AMD Readies Ryzen 5 7600X3D to Rescue its Ryzen 5 AM5 Lineup

[btarunr]

AMD is reportedly giving finishing touches to the Ryzen 5 7600X3D 6-core/12-thread processor featuring 3D V-cache. The company plans to launch this chip in early September 2024. The timing of this launch is particularly interesting, given that the company just got its Ryzen 9000 "Granite Ridge" desktop processors powered by the latest "Zen 5" microarchitecture into the shelves. The 7600X3D is probably designed to be the company's fastest gaming processor in the Ryzen 5 series, the Ryzen 5 9600X is already 5.2% faster in games than the Intel Core i5-14600K, however, the 14600K makes up for this with 7.8% better multithreaded application performance. The 7600X3D with its 3D V-cache could offer a sufficiently higher gaming performance than the i5-14600K to woo the sub-$300 crowd to the AMD camp.

Why "Zen 4" now? AMD is definitely developing a Ryzen 9000X3D series powered by "Zen 5," but those processors probably won't arrive until the very end of 2024 or Q1-2025. It's easier for the company to come up with the 7600X3D by simply disabling two cores from the 8-core "Zen 4" 3D V-cache CCD used in the popular 7800X3D. Not much else is known about the 7600X3D other than its existence, its likely core-count of 6-core/12-thread, and of course its cache sizes of 1 MB per core L2, with 96 MB of L3 cache (32 MB on-die + 64 MB 3D V-cache).



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Pumper]

If they want to "rescue" AM5, maybe they should stop releasing new AM4 CPUs?

I wonder if the 7600X3D will entice the people on a budget to go for AM5 over 5700X3D.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Considering how much the 7900X3D price has cratered they probably think they can make more money selling this.

Guessing $229-249 any more expensive and it doesn't make sense. Although it should be $199.

 

[sethmatrix7]

Interesting. Could shape up to be the definite mid range gaming cpu for those hoping to upgrade in the future without changing boards. Hope TPU gets one to review.

 

[Visible Noise]

AMD marketing strikes again. Stay on message is 101 level stuff. Zen 4 isn’t the message.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

If they want to "rescue" AM5, maybe they should stop releasing new AM4 CPUs?

Word on the street is they are still making Zen 3 based server products so the reject CCDs gotta go somewhere.

 

[hsew]

With how terribly the Zen 5 launch has gone, this is a questionable move at best. Does AMD wish to further cannibalize sales of their newest lineup, which is already struggling to sell?

 

[mb194dc]

It'll give amazing performance at 720 and 1080p, with a nearly 2k 4090, no doubt about that...

 

[phanbuey]

With how terribly the Zen 5 launch has gone, this is a questionable move at best. Does AMD wish to further cannibalize sales of their newest lineup, which is already struggling to sell?

Yeah this is... an interesting move. 9800X3D would have made way more sense but oh well those dies gotta go somewhere.

 

[oooiii222]

In fact, six cores are not enough for high-end gamers, adding 3D Cash to it will undoubtedly increase its price, and players in this part of the budget range redirected by AMD will obviously consider the eight cores more 7800X3D.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Yeah this is... an interesting move.

My guess is the 7900X3D is not making them any money dropping to 350 usd ish.... Why not sell this product for $249 instead and see where it goes. Also this should be only slightly behind the best gaming cpu currently out period while being much cheaper.

To me it makes sense if they have no immediate plans for a 9600X3D and want to charge 400+ for the cheapest 9000X3D product.

This product likely was planned prior to the 9000 series launch they also seem to be doing a wide release of a Am4 option giving both platforms good gaming options at the low end.

They probably rather continue to sell 7000 series to consumers with the majority of good 9000 series ccd going to server where it actually is pretty good.

 

[john_]

Where would AMD be today if some engineer haven't thought "Let's put 64MB cache on one CCD and see what happens"?

