Or the 9950X3D! For the record, I think the 9800X3D if its rumored full overclocking support on 3D-Vcache is accurate will be the FPS KING! Even if the 9950X3D is an OC God which I am sure it will have to be to make up for Zen 5's mixed launch, the fact that it is very unlikley AMD will give the 9950X3D two 3D-Vache CCD's, gives the 9800X3D the edge for top tier gaming performance with an NVIDIA Blackwell or AMD RDNA5 equivalent graphics card.
@@Activation123 That's a misread on your part. It's not what you should buy if you literally just care about gaming, but there are people that play games and have a wide range of computing needs and interests. For example I use Linux and Windows, do some code compiling, video transcoding, DAW software, run virtual machines and play games like DCS, DSP, and Star citizen that absolutely favor the cache. Having previously had the 5950X, but playing games where the 5800X3D crushed nothing else makes sense other than a R9 X3D. Star Citizen utilized up to 60% of a 5950X with a 6800XT, which is approaching 20 threads.
@@Activation123 We have to see if the 9950X3D might actually have 2 CCDs with 3D V Cache (it's rumored, so not guaranteed, given that Zen 5 started as a flop, I doubt they will try to hold performance back), meaning that it could be the best CPU out there. We just have to see if the Zen 5 architecture holds back that 3D V Cache or not.
@@SpaceJazz3K not for the one that intel has not improved anything from earlier with bulky fans which makes too much noises while it overheats to 200 degrees. Too much.
@@perseus31 we all can tell you are not. But i do agree that brands don t matter as long as you get the best from any of them. both will do everything you need them to do even as professionals.
@Pryme. I am. I literally code on a Thinkpad E480 company gave me. I personally have M1 MacBook Air. For graphical work or really heavy loads, of course it's going to help but for average consumer I don't see a point in getting latest i9. If you consider playing 4k full graphics that's another case.
Wendell seems pretty up on them, though to be fair he is looking more at the productivity/server-y side of things rather than gaming centric like much else of the "big names".
Leo at KitGuru hasn't exactly laid into them. Gave it 8/10 and said he'll be switching to it. The channels that don't live off drama are all just saying "Good but expected it to be a better"
@@ibelieveinjesusinmyspareti2861 this is short circuit, they don't usually go very deep on this channel. If they want to go deeper they will do a longer video in the main channel. Short Circuit it basically a first impressions channel.
Higher efficiency means less heat to deal with, this should be the goal :) processing units are fast enough for me, i want companies to maximize efficiency
agreed but it isnt pushing efficiency either. just a meh boost to the old stuff. just like gpus can fo 4k120hz now, but need 300+ watts for it. i also dream of that efficiency where i can get a sub 200w card that can manage the same at great temps
@@cattocs Doesn't need to be. You just set a lower TDP target. Scaling is logarithmic, ie, you should get 90% of the performance at 50% of the power with most high TDP chips.
@@smashed_penguin There isn't really any sound treatment in this area. Gerard Undone did a BTS video and pointed it out. Plus, half this unit is still used for storage and receiving shipments. It's a bloody awkward space.
I can`t hear any distortion in audio despite the fact I watched every short circuit video in the past 3 months... No distortion on my pc headphones, no phone speaker distortion nor soundbar either so idk what u mean...
I think people are just plain dumb for not realizing Moore’s Law is coming to an end and expecting again what they’ve seen over the past 40 years. The expectations were unrealistic. The proportional shrinking of nodes no longer provides the same magnitude compute improvement as it did at the ‘quantum effects!? Never heard of her!’ scale. I mean fuck, frankly it’s been dead for a while. People just didn’t notice. And these days, the “x nm” is illustrative of performance improvement and not physical realities. Its marketing. Recall the N4 N5 controversy. Consider how an intel 10nm can be comparable to an AMD 7nm. Trace width ain’t everything. Gate size and gate density. The future is yet more chiplet stuffing imo.
Also, even if quantum computing isn’t discovered, software will still get more complex and people will just start using server CPUs with core counts in the hundreds for their PCs. i really don’t think Moore’s law is going to die anytime soon.
@@shaansingh6048 True! But the nature of quantum operations is very different than traditional flops. They’re useful for some things, and useless for others. That is to say, whilst processors with qbits are useless for gaming atm, they’re excellent for say, modeling the folding of proteins. Im trying so say, you can’t really say a single quantum operation is equal to x many convention flops. You can’t make an equivalency like that because of the fundamental nature of superpositions, the whole reason a quantum operation is very useful. And as to Moore’s law, maybe, yes, more cores etc. I mentioned chiplet stuffing in the context of CPU’s. If transistors are so keep doubling on integrated circuits, than that necessitates the growth of those circuits. Thermals, power, physical space, might become a problem for the first time even (when, I do not know). But I mean. Eventually it’s gonna be a problem. Computers the size of a fridge like they were back when they ran on vacuum tubes?! It’d be pretty funny/cool if we wrapped back around to them though. But alternatively maybe, because connectivity is good, maybe consumers start to lease cloud compute services to bolster their towers or somehting. Who knows! Speculating about the future is fun. (And in this paradigm, the continued scalability of computing power is maintained, because thermals power and space is data centre 101). Fuck, what if we started to see q operations doubling on a fixed time period or something? That’d be cool af
untrue, that's only given by today's manufacturing techniques. If we can scale processes even smaller say to the natural scale of organic matter, moore's law has literally only just begun.
@@ThaexakaMavro nah it will be, the last ones were also great and this time they have had a few years of experience and data on the VCache to optimise it, also Zen5 is a fresh(relatively) architecture built to scale up long term, like Zen 1- Zen 4. But I am on a 7600x so I will be skipping these cpus and wait for Zen6 x3d ones to upgrade, maybe 8 core or 16 core variants idk, depends on how much money I have.
Finally a review that they don't bash not having an insane increase from one generation to the other, and actually notice how efficiency (and temperatures) do in fact matter.
This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features compared to the previous generation since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. Chip companies prefer to find ways to improve performance without requiring new software optimizations, but when they run out of those, they are more likely to introduce new features which will require more changes to software. Sometimes it takes so long for those optimizations to happen that the first chips to include those changes will already be very old by the time that happens. Zen 5 already shows a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
@@syncmonism exactly, I commented similar on a different video, it might take some years for software to make use of so many architectural improvements. It's really just a shame it's the same IO die and memory controller, but comparing to what Intel did from 13th to 14th Gen this is a much bigger step in the right direction. Certainly ryzen 10000 will come with a new IO die, and for AM5, right? I hope they release a 9700G or 10700G, if they pick up things from strix halo it could be quite good for gaming at 1080p.
Rhe diminishing return from shrinking the CPU die, it's respectable that AMD is still finding ways to make their CPU stronger Until Intel can pull themselves back, AMD is not going try harder than their are now
@@Nightykk no this Gen was supposed to be a new architecture. What Intel did was just a die shrink every other generation and that’s why the performance wasn’t much better
Basically; Gamers on 79(x)0X3D - wait for Ryzen 109(x)0X3D. Gamers on 59(x)0X3D - wait for Ryzen 99(x)0X3D or 109(x)0X3D, if you're happy with what you have. Anybody on 39(x)0X or older - Non-gamers grab this, Gamers wait for the 99(x)0X3D.
Imagine being so underwhelming with your launch that your flagship CPU ends up on the shortcircuit channel. Come on AMD, you were doing so well with Zen 5 mobile. Time to wait for X3D and for these to get discounted like the 7000 series
"Time to wait for X3D and for these to get discounted like the 7000 series" Imagine thinking that the niche that is the desktop PC gaming market is actually THAT important that the not-gaming oriented CPUs will get discontinued🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Keep an open mind. This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. They already show a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than on the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform. Zen 3 was highly unusual, in that it used the same manufacturing process as the previous generation, but was actually significantly faster than the previous generation in most applications from day one. It's actually pretty normal for performance improvements to be very unimpressive for a new CPU architecture that's using the same process, especially when that new architecture has a lot of changes vs. the previous one.
@@syncmonism I agree with you that it's not yet performing to it's full potential, it's just annoying because AMD would have tested their chips on Windows first but still released impressive benchmark scores that they knew wasn't true.
