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

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X

I haven't noticed a subjective interactive difference between systems for years, as long as you have decent SSD storage. Typing this on a 8700K, which is my productivity workhorse PC
And even if, whatever time you gain over the duration of your day, you'll lose waiting 30 seconds in the morning when you power on the machine

Apparently, NO. :rolleyes: Jay says in his video it's happening "everytime your system looses power long enough for the caps to drain, or you clear the CMOS, or update the BIOS, or make memory changes."
So how long does it take to drain the caps? Guess just a few hours. Needs to be tested, deal breaker for quite some.
There's the ultralong 70+ second boot first time it thinks it needs to initialize the memory. After that EVERY TIME you press the power button, no matter what you did before (except fully cut power), it takes 30+ seconds to show the BIOS screen.
 
How can it be less efficient if its running at 25% higher performance? Your take is nonsensical!

I think this is a great showing by AMD, certainly blows everything right now out of the water, though I'm hoping for a price war with Intel once their 13 series processors are released. I think this and all new AMD processors can be 20% cheaper!
What kind of question is that? Do you understand what efficiency is? It's performance per watt. The 7950x at stock is less efficient than the 5950x. Heck, it's less efficient than the 12900k as well at 125 / 240 stock configuration,lol

What happens to AIO's over extended period of time when the CPU is pumping out 95°C? Can they even keep up? Will they get overwhelmed and leak or explode?
Man, stop. Just stop. Nothing pumps out temperature. Stuff pump out HEAT. Heat is not temperature. It doesn't make any freaking difference for the AIO whether your cpu is at 50c or 9000c.
 
Everyone is all up in arms over 95c temps. Let me explain from my point of view:


So if you have a 200watt cooler and stick a cpu that could output 200wats but wont because it will only output 150watts then you have 50watts of untapped power.
It will run cool and will always run cool but that is bad because you have some wasted performance.

With this cpu it will give max performance on every cpu cooler. It revs to 95c finishes the task and drops back to low power state.

If your cpu cooler can do 100 watts then you get 100 watts of performance and the cpu will boost till it hits 95c and will sit there until the task is complete.
If you have a cpu cooler that can handle 250 watts then the cpu will rev to whatever that limit is until the task is complete.

In essence this cpu is now operating the same as laptop cpu's that can run into heat soak with small coolers.
The cpu is now designed to give you whatever the max performance your heat sink is capable of producing.

In other words you start to see people complaining that they stuck a 100 watt cooler and are not getting the same performance as someon using a water cooling loop not understanding that the cpu is running as fast as it can go with the gimped cooler that has been stuck on it.

In other words the entire cooling narative has been flipped.
Anyone still confused about this?
Yeah, but the problem is most people won't receive the advertised performance with a standard prebuilt PC like HP, Dell, or Lenovo. So they are paying for 7900x or 7950x performance they see in the reviews, but then when they buy the PC they receive far less performance (due to the cooler etc). It's essentially a scam: Advertising performance with a high-end cooler, but then delivering far lower performance (while not disclosing it).

I'll use an analogy to cars. Assume you bought a sports car for $80k based on reviews that said the car does the 1/4 mile in 9.7 seconds. But once you purchased it, you found the car was only capable of 12.7 seconds because all the reviews had equipped custom upgrades like drag slicks for tires, custom suspension etc. Would you be happy? You paid for 9.7 seconds of performance, but received 12.7 seconds.

AMD is doing essentially the same thing.
 
Last edited:
I haven't noticed a subjective interactive difference between systems for years, as long as you have decent SSD storage. Typing this on a 8700K, which is my productivity workhorse PC
And even if, whatever time you gain over the duration of your day, you'll lose waiting 30 seconds in the morning when you power on the machine

Yea, I found Jay2Cents claims that everything is snappier on Ryzen 7000 a head scratcher. But he's swearing on it. :)
Experienced something only when comming from a really old PC that constantly runs into it's CPU limits to a newer more powerful one.

If true, I could overlook the 30 second bootup time. But it's still for todays (SSD) standards too long. Let's hope they can reduce it with a BIOS update.
 
If true, I could overlook the 30 second bootup time. But it's still for todays (SSD) standards too long. Let's hope they can reduce it with a BIOS update.
I hope so too. Just to clarify, this long "boot time" isn't storage dependent. It happens way before anything is initialized, during memory training. So once those 30 seconds are over you get to see the motherboard POST screen, then the POST finishes and the OS boot screen comes up, then the OS boots, then you see the login/desktop, all of which add even more time
 
Yea, I found Jay2Cents claims that everything is snappier on Ryzen 7000 a head scratcher. But he's swearing on it. :)
Experienced something only when comming from a really old PC that constantly runs into it's CPU limits to a newer more powerful one.