AM4 is still selling thanks to X3D.
AMD is winning in gaming benchmarks thanks to X3D.
9000 series is a failure and people still waiting for the 9000 X3D versions.


Anyway, AMD needs to offer that 5500X3D at less than $150, and this 7600X3D at less than $250. The more X3D models they throw in the market the better for them. It's the only way to face Intel that is winning the multithreading benchmarks offering more cores. In fact AMD needs to lower the cost of putting those memory chips on top of it's CCDs so much as much as it will make them a mandatory part of the chip. Imagine a (let's say) 10000 series, where ALL models come with X3D cache on them at the same prices we see today the non X3D models.

If they want to "rescue" AM5, maybe they should stop releasing new AM4 CPUs?

I wonder if the 7600X3D will entice the people on a budget to go for AM5 over 5700X3D.

There are no low cost Zen4/5 models in the market, no cheap AM5 boards in the market and DDR5 still is much more expensive than DDR4.
If AMD stops supporting AM4 people will go straight to Intel for a cheaper option.

 

[ViperXZ]

Where would AMD be today if some engineer haven't thought "Let's put 64MB cache on one CCD and see what happens"?

AM4 is still selling thanks to X3D.
AMD is winning in gaming benchmarks thanks to X3D.
9000 series is a failure and people still waiting for the 9000 X3D versions.


Anyway, AMD needs to offer that 5500X3D at less than $150, and this 7600X3D at less than $250. The more X3D models they throw in the market the better for them. It's the only way to face Intel that is winning the multithreading benchmarks offering more cores. In fact AMD needs to lower the cost of putting those memory chips on top of it's CCDs so much as much as it will make them a mandatory part of the chip. Imagine a (let's say) 10000 series, where ALL models come with X3D cache on them at the same prices we see today the non X3D models.

With the recent train wreck of Intel AMD would still be easily ahead of Intel as one must be a lunatic to buy CPUs that are inefficient and frequently broken. The best CPU is 7800X3D the 2nd best is 5800X3D and the 3rd best is Zen 4, the fourth is Zen 3 and only then Intels stuff comes. Maybe 12900K ahead of Zen 3, but still inefficient.

 

[john_]

With how terribly the Zen 5 launch has gone, this is a questionable move at best. Does AMD wish to further cannibalize sales of their newest lineup, which is already struggling to sell?

Maybe they don't care if the chip they sell is Zen 3, 4 or 5, as long as it is NOT Intel.

With the recent train wreck of Intel AMD would still be easily ahead of Intel as one must be a lunatic to buy CPUs that are inefficient and frequently broken. The best CPU is 7800X3D the 2nd best is 5800X3D and the 3rd best is Zen 4, the fourth is Zen 3 and only then Intels stuff comes. Maybe 12900K ahead of Zen 3, but still inefficient.

Have you heard ANYTHING after Intel's release of the final firmware/bios whatever that supposently fixes the problem? I haven't.
This is already old news and the vast majority buying OEM systems don't even know about the issue. What they know is that OEM PC A comes with 12 cores and OEM PC B comes with 8 cores. They don't even understant what that 4+8 means next to that 12 number. 12 > 8, "I buy the 12 cores model".

 

[ViperXZ]

don't even know about the issue

Don’t knowing something didn’t prevent their pcs from breaking down, probably increasing OEM support costs tenfold.

whatever that supposently fixes the problem?

A broken cpu will still be broken and one nearly broken because it was used overvolted for months will also not be fixed by this. But Intel warranty is a help I guess. The inefficiency remains. After some time someone can buy 2 CPUs instead of one for that energy bill, it’s funny. I hope EU will make a limit on CPU and GPU power waste so that efficiency (some base line) will become mandatory.

