AMD Ryzen 7 7700X

[r9]

Well im more worried Intel gonna set Raptor Lake prices higher than AMD considering it cant beat Alder Lake.

If that's the case I'll just stick to my 9700k until ddr6 platforms come out so I can buy this one.
But there is no right or wrong here it's just demand and supply is if people are willing to pay those prices that is what it is.
I know I'm not.

 

[W1zzard]

was the 12900K used in the test an older example, still running with AVX 512 enabled?

Nope, tested with the latest BIOS. Everything at Intel defaults, too. No MCE or similar

 

[jonup]

So marginally better performance for a lot more money on and yeah 12700k wipes the floor with it.
So the only incentive would be to get to this platform for future upgrades but do you really want to with the current money grab direction AMD is going ?!
Ah and yes the AMD "dominance" in the last few years where they never ever beat intel in gaming performance which is what most people care for while for anything else unless you do rendering no mater what you buy it will be an overkill anyways.

I'm a little confused. 7700x has 4 less cores and threads, and matches (barely beats) 12700k, while using about 30W less. With the rumored specs of raptor, this should be more of 13600k competitor.

 

[Space Lynx]

No, it works on all modern AMD CPUs with all modern graphics cards from Intel, NVIDIA and AMD, and on all modern Intel CPUs with all modern graphics cards from AMD, NVIDIA and Intel.

The specification requires it to work universally, or not at all

I just researched it some more, you are correct. I did not know this. When SAM first launched, it required a ryzen 5000 and 6000 series AMD only product, but that has since changed. I didn't realize support was universal now, at launch it was not. The old article below also states this

What is AMD Smart Access Memory?

Smart Access Memory is a performance-boosting feature found inside AMD’s Ryzen 5000 series processors and Radeon 6000 series graphics cards

www.trustedreviews.com

 

[W1zzard]

SAM

Because they called it "Smart Access Memory" to confuse their customers

 

[r9]

I'm a little confused. 7700x has 4 less cores and threads, and matches (barely beats) 12700k, while using about 30W less. With the rumored specs of raptor, this should be more of 13600k competitor.
View attachment 263068

None of those things matter really only thing that matter is who's ahead and in both games and productivity 12700k is ahead and cheaper.
It might even need 50 more cores to achieve it still makes no difference.
30W more for that extra performance I can live with it.
Less cores = cheaper to make so it's a pro for AMD not the customer.
Only place where is justifiable to spend unproportinally more money to gain just that little extra performance even though I would never do it is at very cutting edge when you buy the top top product not at midrange.

 

[Space Lynx]

Because they called it "Smart Access Memory" to confuse their customers

They succeeded, I was confused until now.

None of those things matter really only thing that matter is who's ahead and in both games and productivity 12700k is ahead and cheaper.
It might even need 50 more cores to achieve it still makes no difference.
30W more for that extra performance I can live with it.

Do you know if all Intel motherboards allow for the turning off of E-Cores in the BIOS? that is the only thing I don't like about the new Intel chips.

 

[The Quim Reaper]

Nope, tested with the latest BIOS. Everything at Intel defaults, too. No MCE or similar

Then the only thing I can guess is that like the 12900K, the 7900X needs SMT disabling, to make use of AVX 512 in RPCS3 like the 12900K has to have its E-cores disabled or RPCS3 simply isn't running correctly on these new Ryzens yet and will need an update by the emulator authors.

Something isn't right, that's for sure. With a single core IPC matching Alder Lake, it shouldn't be nearly 40% slower

 

[Arkz]

The Best Zen 4 for Gaming​

$100 more than the 7600X for 3% more game perf in 720p and 0.1% in 4k. Well I'm sold!

 

[Space Lynx]

The Best Zen 4 for Gaming​

$100 more than the 7600X for 3% more game perf in 720p and 0.1% in 4k. Well I'm sold!

I think 7600x set to max pbo is best bang for buck cpu this launch if you are just a gamer, are doing a new build soon anyway, so it's a win win cause of the longevity of AM5 motherboard.

 

[W1zzard]

allow for the turning off of E-Cores in the BIOS?

Yes, and you will lose performance

RPCS3

the RPCS3 devs reached out and confirmed they'll have a new build soon that will improve performance on Zen 4

 

[MKRonin]

AIDA64 memory benchmark looks a little suspect...especially the write result.

 

[jsven008]

94C 0.0
The temperatures are insane, even with a high end cooler. Don't believe AMDs marketing that 95C is "fine" or "ok". And who wants to spend another $100 on a high end cooler just to maintain 95C? Or constantly fight against thermal throttling.

With high temperatures, not only will the PC generate a lot of heat, but also a lot of noise running fans at 100% to stay cooler. And good luck getting advertised performance with a prebuilt PC like HP that will constantly throttle.

The temperatures are a real dealbreaker (if I wanted a PC that sounds like a jumbo jet on takeoff I'd buy an 11900k). And this is from someone who owns AMD stock. I really wanted to like this CPU, but with those temps I can't. Some like it hot, but this is too hot.

 

[Pepamami]

I would still rather go with the 12700K over the 7700X based off the temps alone.

I would go for 5950X or 5800X3D, since Intel cant treat their costumers well, and new Zen4 is hot as hell.