If true, I could overlook the 30 second bootup time. But it's still for todays (SSD) standards too long. Let's hope they can reduce it with a BIOS update.
You're watching Jayz2Cents, that's your error.
 
The temperature at the AIO "side" is much lower. Technically bad things can happen if water inside an AIO starts to boil, because it expands, but I never even heard of such a case, nor experienced it. The thermal gradient CPU silicon -> IHS glue -> IHS -> coldplate -> water inside block would probably be too big for that to happen in the first place
There is absolutely no way for this to happen, even bringing it up as something worth considering is just silly. Heck, boiling any amount of water with a puny 200W heat source is near impossible - most electric kettles are 10x that or more - and doubly so when that water is being run through a radiator. You need massive amounts of energy input to facilitate phase change.

As you point to, but which could be said much more clearly, the absolute temperature of the silicon doesn't directly relate to water temperature - that's a function of wattage and thermal transfer. These new Ryzens seem to run (very) hot due to very thick IHSes - i.e. due to heat transfer from the die to the cooler being slow and relatively inefficient, driving up silicon temperatures. It's a question of where the system finds an equilibrium between cooling, thermal transfer and heat output, not something as simple as "hot cpu=hot water".
 
There is absolutely no way for this to happen, even bringing it up as something worth considering is just silly. Heck, boiling any amount of water with a puny 200W heat source is near impossible - most electric kettles are 10x that or more - and doubly so when that water is being run through a radiator. You need massive amounts of energy input to facilitate phase change.

As you point to, but which could be said much more clearly, the absolute temperature of the silicon doesn't directly relate to water temperature - that's a function of wattage and thermal transfer. These new Ryzens seem to run (very) hot due to very thick IHSes - i.e. due to heat transfer from the die to the cooler being slow and relatively inefficient, driving up silicon temperatures. It's a question of where the system finds an equilibrium between cooling, thermal transfer and heat output, not something as simple as "hot cpu=hot water".
To expand on that, for people that don't understand.

The bigger the temperature difference between your cooler and your CPU, the more heat is able to be transferred. For example, when your CPU is at 40c and your cooler at 30c, we have a δΤ of 10c, and so the cpu can only transfer 50w to the cooler. Therefore if the CPU draws 200w, the CPU temperature will increase. Then the CPU will reach 60c with your cooler at 30c, now the δΤ is 30c and more heat can be transferred (let's say 100w). So the CPU will keep heating up, until it reaches 95c. Now we have a δΤ of 65c between the CPU and the cooler, and now we can transfer 200w at 65δΤ, so the cpu will stop heating up, since all of the wattage it consumes is transferred to the heatsink.


Regarding boiling the water, just lol. A 360 AIO can keep water temps at around 7c over ambient with a constant 250w heatload. So, usually it would never exceed 40c, unless i don't know, you turn the fans completely off or something
 
There is absolutely no way for this to happen, even bringing it up as something worth considering is just silly. Heck, boiling any amount of water with a puny 200W heat source is near impossible - most electric kettles are 10x that or more - and doubly so when that water is being run through a radiator. You need massive amounts of energy input to facilitate phase change.

As you point to, but which could be said much more clearly, the absolute temperature of the silicon doesn't directly relate to water temperature - that's a function of wattage and thermal transfer. These new Ryzens seem to run (very) hot due to very thick IHSes - i.e. due to heat transfer from the die to the cooler being slow and relatively inefficient, driving up silicon temperatures. It's a question of where the system finds an equilibrium between cooling, thermal transfer and heat output, not something as simple as "hot cpu=hot water".

Man where did you study physics, water has a heat capacity of 4.2 joules per gram per degree C, a 200W kettle can boil 1L of water (from 30C-100C) in about 20mins
1Wh = 3600J
 
Last edited:
Man where did you study physics, water has a heat capacity of 4.2 joules per gram per degree C, a 200W kettle can boil 1L of water (from 30C-100C) in about 20mins
If the water in the kettle goes through a radiator with active airflow, it will never boil the water
 
If the water in the kettle goes through a radiator with active airflow, it will never boil the water

Yup, and the heat dissipation at the radiator is more efficient the higher temp difference between ambient/coolant, that's why 120mm AIO can even cool 300W GPU but the coolant will reach higher temp at equilibrium.

