• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Ryzen 5 7600X

jinxjx said:
Why they always use Ngreedia cards and never AMD cards on these reviews ???? :kookoo::kookoo:
Click to expand...
NVIDIA is the market leader, so I picked one of their products. There is no sponsorship or anything here btw. The RTX 3080 is fast enough to not bottleneck the CPU much, but it's not a 3090 Ti that almost nobody can afford (I have 4 or 5 3090 Tis lying around here, so that's not the problem)

tussinman said:
techpowerup has to go back and literally test the cards on every single CPU
Click to expand...
Correct, that's what I did for these reviews, started with planning/game selection/test scene selection/etc in mid-June, and just finished in time
 
W1zzard said:
NVIDIA is the market leader, so I picked one of their products. There is no sponsorship or anything here btw. The RTX 3080 is fast enough to not bottleneck the CPU much, but it's not a 3090 Ti that almost nobody can afford (I have 4 or 5 3090 Tis lying around here, so that's not the problem)
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it be better to remove as much of the bottleneck as possible for the initial review as it is reviewing the CPU? Afterwards, various pairings can be done to find sweet spots or whatever scenarios you deem worthy of testing.
 
Last edited:
Fasola said:
Wouldn't it be better to remove as much of the bottleneck as possible for the initial review as it is reviewing the CPU? Afterwards, various pairings can be done to find sweet spots or whatever scenarios you deep worthy of testing.
Click to expand...
Then the results will be unrealistic, if you want to see cpu bottleneck there is 720p tests
 
W1zzard said:
You've read the conclusion where I specifically talk about that, right?
Click to expand...
I bet you haven't read my reply, the point of my reply is just about your gaming performance review numbers being intel friendly. It doesn't matter what you say in your so-called "conclusions". Based on intel friendly reviews whatever your conclusion says will not remedy this.
 
Chrispy_ said:
The 7600X is currently looking pretty pointless until cheaper boards and DDR5 are available.

For the additional $250 platform cost that you'll have to pay for a 7600X over a 12400F or 5600X, you're better off just throwing that at a faster graphics card.

If you are after productivity, a 5900X can be had on the cheaper B550/DDR4 platform for the same money, and at twice the core count, there's no way the 7600X can hope to match it. The Zen4 clock and IPC improvements are generationally impressive, but they're not twice as fast as Zen3
Click to expand...

I was REALLY looking forward to Zen 4 and AM5. But you've pretty much summed it up perfectly.

5800X is roughly same as 7600X
Both perform roughly same and both are 105W TDP (even though actual consumption is on 7600X side)
But 5800X is already discounted heavily and can be found below 7600X expected pricing. Plus cheaper boards and RAM.

I'm a bit disappointed, no getting around that.

I'm in no hurry luckily, will wait for Raptor, and will wait to see if 7600/7700 non-X get released at ~65-75W. I'd like new platform. If neither pan out I'll just need to wait for next next-gen :(

Edit: or maybe just wait for heavily discounted or 2nd hand previous gen...
 
Thanks for another informative in-depth review! I really appreciate the new emulation and power consumption tests :clap:

@W1zzard
Is the same Blender BMW 27 scene used for temperature measurement and rendering benchmark?
 
LuxZg said:
I was REALLY looking forward to Zen 4 and AM5. But you've pretty much summed it up perfectly.

5800X is roughly same as 7600X
Both perform roughly same and both are 105W TDP (even though actual consumption is on 7600X side)
But 5800X is already discounted heavily and can be found below 7600X expected pricing. Plus cheaper boards and RAM.

I'm a bit disappointed, no getting around that.

I'm in no hurry luckily, will wait for Raptor, and will wait to see if 7600/7700 non-X get released at ~65-75W. I'd like new platform. If neither pan out I'll just need to wait for next next-gen :(

Edit: or maybe just wait for heavily discounted or 2nd hand previous gen...
Click to expand...
Cheaper boards will come. The B650 (non-E) boards are expected within the month and rumoured to be as cheap as $150. That's not quite as cheap as B550 and DDR5 is still more expensive than DDR4, but it will improve the value proposition of the 7600X and 7700X - at the very least for gaming builds where 16GB of RAM is enough and the DDR4/DDR5 price difference matters less when we're only talking about a single small RAM kit.
 
