Review Ryzen 7 9700X Reviews

AnandThenMan · Aug 7, 2024

Big giant meh

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 5 9600X Review: Zen 5 is Alive

www.anandtech.com

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GV7q6CV7GY

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

Ranulf · Aug 7, 2024

Oh boy... just the first 90 seconds of the GN review is painful. At least its not Intel is a positive...I guess. Their 9600X was so bad they needed a new cpu so no review for that at the moment. Yet again, more ram stability issues. I'm getting real tired of ram issues with AMD or Intel over the past 6-7 years.

AnandThenMan · Aug 7, 2024

Holy carp unleashing PDO drastically changes things CPU goes from 90 watts to 166 and performance shoots up 21% in R23. Looks like AMD is sandbagging.

gdansk · Aug 7, 2024

AnandThenMan said:
Holy carp unleashing PDO drastically changes things CPU goes from 90 watts to 166 and performance shoots up 21% in R23. Looks like AMD is sandbagging.

I don't see having an 88W power target as sandbagging but rather a return to the norm. In my mind this is the way CPUs should ship and then tuners can push them to the limits. Hopefully Intel follows this with Arrow Lake too (and rumors suggest they may be).

Rigg · Aug 7, 2024

AMD Ryzen 7 9700X Review - The Magic of Zen 5

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X boasts a robust eight-core design and exceptional single-threaded performance with great power efficiency. In our review we saw good gains with PBO overclocking and TDP increases. Unfortunately, the $360 price tag is steep, and there are several good alternatives available.

www.techpowerup.com

AnandThenMan · Aug 7, 2024

1280x720 tests are still a thing?

Rigg · Aug 7, 2024

AnandThenMan said:
1280x720 tests are still a thing?

Not many reviewers still do them. They're using ultra settings at least. To be fair, there are people who play competitive shooters at 1080p low settings. But yeah, 720p data with a 4090 is mostly for teh science.

CouncilorIrissa · Aug 7, 2024

gdansk said:
I don't see having an 88W power target as sandbagging but rather a return to the norm. In my mind this is the way CPUs should ship and then tuners can push them to the limits. Hopefully Intel follows this with Arrow Lake too (and rumors suggest they may be).

Yeah.
There was a time where top-end client chip, the 7700K had a TDP of 91W.

scannall · Aug 7, 2024

There seems to be a wide spread amongst the reviewers. I'm guessing a few AGESA updates coming. Wendell at Level 1 for example had no problems and liked the product.

Rigg · Aug 7, 2024

Pushing power limits is stupid when it doesn't gain very much performance. Zen 4 X CPUs were clearly pushed too far, and their performance scaled horribly vs X3D, non X, and X eco mode. Zen 5 X sure seems to scale quite a bit better though. These should probably have slightly more aggressive default power limits.

cusideabelincoln · Aug 7, 2024

Any reviews that have memory scaling or overclocking numbers?

JM Popaleetus · Aug 7, 2024

Did AMD not address every complaint people had with Zen 4's launch? The MSRP is cheaper, they're more efficient, and they're faster. Stock vs stock, on average the 9700X is 5% faster using 35% less power than the 7700X in applications. As a cherry pick, der8auer's video has the 9700X using 44% less power than the 7700X in HWBot X265.

The only people that find this release disappointing are likely gamers, who should be waiting for the X3D chips anyway (or buying a discounted 7800X3D). Even then, from that video, the 9700X is still faster and more efficient:

Assassin's Creed: 2.19% faster using 9.67% less power.
Cyberpunk: 1.25% faster using 19.83% less power.
Counter Strike: 2.43% faster using 4% less power.
Valorant: 6.02% faster using 5.2% less power.

SFF community will love these chips, the 9950X should be a hit, and I eagerly await the 9800X3D (especially if the rumor it's completely unlocked is true).

Rigg · Aug 7, 2024

JM Popaleetus said:
Did AMD not address every complaint people had with Zen 4's launch? The MSRP is cheaper, they're efficient, and they're faster. Stock vs stock, on average the 9700X is 5% faster using 35% less power than the 7700X in applications. In der8auer's video, the 9700X uses 44% less power than the 7700X in HWBot X265.

Meh. The power efficiency gain is overblown because of the the 7700X comparison. It's efficiency is not nearly as impressive compared to the 7700 and 7800X3D in most workloads.

The only people that find this release disappointing are likely gamers, who should be waiting for the X3D chips anyway (or buying a discounted 7800X3D). Even then, from that video, the 9700X is still faster and more efficient:

Assassin's Creed: 2.19% faster using 9.67% less power.