@syncmonism you're maybe too generous. This is midcycle refresh performance at best. It was slower in some titles. Im in the x3d crowd, but i can see how some people would be disappointed. They WILL be dropping prices soon.
none of them have ever done well. you need true quad channel for that, otherwise its more of a question of how well the specific motherboard is designed for it. id suggest biggest dual channel kit you can manage and live happy
It's the same memory controller as on 7000-series, so there's no practical difference in RAM support. AMD validates higher RAM speeds with Zen 5 than Zen 4, but that is arbitrary and most likely only because JEDEC DDR5-5600 wasn't available to validate when Zen 4 launched, not due to any actual difference in what RAM speeds and capacities will work.
@@nathangamble125 that's not the entire story tho. Zen 5 has several architectural changes that might affect RAM compatibility. Wendel went into it a bit in his Linux Zen 5 video, if you're interested.
To me it seemed the dragon was more of a figurative for how hot their previous chips were, going to around 100 °c when turboing and now they stay relatively cool
I worry Amd is getting too comfortable with intel only having 12th gen version 3 out now. Need some intel CPUs that move the needle to bring the competition back.
@@RyTrapp0Whoa there buckaroo, thats a bit harsh.We see way to much stagnation due to lack of competition to not be concerned to some extent. In any case, I would be happy if I was wrong.
From what I hear, this generation was basically tailor-made for businesses and AI generation companies. Gamers want more power with the same efficiency. Companies want the same power with higher power efficiency
The fact that this isn't even on their "main" channel is already a HUGE demotion. It's not a bad chip by any means but neither did it blow us away. A B+ is fair.
they hold their own against intel with these guys, the main appeal is significantly lower power draw, a 100W decrease in power draw for very similar if not better performance is massive. As for comparing them against previous gen ryzen, they don't have to massively improve performance to appeal to people, a slight bump in performance + a slight bump in efficiency is going to be enough for a lot of people to consider buying these, they're targeting the small market of people who are actually going to shill out for a 14900K/KS because "It's the best".
@@YuokoII Yeah, when Intel decides to stick to a socket that was planned with at least SOME forethought, rather than needlessly making new sockets just to force consumers to replace their motherboard every time they want a decent CPU upgrade.
@@fujinshu tbh I don’t really understand this point. I’ve upgraded in 2022 from 3700k to 13700k. So I’ve used it for pretty much 10 years and it has started struggling only after 8-9 years. Having ability to upgrade cpu after 4-5 years without changing mobo is nice but does normal user really need it? Like is it gamechanging? Especially considering that new mobo’s are also getting new features
@@YuokoII most people upgrade their CPU within 3-5 years, you're definetly an outlier in this. obviously if you upgrade every 10 years with basically a whole new mobo, ram and cpu you won't care about a socket's upgradability.
"The Ryzen 9 9950X was 33% faster than the Intel Core i9 14900K performance overall and even the Ryzen 9 9900X was 18% faster than the Core i9 14900K. For those still on AM4, the Ryzen 9 9950X was delivering 1.87x the performance of the Ryzen 9 5950X processor. These are some great gains found with the Ryzen 9 9900 series." -Phoronix on Linux performances
Ok before we get into another situation like everyone thinking the 9700/9600X will always pull "40% less power", they're talking about specific use cases on Linux. There's some indicators that the Windows scheduler is just not behaving right yet (shocker), which is something that'll likely improve but if you're a developer on Linux it's very promising. For everyone else, there's few situations where the current price is justified over the 7950X and if you also game, the latter also doesn't need a bunch of core parking/scheduling optimizations to work properly.
If I'm correct it's because the 7800X3D only has 1 CCD, meanwhile 7950X3D has 2 CCD and sometimes the games won't use the CCD that has 3D vcache on it Could be wrong tho, I'm not 100% sure
because the 7950x3d only has 3d cache in half of the CPU, if you want to go for max performance then you must limit it on half the die otherwise it' pretty compareable to a 7950x with some minor extra sauce. The 7800x3d is THE best CPU for single core performance
wow.. i'd be happy in 60s.. any 90s scare me.. what do you think of combo-ing 9900x with ASUS x670e Prime and an ASUS TUF 4070TISuper for general multi-purpose?
Keep an open mind, this is a new architecture, with more changes and new features since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. They already show a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform. Zen 3 was highly unusual, in that it used the same manufacturing process and motherboard platform as the previous generation, but was actually significantly faster than the previous generation in most applications from day one. It's actually pretty normal for performance improvements to be very unimpressive for a new CPU architecture that's using the same process, especially when that new architecture has a lot of changes vs. the previous one.
@@syncmonismthe % performance gains they got were just for average consumer who just plug in the cpu doesn’t do any tuning, people who already turned those settings off from the start saw absolutely no gains, i certainly didn’t. It’s still Zen 5%
Its not that straight forward … most tests do say there is some decent improvements, but areas where they do stay behind. If you look through the tests show very heterogenous results with areas and games where even older CPU’s outrun 7900/7950x.
That "tiny little" CPU is a monster, great for gaming, but also great for some types of workstation workloads as well, such as compiling, I believe. The 7600 is already a great gaming CPU that would be more than enough for most people, and most gamers are still getting by with something that's two or more generations older than that still.
People who showed 9950X tests for gaming after Windows 24h2 update. I think this makes a big difference for people who want productivity and also gaming.
LMG have framed it more positively but got the same conclussions as plenty of other reputable reviewers like Kit Guru. If your building a productivity machine this is the top mainstream chip to get if your building a gaming machine skip it for now because the performance is all over the place at the minute.
@@senraXD The performance isn't bad... its just not a leap on previous generations making it disappointing so no point in upgrading... But if you are looking for a new CPU ... hey its more efficient.
Here a question, as I'm very inexperienced in CPUs. Why is the key measure by FPS, if CPU's are focused on general desktop use? I have a dedicated gaming PC for sim racing, with a current Intel i7 9700k and a 4080 and I game at 4K only. I cap my FPS at around 100 max as I can't even notice anything above that and I am 95% single player and not multiplayer. Will I get any benefit in upgrading to a new 9900X, or even a previous gen 7800x3D?
”Huge architecture improvements” is from your own tests 2-8% faster than AMD’s previous series, for a much much more expensive platform than 7000-series. I don’t quite understand that statement.
30% better for workstations. Gaming seems to be having software issue and we wont know what performance will be but rn gaming performance is like 6% better
@@eriklindahl7376 avx512 testing from phoronix. Also database testing from phoronix and techpowerup. Meant to write 20% but for avx512 it is ~30% better
It's a little weird to say that it's unfortunate that AMD has tuned their CPU's to run at the best performance vs efficiency out of the box rather than having to change a bunch of settings in the BIOS. Isn't this what we've been asking for? More average consumer friendly products. If these are stable AND high performance, this is great and not something to be called "unfortunate". Rest of the video was great, just a weird perspective poking out through some of the word choice here.
i think that's okay, what is unfortunate is that there was no performance gain. the 7700 non-x already had the same power limit and performed almost the same as the badly named 9700x.
I am curious. How does the IGPU within the 9950X perform at 4k for NON-gaming purposes like normal office work playing RUclips or simple 2D CAD work? Do you actually gain performance from a pure GPU board anymore? For this kind of "simple" workload, does it matter whether 4060, 4070, 4080, or 4090?
Love your videos Linus, but what is Labs doing? Every other reviewer is tearing these a new one for basically 5% or less gains and yet somehow the Labs testing shows it being better than that. Did someone… screw up? This is worth a closer look I think on your part
Its pretty easy to understand, they use rocket league for benchmarks while others dont, notice how the 14900ks also seems like a great CPU while the 7800x3d is midrange? Im pretty dumb myself but i would say that rocket league is a huge single core load with very little benefit for 3dcache
Possibly other reviews did not get the message from AMD about the chipset drivers needing to be installed like the last gen x3d chips.. possibly without installing the software correctly the core parking wont work correctly so performance will drop.
Keep an open mind. This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. They already show a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform. Zen 3 was highly unusual, in that it used the same manufacturing process and motherboard platform as the previous generation, but was actually significantly faster than the previous generation in most applications from day one. It's actually pretty normal for performance improvements to be very unimpressive for a new CPU architecture that's using the same process, especially when that new architecture has a lot of changes vs. the previous one.
pbo is a overclocking feature that can void your warranty, remember OVERCLOCKING, the stock already an advertised performance so making the thing consumed more energy make it degrade faster
Benchmarks on these processors is very diverse, some say they are ok at best, others say it's bad and some say it's good... To be honest the tech youtube right now is a mess...
Cuz cpu value massively affected by what are you gonna do with it, if you purely for gaming 3d is way better value, even if you also doing work just buy 7000 non x3d series, the only reason for this is for professional people thats value their time soo much
You're not listening properly is the problem. Most tech channels here pander to the gaming section. This CPU is for productivity and it does it better at a lower power draw, By that logic yes AMD completely butchered Intel. If you want a gaming CPU just wait for the X3D version.