Thanks for the review W1zzard! The gaming temps and power consumption charts are a nice addition - helps to identify perfectly acceptable temps outside of non-gaming full load/synthetic benchmarks/stress tests.

I'm primarily interested in 1440p gaming performance and I have to admit i was hoping for a little wider performance uplift over the 5600X/12600K. Doesn't really matter... for a fresh socket still solid all-round performance from Zen 4 and the 3 year+ gen-2-gen longevity plan is very appealing. I'm all about best value for money hence sticking to that Nov-Dec upgrade plan in hopes of more affordable DDR5 memory and less extortianate non-X B-series boards. Should be interesting with the RPL drop, possibly 7000 series reductions and who knows a Zen 4 counterpunch with X3D.

I'm not discounting the 5800X3D either... what a road warrior! I got a B450 laying about hence if we see price reductions on the 5800X3D i might just grab one and call it a day for a couple of years.
 
QuietBob said:
Is the same Blender BMW 27 scene used for temperature measurement and rendering benchmark?
Click to expand...
Correct. The temperature measurement runs multiple frames though, so it doesn't just stop early on fast machines

Fasola said:
Wouldn't it be better to remove as much of the bottleneck as possible for the initial review as it is reviewing the CPU? Afterwards, various pairings can be done to find sweet spots or whatever scenarios you deep worthy of testing.
Click to expand...
I rather use something more realistic, but that's a philosophy question imo. Not even sure if there's a meaningful difference there, other than higher FPS and more CPU bottleneck in some tests

IllIIIl said:
I bet you haven't read my reply, the point of my reply is just about your gaming performance review numbers being intel friendly. It doesn't matter what you say in your so-called "conclusions". Based on intel friendly reviews whatever your conclusion says will not remedy this.
Click to expand...
Of course I read your reply. Have you tried excluding the games you don't like? It's easy to do the math yourself to come to your own conclusions. Actually this is what you should do, look at the numbers, don't be a sheep and just believe everything people tell you
 
The bluff has revealed over zen4.
I`m afraid zen4 best time will be from now till RL will be available to purchase (about 2 month?), And that "best" isn't looking good at all relative to AL.
Grate CPU`s and massive improvment that almost nobady will prefere.
Just sad.
 
Thanks for the review. I'd love to see how this chip performs when locked to 65W TDP - sort of a preview of what the non-X might look like.
 
I was very excited for this gen of AMD. But this is not looking very promising. AMD is trying to win over intel users in the mid range gaming market with zen 4. But from the benchmarks I am seeing, the 7600x loses to a 12600K in everything. While running 8 degrees hotter on average.

Additionally the insane motherboard pricing is not very sexy, and neither is the DDR5 only. It looks like they won't be winning over any intel users. At least in the mid range for now.
 
The 7600X should have been cheaper.
It's not a problem about being slower than the 12600K.

The thing is that Intel made the x600K series a premium segment and AMD follows that.
The x400 cpus are the new x600.
 
Welp. I think AMD blew it with the AM5-gen CPU's. At least for Mini-ITX computers. As my computer is a small Mini-ITX build with tiny spaces and with a CPU-cooler that is 65mm in height (max height possible in the case I have) with the fan (Noctua NH-L9x65), I don't think the idea of boosting the CPU in the beginning so much that it has to go up to 90-degree celsius is good at all for a Mini-ITX computer. It will pretty much cook the rest of the computer.

And as NVIDIA with its extremely insane prices on their new 4000-series GPU is ripping off everyone like there is no tomorrow, I won't be buying their GPU's as well. So, I'm most likely ending up with an 'Intel Core i5-13600K' CPU (as it seems to have the best balance between power usage and performance) and either an 'AMD RX 7600 XT' or 'AMD RX 7700 XT' GPU depending on if those can be bought in an ITX format GPU.

I know the 'Intel Core i5-13600K' have a 20-watt higher TDP than the 'AMD Ryzen 5 7600K' on paper. But it's the way the AMD CPU uses its power in a normal way that kills the new AMD CPU's for me.

Sorry AMD. 'Intel' will be my next CPU this time also. So, I will be going from 'Intel 4th-gen' to 'Intel 13th-gen' this time and not from 'Intel 4th-gen' to 'AMD 7th-gen' as I was hoping for.
 
