AMD Ryzen 5 7600

[persizi]

Тhe cover photo is classic click bite but otherwise it is worth to watch it.

 

[Bomby569]

If only the government could help me get rid of the heat output.

My undervolted 3080 turns my room into a sauna during the summer, together with the rest of my equipment (TV, receiver). I am never buying a 300+ W card again.

Power consumption is the main thing I will be looking at from now on, for both CPUs and GPUs.

put the PC on another room, it is amazing for thermals and noise... and even space

 

[Gica]

As promised, the consumption of 11600KF in the "real world". If you test the extremes in reviews, the real world is different. You can take the processor over 100W, but in most cases it stays quiet and consumes decently, even in games with the 3070 Ti, which is not really entry level in the world of video cards.
Bonus: 12500 power consumption in the same PCMark10
P.S. The results are inconclusive because the video card has a huge impact in this test. You can't compare an RTX with an igp.

 

[PenguinBelly]

They could have bundled Wraith Spire with this and got another sale. Too bad.

 

[persizi]

13600K
P - 5400-2Cores, 5300-4Cores, 5200-5Cores, 5100-All Cores, AVX-5000
E - 4100
Ring - 4500


RAM-3600 CL16 Gear 1

RAM-4200 CL19 Gear 1

Express

 

[Assimilator]

Please stop posting 3DMark graphs of power consumption as if they prove something. The only accurate measure of power consumption is physically at the connectors and the wall.

 

[persizi]

No problem.
I have 36-37W at idle.
About 62W at 1T CinebechR23 (about 2100 points)
And little bit less than 200W(about 145W CPU power consumption from HWinfo) nT CinebechR23 (about 25 000 points)
Those are physical readings at the connector on the wall from a system with optimized and slightly overclocked 13600K.

Let someone with Zen 4 post his readings.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Well, as a DDR5 platform, the real cost comparison needs to be an R7 7600 on B650 vs i5-13400(F) on B660 DDR5.

I agree that the price comparison between those two now looks evenly matched, but we need reviews to answer the question of whether DDR5 is even worth bothering with at this price point for now.

I couldn't agree more because I don't think that DDR5 is worth it. I think that AMD made a mistake by offering the AM5 platform with only DDR5 compatibility. At the same time though, DDR4 and DDR3 were also premature. When DDR3 came out, DDR2 was still perfectly viable and the same could be said about DDR4 vis a vis DDR3. Hell, just think of the people out there still using DDR3 with their FX processors. For example, Steve Burke, the Tech Jesus himself, still uses an FX-8350 in his home PC.

At the very least, these non-X CPUs offer the best AM5 value yet, and while they're not as fast as Intel, they are vastly more power-efficient, which is an increasingly-important metric to judge a CPU by.

You know what's funny? Ten years ago, people were quoting the high power usage of AMD CPUs and Radeon GPUs as reasons they didn't buy them. Now those people have been proven to be full of donkey doo-doo because suddenly such things don't seem to matter to them anymore.

460 usd is a reasonable cost for a low tier CPU and a mobo?!

What do you drive a Lambo?

How much did the Intel DDR5 platform cost again?

What do you game on, Sandy Bridge?

 

[Gica]

Please stop posting 3DMark graphs of power consumption as if they prove something. The only accurate measure of power consumption is physically at the connectors and the wall.

It's a problem with AMD video cards, because they report much less consumption in reality. That's how they are designed. You can find the explanation in each video card review. For processors, consumption is accurately reported, via VRM sensors.

You know what's funny? Ten years ago, people were quoting the high power usage of AMD CPUs and Radeon GPUs as reasons they didn't buy them. Now those people have been proven to be full of donkey doo-doo because suddenly such things don't seem to matter to them anymore.

They consumed too much and offered little, that was the problem with FX. Now it's funny that many AMD fans invoke the consumption of Intel processors in programs that they don't use without realizing that the same processor consumes in many others less than an AMD consumes in idle.
I would like to see hwinfo captures here with Zen 4 consumption after 2-3 hours of use. Minimum, maximum, average. At Zen 3 I saw a few.

 

[Assimilator]

For processors, consumption is accurately reported, via VRM sensors.

If it was accurately reported, we wouldn't have TPU and GN showing us that it's not.

 

[Chrispy_]

It's a problem with AMD video cards, because they report much less consumption in reality. That's how they are designed. You can find the explanation in each video card review. For processors, consumption is accurately reported, via VRM sensors.

It's only a problem if you don't read the labels of the values you're given.

• Radeons report the GPU Chip Power Draw
• Geforces report both the GPU Chip Power Draw and the Board Power Draw.

The difference is that Nvidia boards typically have shunt resistors at the connectors to measure exact power draw from each of the sockets and slot. Just like Radeons, if you only look at the GPU Chip Power Draw on a Geforce, you'll see it reporting about 80-85% of the Board Power Draw.

Would it be nice to have shunt resistors on Radeons to measure Board Power Draw? Yes.

 

[Bomby569]

How much did the Intel DDR5 platform cost again?

