AMD Ryzen 7000 non-X Processor SKUs Confirmed with 65W TDP, Boxed Coolers

[btarunr]

Ahead of their market debut early January, we got confirmation of the specifications of the three upcoming AMD Ryzen 7000 series non-X processor SKUs. There will indeed only be three new SKUs, the 6-core/12-thread Ryzen 5 7600, the 8-core/16-thread Ryzen 7 7700, and the 12-core/24-thread Ryzen 9 7900; and no 16-core part. All three SKUs have their TDP rated at 65 W, which means that their PIB (processor in box) retail packages will include a stock cooling solution. The 7600 comes with a Wraith Stealth cooler that's capable of handling thermal loads of 65 W TDP processors at stock speeds; while the 7700 and 7900 will include a feature-packed Wraith Prism RGB cooler that's designed for 140 W TDP processors. Since Socket AM5 has cooler compatibility with AM4, AMD could simply be reusing the same coolers it packed with past-generation Ryzen processors.

The Ryzen 5 7600 comes with an MSRP of USD $229, clock speeds of up to 5.10 GHz boost, and targets the likes of the Intel Core i5-13600 or i5-12600. The $329 MSRP Ryzen 7 7700 ticks at speeds of up to 5.30 GHz boost, and is designed to compete with the Core i7-13700 or i7-12700. The Ryzen 9 7900 has an interesting price tag of $429 (MSRP), ticks at speeds of up to 5.40 GHz boost, and purportedly competes against the Core i9-13900 (non-K) and i9-12900. The three chips should be drop-in compatible with Socket AM5 motherboards being sold right now, likely with no need for a BIOS update. Although launch of these three SKUs in January is certain, the company might use the 2023 International CES keynote address by its CEO Dr Lisa Su to either tease or announce the Ryzen 7000X3D processors featuring 3D Vertical Cache memory, which is known to boost gaming performance.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

And launching at the prices the (X) series should have launched at.

If these are remotely close to the (X) series in performance then AMD may as well discontinue the (X) until the 3D parts arrive.

 

[tfdsaf]

AMD needs to lower prices, they can't sell these at the suggested prices. The 7600 needs to be $200, while the 7600x needs to be $250, not a penny more!

Intel is destroying them with higher core counts, better gaming performance and much better multithreaded performance, while being a little a bit more expensive!

The 13600k is the sweet spot of great value and great at every field.

The 7700 needs to be something like $290 at most, with the 7700x at $330

 

[eidairaman1]

AMD needs to lower prices, they can't sell these at the suggested prices. The 7600 needs to be $200, while the 7600x needs to be $250, not a penny more!

Intel is destroying them with higher core counts, better gaming performance and much better multithreaded performance, while being a little a bit more expensive!

The 13600k is the sweet spot of great value and great at every field.

The 7700 needs to be something like $290 at most, with the 7700x at $330

Ya and a socket change every other year (intel)

Give it a rest

Where your system specs?

 

[Deleted member 185088]

And launching at the prices the (X) series should have launched at.

If these are remotely close to the (X) series in performance then AMD may as well discontinue the (X) until the 3D parts arrive.

Unless AMD does an Intel they should unlocked and with an overclock they should perform similarly to the X versions.

AMD needs to lower prices, they can't sell these at the suggested prices. The 7600 needs to be $200, while the 7600x needs to be $250, not a penny more!

Intel is destroying them with higher core counts, better gaming performance and much better multithreaded performance, while being a little a bit more expensive!

The 13600k is the sweet spot of great value and great at every field.

The 7700 needs to be something like $290 at most, with the 7700x at $330

I would argue the prices are sane now, motherboards are the issue, e.g. the B650 Mortar is 100% more expensive than the B550.
Motherboards should be priced half what they are now to make AM5 interesting.

 

[Chaitanya]

B&H had listed AM5 CPUs with bundles cooler for quite sometime now.

 

[Mussels]

I wanna see their gaming performance


The 5700x for example made a niche of its own for being the perfect gaming chip (before the x3D came along) with low overall wattage, great ST performance and decent MT performance while barely using any juice and being cooled by a mild fart

 

[AsRock]

AMD needs to lower prices, they can't sell these at the suggested prices. The 7600 needs to be $200, while the 7600x needs to be $250, not a penny more!

Intel is destroying them with higher core counts, better gaming performance and much better multithreaded performance, while being a little a bit more expensive!

The 13600k is the sweet spot of great value and great at every field.