 

[dir_d]

This may be the upgrade to 5800x3d

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

I think a lot of people are expecting a new generation to phase out the old, but that does not have to be the case. One way for companies to hit price points is to sell the “old” with the new. Apple sells multiple generations of SOCs in iPhones, iPads, and Macs, for example, and price differentiates the product application. What we don’t actually need is “refresh” products that artificially obsolete the previous generation while not actually offering anything new, and worse, possibly dropping support for the old. I think that this classic approach of “new year gets a new model, old model gets retired” is outdated. Most consumers don’t care what generation a product is, as long as it meets their needs and fits their budget, and generational performance gains just aren’t as substantial as they were years ago. Anyone can always buy the latest and greatest, but there are millions of people who would be just as happy with an AM4 rig as they would an AM5, or an Adler Lake instead of a Raptor Lake. The only thing that really makes those products obsolete is when AMD and Intel stop selling them.

 

[Ayhamb99]

Is AMD trying to hurt Zen 5 sales even more with this? If they actually release this what would even be the point of buying the 9600X unless someone is strictly doing applications only and no gaming.

 

[theglaze]

Is AMD trying to hurt Zen 5 sales even more with this? If they actually release this what would even be the point of buying the 9600X unless someone is strictly doing applications only and no gaming.

7800X3D only boosts to 5.0Ghz, and 7600X3D will (probably) have lower clocks. So in titles/resolutions where the 3D V-Cache doesn't help much, the difference in core clock from 9600X (5.4Ghz) to 7600X3D (4.9Ghz?) will be even greater.

9600X beat or 'tied' 7800X3D in 10 of 14 tests TPU performed at 1440p, or 5 of 14 at 1080p. Not sure why people keep missing that.

 

[Steevo]

7800X3D only boosts to 5.0Ghz, and 7600X3D will (probably) have lower clocks. So in titles/resolutions where the 3D V-Cache doesn't help much, the difference in core clock from 9600X (5.4Ghz) to 7600X3D (4.9Ghz?) will be even greater.

9600X beat or tied 7800X3D in 10 of 14 tests TPU performed at 1440p, or 5 of 14 at 1080p. Not sure why people keep missing that.

I await a overclockable 9800X3D, I just wonder if they have uncoupled the 3D from the L3/Core cache speed or if its just looser timings or better manufacturing.

 

[tussinman]

In fact, six cores are not enough for high-end gamers

Says who? Zen 5 has almost identical performance from 6 to 8 core variants. Main reason why is cache and max boost clocks are similar for both. On the Intel side raptor lake i7s usually have a decent step up in gaming performance over the i5s but that's because it has 300mhz higher clocks and more cache. Having 2 less cores isn't the culprit.

adding 3D Cash to it will undoubtedly increase its price, and players in this part of the budget range redirected by AMD will obviously consider the eight cores more 7800X3D.

But adding 3d cache is how it will get higher performance. People will vote with their wallets, if the 6-core variant is $80-100 cheaper but 98% as good then it will be popular

 

[kapone32]

The problem for AMD is that the 7800X3D is their best selling AM5 chip by some measure. The APUs are too expensive on AM5, thanks to the success of the handheld market. They did not sample the 7900X3D ( I have one) and that made the internet sour to the point where there are people who have never used that chip berate it as being "Garbage". That narrative was so strong that there was a point a couple months back that the 7900X3D was cheaper than a 7800X. The 7950X3D is also an expensive chip.

AM5 is also at a point where costs should come down for 1st gen parts. When the X870,X870E boards launch there will still be plenty of B650 and X670E boards to sell at better prices and 32GB DDR5 6000 30 timing RAM from TEAM is regularly $129 CAD on sale on Newegg. With the boom going on in the US I expect this chip to rival the 7800X3D in sales once released.