What do you game on, Sandy Bridge?

so it's fine because Intel. Got it.

 

[Gica]

If it was accurately reported, we wouldn't have TPU and GN showing us that it's not.

Ok, it's wrong with me. The 25W reported by the wattmeter for the entire system at idle is the consumption of the processor only. It is only correct for AMD, with 20W, only processor, in idle and 50 degrees, which means that the AMD processor generates current, not consumes it.

----
The average is 6.1 hours/day since system installation (upgrade to W11, to be exact). Certainly in January 2023 it was higher because I have been on leave since December 23. In 11 days it consumed 5.5KW, 500W/day for minimum 6.1 h/day use. The whole system. Bankruptcy, what else!
The highlight is that here I have the WoT base and some older games, so I play, but the system is intended especially for office, www, movies and other activities that eat up my time.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

This pricing makes ZERO sense... lowest rung non-X CPU (7600) is a whopping $70 cheaper than its X counterpart, yet the next one up (7700) is a mere $15 cheaper? Surely it should be the other way around?

It doesn't matter though, people are still not going to pay a premium for a 6-core 7600 + motherboard + DDR5 when you can get an 8-core 5800X3D + motherboard + DDR4 for less and have better gaming performance. I don't understand which genius at AMD thought that people would be happy to pay more for CPU performance, after years of the same company charging less. A smart company would be selling its newer CPUs for less than its old ones to encourage consumers to upgrade... maybe AMD is just hoping that AM4 stock will run out and consumers will be forced to buy AM5... or, maybe those consumers will just buy Intel...

Everything about AM5 has felt like the Bulldozer-era AMD TBH - clueless about the actual value proposition of their product and expecting people to buy it solely due to brand loyalty.

It's AMD's old cycle. They were doing alright before bulldozer with CPUs, in GPUS they were great, got to 49% market share with evergreen.....then just rebranded everything of the 6000s, shoved it at us, and got caught with their pants down when fermi 2.0 came out.

Or before that, when athlon 64 was kicking intels arse and AMD went and bought ATi while pushing back their new arch and charging $1000 for the FX-62 only for conroe to exist and obliterate them from orbit.

Wraith prism is the best stock cooler currently available and superior to the Intel cooler. It performs slightly worse than CM 212. It does a descent job up to 100W load.
View attachment 278394

That's A) on a ryzen 5 3600, not a 7600, and B) the new wraith stealth cooler (which is what comes with the 7600) is hot garbage.

 

[Cowboystrekk]

It's AMD's old cycle. They were doing alright before bulldozer with CPUs, in GPUS they were great, got to 49% market share with evergreen.....then just rebranded everything of the 6000s, shoved it at us, and got caught with their pants down when fermi 2.0 came out.

Or before that, when athlon 64 was kicking intels arse and AMD went and bought ATi while pushing back their new arch and charging $1000 for the FX-62 only for conroe to exist and obliterate them from orbit.

That's A) on a ryzen 5 3600, not a 7600, and B) the new wraith stealth cooler (which is what comes with the 7600) is hot garbage.

As I replied later the prism works fine on 7700 and I thought the 7600 also had prism. Stealth is crap.

 

[sLowEnd]

AMD definitely should've included at least a Wraith Spire instead of a Wraith Stealth.

 

[Avro Arrow]

so it's fine because Intel. Got it.

The AM5 platform including the CPU and motherboard are about the same price now as the Intel LGA 1700 with DDR5. If both platforms are about the same price, NEITHER of them can really be called negative and it has nothing to do with Intel or AMD. I didn't think it was that complicated of a concept, but I guess I was mistaken because you clearly proved me wrong in that regard.

 

[Gica]

Off and On at the same time (the impact of the processor in gaming).
I replaced 11600KF with 10500. The reason: two processors, one motherboard and 10500 practically cannot be sold. I got rid of 11600KF immediately, at a reasonable price.
I did some tests beforehand, so that I don't regret it later. To my surprise, the 10500 behaves very well next to the 3070Ti. I even have a 3% blck reserve (120MHz more, all cores) and the Gaming profile in the BIOS (another 100 MHz more on all cores), but I'll try it when I have time, I have no serious reasons now. The eye does not distinguish the differences.
In synthetic tests, the differences are huge. They are also in gaming (see force), but the eye does not see them. With the downgrade to pcie 3.0 on the video card and nvme, you'd say it's a catastrophe, but the reality is completely different.
So, if we invoke gaming, what is the impact of the processor really in gaming? The reviews use powerful, top-of-the-line video cards. Most users, hmmm... I think entry-mid video cards definitely dominate.
So what are we talking about? How to spend the money and encourage them to sell us at a high price?