@@mrbobgamingmemes9558 Zen 5 is actually significantly better for Assetto Corsa specifically, showing improved frame consistency and about an 18% performance improvement. That suggest that there will likely be at least some other new games which will also see more than a 10% improvement in performance, but time will tell. Keep an open mind, this is a new architecture, with more changes and new features since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. They already show a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
How is this comment section so insufferable. Other reviewers are "shitting" on this launch, because they focus on gaming performance, but that isn't the only metric important to people; so if LMG focuses on other things like productivity and efficiency of course the vibe of the video will be more positive.
A lot of people don't have context, unfortunately. People are quick to ride their outrage ponies these days. I think all the reviewer takes I've seen thus far are valid, whether from a more positive angle or more negative one. A lot comes down to individual use case, though, i.e. are you more gaming focused vs prosumer oriented. But I think most of us can agree these chips will probably be more attractive over time with price drops.
There were genuine problems with the launch. AMD should have waited longer before Windows was better optimized for Zen 5. There was no need for them to release it this soon. That being said, Zen 5 already shows some promise to at least offer decent performance improvements, with up to an 18% performance improvement in some games. This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features compared to the previous generation since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. Chip companies prefer to find ways to improve performance without requiring new software optimizations, but when they run out of those, they are more likely to introduce new features which will require more changes to software. Sometimes it takes so long for those optimizations to happen that the first chips to include those changes will already be very old by the time that happens, so nobody should buy Zen 5 CPUs on the assumption that performance will improve a lot soon in any of their preferred applications. Zen 5 already shows a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%, and by over 20% or more in some cases.
Yes, but these are general purpose CPUs, and the uplift wasn't that great across the board. Better as a Linux chip, server, etc. It's not a big deal, though. Just skip this gen, whatever.
don't get me wrong, I love AMD and have switched back to them (maybe permanently), but it is strange to see such a glowing and optimistic review of a pricey and not-that-impressive launch
Well it's LTT. They did the same thing with the first 2 generations of Ryzen even when their own test results at the time supported none of their statements. It wasn't until 3rd gen that their results matched their statements.
i mean he basically said don’t upgrade and wait for these chips to be sold second hand, and if your CPU is older than 7000 series you can upgrade to them
I agree. However, this is a new architecture, with more changes and new features since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. They already show a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform. Zen 3 was highly unusual, in that it used the same manufacturing process and motherboard platform as the previous generation, but was actually significantly faster than the previous generation in most applications from day one. It's actually pretty normal for performance improvements to be very unimpressive for a new CPU architecture that's using the same process, especially when that new architecture has a lot of changes vs. the previous one.
8:23 "Aren't you going to be glad to have the option when 10000 series comes out and these start showing up on the second hand Market?" What? No, of course not. For anyone with a Zen 4 CPU there's no rhyme or reason to upgrade to Zen 5. Maybe if you decide you need more cores for productivity, it could make sense, but if Zen 4 is even cheaper in the used market than Zen 5 it might still be the better option.
Keep an open mind, this is a new architecture, with more changes and new features compared to the previous generation since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. Chip companies prefer to find ways to improve performance without requiring new software optimizations, but when they run out of those, they are more likely to introduce new features which will require more changes to software. Sometimes it takes so long for those optimizations to happen that the first chips to include those changes will already be very old by the time that happens. Zen 5 already shows a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
Looking at 7900X vs 9900X, the charts really don't show a "huge generational improvement" as the video claims... There is one case where it's 10% better, but the others are much closer, more like 2-5%. That is not a huge improvement
Would be very interested to see why your temps are so much lower then other's like Hardware unboxed. Wonder if it's a methodology thing, manufacturer motherboard settings, sample quality, bios version etc....
And now check the Zen 4 launch again. There was no overwhelming positivity then either. Obvious observation bias is obvious. Also, most techtubers are simply idiots about this, it has to be said.
@@mycosys sure blame the os for the failings of the manufacturer for not tweaking their own products to begin with for the os that it clearly is designed for...its clearly designed for windows and not the whole 12 linux users on the planet...the denial of amd fanboys is astounding asif simp for any of these money hungry companies and not make them all accountable AMD,Intel and Microsoft included
You have a short memory because everyone was complaining about Zen 4 and the new motherboards with recommendation from HU to just buy 5800x3D because DDR5 and AM5 was too costly to worth it.
Are we looking at the same charts? How is 5-10% improvement a huge success? The only good thing about this launch is that hopefully 7950X prices will drop.
Because it does that 5% improvement while doing 30% less power and 15 degree lower temperature compared to Intel. This give AMD a lot of room to go forwards, meanwhile Intel is already frying it chips to get that performance and causing stability issues etc. We also forgetting that we testing this in a AM 5 board that was updated to support 9000 series. Lets wait to see how well this works once fully supported boards come out.
@@pipooh1 There is no such thing as a fully supported board, if the VRM is capable enough and the socket is the same then the product is fully supported, and the performance will be the same as well within margin of error. My point was, why would anyone be excited for this 5-10% increase when you can just buy Ryzen 7000? The other reviewers are correct, this is a meh generation, definitely not a good or great one.
@@pipooh1 yeah but compared to 7000 series the efficiency improvement is nothing special. 7950X prices will drop and any smart person would buy that over these new chips.
@@pipooh1 the 7000s... they are efficient while not losing a lot of performance. And they come with boxncooler AND they're cheaper. These 9000 chips are just not good value and are not what amd advertised
New comment moderation gonna go wacky on this one. That being said l understand why you didn’t highlight gaming benchmarks on a productivity chip, and I’m also blown away by how power efficient these chips are… that’s the most impressive generational improvement imho
@@Rhamses220 It depends on the workload, that's what Gamers Nexus has said on the topic. Keep in mind also that Zen 5 performance and efficiency may yet improve significantly with further software optimizations. Some software already does see significant improvements to both performance and efficiency. For example, up to 18% in gaming. If one game can get that much of a performance uplift, than others can as well. That being said, nobody should buy Zen 5 with any kind of assumption about when, or by how much performance will improve in their favored applications, but people should keep an open mind. This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features over the previous generation since arguably Zen 1. Zen 5 already shows a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. Chip companies prefer to find ways to improve performance without requiring new software optimizations, but when they run out of ways of improving performance without requiring significant changes to software, they are more likely to introduce new features which will require more changes to software for new performance to be gained. Sometimes it takes so long for those optimizations to happen that the first chips to include those changes will already be very old by the time that happens, but often software companies won't even think about optimizing for new architectural features until those features become extremely common in existing hardware.
this new gen of ryzen has me excited to potentially see DIY laptops made with the 65W 9700X, (an 8 core desktop cpu drawing less power than most laptop cpus is wild) and the 4060 low profile. AsRock also has a new am5 ITX-Thin mobo which is only 2-3 cm tall (no pcie 16x slot though :( but I was thinking you could potentially hook it up to an m.2 slot, after all the 4060 isn't exactly a high bandwidth card)
Worthy for your setup … they do not sound to be worthy for my setup as most tend to recommend 2-3 year old processors over those two ‘failures’ as many describe them,
I have a 14900ks. Should I get the 9950x now or wait until the 9950x3d comes out? (I have a 1600 watt power supply so I don’t have to worry about power)
Yes, and LTT wants to focus on positive features. You've clearly already watched negative reviews, so relax and watch this. He talks to you about it at 8:00 , the only bad thing about Zen 5 is the price, and that drops over time, but videos stay up.
@@BusAlexey "The only bad thing about Zen 5 is the price". You can't be serious. Zen 3 to Zen 4 was a 20% + improvement. Zen 4 to Zen 5 is on average 5% better. The prices would have to be cut in half for it to make sense.
@@jdewinnaar Plenty of other places are positive. Level1Techs, Phoronix, and KitGuru are the ones I have seen. All of them show about a 20% improvement over 7000 series. Just not in gaming.
im trying to build my first ever gaming pc and so far im planning on getting the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X CPU and i have RTX 3070 GPU but im still lost if its a good cpu or not
Is this the comment section where folks complain about a really nicely designed chip because they think gamers are the only chip purchasers in the world. Relax, the 3d chips will be coming.
Almost like gamers forget that game DEVELOPERS exist. How do they think games get created? By playing games? Most CPUs are sold for productivity, not leaser. Gamers can't seem to wrap their head around this concept.