 

[LuxZg]

I'd like to make a request, no hurry though could we get some numbers for 7600X and 7700X in ECO/65W mode. I'd like to gauge how much performance loss it would be. I'm hoping they release non-X models eventually at 65W stock.

Edit: and thanks for all those benches and re-benching so many CPUs!

 

[Space Lynx]

I'd like to make a request, no hurry though could we get some numbers for 7600X and 7700X in ECO/65W mode. I'd like to gauge how much performance loss it would be. I'm hoping they release non-X models eventually at 65W stock.

Edit: and thanks for all those benches and re-benching so many CPUs!

you can probably find these results somewhere else. keep in mind everyone is dumping their reviews today. gamersnexus, jayz2cents, linus, techspot, ars technica, and i could go on and on

jayz loves it

94C 0.0
The temperatures are insane, even with a high end cooler. Don't believe AMDs marketing that 95C is "fine" or "ok". And who wants to spend another $100 on a high end cooler just to maintain 95C? Or constantly fight against thermal throttling.

With high temperatures, not only will the PC generate a lot of heat, but also a lot of noise running fans at 100% to stay cooler. And good luck getting advertised performance with a prebuilt PC like HP that will constantly throttle.

The temperatures are a real dealbreaker (if I wanted a PC that sounds like a jumbo jet on takeoff I'd buy an 11900k). And this is from someone who owns AMD stock. I really wanted to like this CPU, but with those temps I can't. Some like it hot, but this is too hot.

thermal throttling doesn't exist anymore. watch the Jayz video, he explains it at around 13 minutes in.

 

[Shazamy]

I thought now that we're getting super high frame rates even on 4K, that the CPUs would matter more at that resolution.
Can anyone explain why the faster CPUs get practically the same FPS as much slower CPUs get at 4k res even at frame rates over 120 or 200?

 

[Mistral]

Question about overclocking... With Ryzen, wasn't overclocking more successful in a way different than bumping the voltage and increasing the multiplier?

 

[MxPhenom 216]

I thought now that we're getting super high frame rates even on 4K, that the CPUs would matter more at that resolution.
Can anyone explain why the faster CPUs get practically the same FPS as much slower CPUs get at 4k res even at frame rates over 120 or 200?

Because those scenarios become much more GPU dependent than CPU. CPU is able to send the GPU more data than the GPU is able to render at any instance in time. Look at 720p benches. Its the opposite. The gpu can basically sit idle at that res for the most part waiting for its work from CPU. It can process those frames so much faster.

Techpowerup is such a big website with nice forum who help thousands but their reviews are crap! When you test gpus or cpus the most important thing is to test MIN fps in games...still after so many years they did not learn basics of component testing. I would not be surprised if they did not test components themselves only copy other tests from the internet. Sad but truth!
Here where I live 7700x with ddr5 5200 tests are not looking that good...zen 4 is very hot and expensive and the good thing its using much less power than alder lake...
For final conclusions lets wait for raptor lake.

No. Just because TPU reviews dont look at mins doesnt mean they can just be written off as bogus. You also dont know for sure what Wizz is doing for his reviews. So unless you have proof tpu copies numbers from other sites dont throw that shit around.

 

[r9]

you can probably find these results somewhere else. keep in mind everyone is dumping their reviews today. gamersnexus, jayz2cents, linus, techspot, ars technica, and i could go on and on

jayz loves it

thermal throttling doesn't exist anymore. watch the Jayz video, he explains it at around 13 minutes in.

Are we back to the Duron times ?

 

[jsven008]

Thermal throttling doesn't exist anymore. watch the Jayz video, he explains it at around 13 minutes in.

Thermal throttle or performance throttle. Gray or grey? The end result is the same. Lower performance.

If you dont believe me, try a 7700x with a stock $10 cooler.

 

[Dirt Chip]

So zen4 are in line with AL preformance, about the same cost if not more (considering the expensive motherboard), consume same amount of W and produce much heat.
What did I miss?

 

[Denver]

Can you show the settings used in the RPCS3?

I expected a little more, the performance gain is inconsistent in games, unfortunately it leaves a lot of scope for the more expensive 3D models to take the crown.

And there also seems to be some fault on the part of AMD regarding the IHS used, a difference of -20° after the delid: m.youtube.com/watch?v=y_jaS_FZcjI

 

[W1zzard]

Just because TPU reviews dont look at mins doesnt mean they can just be written off as bogus

Umm .. have you seen the frametimes page? @error1984

 

[tvshacker]

Thanks @W1zzard for keeping the 2700X in this review.
On the downside it's making me consider upgrading to a 5700X or 5900X if a good deal shows up...

Meanwhile can someone help me understand how a ~5% performance gap between the 2700X and the 5900X in 2020 grew to ~25% in 2022

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X Review The Ryzen 9 5900X dominates Intel's Core i9-10900K in our testing because of AMD's massive IPC improvements. At $550, this processor is certainly not cheap, but it offers so much more performance, especially single-threaded, that AMD has a clear winner on their hands. www.techpowerup.com	AMD Ryzen 7 7700X Review - The Best Zen 4 for Gaming With the Ryzen 7 7700X, AMD is introducing their fastest Zen 4 processor for gamers. In our review we found out that gaming on the 7700X runs better than the 7900X and 7950X, thanks to the single CCD design of the 7700X. Just like on other high-end AM5 CPUs, temperatures are a problem though. www.techpowerup.com