AMD Ryzen 5 7600X

[tussinman]

Something stinks in these TPU Zen4 tests. The data for test of 5800X3D and i9-12900K are different from the older review by about 5 %.
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d/17.html

He explained in the conclusion that he retested all of the old CPUs with modern game updates, Windows 11 updates, and new drivers.

Alderlake saw a pretty good uplift due to maturation of the architecture (for example i5 12400 when it launched was slower than a 5600x in gaming but now with updated windows 11 and updated game patches it's offering gaming performance almost on par with the 5900x)

 

[RedBear]

Something stinks in these TPU Zen4 tests. The data for test of 5800X3D and i9-12900K are different from the older review by about 5 %.
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d/17.html

Not sure about Alder Lake, but the 5800X3D tests were done with tighter timed RAM (16GBx2 3600mhz at 14-14-14-34 instead of 16-20-20-34).

 

[RandallFlagg]

<snip> Fan noise is going to be a whole other story though.

Yeah, that 'turbo till 95c' thing is going to make for some noisy fans if profiles aren't changed. I guess you could adjust you fan profile to go as fast as you can stand the noise at 95C, since it theoretically won't go above that no matter the cooler.

 

[wheresmycar]

Robin I agree... something is a little off. I finally found time to go through a couple of reviews to see how other tested games measure up.

TPU's 12 game performance average sees the 7600X negligibly trailing the 12600K by ~1%



Hardware Unboxed showing their 12 game avg: 7600X beating the 12600X-DDR5 by a 8.5% margin or the 12600K-DDR4 by a whopping 16.5%.



Tomshardware: 7600X beating the 12600K by 11%



Am i correctly observing these results? I'm assuming all these charts are correct based on the games employed to conduct these tests whereby some games will favour Intel over AMD and vice versa.

Please shed some light!

He explained in the conclusion that he retested all of the old CPUs with modern game updates, Windows 11 updates, and new drivers.

Alderlake saw a pretty good uplift due to maturation of the architecture (for example i5 12400 when it launched was slower than a 5600x in gaming but now with updated windows 11 and updated game patches it's offering gaming performance almost on par with the 5900x)

Or is Windows 11 holding back the 7600X (cache latency/scheduler/etc)?.... which would contribute to uneven results. Wouldn't it have been better to stick with the previous results whilst the 7600X remains in its infancy at the OS level?

One thing is certain... as things stand: BAD VALUE buying into 7600X for gaming! We need those B-series boards pronto + further trim in the DDR5 pricing which seems likely

 

[Crackong]

This thread is missing someone .. ah yes @Crackong

Thanks for mentioning me.

And welcome you can join me at the 7950x post

 

[RandallFlagg]

Robin I agree... something is a little off. I finally found time to go through a couple of reviews to see how other tested games measure up.

TPU's 12 game performance average sees the 7600X negligibly trailing the 12600K by ~1%

View attachment 263130

Hardware Unboxed showing their 12 game avg: 7600X beating the 12600X-DDR5 by a 8.5% margin or the 12600K-DDR4 by a whopping 16.5%.

View attachment 263132

Tomshardware: 7600X beating the 12600K by 11%

View attachment 263133

Am i correctly observing these results? I'm assuming all these charts are correct based on the games employed to conduct these tests whereby some games will favour Intel over AMD and vice versa.

Please shed some light!



Or is Windows 11 holding back the 7600X (cache latency/scheduler/etc)?.... which would contribute to uneven results. Wouldn't it have been better to stick with the previous results whilst the 7600X remains in its infancy at the OS level?

Tom's used DDR5-4800 on Alder Lake, and DDR5-5200 on Zen 4. TPU used DDR5-6000 C36 on all systems, plus some runs with DDR5-6000 C30 for AMD. You can start there. I think it obvious, no one doing DIY is using DDR5-4800.

Another aspect is that Tom's is most likely re-using old benchmarks for comparison, TPU did a complete refresh with Win 11 and new drivers for all test configs. Most sites don't do this, they show you what the chips performed like 1, 2 years ago when released - buggy BIOS, drivers, OS and all.

When you cripple the memory on both rigs like that to the 4800/5200 offical spec, the 5800X3D absolutely crushes all of the Zen 4 and Alder Lake rigs.

Thing is, I don't know a single person using that kind of memory. Everyone I've talked to the last week who is upgrading is using 6000Mhz or 5600Mhz. Nobody is using 4800 or even 5200. I'd expect Zen 4 to be the same, the cost of upgrading is so large why skimp on something like memory to save $50 on your $1000 upgrade, especially to go so far down as 4800. This makes those reviews pretty irrelevant for people upgrading in the way people actually upgrade.

