter it, aside from the far slower AMD Ryzen 5 9600X.
Similar Products
On paper, the 7700X3D should be a more competent opponent for the 270K Plus than the 9600X. It has eight CPU cores instead of six like the 9600X, and the 3D V-Cache on the 7700X3D will help it in games. The biggest handicap on the 7700X3D is its relatively low 4.5GHz peak clock speed, but AMD sells an existing alternative.
You see, AMD has another processor that is almost identical to the 7700X3D: the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D. The only difference between these two chips, aside from price, is that the 7800X3D can reach up to 5.0GHz out of the box, while the 7700X3D cannot. That’s a noticeable difference, and while the 7700X3D's lower price can help to make up for this, the 7800X3D has dropped from its 2023 launch price and now retails for closer to $349. With this price difference, I’d say the 7700X3D and 7800X3D are both compelling.
To test the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D, 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 that are set to run at the chip's max officially supported memory speed, which is 5,200MHz for the Ryzen 7 7700X3D. It also has a 1TB PCIe 4.0 SSD and an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 graphics card. The RTX 5090 was utilized for all tests except those focused on integrated graphics performance.
In addition to these components, a SilverStone Hela 1650R Platinum ATX3.1 power supply powers the system, and everything sits on a Praxis Wetbench open-air chassis. All tests were conducted using Windows 11 with the latest updates installed.
Among the CPUs I’ve tested with our current processor benchmarking routine, the 7700X3D’s specs come closest to matching those of the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D and the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D. All three of these processors employ AMD’s 3D V-Cache technology and have the same core and thread counts. The 7700X3D utilizes first-generation 3D V-Cache technology, which is inferior to the second-gen 3D V-Cache technology on the 9000-series chips. This difference is, in part, why the newer Ryzen 7 9800X3D and 9850X3D operate at far faster clock speeds than the 7700X3D. (They are also more expensive, at $479 and $499, respectively.)
In terms of price, the 7700X3D competes with Intel’s Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, which launched at $299 and has since jumped to $339 to $349. That leaves just $10 or $20 separating the 270K Plus from the 7700X3D, which isn’t much. The more affordable Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, which now costs $219, is also a threat to the 7700X3D. The 250K Plus has a higher core count and a faster clock speed, which will likely give it a performance advantage. If you'd like more information on the testing process, check out our How We Test CPUs article.
The Ryzen 7 7700X3D’s performance wasn't impressive in CPU-focused benchmarks. It performed worse than the other processors in this test set in almost all of these tests. This is unsurprising given that the 7700X3D has just eight CPU cores that run on the older Zen 4 architecture. The 7700X3D would appear more competitive against older chips, like the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 or the Intel Core i5-14600K, but those aren’t as notable today. The CPUs listed in the chart are all processors the 7700X3D will have to compete against, and because these chips are newer, they were faster in CPU-focused tests.
For some reason, the Ryzen 7 7700X3D wasn’t able to run the PugetBench Adobe Premiere Pro 24 benchmark. The test worked just fine on other AMD processors, however, which suggests some issue specific to the 7700X3D in its pre-launch state. This is likely minor and may already be addressed in newer versions of Adobe Premiere Pro or in the PugetBench software.
The 7700X3D's lackluster performance in CPU tests makes it a poor upgrade option if you already own an AM5 motherboard. AMD's Ryzen 7000-series processors were the first ones released for the AM5 platform, and you'll find few on the platform that produce lesser CPU-centric numbers than these. Only the six-core AMD Ryzen 5 7000-series processors and ultra-budget 8000-series Ryzen processors, like the AMD Ryzen 5 8500G, are likely to perform worse.
While the 7700X3D was often the slowest chip in the CPU tests, in-game benchmarks showed the 7700X3D's competitive edge. At times, AMD's old-is-new-again chip showed that it can compete with the best of them.