That being said, with coolant temp at above 60C, lots of things can go wrong.
 
ComputerBase said:
...the Ryzen 9 7950X requires significantly less energy than the slightly faster Core i9-12900KS, which, however, also draws 168 watts on average for the 1 percent more FPS and thus 50 watts more than the AMD CPU. In extreme cases, the gap can widen significantly: In Spider-Man Remastered including ray tracing, the Ryzen 9 7950X, for example, uses 129 watts, but the Core i9-12900K uses 218 watts. The difference here is 89 watts.


Good power consumption during gaming. Matches 12900KS (1% gap) but draws a lot less power.
 
You're watching Jayz2Cents, that's your error.

I am watching them all. ;) But this statement was just standing out, made me curious.

On that note, here's something about power consumption & the ECO mode:


The 7950X beats the 12900K even in the 65w ECO mode in Cinebench R23 nT. o_O Holy smokes!
And only 10% performance hit when you switch to the 105w ECO mode.

There is absolutely no way for this to happen, even bringing it up as something worth considering is just silly. Heck, boiling any amount of water with a puny 200W heat source is near impossible - most electric kettles are 10x that or more - and doubly so when that water is being run through a radiator. You need massive amounts of energy input to facilitate phase change.

As you point to, but which could be said much more clearly, the absolute temperature of the silicon doesn't directly relate to water temperature - that's a function of wattage and thermal transfer. These new Ryzens seem to run (very) hot due to very thick IHSes - i.e. due to heat transfer from the die to the cooler being slow and relatively inefficient, driving up silicon temperatures. It's a question of where the system finds an equilibrium between cooling, thermal transfer and heat output, not something as simple as "hot cpu=hot water".

Yes, it's theoretically impossibe. :) The surface of a water radiator is big enough to dissipate the heat from the small size of a CPU.
The CPU would have to reach melting temperatures to make water boil.

However, if the pump fails and there is no water circulation it could increase pressure in the system. Higher temperatures can also affect the AIO's lifespan:
TPU: does high aio liquid temperature affect its lifespan?

Btw. what is the IHS made out of, aluminium? If it where made out of pure copper heat dissipation would be quite better.
Would be a bit more expensive, but it would also use less power, potentially runs faster & reduces degredation of the CPU.
 
Last edited:
95C is now Normal :)
AMD changed the boost behaviour to be like a GPU
CPU T die : GPU T junction

The CPU will keep boosting on all threads as long as there is thermal headroom and power headroom.

Not like the previous generation with separated boost limits depending on thread loading.

I think this is some kind of 'Intel MCE' counterpart since they basically did the same thing.
 
Will a na-u12a be able to handel it?

And if so, how do you think the noise output will look like across time comper to a 12900k with the same coller and work load?
 
What a CPU, to have basically double the amount of P cores then the 12900K, better IPC, and still use less power and be cooler then the 12900K is just amazing!
 
There is absolutely no way for this to happen, even bringing it up as something worth considering is just silly. Heck, boiling any amount of water with a puny 200W heat source is near impossible - most electric kettles are 10x that or more - and doubly so when that water is being run through a radiator. You need massive amounts of energy input to facilitate phase change.

As you point to, but which could be said much more clearly, the absolute temperature of the silicon doesn't directly relate to water temperature - that's a function of wattage and thermal transfer. These new Ryzens seem to run (very) hot due to very thick IHSes - i.e. due to heat transfer from the die to the cooler being slow and relatively inefficient, driving up silicon temperatures. It's a question of where the system finds an equilibrium between cooling, thermal transfer and heat output, not something as simple as "hot cpu=hot water".

I have doubts you could make it explode even without fans on the radiator to aid in the cooling because the CPU is designed to throttle anyway plus it also will shut off if a certain temp is exceeded. There damn near no way you could make AIO explode with pretty much any CPU w/o it being deliberate user error. You could have a leak, but that is a different can of worms.
 