 

[Steevo]

Technically, he is correct.
But that distinction is irrelevant in this thread: a hotter CPU (higher temperature) will dissipate more heat in the environment, than a cooler (lower temperature) one.

No, it’s about how many watts are being dissipated into an environment, it appears AMD made a stronger IHS that prevents the socket from flexing but doesn’t help thermal transfer.

 

[Why_Me]

Tom's used DDR5-4800 on Alder Lake, and DDR5-5200 on Zen 4. TPU used DDR5-6000 C36 on all systems, plus some runs with DDR5-6000 C30 for AMD. You can start there. I think it obvious, no one doing DIY is using DDR5-4800.

Another aspect is that Tom's is most likely re-using old benchmarks for comparison, TPU did a complete refresh with Win 11 and new drivers for all test configs. Most sites don't do this, they show you what the chips performed like 1, 2 years ago when released - buggy BIOS, drivers, OS and all.

When you cripple the memory on both rigs like that to the 4800/5200 offical spec, the 5800X3D absolutely crushes all of the Zen 4 and Alder Lake rigs.

Thing is, I don't know a single person using that kind of memory. Everyone I've talked to the last week who is upgrading is using 6000Mhz or 5600Mhz. Nobody is using 4800 or even 5200. I'd expect Zen 4 to be the same, the cost of upgrading is so large why skimp on something like memory to save $50 on your $1000 upgrade, especially to go so far down as 4800. This makes those reviews pretty irrelevant for people upgrading in the way people actually upgrade.

This ^^

 

[1d10t]

Kinda disappointing, yes its outperform 5800X in application and X3D variant in games, but not by significant margin. As @Valantar suggest, I might wait for non X SKU if that a thing, or 3D V-Cache so this SKU could get another price reduction.

 

[Sombreuil]

How come the 12600K suddenly has a lower average in gaming perfomance than the 5600X? In this video the 12600k has a better average, but in this one the 5600X wins?
I'm a bit confused.

 

[Steevo]

Something stinks in these TPU Zen4 tests. The data for test of 5800X3D and i9-12900K are different from the older review by about 5 %.
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d/17.html

Cause other sites don't update their reviews with new BIOS, firmware, drivers etc


Meaning TPUs reviews are exactly the performance you should expect today with like hardware, not aged performance with old drivers or windows issues that were unknown then. Please see the Nvidia performance drivers er update, AMDs TPM polling issue, Intel has a LOT of microcode updates, their new GPU drivers were garbage and they were made better.

If anyone can't understand testing methodology and see how much more work W1zz puts in to give real world unbiased reviews they have other blinders on.

 

[GoldenX]

The platform cost is too high to justify the 7600X and 7700X.

 

[MarsM4N]

Hupe jump in productivity tasks, head to head now with Intel's top dogs. In gaming a bit underwhelming. Still a big step up, though.
But lets wait & see what the X3D variants bring to the table. Or upcomming Intel's chips.

Robin I agree... something is a little off. I finally found time to go through a couple of reviews to see how other tested games measure up.

TPU's 12 game performance average sees the 7600X negligibly trailing the 12600K by ~1%

View attachment 263130

Hardware Unboxed showing their 12 game avg: 7600X beating the 12600X-DDR5 by a 8.5% margin or the 12600K-DDR4 by a whopping 16.5%.

View attachment 263132

Tomshardware: 7600X beating the 12600K by 11%

View attachment 263133

Am i correctly observing these results? I'm assuming all these charts are correct based on the games employed to conduct these tests whereby some games will favour Intel over AMD and vice versa.

Please shed some light!



Or is Windows 11 holding back the 7600X (cache latency/scheduler/etc)?.... which would contribute to uneven results. Wouldn't it have been better to stick with the previous results whilst the 7600X remains in its infancy at the OS level?

One thing is certain... as things stand: BAD VALUE buying into 7600X for gaming! We need those B-series boards pronto + further trim in the DDR5 pricing which seems likely

Benchmark results differ mostly by game selection. You can create some pretty bias benchmark results by selecting games/engines that are badly optimized on AMD.
So it's always wise to check differnt sources.

The other thing is the OS. I wouldn't do benchmarks on the "Beta OS" Win11 (which TPU did). Adoption is still very low and most still use Win10.
Windows 11’s 2022 Update is wreaking havoc with PC gamers, but there’s a fix

About "Value", yea it's bad. Upcomming B Series boards bring it down a lot, but there is still the DDR5 price problem. And that was very predictable. Prices didn't drop as fast as they hoped.
Tbh. AMD should have partnered up with some RAM companies & ship their CPU's with RAM discount coupons. Or just buy a RAM company & produce their own, lol.

 

[W1zzard]

Tom's used DDR5-4800 on Alder Lake, and DDR5-5200 on Zen 4. TPU used DDR5-6000 C36 on all systems, plus some runs with DDR5-6000 C30 for AMD. You can start there. I think it obvious, no one doing DIY is using DDR5-4800.