This. Honestly the reviewers have kinda frustrated me because they have basically focused only on Gaming. It has been clear since the 5800X3D that if you want a gaming powerhouse you need to wait for the X3D variant. Use cases matter and if you only account for one of them you are being pretty stupid.
Oh man I was really taken off guard by the comments here haha. I think a lot of people maybe just hyper focused on it not being as good as they'd like for their use case, while LMG is more excited about it being an actual generation bump and not just stalemating out in the dreaded intel tick-tock cycle of the late 2010s. That and they skipped over the part where he goes over and over that its the X3D chips beating it out in gaming performance and the part where he said if youre waiting to upgrade from those, youre waiting on the Zen5 X3D....
@@SomeUserNameBlahBlah except the 7950x beats the 9950x in some productivity tasks lmao. Also its a fact that when it comes to gaming improvement they have regressed. . A 7700x matches or beats 5800x3d in games, the 9950x cannot compete with the 7800x3D lmao
@@nameless.0190 I don't think anyone was expecting it to. The X3D parts have a lot more cache and have been powerhouses in gaming workloads. That is not what these 16 core parts are for. If you want a great gaming chip wait for the new X3D parts or get the 7800X3D like Linus said. These high core count parts are intended more for professional workloads. Yes Threadripper is better but these are a lot cheaper so they can really fill that niche of I need to get some work done but I don't want to sell my firstborn.
Do you think they will make a desktop with the zen5c cores? I understand they are for mobile, but how do they perform on desktop? I know they can’t turbo up past 3.1 or 3.5 GHz, but considering the architectural improvements, it would be nice to see it in a small form factor Will they ever come out for server chips?
The website. Linus has said plenty of times they want the labs site to have all the useful data people want to look at but they'll only use it in LMG videos where the story is interesting enough. A chip with a small uplift in producivity and all so inconsistent with gaming results that no 2 reviewers are getting consistent results and no one is recommending for gaming clearly doesn't need dozens of gaming graphs in LMGs opinion.
LMG should launch a labs channel if you they could make it work. Just test some whacky stuff and so on. And more in-depth sometimes. We want fun from LMG, we go for info on others like hub.
@@Djuntas- they've addressed this on the WAN show they don't think there's enough audience for that kind of content to make sense for them as a buisness and would impact in the rest of their channels, to the point where they cant even justify having a voice actor on the labs site videos, they'll incorporate labs results into their videos where it makes sense but most labs content will be on the labs site
@@Drunken_Horse Thats fair, their choice, but imo they could churn out low production videos testing stuff. LMG is slave to their own standards. HUB or GN does not haft to have 3 editors and 5 staff people for 1 video etc.
5:18 "Not to mention their HUGE architectural improvements..." *shows graphs with improvements ranging from 9% to -0.5%* Is the "HUGE improvements" in the room with us right now, Linus?
I don't think you are taking the nearly 50% DROP in power consumption into account when they make their recommendations. It's 5% faster while using 50% less power. That's a HUGE architectural improvement. It's not in this video since they don't compare to the 7900's (this is a Short Circuit, after all, not a full review). But compared to the Intel, it's almost half the power and similar performance.
@@WhiteG60 Is 50% power consumption drop in the room with us? Efficiency during gaming compared to 7000 is actually worse, while for most productivity workloads is around 5% better.
@@WhiteG60 Please watch Gamer Nexus's deep dive and Hardware Unboxed re-reviews. The new chips offer minimal improvements, while actually being LESS efficient!
@@WhiteG60 50%? Where? The graphs shown at 6:50 have the average power draw at 197w and peak at 200w. Looking back at LTTs 7950x review video they showed peak of 208 and averages of 174w. That's not what I'd call a "50% DROP in power consumption". According to my math, that's at best a 4% drop.
This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features over the previous generation since arguably Zen 1. Zen 5 already shows a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. Chip companies prefer to find ways to improve performance without requiring new software optimizations, but when they run out of ways of improving performance without requiring significant changes to software, they are more likely to introduce new features which will require more changes to software for new performance to be gained. Sometimes it takes so long for those optimizations to happen that the first chips to include those changes will already be very old by the time that happens, but often software companies won't even think about optimizing for new architectural features until those features become extremely common in existing hardware.
So a +~3% gen on gen performance uplift is "slaying the dragon"... No Cyberpunk 2077, No starfield (AMD sponsored title too!), no Last of us Part 1. The truth is that the 9950X can't even slay the 7950X.
@@mycosys Its like Debauer said. If you have to run the tests 10 times with different settings to get one good result you can't throw out 90% of the data
@@ZackSNetwork Thats like saying "all cars can dragrace" to complain someone didnt test that in detail in a review for a family car, there are CPUs specifically designed with gaming in the forefront, and there are ones that are designed with other sensibilities in mind first.
The video is very detailed but I didn't understand one thing. The question of consumption and temperatures. The 7xxx generation (not 3d) had obvious issues with temperatures. Whatever heatsink you put on they were always at 95 degrees. How do these behave? If one wanted to make a workstation (particularly for blenders) how should one dissipate it and what should one expect? Above all, would it be manageable with air? Maybe with a peerless assassin?
Why does every review feel like an ad these days here. GN and HU gave insightful reviews and these chips did not fare that well at all. Of course on LTT any such critical thinking seems absent. Lose the silly hair and try to look at these from the perspective of the consumer.
Gotta love the "uh this must be sponsored because linus is on the enthusiastic side" and the "well he has been sponsored by amd for years" then they magically seem to forget that they've also done numerous sponsors from intel, and i've heard some harsh things from their own mouths about both, deservedly so. Of course its not like its worth arguing with these people, when you're at the point when linus of all freaking people is a shill, and steve from GN of all freaking people is 'rage bait' like brother, you *need* to be on the internet less lol. On the internet, remember, there's always 2 sides, the wrong people, and the other wrong people. But when you're neither your worse so y'know. I say all this not because i'll change someones mind (thats what they go to twitter for right?) I say it so you can realize these people are the minority, and most people happen to just... Not be rage mongerers, and are capable of enjoying other people lmao.
"But But But Steve says it's bad because it's not 20% better and 20% cheaper than the last gen even if his graphs showed that they are the best productivity chips now"
@@nameless.0190 no one said its not. Everyone was expecting a bigger performance uplift in producivity and gaming and that's exactly how a lot of channels are reporting it, it's the "It doesn't smash every other mainstream chip therefore it's bad" that's the bad take. If your about to build the top performing producivity system this is the top mainstream chip and the pricing isn't crazy compared to the market how is that a bad thing? Now if X3D doesn't compete that's the time to get annoyed
@@Drunken_Horse Linus didn't _say_ Zen 5 is not disappointing, but certainly implied it in this video. Zen 5 isn't exactly bad, it's just a lot weaker than what AMD claimed, and they ought to be called out for it. Linus is going way too easy on AMD, considering the misleading/inaccurate performance they showed in their Zen 5 announcement presentation.
basically, gamers get the 7800X3D or wait for the 9800X3D
Or the 9950X3D! For the record, I think the 9800X3D if its rumored full overclocking support on 3D-Vcache is accurate will be the FPS KING! Even if the 9950X3D is an OC God which I am sure it will have to be to make up for Zen 5's mixed launch, the fact that it is very unlikley AMD will give the 9950X3D two 3D-Vache CCD's, gives the 9800X3D the edge for top tier gaming performance with an NVIDIA Blackwell or AMD RDNA5 equivalent graphics card.
@@Activation123 7950x3d is good if you want crazy gaming performance and still extremely good productivity
@@Activation123 That's a misread on your part. It's not what you should buy if you literally just care about gaming, but there are people that play games and have a wide range of computing needs and interests. For example I use Linux and Windows, do some code compiling, video transcoding, DAW software, run virtual machines and play games like DCS, DSP, and Star citizen that absolutely favor the cache. Having previously had the 5950X, but playing games where the 5800X3D crushed nothing else makes sense other than a R9 X3D. Star Citizen utilized up to 60% of a 5950X with a 6800XT, which is approaching 20 threads.
@@Activation123 We have to see if the 9950X3D might actually have 2 CCDs with 3D V Cache (it's rumored, so not guaranteed, given that Zen 5 started as a flop, I doubt they will try to hold performance back), meaning that it could be the best CPU out there. We just have to see if the Zen 5 architecture holds back that 3D V Cache or not.