Man where did you study physics, water has a heat capacity of 4.2 joules per gram per degree C, a 200W kettle can boil 1L of water (from 30C-100C) in about 20mins
1Wh = 3600J
... assuming zero heat transfer into the surrounding air. Which, in case you missed it, is not how reality tends to work. So ... maybe you should have paid more attention during physics class? Also: boiling is not equal to water temperature being 100°C. Boiling means rapid phase change (above the general evaporation of water into ambient air, which is also temperature dependent but happens even at freezing temperatures). Bringing water up to ~100°C is not sufficient to boil it - you need significant excess energy to tip it over the phase change threshold. As temperatures rise, water evaporation would increase, which would slow temperature rise as said evaporation dissipates heat into ambient air - and evaporation also drives convection, causing airflow around the water and container, further increasing thermal transfer. And, of course, as thermal deltas increase, water-air thermal transfer would also increase. The hotter the water got, the more of its heat would be transferred into the air, and the more energy you would need to put into the system to heat it up further. Would this reach equilibrium for a 200W heat source before boiling? That depends on the container, ambient air temperatures, and a bunch of other variables. In a sufficiently sealed container it would eventually boil with a 200W heat source, sure, but it would take ages unless it was covered in thick insulation.
Yup, and the heat dissipation at the radiator is more efficient the higher temp difference between ambient/coolant, that's why 120mm AIO can even cool 300W GPU but the coolant will reach higher temp at equilibrium.
Which in turn points back to the problem (if it really is a problem) with these chips: high thermal resistance and a resulting low ability to get said heat into the cooling system while keeping the chip at low temperatures (unlike GPUs, with their low thermal density and direct die cooling).
That being said, with coolant temp at above 60C, lots of things can go wrong.
That's true - both plastics and pumps can fail at those temperatures. But again, for that you need efficient thermal transfer from the heat source - excactly what these CPUs lack. The exact reason why the CPU reaches 95°C is that it isn't transferring its thermal energy efficiently into the cooling loop - so water temperatures will be quite low.
I have doubts you could make it explode even without fans on the radiator to aid in the cooling because the CPU is designed to throttle anyway plus it also will shut off if a certain temp is exceeded. There damn near no way you could make AIO explode with pretty much any CPU w/o it being deliberate user error. You could have a leak, but that is a different can of worms.
Water does like to evaporate even at freezing temperatures, but AFAIK that requires it to actually be in contact with air (i.e. it doesn't spontaneously transition into gas if in a closed, air-free container). Beyond that, 95°C is below 100°C, and thus can't boil water, and according to this, propylene glycol additives increase the boiling point of coolants. So no, there would under no circumstances be any explosions or pressure-related leaks.
 
Yeah, but the problem is most people won't receive the advertised performance with a standard prebuilt PC like HP, Dell, or Lenovo.

You know this, so why buy a branded unit from HP, Dell or Lonovo where corners will be cut?!?
 
However, if the pump fails and there is no water circulation it could increase pressure in the system. Higher temperatures can also affect the AIO's lifespan:
TPU: does high aio liquid temperature affect its lifespan?
That is true, but only if said heat is actually effectively transferred into the loop - and the problem here is that it isn't. The die is hot precisely because it fails to effectively transfer its heat into the cooling system, so despite the die being hotter, water (and general AIO) temperatures won't be.
Btw. what is the IHS made out of, aluminium? If it where made out of pure copper heat dissipation would be quite better.
Would be a bit more expensive, but it would also use less power, potentially runs faster & reduces degredation of the CPU.
IHSes are pure copper, with nickel plating for protection (and often gold plating on the inside to aid in soldering).
 
I don't understand why people don't get this.... My 5950X runs around 68C while fully stressed but puts out very little heat, My 3080ti on the other hand running around 65C is dumping a crap ton of heat into my case/room because it's consuming more than double the wattage even though it is running relatively cool.
Thermodynamics is a bitch! Many people ended their lives just studying it, incl. the 'father' of the discipline, the great Boltzmann.
 
AMD changed the boost behaviour to be like a GPU
CPU T die : GPU T junction

The CPU will keep boosting on all threads as long as there is thermal headroom and power headroom.

Not like the previous generation with separated boost limits depending on thread loading.

I think this is some kind of 'Intel MCE' counterpart since they basically did the same thing.
They might have done that :) - cant deny the fact that AMD had no options left
 
How does one even set the fan curves for air cooling on such a processor? If I understand correctly, it can now shoot to Tmax (95 degrees) even without the torture test like Prime95, just ordinary multicore load like unzipping, Cinebench? Even though there is still large difference in power consumption with lighter loads that push the CPU to 95 degrees, and full torture?

It's easy enough with custom water cooling, I use an Aqua Computer Quadro to run fan and pump speed relative to water temperature. But setting up a fan curve for air cooling directly from motherboard by CPU temperature will be less than ideal - either fans will overshoot often, spin at 100% when they don't need to, or you don't leave any headroom between light multicore load and a really heavy load with heavy power draw...
 
Back
Top