Another aspect is that Tom's is most likely re-using old benchmarks for comparison, TPU did a complete refresh with Win 11 and new drivers for all test configs. Most sites don't do this, they show you what the chips performed like 1, 2 years ago when released - buggy BIOS, drivers, OS and all.

When you cripple the memory on both rigs like that to the 4800/5200 offical spec, the 5800X3D absolutely crushes all of the Zen 4 and Alder Lake rigs.

Thing is, I don't know a single person using that kind of memory. Everyone I've talked to the last week who is upgrading is using 6000Mhz or 5600Mhz. Nobody is using 4800 or even 5200. I'd expect Zen 4 to be the same, the cost of upgrading is so large why skimp on something like memory to save $50 on your $1000 upgrade, especially to go so far down as 4800. This makes those reviews pretty irrelevant for people upgrading in the way people actually upgrade.

Cause other sites don't update their reviews with new BIOS, firmware, drivers etc


Meaning TPUs reviews are exactly the performance you should expect today with like hardware, not aged performance with old drivers or windows issues that were unknown then. Please see the Nvidia performance drivers er update, AMDs TPM polling issue, Intel has a LOT of microcode updates, their new GPU drivers were garbage and they were made better.

If anyone can't understand testing methodology and see how much more work W1zz puts in to give real world unbiased reviews they have other blinders on.

I have to thank the community for that. Over the years you people asked for better memory speeds, so I kept pushing them further and further.

I think what also matters a lot is test selection. Look at the individual performance results, there's games like Far Cry 6 and Watch Dogs, which run much better on Intel than on AMD. For Far Cry 6 I know that it does complex stuff with memory and inter-thread communication.
Should I kick out one of the most popular games for that? Don't think so.
Does my test suite feel a bit biased towards Intel? I suspect so, even though I never intended that. I really just picked popular games. The target was 10, I ended up with 12.
Will I look at switching out the games in the future? Absolutely, yes.
Are other reviewers wrong? Definitely not. Look at their results, try to understand them, ask them about test configs and in the end come to your own conclusions based on what you've learned and what's relevant for you.

And as always, feel free to AMA

 

[gffermari]

Looks like Zen architecture has more or less reached the limits when it comes to gaming, but they are still posting healthy gains in non-gaming benchmarks.

Not yet.
They still have the 3D V-cache.
On the other hand they might have reached the limits in productivity tests. I can't believe Zen 5 can go higher in clocks.

 

[HABO]

These new power and temperature charts don't make sense to me. If these are the same cooler, how is the Ryzen producing more heat energy using less electrical energy? It seems to defy the first law of thermodynamics.

	CPU Temperature - Gaming	Power Consumption - Gaming
Ryzen 5 7600X (stock)	70 C	45 W
Core i5-12600	55 C	50 W

It just seems that you don't know much about thermodynamics at all.

 

[GoldenX]

It just seems that you don't know much about thermodynamics at all.

Check again.
Difference between a monolithic die and chiplets, contact area.

 

[TheDeeGee]

Idk, I don't feel really excited about this unlike me who get excited when hearing Zen 2 release.

Guess I'll stick with my 3600 then.

As GN always says: "If you're happy with what you have, don't change it."

I'd look into upgrades once FPS drops below your standards.

 

[Valantar]

These new power and temperature charts don't make sense to me. If these are the same cooler, how is the Ryzen producing more heat energy using less electrical energy? It seems to defy the first law of thermodynamics.

	CPU Temperature - Gaming	Power Consumption - Gaming
Ryzen 5 7600X (stock)	70 C	45 W
Core i5-12600	55 C	50 W

It just seems that you don't know much about thermodynamics at all.

A bit more helpful of an answer: it isn't producing more heat, it's just not as efficient at transferring the thermal energy generated into the cooling system. As thermal energy accumulates in the die, temperatures rise. Factors affecting thermal transfer: thermal density of the die, TIM (both die-IHS and IHS-cooler), IHS materials, IHS thickness, cooler contact/flatness, cooler cold plate materials, cooler performance, and more.

These chips have a very thick IHS, which reduces thermal transfer, and have a very small, dense core, both of which hamper thermal transfer.

This means that it's not generating more heat, it just doesn't get that heat into the cooler as quickly. Cooling systems move towards equilibrium, as thermal transfer increases with increased thermal deltas, which means that the hotter any part of the system gets relative to the next step, the more efficiently it will transfer its thermal energy. Which is what we're seeing here: with the same cooler (and presumably fan speeds), the Ryzen due to its higher thermal density and thicker IHS reaches equilibrium at ~70°C where it's able to dissipate its ~45W power, while the Intel chip (due to its much lower thermal density, and thinner IHS) reaches its equilibrium at a lower ~55°C for transferring 50W. They're both transferring (roughly) the same energy into the ambient air, it's just that the different stages in the thermal transfer chain reach equilibrium at different temperatures for this to happen due to, well, physics.