The 7700 needs to be something like $290 at most, with the 7700x at $330

When i got my 7700X it was $330, now $346 so.

 

[Pumper]

Well, at least they are optimistic with the "competing CPUs", lol. 13600 is between 7700X and 7900X in overall performance, but AMD is dreaming about the 7600 being the competitor?

 

[ratirt]

For a gaming CPU these could really be useful if and lower power consumption. If the price for the mobos go down it would be a very nice option but I guess we will have to wait for that a bit more.
If I were to change my CPU it would have been one of those non-k or non-x

 

[Space Lynx]

AMD really needs to work on its NVME performance. on Raptor Lake my KC3000 1TB scores were insanely high, but on 7700x I got below average, but still acceptable scores in crystaldiskmark. There is a reason reviewers use Intel when testing nvme drives, never knew this until recently. Raptor Lake also felt more snappy than my 7700x rig, so it wasn't just placebo.

That being said, I still appreciate that AMD cares more about gamers than the other two companies. I know I will not go Nvidia again due to cost (my 6800 XT at $540 was a bang of a deal) and AMD has consistently always allowed great gaming experiences at more affordable price for the working class, and I respect that.

 

[Mussels]

AMD really needs to work on its NVME performance. on Raptor Lake my KC3000 1TB scores were insanely high, but on 7700x I got below average, but still acceptable scores in crystaldiskmark. There is a reason reviewers use Intel when testing nvme drives, never knew this until recently. Raptor Lake also felt more snappy than my 7700x rig, so it wasn't just placebo.

That being said, I still appreciate that AMD cares more about gamers than the other two companies. I know I will not go Nvidia again due to cost (my 6800 XT at $540 was a bang of a deal) and AMD has consistently always allowed great gaming experiences at more affordable price for the working class, and I respect that.

I was aware of this on chipset lanes, but not CPU lanes

Sure this isn't a case of specific benchmarks being platform biased?

 

[Space Lynx]

I was aware of this on chipset lanes, but not CPU lanes

Sure this isn't a case of specific benchmarks being platform biased?

I only used crystaldiskmark, but I can also tell an overall "snappiness" feeling when using Intel raptor lake in day to day usage, even just using file explorer. It's def not placebo.

 

[pressing on]

The issue simply is that the imminent Intel i5 13400/F, 13500 and 13600 CPUs will all run in a cheap B660 motherboard with DDR4 memory, including any existing DDR4 memory. This will make them extremely well-placed for both new builds and upgrades in a budget sector of the market where every $, £ and € etc counts. The AMD 7600 will be hampered from the outset by higher board costs and higher DDR5 memory costs. At some stage the memory costs issue will go away but probably not this year. It might be worth noting that the Spring 2023 CPUs are actually based on the Alder Lake die used to produce the 12600K and upwards. There are rumours that Intel will produce a further round of budget i5s in Spring 2024 that will be based on the Raptor Lake die. This would make Alder Lake/Raptor Lake a three year platform instead of the usual two years.

As Alder Lake/Raptor Lake CPUs are dual DDR4/DDR5 even users on cheap DDR4 boards could transition to a DDR5 board in the future and keep their CPU, although they would still be changing the board and memory. Or they could keep existing DDR4 boards and memory and upgrade to a Raptor Lake budget i5 in 2024.

 

[Space Lynx]

The issue simply is that the imminent Intel i5 13400/F, 13500 and 13600 CPUs will all run in a cheap B660 motherboard with DDR4 memory, including any existing DDR4 memory. This will make them extremely well-placed for both new builds and upgrades in a budget sector of the market where every $, £ and € etc counts. The AMD 7600 will be hampered from the outset by higher board costs and higher DDR5 memory costs. At some stage the memory costs issue will go away but probably not this year. It might be worth noting that the Spring 2023 CPUs are actually based on the Alder Lake die used to produce the 12600K and upwards. There are rumours that Intel will produce a further round of budget i5s in Spring 2024 that will be based on the Raptor Lake die. This would make Alder Lake/Raptor Lake a three year platform instead of the usual two years. It's possible because the CPUs are dual DDR4/DDR5 so even users on cheap DDR4 boards could transition to a DDR5 board in the future and keep their CPU, although they would still be changing the board and memory.

raptor lake still loses about 10-20 fps in games without ddr5. just a side note.

 

[pressing on]

raptor lake still loses about 10-20 fps in games without ddr5. just a side note.