 

[EatingDirt]

Off and On at the same time (the impact of the processor in gaming).
I replaced 11600KF with 10500. The reason: two processors, one motherboard and 10500 practically cannot be sold. I got rid of 11600KF immediately, at a reasonable price.
I did some tests beforehand, so that I don't regret it later. To my surprise, the 10500 behaves very well next to the 3070Ti. I even have a 3% blck reserve (120MHz more, all cores) and the Gaming profile in the BIOS (another 100 MHz more on all cores), but I'll try it when I have time, I have no serious reasons now. The eye does not distinguish the differences.
In synthetic tests, the differences are huge. They are also in gaming (see force), but the eye does not see them. With the downgrade to pcie 3.0 on the video card and nvme, you'd say it's a catastrophe, but the reality is completely different.
So, if we invoke gaming, what is the impact of the processor really in gaming? The reviews use powerful, top-of-the-line video cards. Most users, hmmm... I think entry-mid video cards definitely dominate.
So what are we talking about? How to spend the money and encourage them to sell us at a high price?

Are you just kind of rambling to yourself on the thread? Oh well, I'll engage this time.

You're comparing two generations that were barely different from one another. The 10 & 11th Generation Intels were something like 0-5% apart. There was basically no meaningful difference between the two. On top of that you're comparing Forza 5, a game that has barely a meaningful difference in FPS at 1080p in this very review. 20 of the CPU's in Forza 5 are within 2 FPS of one another.

There are some games where there is a huge, meaningful improvement in CPU upgrades for gaming. Typically they are not graphically intensive games but sim-calculation heavy games such as Factorio, Paradox Interactive Grand Strategy Games(Crusader Kings, Stellaris, etc.), X4 Foundations, etc. However, Far Cry 6, Borderlands 3 and Age of Empires 4 all have fairly meaningful FPS gains from a 10600k to the 13600k.

 

[Gica]

You are seriously mistaken. Series 10 was the last of the skylake series, series 11 being a breakdown solution by redesigning a 10nm processor for 14nm lithography. The differences between them are very big, both single and multiple. According to the benchmark, 11600K exceeds 10500 by more than 30%. In reviews. In real life, you don't die with a 10500 in the system.
Ontopic:
Yes, I know, it's wrong. It's not just my wattmeter that generates errors, but everything that indicates a consumption-friendly Intel. Like in this video.

 

[EatingDirt]

You are seriously mistaken. Series 10 was the last of the skylake series, series 11 being a breakdown solution by redesigning a 10nm processor for 14nm lithography. The differences between them are very big, both single and multiple. According to the benchmark, 11600K exceeds 10500 by more than 30%. In reviews. In real life, you don't die with a 10500 in the system.
Ontopic:
Yes, I know, it's wrong. It's not just my wattmeter that generates errors, but everything that indicates a consumption-friendly Intel. Like in this video.

You're all over the place. Your last post was about games, not productivity. In games, the 11600k & 10600k were separated by a mere 0.8% at 720p, and it actually was the 10600k that was that little bit faster than the 11600k. I'm just sticking with your own talking points.

We get it, you like Intel... a lot apparently. Until we see a 13400, 13500, 13600 or 13700 non-K, the 7600 non-X, the subject of this thread, is slightly more power efficient than Intel 13th gen and on par with the 12600k.

 

[Gica]

I will also like AMD when I see 1W in idle with a hexacore, not 20+W. I don't think that the average consumption for www, movies, office, multimedia and other light activities exceeds an idle AMD.
Regarding the gaming system, I'm not worried because the video card eats 80% of the GPU-CPU power. Here, the price matters.

At least one hour of WoT with the igp. If you ask the wattmeter, ~60W average in this game, towards 70W peak. The whole system!
You can also capture sessions of 3-4 hours with ryzen, let's see the consumption in real life.

 

[rabidhole]

There's something I'd really like to know, were the emulation benchmarks done with AVX-512 enabled/capable 12th gens?

 

[big_glasses]

At least one hour of WoT with the igp. If you ask the wattmeter, ~60W average in this game, towards 70W peak. The whole system!
You can also capture sessions of 3-4 hours with ryzen, let's see the consumption in real life.

What do you determine as "consumption in real life"?
W1zzard already have 3 different power consumption test cases, that is actually testing the CPU power, and not relying on the software monitor (a combination of those is somewhat close to my real usage)

All power measurements on this page are based on a physical measurement of the voltage, current and power flowing through the 12-pin CPU power connector(s), which makes them "CPU only," not "full system." We're not using the software sensors inside the processor, as these can be quite inaccurate and will vary between manufacturers.

The 7600 is also 18W in single thread test case, which last time I checked is under 20+W
Strangely enough(?) the lowest consumption single-thread CPU is 5700G...

 

[THU31]

What do you determine as "consumption in real life"?
W1zzard already have 3 different power consumption test cases, that is actually testing the CPU power, and not relying on the software monitor (a combination of those is somewhat close to my real usage)

The 7600 is also 18W in single thread test case, which last time I checked is under 20+W
Strangely enough(?) the lowest consumption single-thread CPU is 5700G...

Yeah, so many people say that Ryzens consume ~50 W in idle. If that's so, how are there so many apps that consume less than 20 W in TPU testing?

Someone has to be right. Do some reviewers/users have power saving options disabled? Like C-states or whatever they have on AMD.