 

[Fourstaff]

Not yet.
They still have the 3D V-cache.
On the other hand they might have reached the limits in productivity tests. I can't believe Zen 5 can go higher in clocks.

Oh yes, one more trick in their sleeve. But both parties are pushing straight into the Pentium 4 / AMD FX corner of high performance high power.

 

[Valantar]

Oh yes, one more trick in their sleeve. But both parties are pushing straight into the Pentium 4 / AMD FX corner of high performance high power.

True. This time around we have coolers capable of handling more heat output, but still running headfirst into a wall. Then again, the entire chip industry is - the scaling we've seen over the past couple of decades isn't anywhere close to sustainable, as we're already seeing with vastly increased component longevity in terms of delivering acceptable performance. Heat is just one of many walls we're running into.

 

[MarsM4N]

Oh yes, one more trick in their sleeve. But both parties are pushing straight into the Pentium 4 / AMD FX corner of high performance high power.

In the stock settings, yes. But AMD also got the ECO Modes. ~33% less power/heat for a 10% performance hit sounds like a pretty good tradeoff.
And the performance hit will only be in multithread applications. So gaming will mostly not take a hit.

 

[IllIIIl]

This makes those reviews pretty irrelevant for people upgrading in the way people actually upgrade.

Cause other sites don't update their reviews with new BIOS, firmware, drivers etc

Tell me what's wrong with this config table.

My first reaction when I saw this review was: 5800x3d is too weak. Then based on the 40 game data of 5800x3d in hardware unboxed, it is judged that the evaluation data here is intel friendly.

To be honest, I thought the review here was the one that didn't use the new data, especially when I saw that the price figures on the price/performance table were very old prices.

I have no problem with the source of information. You think the data here is relatively fair, and the evaluation here is a new source for me, so I look at it very cautiously. I usually don't look at any website's reviews but only watch video reviews, it's based on concerns about the quality of the review data, at least the video uploader said it was a retest, he may be lying, you may be right, But at least now i dont think so. And as I replied in #11, I think it's mostly a game choice difference.

You and I just chose information from different sources, that's all.

 

[W1zzard]

Tell me what's wrong with this config table.

Nothing wrong. HWUB does great testing. DDR4-3200 CL14 is a bit slower than my 3600 CL14, also I use 2x 16 GB (which will prob be an insignificant difference).
Not sure why DDR5-6400 CL32 SR on Intel vs 6000 CL30 SR. Ideally one should use identical settings?
AMD sent that G.SKILL DDR5-6000 CL30 kit to all reviewers and requested that it is used for testing, because it is the best case for them. I used the same memory I've been using on previous Intel reviews. The difference is like 1%, full data is in the 7950X review

To be honest, I thought the review here was the one that didn't use the new data, especially when I saw that the price figures on the price/performance table were very old prices.

I looked up the prices on Monday @ Newegg ?

so I look at it very cautiously

Good

I think it's mostly a game choice difference.

I think so too

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Probably not. But then why buy the 7600X if you are going to limit Its performance back to 5600X performance to be able to use the CPU in a more normal way in a Mini-ITX case?

I would rather buy the 'AMD Ryzen 5 5600X' instead and then run that one on full power over longer periods and even have room to overclock it as it's only 65 watt. I'm sure I can reach 80-85 degrees Celsius on it as well, but that will be under extreme loads over longer periods.


The point is still that the 7600X CPU will boost right to 95 degrees Celsius under heavy load which will be a massive problem for a Mini-ITX case with limited ability to cool everything in the case anyways.

High temperatures are the number 1 enemy to Mini-ITX cases.

It will be no more of a problem then the 5600x or 12600 would be. It's still pulling the same amount of power. You dont seem to understand the difference between temperature and thermal output.

Nothing wrong. HWUB does great testing. DDR4-3200 CL14 is a bit slower than my 3600 CL14, also I use 2x 16 GB (which will prob be an insignificant difference).
Not sure why DDR5-6400 CL32 SR on Intel vs 6000 CL30 SR. Ideally one should use identical settings?
AMD sent that G.SKILL DDR5-6000 CL30 kit to all reviewers and requested that it is used for testing, because it is the best case for them. I used the same memory I've been using on previous Intel reviews. The difference is like 1%, full data is in the 7950X review


I looked up the prices on Monday @ Newegg ?


Good


I think so too

Keep in mind, you're arguing with a brand new user who is accusing the sites admin of being intel biased. Smells a little....you know, smelly?