The benchmarks I've seen show there is a difference, sometimes very little but nothing consistently like those numbers. But it will obviously vary depending on the game and screen resolution. I have seen comments that the lower latency of DDR4 gives a smoother gaming experience so it may be more that just fps that matter.

 

[Daven]

AMDs lineup looks good enough:

7950X3D $700
7950X $575
7900X3D $550
7900X $450
7900 $430
7800X3D $400
7700X $350
7700 $330
7600X $250
7600 $230

Sub $200 CPUs are served by the AM4 socket and 5000 series.

 

[Mussels]

I only used crystaldiskmark, but I can also tell an overall "snappiness" feeling when using Intel raptor lake in day to day usage, even just using file explorer. It's def not placebo.

considering how easy it is to set up a PC entirely differently, that's not much to go on


you can set a higher DPI setting in windows and suddenly wow the mouse moves so fast and its so snappy, refresh rates, etc

 

[Space Lynx]

considering how easy it is to set up a PC entirely differently, that's not much to go on


you can set a higher DPI setting in windows and suddenly wow the mouse moves so fast and its so snappy, refresh rates, etc

i do everything exactly the same when i do clean installs and tests.

at end of day though it doesn't matter, I am happy with AMD. I just found it rather interesting is all.

The benchmarks I've seen show there is a difference, sometimes very little but nothing consistently like those numbers. But it will obviously vary depending on the game and screen resolution. I have seen comments that the lower latency of DDR4 gives a smoother gaming experience so it may be more that just fps that matter.

Had not heard about this smoother claim in games before, very interesting.

 

[AsRock]

I was aware of this on chipset lanes, but not CPU lanes

Sure this isn't a case of specific benchmarks being platform biased?

His post lacks a lot of context even more not knowing the full system specs.

 

[Chrispy_]

I just checked pricing; The cheapest, nastiest AM5 board and 32GB of slow-ass DDR5-4800 are still $140 more than a good quality B550 board with fast DDR4.

Given that difference, you could get a Ryzen 9 5900X or 5800X3D instead of a Ryzen 5 7600, which is no-brainer. If you don't have the budget for a faster DDR5 kit, and nicer board, you're going to have a horrible experience on AM5 anyway, so why bother?

Motherboard prices are still ruining AM5, no matter what AMD do to the MSRPs on their CPUs.

 

[tussinman]

raptor lake still loses about 10-20 fps in games without ddr5. just a side note.

From what i've seen up to 20FPS is mostly in games that are already running well over 144hz (which means most people won't even notice) and the DDR5 you see with decent leaps over DDR4 are reviewers running those $250-300 dollar ram kits which obviously isn't in play for the scenario he was talking about (mid level/value price tier)

The benchmarks I've seen show there is a difference, sometimes very little but nothing consistently like those numbers. But it will obviously vary depending on the game and screen resolution. I have seen comments that the lower latency of DDR4 gives a smoother gaming experience so it may be more that just fps that matter.

From what i've seen the games that are showing good 10-25fps jumps are games that area already running over 150FPS on DDR4 so it's moot for most people. The reviewers are also alot of times running DDR5 kits that are $250-300 so like you said the mid level and budget buyers where never going to buy ram that pricey anyways

 

[oldwalltree]

Might finally swap out my 8600k for one of these!

 

[AnotherReader]

From what i've seen up to 20FPS is mostly in games that are already running well over 144hz (which means most people won't even notice) and the DDR5 you see with decent leaps over DDR4 are reviewers running those $250-300 dollar ram kits which obviously isn't in play for the scenario he was talking about (mid level/value price tier)

While I agree that DDR5 usually shows benefits in cases where the frame rates are already high, the pricing disparity between DDR5 and DDR4 isn't that bad now. Techspot used DDR5 6000 CL36 in their comparison with DDR4 last year. In the USA, It's around $180 on Newegg and DDR4 3600 CL16 is about $153 there. I think that price difference isn't significant enough to choose the slower DDR4.

 

[Jism]

AMD needs to lower prices, they can't sell these at the suggested prices. The 7600 needs to be $200, while the 7600x needs to be $250, not a penny more!

Intel is destroying them with higher core counts, better gaming performance and much better multithreaded performance, while being a little a bit more expensive!

The 13600k is the sweet spot of great value and great at every field.

The 7700 needs to be something like $290 at most, with the 7700x at $330

You obviously have'nt seen a business from inside, did you? R&D is the first thing thats taxed upon sales, meaning R&D has to be paid back first before they even think of selling it for cheaper. Always has bin like that. 3 years of engineering usually goes into chips.