I don't think the X3D will be any better looks like AMD has been on a break for 2 years
Stop it intel is already ded
Yeah right it overheated not so blast processing of intel btw
We thought that of AMD once. We never know what next year might bring.
About time for a Linus sponsored video where he talks about how Awesome Intel is again…..
Not really.
Intel is still ahead... if you ignore temps 😂
I love competition but we gotta calm down gang, they did not cook yet.
@@SpaceJazz3K not for the one that intel has not improved anything from earlier with bulky fans which makes too much noises while it overheats to 200 degrees. Too much.
Damn, we lived to see Zen 5 getting ShortCiruited
Power of a CPU is pointless nowadays.. Most budget systems use i3 or old gen Ryzen 5 at best and nobody really cares.
@@mycosys I'm a software engineer..
@@perseus31 all you need is chromebook
@@perseus31 we all can tell you are not. But i do agree that brands don t matter as long as you get the best from any of them. both will do everything you need them to do even as professionals.
@Pryme. I am. I literally code on a Thinkpad E480 company gave me. I personally have M1 MacBook Air. For graphical work or really heavy loads, of course it's going to help but for average consumer I don't see a point in getting latest i9. If you consider playing 4k full graphics that's another case.
1:28 NOT AGAIN LINUSSSS
Thank god they don't have pins anymore.
Certified Linus Drop Tips TM
Drop like the bars this Slim Linus will.
He is a pro it it now dont worry
@@L1B4NN1NHO Yes, LGA saved this one
Whaddya expect, LTT have been dropping the ball for years now
Is this the only channel on youtube who isn't roasting Zen 5 like crazy?
Wendell seems pretty up on them, though to be fair he is looking more at the productivity/server-y side of things rather than gaming centric like much else of the "big names".
Leo at KitGuru hasn't exactly laid into them. Gave it 8/10 and said he'll be switching to it. The channels that don't live off drama are all just saying "Good but expected it to be a better"
@@ibelieveinjesusinmyspareti2861 this is short circuit, they don't usually go very deep on this channel. If they want to go deeper they will do a longer video in the main channel. Short Circuit it basically a first impressions channel.
@@mrbi0 I watch LTT/LMG solely for entertainment and not for anything informative
@@Cats_Are_Scaryhe was sponsored by Intel before amd?
Higher efficiency means less heat to deal with, this should be the goal :) processing units are fast enough for me, i want companies to maximize efficiency
agreed but it isnt pushing efficiency either. just a meh boost to the old stuff.
just like gpus can fo 4k120hz now, but need 300+ watts for it. i also dream of that efficiency where i can get a sub 200w card that can manage the same at great temps
Maybe it's not marketable
@@cattocs Doesn't need to be. You just set a lower TDP target. Scaling is logarithmic, ie, you should get 90% of the performance at 50% of the power with most high TDP chips.
Not even worth a full on LTT review lol. Short Circuit FTW. I actually appreciate it.
The added bonus of future-proofing with the same AM5 socket is quite attractive for incremental upgrades.
Is it me or does the audio sound echo-y?
It is not you.
We've been saying that about shortcircuit videos shot on this set for 2-3 months now.
@@smashed_penguin There isn't really any sound treatment in this area. Gerard Undone did a BTS video and pointed it out. Plus, half this unit is still used for storage and receiving shipments. It's a bloody awkward space.
I didn't hear the echo on my ROG Ally Speakers, so I put on my gaming headset and holy crap. I see what you mean.
I can`t hear any distortion in audio despite the fact I watched every short circuit video in the past 3 months... No distortion on my pc headphones, no phone speaker distortion nor soundbar either so idk what u mean...
I think people are just plain dumb for not realizing Moore’s Law is coming to an end and expecting again what they’ve seen over the past 40 years. The expectations were unrealistic. The proportional shrinking of nodes no longer provides the same magnitude compute improvement as it did at the ‘quantum effects!? Never heard of her!’ scale. I mean fuck, frankly it’s been dead for a while. People just didn’t notice. And these days, the “x nm” is illustrative of performance improvement and not physical realities. Its marketing. Recall the N4 N5 controversy. Consider how an intel 10nm can be comparable to an AMD 7nm. Trace width ain’t everything. Gate size and gate density.
The future is yet more chiplet stuffing imo.
if Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Snapdragon, and Apple invest in quantum computer research we’ll have those chips soon
Also, even if quantum computing isn’t discovered, software will still get more complex and people will just start using server CPUs with core counts in the hundreds for their PCs. i really don’t think Moore’s law is going to die anytime soon.
@@shaansingh6048 True! But the nature of quantum operations is very different than traditional flops. They’re useful for some things, and useless for others. That is to say, whilst processors with qbits are useless for gaming atm, they’re excellent for say, modeling the folding of proteins.
Im trying so say, you can’t really say a single quantum operation is equal to x many convention flops. You can’t make an equivalency like that because of the fundamental nature of superpositions, the whole reason a quantum operation is very useful.
And as to Moore’s law, maybe, yes, more cores etc. I mentioned chiplet stuffing in the context of CPU’s. If transistors are so keep doubling on integrated circuits, than that necessitates the growth of those circuits. Thermals, power, physical space, might become a problem for the first time even (when, I do not know). But I mean. Eventually it’s gonna be a problem.
Computers the size of a fridge like they were back when they ran on vacuum tubes?! It’d be pretty funny/cool if we wrapped back around to them though.
But alternatively maybe, because connectivity is good, maybe consumers start to lease cloud compute services to bolster their towers or somehting. Who knows! Speculating about the future is fun. (And in this paradigm, the continued scalability of computing power is maintained, because thermals power and space is data centre 101).
Fuck, what if we started to see q operations doubling on a fixed time period or something? That’d be cool af
@@shaansingh6048the future is now old man
untrue, that's only given by today's manufacturing techniques. If we can scale processes even smaller say to the natural scale of organic matter, moore's law has literally only just begun.
>Same performance as two year old CPU.
What a roast.
Consuming less power and more fresh cpu.
Basically this video explains just wait for the 9950x3d 😅
When do you think the 9950x3d be released?
@@DBitRun Last time it took them about 4 months, so December?
Yip - sitting with my 7950X3D and waiting to see what the next version is like.
x3d won't be better lower your expectations right now
@@ThaexakaMavro nah it will be, the last ones were also great and this time they have had a few years of experience and data on the VCache to optimise it, also Zen5 is a fresh(relatively) architecture built to scale up long term, like Zen 1- Zen 4. But I am on a 7600x so I will be skipping these cpus and wait for Zen6 x3d ones to upgrade, maybe 8 core or 16 core variants idk, depends on how much money I have.
Finally a review that they don't bash not having an insane increase from one generation to the other, and actually notice how efficiency (and temperatures) do in fact matter.
This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features compared to the previous generation since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. Chip companies prefer to find ways to improve performance without requiring new software optimizations, but when they run out of those, they are more likely to introduce new features which will require more changes to software. Sometimes it takes so long for those optimizations to happen that the first chips to include those changes will already be very old by the time that happens.
Zen 5 already shows a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
@@syncmonism exactly, I commented similar on a different video, it might take some years for software to make use of so many architectural improvements. It's really just a shame it's the same IO die and memory controller, but comparing to what Intel did from 13th to 14th Gen this is a much bigger step in the right direction. Certainly ryzen 10000 will come with a new IO die, and for AM5, right? I hope they release a 9700G or 10700G, if they pick up things from strix halo it could be quite good for gaming at 1080p.
Talking about the x3d but not including them in the charts is a bad move
But they were included...
You shills praise a 3% increase as “incredible” meanwhile the 7950x was like 50% better than 5950x. THAT is incredible.
Waddaya know he’s linus 🤷
Rhe diminishing return from shrinking the CPU die, it's respectable that AMD is still finding ways to make their CPU stronger
Until Intel can pull themselves back, AMD is not going try harder than their are now
This is more of an Intel tick-tock approach, I suppose.
Tick: New tech - Tock: Refining the tech.
People were literally doing that to Intel for years. It's a 3% increase while drawing a good bit less power.
@@Nightykk no this Gen was supposed to be a new architecture. What Intel did was just a die shrink every other generation and that’s why the performance wasn’t much better
Basically;
Gamers on 79(x)0X3D - wait for Ryzen 109(x)0X3D.
Gamers on 59(x)0X3D - wait for Ryzen 99(x)0X3D or 109(x)0X3D, if you're happy with what you have.
Anybody on 39(x)0X or older - Non-gamers grab this, Gamers wait for the 99(x)0X3D.
Brooo, im upgrading from ipad pro to this 😅 not gonna wait for x3d etc.