In Cyberpunk 2077, the 7700X3D landed about in the middle of the pack. It was often behind the other 3D V-Cache processors, though it outpaced some chips lacking that technology, including the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and Ultra 5 250K Plus both essentially tied with the 7700X3D in this test, but the 7700X3D edged ahead when running the game at 4K.
The 7700X3D struggled more in F1 2024 than Cyberpunk 2077, with its speed falling further behind the other 3D V-Cache CPUs. Its performance was about on par with the Ryzen 9 9950X. Intel’s processors had even more difficulty keeping up, however, which placed them further behind the 7700X3D.
Black Myth: Wukong is one of the most demanding titles that I use to test CPUs, and this game proved to be the biggest challenge for the 7700X3D. Its performance at 1440p and 4K was again on par with the 9950X and other high-end chips lacking the additional cache, like Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K. At 1080p, however, the 7700X3D turned in the worst performance of all the processors tested. This result may seem surprising because gaming at 1080p with low settings is what these 3D V-Cache products are best at. Here, the 7700X3D’s weaker CPU performance likely bottlenecked the chip at 1080p.
Things picked up for the 7700X3D in Total War: Three Kingdoms. This is an older game at this point, and it likely places less strain on the CPU, as the 3D V-Cache processors were all ahead of those lacking that extra cache. The 7700X3D still couldn't match up to the 9000-series 3D V-Cache, performing about the same in Shadow of the Tomb Raider as it did here.
You should keep in mind that these results are based on testing with an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 GPU. This is currently the most powerful graphics card available, which means it is able to drive frame rates far higher than any other graphics card. (We test all CPUs using the same graphics card for consistency in our results.) With something weaker like an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5080, these frame rates will reduce, which will shrink the 7700X3D's slight edge in games. The difference will be smaller still, and the 7700X3D's effect less crucial, as you go down the GPU hierarchy.
Turning the settings up from low to near their maximum values reduced the 7700X3D’s advantage in games. In 3DMark, the 7700X3D scored much lower than the rest of the competition. The 7700X3D outpaced the 9950X at 1080p in Cyberpunk 2077 with the Ray Tracing Ultra preset enabled, but the 7700X3D tied with the 9950X at 1440p and 4K.
Flipping F1 2024 to its ultra-high preset benefited the 7700X3D far more than most of the competition. The 7700X3D came closer to matching the Ryzen 9000-series 3D V-Cache processors using these settings, and the 7700X3D held a larger performance advantage over the other tested chips at 1080p.
Likewise, the 7700X3D also fared better in Black Myth: Wukong when the cinematic preset was used. It didn’t outperform anything in this test, but at least it wasn’t behind the competition, either.
The AMD Radeon Graphics integrated into the 7700X3D runs on AMD’s RDNA 2 architecture. This integrated graphics processor (IGP) is equipped with 128 shading units clocked at 2.2GHz, and it is used on all AMD Ryzen 7000 and Ryzen 9000 series chips that support an IGP. It doesn’t produce a ton of performance, but it’s fine if you don’t intend to play games. You can run some games with this IGP, but the two games we tested the IGP with ran barely fast enough to be playable.
The IGP used on Intel’s competing Core Ultra 200S Arrow Lake processors produced far faster performance. If you are thinking about using an IGP to play games, one of those Intel chips would be a better option. The whole point of an X3D CPU is to pair it with a GPU.
The Ryzen 7 7700X3D may not be the fastest processor, but it’s not overly power-hungry, either. I used a Kill-A-Watt power meter to measure the peak power consumption of each CPU test bed, which showed that the 7700X3D used far less power than the other chips in my test set. This doesn’t mean the 7700X3D is more efficient, as its performance was also a lot slower. But the fact that the 7700X3D is less power-hungry helps make up for its lackluster performance.
The 7700X3D didn’t get too hot during tests, either. The 7700X3D’s lower power draw likely helped a lot with this result. How hot it became isn’t commensurate with its performance. The 9950X3D hit about the same peak temperatures, and the Ultra 5 250K Plus stayed cooler while turning in higher test scores.