Last edited:
Quattroking said:
Welp. I think AMD blew it with the AM5-gen CPU's. At least for Mini-ITX computers. As my computer is a small Mini-ITX build with tiny spaces and with a CPU-cooler that is 65mm in height (max height possible in the case I have) with the fan (Noctua NH-L9x65), I don't think the idea of boosting the CPU in the beginning so much that it has to go up to 90-degree celsius is good at all for a Mini-ITX computer. It will pretty much cook the rest of the computer.
Click to expand...
There's nothing stopping you from limiting the power, is there?
 
Quattroking said:
Welp. I think AMD blew it with the AM5-gen CPU's. At least for Mini-ITX computers. As my computer is a small Mini-ITX build with tiny spaces and with a CPU-cooler that is 65mm in height (max height possible in the case I have) with the fan (Noctua NH-L9x65), I don't think the idea of boosting the CPU in the beginning so much that it has to go up to 90-degree celsius is good at all for a Mini-ITX computer. It will pretty much cook the rest of the computer.

And as NVIDIA with its extremely insane prices on their new 4000-series GPU is ripping off everyone like there is no tomorrow, I won't be buying their GPU's as well. So, I'm most likely ending up with an 'Intel Core i5-13600K' CPU (as it seems to have the best balance between power usage and performance) and either an 'AMD RX 7600 XT' or 'AMD RX 7700 XT' GPU depending on if those can be bought in an ITX format GPU.

I know the 'Intel Core i5-13600K' have a 20-watt higher TDP than the 'AMD Ryzen 5 7600K' on paper. But it's the way the AMD CPU uses its power in a normal way that kills the new AMD CPU's for me.

Sorry AMD. 'Intel' will be my next CPU this time also. So, I will be going from 'Intel 4th-gen' to 'Intel 13th-gen' this time and not from 'Intel 4th-gen' to 'AMD 7th-gen' as I was hoping for.
Click to expand...

It won't cook the computer - the output will still be 100W. It will run to 95C on a 65W cooler or a quad rad -- it will hit 95 C with or without cooler.

Most laptop processors hit 95C on a regular basis in a much smaller chassis. Fan noise is going to be a whole other story though.
 
ZetZet said:
It's not. Ryzen just has less die area, so it reaches higher temperatures while using less energy. The amount of heat is also lower, it just gets rid of it worse.
Click to expand...
This makes sense. Although it seems like a big gap considering the die is only 25% smaller. I guess it's not a linear relationship.
 
sLowEnd said:
There's nothing stopping you from limiting the power, is there?
Click to expand...
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.

phanbuey said:
It won't cook the computer - the output will still be 100W. It will run to 95C on a 65W cooler or a quad rad -- it will hit 95 C with or without cooler.

Most laptop processors hit 95C on a regular basis in a much smaller chassis. Fan noise is going to be a whole other story though.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
gffermari said:
The 7600X should have been cheaper.
It's not a problem about being slower than the 12600K.

The thing is that Intel made the x600K series a premium segment and AMD follows that.
The x400 cpus are the new x600.
Click to expand...
After the 5600X the price of the CPU isn't really amazing, actually I kind of expected them to price it at $350, the problem is the whole platform cost; Intel at least still offers something of competitive on the medium-low range below the 12600K and while Raptor Lake doesn't introduce the new architecture on the low end, at least it increases the number of cores (Intel now is playing AMD's old card, more cores for less money, what times). AMD is basically telling the rest of us to stick with what we have (5600X+B450 in my case) or switch to Intel.
 
Yeah, this was definitely as impressive of a showing as I was hoping for - really looking forward to seeing how the inevitable 65W 7600 non-X performs, though I'm getting a feeling that an early price cut might be in the cards for this CPU.
 
Quattroking said:
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?
Click to expand...
You're making an assumption that you have to drop performance that low to get manageable heat levels.

Pending more in depth looks into eco mode, Anandtech's 7950X still demonstrated sizable gains in CB over the 5950X, even when limited to 65W.
www.anandtech.com

AMD Zen 4 Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 5 7600X Review: Retaking The High-End

www.anandtech.com www.anandtech.com

I'd wager the situation will be similar with the 7600X.
 
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.
 
The cons kinda remind me the zen 2 launch.

Intel was taken with its pants down during zen 2 and zen 3 because of greed and laziness[if competitor has nothing to show you start to slack], but they got their shit together and returned back to their technological superiority. It was foolish to think that AMD will beat intel consistently. People tend to forget that AMD is on a smaller process...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top