@@ejudeeusThen you're not a part of who's talking to
@@Crecross chill bro. 😅 why so serious.
Imagine being so underwhelming with your launch that your flagship CPU ends up on the shortcircuit channel. Come on AMD, you were doing so well with Zen 5 mobile. Time to wait for X3D and for these to get discounted like the 7000 series
uh?
@@mileskt9232 yeah everything is cherry pic the sky is blue smh 🤦♂🤦♂
"Time to wait for X3D and for these to get discounted like the 7000 series"
Imagine thinking that the niche that is the desktop PC gaming market is actually THAT important that the not-gaming oriented CPUs will get discontinued🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@RyTrapp0 he didn't say discontinued.... He said discounted.... Which the 7000 series did do...
@@Brockzillagaming 😭Damn it, that's one solid 'derp' job on that one lmao
it's 3% faster in productivity and 1% faster in gaming vs zen 4, and using similar power
Keep an open mind. This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features.
They already show a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than on the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
Zen 3 was highly unusual, in that it used the same manufacturing process as the previous generation, but was actually significantly faster than the previous generation in most applications from day one. It's actually pretty normal for performance improvements to be very unimpressive for a new CPU architecture that's using the same process, especially when that new architecture has a lot of changes vs. the previous one.
@@syncmonism I agree with you that it's not yet performing to it's full potential, it's just annoying because AMD would have tested their chips on Windows first but still released impressive benchmark scores that they knew wasn't true.
@syncmonism you're maybe too generous. This is midcycle refresh performance at best. It was slower in some titles. Im in the x3d crowd, but i can see how some people would be disappointed. They WILL be dropping prices soon.
This is not a gaming chip bro.
Any tests on how well their memory controller handles 4 DIMMs? Really want higher speed 128GB
none of them have ever done well. you need true quad channel for that, otherwise its more of a question of how well the specific motherboard is designed for it. id suggest biggest dual channel kit you can manage and live happy
It's the same memory controller as on 7000-series, so there's no practical difference in RAM support.
AMD validates higher RAM speeds with Zen 5 than Zen 4, but that is arbitrary and most likely only because JEDEC DDR5-5600 wasn't available to validate when Zen 4 launched, not due to any actual difference in what RAM speeds and capacities will work.
@@nathangamble125 Really? well that is lame
@@nathangamble125 that's not the entire story tho. Zen 5 has several architectural changes that might affect RAM compatibility. Wendel went into it a bit in his Linux Zen 5 video, if you're interested.
Really isn't a LTT vid unless Linus drops something. Classic.
JayzTwoCents - AMD fumbled the launch
LTT - AMD slayed the dragon
But both come to the same conclusions. Just framed it differently.
To me it seemed the dragon was more of a figurative for how hot their previous chips were, going to around 100 °c when turboing and now they stay relatively cool
More like the dragon ate them and 💩them out 😂
Jayz never miss an opportunity to hit on AMD.
@@Drunken_Horse JayZ-Two-Buttholes
I worry Amd is getting too comfortable with intel only having 12th gen version 3 out now. Need some intel CPUs that move the needle to bring the competition back.
Arrowlake please don't dissapoint
It's been literally ONE generation, stop with this reactionary garbage
as and AMD boi, i totally agree with ya
@@RyTrapp0Whoa there buckaroo, thats a bit harsh.We see way to much stagnation due to lack of competition to not be concerned to some extent. In any case, I would be happy if I was wrong.
@@GonnerMeLeggies "That's a bit harsh" - kinda like assuming that a company just literally stopped trying over a single product generation...
From what I hear, this generation was basically tailor-made for businesses and AI generation companies. Gamers want more power with the same efficiency. Companies want the same power with higher power efficiency
what load were they running for the temperature tests with and without PBO? 60° sounds really low to me
The fact that this isn't even on their "main" channel is already a HUGE demotion. It's not a bad chip by any means but neither did it blow us away. A B+ is fair.
C+
they hold their own against intel with these guys, the main appeal is significantly lower power draw, a 100W decrease in power draw for very similar if not better performance is massive. As for comparing them against previous gen ryzen, they don't have to massively improve performance to appeal to people, a slight bump in performance + a slight bump in efficiency is going to be enough for a lot of people to consider buying these, they're targeting the small market of people who are actually going to shill out for a 14900K/KS because "It's the best".
C-
B- or C+
Thankfully my i7 13700k is doing alright,
But I'll be switching to AMD next time for sure!
Hopefully it wasn’t killed…
At the point you’ll be switching things can change again and ppl will be praising intel over amd. This shit is so funny to watch every single time.
@@YuokoII Yeah, when Intel decides to stick to a socket that was planned with at least SOME forethought, rather than needlessly making new sockets just to force consumers to replace their motherboard every time they want a decent CPU upgrade.
@@fujinshu tbh I don’t really understand this point. I’ve upgraded in 2022 from 3700k to 13700k. So I’ve used it for pretty much 10 years and it has started struggling only after 8-9 years.
Having ability to upgrade cpu after 4-5 years without changing mobo is nice but does normal user really need it? Like is it gamechanging? Especially considering that new mobo’s are also getting new features
@@YuokoII most people upgrade their CPU within 3-5 years, you're definetly an outlier in this. obviously if you upgrade every 10 years with basically a whole new mobo, ram and cpu you won't care about a socket's upgradability.
"The Ryzen 9 9950X was 33% faster than the Intel Core i9 14900K performance overall and even the Ryzen 9 9900X was 18% faster than the Core i9 14900K. For those still on AM4, the Ryzen 9 9950X was delivering 1.87x the performance of the Ryzen 9 5950X processor. These are some great gains found with the Ryzen 9 9900 series."
-Phoronix on Linux performances
Ok before we get into another situation like everyone thinking the 9700/9600X will always pull "40% less power", they're talking about specific use cases on Linux. There's some indicators that the Windows scheduler is just not behaving right yet (shocker), which is something that'll likely improve but if you're a developer on Linux it's very promising.
For everyone else, there's few situations where the current price is justified over the 7950X and if you also game, the latter also doesn't need a bunch of core parking/scheduling optimizations to work properly.
@Chett_Manlybecause they got released at the same time, and it's actually a comparison between Zen 4 and Zen 5.
Don'tcare about Linux, windows users are greater in number
Though it is interesting to see a generation of cpu being os biased
@Chett_Manlyboth gens are carried by avx 512. (All of sudden it's not useless when AMD does it and drops clocks to 60%)
Just a note for those who have a Microcenter near them. You can snag the 7800X3D for $194 USD on a new build with a mobo/memory combo of your choice.
1:23 i still don’t get why linus isn’t sponsored by drop (massdrop)
9900x is on sale for like $360 right now at Microcenter which is just insane when you compare it to the other options.
Man and we thought that shaved Linus looked weird
Glad I picked one up. 5950 to 9950... hell of a jump.
When will the 9950X3D be released?
Some say late 2024, others say in about a year.
Oh, I hope they announced it at the January 2025 CES.
Pls review the PSVR2 adapter
come on, why everbody is inculding the 7800x3D but NOT the 7950x3D in their Tests?
because 7950x was performing way better than 7950x3D in almost every scenario due to some of that extra cache problem and tdp reduction
If I'm correct it's because the 7800X3D only has 1 CCD, meanwhile 7950X3D has 2 CCD and sometimes the games won't use the CCD that has 3D vcache on it
Could be wrong tho, I'm not 100% sure
7950X = faster than 7950X3D in cpu tests
7800X3D = faster or equal to 7950X3D in gaming without dealing with Windows scheduler bullshit
because the 7950x3d only has 3d cache in half of the CPU, if you want to go for max performance then you must limit it on half the die otherwise it' pretty compareable to a 7950x with some minor extra sauce. The 7800x3d is THE best CPU for single core performance
Also the difference between 7800x3D and 7950x3D are negligible for the price to performance in gaming
My new Ryzen9 9900x build Is running @ 42C Which is cooler than expected after seeing so many vids about the heat.
wow.. i'd be happy in 60s.. any 90s scare me.. what do you think of combo-ing 9900x with ASUS x670e Prime and an ASUS TUF 4070TISuper for general multi-purpose?
First tech RUclipsr Calling this a decent upgrade, everyone else telling you to get the 7900x or 7950x and skip this Gen but not LTT.
Keep an open mind, this is a new architecture, with more changes and new features since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features.