Cyberpunk: 1.25% faster using 19.83% less power.

Counter Strike: 2.43% faster using 4% less power.

Valorant: 6.02% faster using 5.2% less power.

SFF community will love these chips, the 9950X looks to be a hit, and I eagerly await the 9800X3D.

The 7800X3D absolutely kills the 9700x in both gaming performance and efficiency.

AnandThenMan · Aug 7, 2024

3D cache is legit.

CakeMonster · Aug 7, 2024

I've watched 3 reviews now, one of them (can't remember which now) confirmed AMD had said that 6000 is still the sweet spot for memory. I'm not surprised, but a little disappointed as it could probably use more bandwidth.

JM Popaleetus · Aug 7, 2024

Rigg said:
The 7800X3D absolutely kills the 9700x in both gaming performance and efficiency.

I too think peaches are superior to apples. In fact, I even stated that gamers should buy a 7800X3D or wait for the 9800X3D.

In2Photos · Aug 7, 2024

HWUB on the 9700X efficiency.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1821307394238116061

Rigg · Aug 7, 2024

JM Popaleetus said:
I too think peaches are superior to apples. But that's not what's being compared.

720p with a 4090:

lakedude · Aug 7, 2024

Anandtech's own review is out.

Does this look right to you? Peak power lower than TDP?

Markfw · Aug 7, 2024

lakedude said:
Anandtech's own review is out.

Does this look right to you? Peak power lower than TDP?

View attachment 104743

Supposed to be 65 watt. Its a typo

gdansk · Aug 7, 2024

Markfw said:
Supposed to be 65 watt. Its a typo

Not a typo. 7800X3D is 120W TDP part.

Abwx · Aug 7, 2024

lakedude said:
Anandtech's own review is out.

Does this look right to you? Peak power lower than TDP?

View attachment 104743

That s right, AMD willfully exagerated the actual TDP so a 120W capable cooler would be mounted either by OEMs or DIY builders to ensure temps low enough for the V-cache.

Computerbase measured 81W CPU package power in Prime 95 and 155W full system power in Cinebench, wich amount to about the same CPU power.

FTR they measured 90W CPU power in Prime 95 for the 7700 and 170W system power in Cinebench.

You can see in the review that all X3D CPUs have power numbers well below their rated TDPs.

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D im Test

Am sehnlichsten erwartet, als letzter gestartet, aber jetzt ist er da: Der AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D mit 3D V-Cache im Test.

www.computerbase.de

AnandThenMan · Aug 7, 2024

lakedude said:
Anandtech's own review is out.

Core i9 should not be in any of those graphs since there is no way to know if performance will stay where it is or even if the chip will survive long term. Irresponsible testing.

lakedude · Aug 8, 2024

AnandThenMan said:
Core i9 should not be in any of those graphs since there is no way to know if performance will stay where it is or even if the chip will survive long term. Irresponsible testing.

That is discussed in the text of the article. Questionable RL chips get an "*" to indicate exactly what you are talking about.

"...we cannot in good consciousness recommend buying Intel’s high-end Raptor Lake chips until that microcode update is available.

But this problem will eventually get fixed. And in the meantime, we need to provide some kind of performance comparison for the Ryzen 9000 chips against both AMD’s previous-generation parts, as well as AMD’s competitors (spoiler: AMD is already winning, so pulling Intel’s chips now doesn’t do them any favors). Consequently, we’ve decided to include Intel’s chips anyhow, which are being marked with the classic and time-honored anomalous data symbol, the asterisk, to indicate that these are results from unfixed chips.

Hopefully, you’ll agree that this is a fair way to include the data for Intel’s chips so that we can compare their performance, while acknowledging that performance could very well change for the worse here in a matter of weeks."

Mahboi · Aug 8, 2024

Rigg said:
Not many reviewers still do them. They're using ultra settings at least. To be fair, there are people who play competitive shooters at 1080p low settings. But yeah, 720p data with a 4090 is mostly for teh science.

Will they someday switch to Radeon for CPU tests?
That driver overhead difference is no joke, it's a valid argument to test with AMD, even if the graphical perf isn't the best, the CPU can show its best chops. Although yes, most people want to know Nvidia perf anyway.

Review Ryzen 7 9700X Reviews

Diamond Member

Platinum Member

Diamond Member

Platinum Member

Senior member

Diamond Member

Senior member

Senior member

Golden Member

Senior member

Diamond Member

Senior member

Senior member

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Senior member

Platinum Member

Senior member

Platinum Member

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member

Platinum Member

Lifer

Diamond Member

Platinum Member

Golden Member