 

[john_]

I think a lot of people are expecting a new generation to phase out the old, but that does not have to be the case. One way for companies to hit price points is to sell the “old” with the new. Apple sells multiple generations of SOCs in iPhones, iPads, and Macs, for example, and price differentiates the product application. What we don’t actually need is “refresh” products that artificially obsolete the previous generation while not actually offering anything new, and worse, possibly dropping support for the old. I think that this classic approach of “new year gets a new model, old model gets retired” is outdated. Most consumers don’t care what generation a product is, as long as it meets their needs and fits their budget, and generational performance gains just aren’t as substantial as they were years ago. Anyone can always buy the latest and greatest, but there are millions of people who would be just as happy with an AM4 rig as they would an AM5, or an Adler Lake instead of a Raptor Lake. The only thing that really makes those products obsolete is when AMD and Intel stop selling them.

I think CPUs are becoming like every other hardware, where even old models can sell in the market years after their release.
The first HDD for example with a capacity of 4TBs, was released back in 2011. How many check if their ***new*** 4TB HDD that they got for storage is a model first released in 2024, 2020 or 2016? Performance is probably more or less the same, between those models and capacity obviously the same. Most hardware is valid in the market for many years. In GPUs we have 2-3-more generations selling at various price points(AMD: Vega, RDNA2, RDNA3, soon RDNA3.5 - Nvidia: 4000, 3000 and still 2000, 1600 series and 1000 series in mobiles and sub $150 discrete market).
Apple has gone from the company that only sells 2 models to the company that sells multiple generations of models. Many just want an Apple, they don't care if it is a 3 years old model as long as the price is right for them.
Hardware remains in the market for much longer now, because it has far exceeded the needs of the majority of consumers.

 

[kapone32]

I think CPUs are becoming like every other hardware, where even old models can sell in the market years after their release.
The first HDD for example with a capacity of 4TBs, was released back in 2011. How many check if their ***new*** 4TB HDD that they got for storage is a model first released in 2024, 2020 or 2016? Performance is probably more or less the same, between those models and capacity obviously the same. Most hardware is valid in the market for many years. In GPUs we have 2-3-more generations selling at various price points(AMD: Vega, RDNA2, RDNA3, soon RDNA3.5 - Nvidia: 4000, 3000 and still 2000, 1600 series and 1000 series in mobiles and sub $150 discrete market).
Apple has gone from the company that only sells 2 models to the company that sells multiple generations of models. Many just want an Apple, they don't care if it is a 3 years old model as long as the price is right for them.
Hardware remains in the market for much longer now, because it has far exceeded the needs of the majority of consumers.

The PC Market is for the entire World. Right now Africa and parts of South America are on 7 to 9th Gen Intel and AM3. AM4 is like nothing before it as the longevity has only things like Windows XP as rivals. When you think about that it really is insane that 10 years from now some places will be experiencing AM4 for the first time. I use my AM4 rigs for Mining though, I just cannot sell my MSI X570S Ace Max. I love MBs that are extreme that is why my daughters PC uses the Asus B550 XE which is head and shoulders above most X570 boards. This chip will sell MBs.

If they want to "rescue" AM5, maybe they should stop releasing new AM4 CPUs?

I wonder if the 7600X3D will entice the people on a budget to go for AM5 over 5700X3D.

They want to have 2 revenue streams in Desktop PC.

 

[john_]

The PC Market is for the entire World. Right now Africa and parts of South America are on 7 to 9th Gen Intel and AM3. AM4 is like nothing before it as the longevity has only things like Windows XP as rivals. When you think about that it really is insane that 10 years from now some places will be experiencing AM4 for the first time. I use my AM4 rigs for Mining though, I just cannot sell my MSI X570S Ace Max. I love MBs that are extreme that is why my daughters PC uses the Asus B550 XE which is head and shoulders above most X570 boards. This chip will sell MBs.

It's not about poor countries that are years behind and don't know that Zen 4 is a current product and not a future one.
For example AM4 X3D last I checked was selling nicely in the German market. I wouldn't call Germany a country where new CPUs and platforms are late to arrive. Even in Amazon US AM4 models keep selling. Is US years behind? Are US citizens poor and can only afford AM4?
It's not about rich and poor regions. It's about "Is it good enough for the job I want to do?".