They already show a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
Zen 3 was highly unusual, in that it used the same manufacturing process and motherboard platform as the previous generation, but was actually significantly faster than the previous generation in most applications from day one. It's actually pretty normal for performance improvements to be very unimpressive for a new CPU architecture that's using the same process, especially when that new architecture has a lot of changes vs. the previous one.
@@syncmonismthe % performance gains they got were just for average consumer who just plug in the cpu doesn’t do any tuning, people who already turned those settings off from the start saw absolutely no gains, i certainly didn’t. It’s still Zen 5%
Its not that straight forward … most tests do say there is some decent improvements, but areas where they do stay behind. If you look through the tests show very heterogenous results with areas and games where even older CPU’s outrun 7900/7950x.
Slim Shady has reincarnated into Linus.
glad to see my tiny little 85watt 7800x3d still whoop cpu above its weight class a full year and a half later
That "tiny little" CPU is a monster, great for gaming, but also great for some types of workstation workloads as well, such as compiling, I believe.
The 7600 is already a great gaming CPU that would be more than enough for most people, and most gamers are still getting by with something that's two or more generations older than that still.
People who showed 9950X tests for gaming after Windows 24h2 update. I think this makes a big difference for people who want productivity and also gaming.
LTT: Zen 5 excellent/great
Other reviewers: Zen 5 mid/okay/meh
🤔
AMD is looking like Intel back in their tick-tock days
Other reviewers: Performance bad. Me no likey!
LTT: Performance per watt is good 👍
LMG have framed it more positively but got the same conclussions as plenty of other reputable reviewers like Kit Guru. If your building a productivity machine this is the top mainstream chip to get if your building a gaming machine skip it for now because the performance is all over the place at the minute.
not only LTT you might want to widen your scope of reviewers
@@senraXD The performance isn't bad... its just not a leap on previous generations making it disappointing so no point in upgrading... But if you are looking for a new CPU ... hey its more efficient.
8:04… did you watch the end
Here a question, as I'm very inexperienced in CPUs. Why is the key measure by FPS, if CPU's are focused on general desktop use? I have a dedicated gaming PC for sim racing, with a current Intel i7 9700k and a 4080 and I game at 4K only. I cap my FPS at around 100 max as I can't even notice anything above that and I am 95% single player and not multiplayer. Will I get any benefit in upgrading to a new 9900X, or even a previous gen 7800x3D?
”Huge architecture improvements” is from your own tests 2-8% faster than AMD’s previous series, for a much much more expensive platform than 7000-series. I don’t quite understand that statement.
30% better for workstations. Gaming seems to be having software issue and we wont know what performance will be but rn gaming performance is like 6% better
@@PaulBlartGaming where do you see a 30% performance gain on the 9950X vs the 7950X?
@@eriklindahl7376 avx512 testing from phoronix. Also database testing from phoronix and techpowerup. Meant to write 20% but for avx512 it is ~30% better
@@eriklindahl7376 not even 10 percent
@@Fuad_exactly. But the poster above said 30% for workstation. I was wondering what and where he saw that.
Has anyone taken the time to run Passmark with the new 9950x? Be interesting to see where it rates.
It's a little weird to say that it's unfortunate that AMD has tuned their CPU's to run at the best performance vs efficiency out of the box rather than having to change a bunch of settings in the BIOS. Isn't this what we've been asking for? More average consumer friendly products. If these are stable AND high performance, this is great and not something to be called "unfortunate". Rest of the video was great, just a weird perspective poking out through some of the word choice here.
i think that's okay, what is unfortunate is that there was no performance gain. the 7700 non-x already had the same power limit and performed almost the same as the badly named 9700x.
I am curious.
How does the IGPU within the 9950X perform at 4k for NON-gaming purposes like normal office work playing RUclips or simple 2D CAD work?
Do you actually gain performance from a pure GPU board anymore?
For this kind of "simple" workload, does it matter whether 4060, 4070, 4080, or 4090?
Love your videos Linus, but what is Labs doing? Every other reviewer is tearing these a new one for basically 5% or less gains and yet somehow the Labs testing shows it being better than that. Did someone… screw up? This is worth a closer look I think on your part
Its pretty easy to understand, they use rocket league for benchmarks while others dont, notice how the 14900ks also seems like a great CPU while the 7800x3d is midrange? Im pretty dumb myself but i would say that rocket league is a huge single core load with very little benefit for 3dcache
Possibly other reviews did not get the message from AMD about the chipset drivers needing to be installed like the last gen x3d chips.. possibly without installing the software correctly the core parking wont work correctly so performance will drop.
@@caldark2005 oh dude your gonna get so roasted, is not late to delete that
Different tests used, we don't want EVERY reviewer having the same opinion anyway. What kinda world is that?
@@G0A7it is too late now
What was it again? 30% or 40% IPC uplift?
It's barely an upgrade from last year lol
Okay, but almost nobody upgrades their CPU every year.
Keep an open mind. This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features.
They already show a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
Zen 3 was highly unusual, in that it used the same manufacturing process and motherboard platform as the previous generation, but was actually significantly faster than the previous generation in most applications from day one. It's actually pretty normal for performance improvements to be very unimpressive for a new CPU architecture that's using the same process, especially when that new architecture has a lot of changes vs. the previous one.
so is there a mobile version of 9950X coming. out? Need to wait? Ryzen 9 AI HX 370 is slower than 7945HX
1:28 Linus Drop Tips.
When did Eminnem start doing cpu reviews?
Why is *DUKE NUKEM* telling me about tech
You made some tweaks to your charts!
GREAT!
Heaps more legible on the video.
Thanks
Question: how can a feature they offer as a standard feature void warranty? Is PBO required to hit advertised performance?
pbo is a overclocking feature that can void your warranty, remember OVERCLOCKING, the stock already an advertised performance so making the thing consumed more energy make it degrade faster
Did LMG accidentally get sent the Zen 6 engineering samples or something?
Benchmarks on these processors is very diverse, some say they are ok at best, others say it's bad and some say it's good... To be honest the tech youtube right now is a mess...
Cuz cpu value massively affected by what are you gonna do with it, if you purely for gaming 3d is way better value, even if you also doing work just buy 7000 non x3d series, the only reason for this is for professional people thats value their time soo much
You're not listening properly is the problem. Most tech channels here pander to the gaming section. This CPU is for productivity and it does it better at a lower power draw, By that logic yes AMD completely butchered Intel. If you want a gaming CPU just wait for the X3D version.
@@mrbobgamingmemes9558 Zen 5 is actually significantly better for Assetto Corsa specifically, showing improved frame consistency and about an 18% performance improvement. That suggest that there will likely be at least some other new games which will also see more than a 10% improvement in performance, but time will tell.
Keep an open mind, this is a new architecture, with more changes and new features since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features.
They already show a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
6:50 aahhh yes, the good ol, “we are better because we can do this, but if you use it you’ll void your warranty”
How is this comment section so insufferable.
Other reviewers are "shitting" on this launch, because they focus on gaming performance, but that isn't the only metric important to people; so if LMG focuses on other things like productivity and efficiency of course the vibe of the video will be more positive.
A lot of people don't have context, unfortunately. People are quick to ride their outrage ponies these days.
I think all the reviewer takes I've seen thus far are valid, whether from a more positive angle or more negative one. A lot comes down to individual use case, though, i.e. are you more gaming focused vs prosumer oriented.
But I think most of us can agree these chips will probably be more attractive over time with price drops.
There were genuine problems with the launch. AMD should have waited longer before Windows was better optimized for Zen 5. There was no need for them to release it this soon.
That being said, Zen 5 already shows some promise to at least offer decent performance improvements, with up to an 18% performance improvement in some games.
This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features compared to the previous generation since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. Chip companies prefer to find ways to improve performance without requiring new software optimizations, but when they run out of those, they are more likely to introduce new features which will require more changes to software. Sometimes it takes so long for those optimizations to happen that the first chips to include those changes will already be very old by the time that happens, so nobody should buy Zen 5 CPUs on the assumption that performance will improve a lot soon in any of their preferred applications.
Zen 5 already shows a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%, and by over 20% or more in some cases.
Yes, but these are general purpose CPUs, and the uplift wasn't that great across the board. Better as a Linux chip, server, etc. It's not a big deal, though. Just skip this gen, whatever.
What is the idle power draw of these?
don't get me wrong, I love AMD and have switched back to them (maybe permanently), but it is strange to see such a glowing and optimistic review of a pricey and not-that-impressive launch
political correct
Well it's LTT. They did the same thing with the first 2 generations of Ryzen even when their own test results at the time supported none of their statements. It wasn't until 3rd gen that their results matched their statements.
i mean he basically said don’t upgrade and wait for these chips to be sold second hand, and if your CPU is older than 7000 series you can upgrade to them
I agree. However, this is a new architecture, with more changes and new features since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features.