Final Thoughts
(Credit: Michael Justin Allen Sexton)
AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D
- 5.0 - Exemplary: Near perfection, ground-breaking
- 4.5 - Outstanding: Best in class, acts as a benchmark for measuring competitors
- 4.0 - Excellent: A performance, feature, or value leader in its class, with few shortfalls
- 3.5 - Good: Does what the product should do, and does so better than many competitors
- 3.0 - Average: Does what the product should do, and sits in the middle of the pack
- 2.5 - Fair: We have some reservations, buy with caution
- 2.0 - Subpar: We do not recommend, buy with extreme caution
- 1.5 - Poor: Do not buy this product
- 1.0 - Dismal: Don't even think about buying this product
Read Our Editorial Mission Statement and Testing Methodologies.
It is clear from the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D's test results and features that this isn't a 100% new CPU. The 7700X3D may be new in the sense that it has never been sold before, but its underlying technology is years old. The 7700X3D is, in truth, just a 7800X3D with a lower clock speed, and, like the 7800X3D, it is best viewed as a 2023 processor.
You technically can't go wrong with older hardware. I don't condemn it, as collecting old PC parts is a personal hobby, and the 7700X3D isn’t so old as to be obsolete. If you are building a PC for gaming only, you could do worse than the 7700X3D. It would be a tricky choice to justify, though, as the faster Ryzen 7 7800X3D doesn't cost much more, and the 9800X3D and 9850X3D are both much better options for a PC built for gaming only and paired with a high-end graphics card. You simply don't save enough buying the 7700X3D to be worth the cost for the kind of use cases it makes the most sense for.
We wouldn't recommend the 7700X3D for most people. Its gaming performance is competitive, but its general-purpose CPU speeds don't impress for the price. Both the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and Ultra 7 270K Plus are far faster in everything except games, often matching the 7700X3D there, as well. If you are on a tight budget, the 250K Plus is far more appealing. The 270K Plus costs about $10 more than the 7700X3D, but it’s also faster on the CPU-performance front to an impossible-to-ignore degree. Even if you are building a PC just for gaming, better CPU performance can open the door for more use cases down the road. That's why our Editors' Choice award stays with the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus in this price range.
SHOULD I UPGRADE?
The Ryzen 7 7700X3D runs on AMD's older Zen 4 architecture, which has been available for several years now. Zen 4 was also the first architecture to support AMD's AM5 platform, which means you likely don't already have an AM5 system that it would be worthwhile upgrading with the 7700X3D. We wouldn't recommend it as an upgrade option under most circumstances, unless you're moving to an AM5 motherboard for the first time.
About Our Expert
I have been interested in science and technology for as long as I can remember, spurred on by a fondness for video games. I learned to work in Windows and manipulate files to get buggy games to work, and I learned to build and upgrade PCs for better performance.
In my role at PCMag for the past four years, I’ve deeply enjoyed the opportunity to share my knowledge and expertise. Before PCMag, I wrote for Tom's Hardware for three years, where I covered tech news, deals, and wrote some hands-on reviews. After working as a PCMag contributor for a time reviewing desktops, PC cases, budget processors, and motherboards, I now focus on testing and reviewing processors and graphics cards and sharing my insights on the industry.
- Geekom A9 Max 2026 Edition Review: An Outpaced and Out-Priced Mini PC
- Asus NUC 16 Pro Mini Review: A Powerhouse Mini PC for Work and Play
- I Tested Nvidia's DLSS 5 in NBA 2K27. AI Slop It Is Not
- Asus ProArt GeForce RTX 5090 32GB GDDR7 OC Edition Review: The Ultimate Creator Card
- AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 Dual Edition Review: The Ultimate 3D V-Cache Chip for Creators, Not Gamers
- More from Michael Justin Allen Sexton
