No, the tweet is a month old I think.I have no doubt that's based on the temps from this very thread.
Yeah, also the leaked numbers from the AMD event were 42k stock and 44k PBO. No way this ES does 46k. Something is off.
I know AMD says it is better, but 7950X ran at 95° pretty much everywhere. There's no way we are sitting at 60° now with 9950X. Also the numbers are higher than the leaked PBO ones.
It was 43.3k at 5ghz all coreAll the numbers are quite consistent w.r.t. PPC. The stock AMD run had a score of 42k at 5.0 GHz, the ES is 46k at 5.28 GHz, and the mild OC AMD (on LN2) is 51k at 5.85 GHz all core.
So default settings "out of the box" setting? Or something else, manual static OC?Nope
Whoops that makes it even more consistent . Thanks for the correction.It was 43.3k at 5ghz all corehttps://x.com/9550pro/status/1813063693682557174?s=46
Not Tweets, an article.Hassan (yeah I know, I know) did allude to GNR being unusually cool in one of his tweets.
AMD's Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" CPUs by default will run cooler than Ryzen 7000 "Zen 4" CPUs. Based on testing with a Ryzen 9 9950X CPU (Default ES), the chip consumed up to 190W of power whereas the Ryzen 9 7950X consumes around 220-ish Watts of power in the same workloads. The workload being performed here is Cinebench R23 and we got some interesting numbers here too. The 9950X is almost as fast as the Core i9-14900KS by default and that chip can consume over 300W of power with its extreme profile.
This is gonna take some time with so many different PPT levels to bench. I think I need to do 80, 100, 120, 160, 200, 230, 253, and unlimited. 253 and unlimited will do nothing because it doesn't even hit the 230W PPT cap at stock, but I'll run them anyway.I'll try my best
Do ones for 253W and Unlimited too.
But it doesn't make sense that stock ES is better than PBO scores that AMD shows officially. AlsoAll the numbers are quite consistent w.r.t. PPC.
I wonder if there's some weird offset that causes the temps to be reported N degrees lower than they actually are.But it doesn't make sense that stock ES is better than PBO scores that AMD shows officially. Also
AMDs slide says Ryzen 9000 is 7° cooler at same power. And now this ES runs at 230W with 60°?!?. 7950X needed a chiller to even get to 230W at 95°. Most reviews with AIO measured a Max powerdraw of 190-200W for 7950X because it simply ran into the 95° Limit. So this ES looks to be more like 40-45° cooler at same power. Very suspicious.
Yeah I'm more likely to believe temperature reporting being off on the ES...maybe the sensors aren't configured properly idk .I wonder if there's some weird offset that causes the temps to be reported N degrees lower than they actually are.
I wouldn't trust anything from that account.
yeah, low wattage runs report temperatures in the low 30s, that's impossible.Yeah I'm more likely to believe temperature reporting being off on the ES...maybe the sensors aren't configured properly idk .
CCD: N4PHas it been confirmed the process node used for the CCD and IOD in 9000 series ??
Mobile is slower than desktop per clock. That's normal.Zen 5 mobile seem to have worse performance per clock vs desktop zen 5 in geekbench 6. Hx 370: 2860@5.1ghz
My bad. I forgot about the first screenshot.
No, yours is coming. Soon. Hopefully.
Me too. So the numbers from AMD event (42k stock, 44k PBO, 45.5K Curve Shaper) could be true. But this still is like the best ES ever.My bad. I forgot about the first screenshot.
Or it's just grateful for the royal treatment (custom watercooling)But this still is like the best ES ever.
I wonder how many seconds it can operate like this before it dies?14900kf
1.45V
417.6W
P-cores 6ghz / E-cores: 4.8
R23: 45K
Have you ever seen temperature readouts of EPYC chips @400 W under decent air cooling? Let alone water cooling.And now this ES runs at 230W with 60°?!?
Do you happen to know the ambient temperature which the leaker maintained?yeah, low wattage runs report temperatures in the low 30s, that's impossible.