They already show a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
Zen 3 was highly unusual, in that it used the same manufacturing process and motherboard platform as the previous generation, but was actually significantly faster than the previous generation in most applications from day one. It's actually pretty normal for performance improvements to be very unimpressive for a new CPU architecture that's using the same process, especially when that new architecture has a lot of changes vs. the previous one.
I guess your eyes glazed over when Linus talked about the negative aspects of the 9900, and 9950 then…
Ya know a nice soothing mist can really comfort those sick dragon burns.
I understand why people need to be banned. This comment section is clapped.
Huh? No bans. Except your mom, we can't keep having her propositioning the residents, it's a problem.
@Artcore103 calm down bro, chill
It's pretty rough
@@Artcore103bro you just proved his point
What is 'clapped'?
How does the 9950X compare to the 16-core Epyc Threadripper?
dude its like a 5% improvement from the 7950x. it aint "crushing" anything.
There is an improvement tho. Yes it maybe 5% but look at the power rating and temperature. They are quite less.
5% improvement, while using 40% less power. If you "overclock" it to use as much power as the previous gen, then it is quite a bit better
@@M1szS That's just blatantly untrue. The 9950X does not use less power than the 7950X.
@@nathangamble125 didn't look at the 9950x, but the 9700x and 9600x, which most people care about are way more power efficient than previous gen
@@M1szS thats also false, just compare them to the non X 7000 skus. Same tdp, little more performance at higher prices and no included cooler.
i’m amazed at how you handle such topics with ease!
8:23 "Aren't you going to be glad to have the option when 10000 series comes out and these start showing up on the second hand Market?"
What? No, of course not. For anyone with a Zen 4 CPU there's no rhyme or reason to upgrade to Zen 5. Maybe if you decide you need more cores for productivity, it could make sense, but if Zen 4 is even cheaper in the used market than Zen 5 it might still be the better option.
Keep an open mind, this is a new architecture, with more changes and new features compared to the previous generation since arguably Zen 1. Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. Chip companies prefer to find ways to improve performance without requiring new software optimizations, but when they run out of those, they are more likely to introduce new features which will require more changes to software. Sometimes it takes so long for those optimizations to happen that the first chips to include those changes will already be very old by the time that happens.
Zen 5 already shows a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
glad to see my 1 year old 7900x barley hanging on...
Looking at 7900X vs 9900X, the charts really don't show a "huge generational improvement" as the video claims... There is one case where it's 10% better, but the others are much closer, more like 2-5%.
That is not a huge improvement
You missed the part about PRODUCTIVITY...
@@evalangley3985 yeah his results are off compared to other channels. The difference is not that great in productivity either except in few apps.
@@evalangley3985 Less than 10% performance gain in their 3 tests
Would be very interested to see why your temps are so much lower then other's like Hardware unboxed. Wonder if it's a methodology thing, manufacturer motherboard settings, sample quality, bios version etc....
Zen 3 -> Zen 4 = WOW
Zen 4 -> Zen 5 = What the f... is this piece of s...?
To be fair Zen 4 had half it's gains by increasing the TDP from 105W to 170W.
And now check the Zen 4 launch again. There was no overwhelming positivity then either. Obvious observation bias is obvious. Also, most techtubers are simply idiots about this, it has to be said.
@@mycosys sure blame the os for the failings of the manufacturer for not tweaking their own products to begin with for the os that it clearly is designed for...its clearly designed for windows and not the whole 12 linux users on the planet...the denial of amd fanboys is astounding asif simp for any of these money hungry companies and not make them all accountable AMD,Intel and Microsoft included
You have a short memory because everyone was complaining about Zen 4 and the new motherboards with recommendation from HU to just buy 5800x3D because DDR5 and AM5 was too costly to worth it.
@@lharsay And people literally complained about that and the 95C.
I'm surprised by the 5900X being that high in Total War: Warhammer 3.
Are we looking at the same charts? How is 5-10% improvement a huge success? The only good thing about this launch is that hopefully 7950X prices will drop.
Because it does that 5% improvement while doing 30% less power and 15 degree lower temperature compared to Intel. This give AMD a lot of room to go forwards, meanwhile Intel is already frying it chips to get that performance and causing stability issues etc.
We also forgetting that we testing this in a AM 5 board that was updated to support 9000 series. Lets wait to see how well this works once fully supported boards come out.
@@pipooh1 There is no such thing as a fully supported board, if the VRM is capable enough and the socket is the same then the product is fully supported, and the performance will be the same as well within margin of error. My point was, why would anyone be excited for this 5-10% increase when you can just buy Ryzen 7000? The other reviewers are correct, this is a meh generation, definitely not a good or great one.
@@pipooh1 yeah but compared to 7000 series the efficiency improvement is nothing special. 7950X prices will drop and any smart person would buy that over these new chips.
@@pipooh1 the 7000s... they are efficient while not losing a lot of performance. And they come with boxncooler AND they're cheaper. These 9000 chips are just not good value and are not what amd advertised
@@pipooh1gamers nexus video takes a fat 💩 on the idea that zen 5 is "much more efficient".
Dropping important things in the video in less than 1 min 30 secs. Impressive.
Is it just me or does the audio of the first 40 seconds sound a bit weird? Or am I just imagining thinks?
it does
Please bring back the short circuit hoodie, I really want to buy it
New comment moderation gonna go wacky on this one.
That being said l understand why you didn’t highlight gaming benchmarks on a productivity chip, and I’m also blown away by how power efficient these chips are… that’s the most impressive generational improvement imho
They’re not any more power efficient than Zen4. Watch Gamers Nexus recent video on the topic
@@Rhamses220 It depends on the workload, that's what Gamers Nexus has said on the topic. Keep in mind also that Zen 5 performance and efficiency may yet improve significantly with further software optimizations. Some software already does see significant improvements to both performance and efficiency. For example, up to 18% in gaming. If one game can get that much of a performance uplift, than others can as well.
That being said, nobody should buy Zen 5 with any kind of assumption about when, or by how much performance will improve in their favored applications, but people should keep an open mind.
This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features over the previous generation since arguably Zen 1.
Zen 5 already shows a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. Chip companies prefer to find ways to improve performance without requiring new software optimizations, but when they run out of ways of improving performance without requiring significant changes to software, they are more likely to introduce new features which will require more changes to software for new performance to be gained. Sometimes it takes so long for those optimizations to happen that the first chips to include those changes will already be very old by the time that happens, but often software companies won't even think about optimizing for new architectural features until those features become extremely common in existing hardware.
this new gen of ryzen has me excited to potentially see DIY laptops made with the 65W 9700X, (an 8 core desktop cpu drawing less power than most laptop cpus is wild) and the 4060 low profile. AsRock also has a new am5 ITX-Thin mobo which is only 2-3 cm tall (no pcie 16x slot though :( but I was thinking you could potentially hook it up to an m.2 slot, after all the 4060 isn't exactly a high bandwidth card)
I wish I had a setup worthy of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X or 9950X but for now I'll live vicariously through your videos
Worthy for your setup … they do not sound to be worthy for my setup as most tend to recommend 2-3 year old processors over those two ‘failures’ as many describe them,
I have a 14900ks. Should I get the 9950x now or wait until the 9950x3d comes out? (I have a 1600 watt power supply so I don’t have to worry about power)
Hardware Unboxed and Gamers Nexus are A LOT more negative.
Yes, and LTT wants to focus on positive features. You've clearly already watched negative reviews, so relax and watch this. He talks to you about it at 8:00 , the only bad thing about Zen 5 is the price, and that drops over time, but videos stay up.
You mean accurate and truthful, right?
Linus is basically the only one praising these CPU's.. and that should set off some alarm bells!!
@@jdewinnaar I'd be more wary of overly negative reviews, the likes of GN & HU
@@BusAlexey "The only bad thing about Zen 5 is the price". You can't be serious. Zen 3 to Zen 4 was a 20% + improvement. Zen 4 to Zen 5 is on average 5% better. The prices would have to be cut in half for it to make sense.
@@jdewinnaar Plenty of other places are positive. Level1Techs, Phoronix, and KitGuru are the ones I have seen. All of them show about a 20% improvement over 7000 series. Just not in gaming.
im trying to build my first ever gaming pc and so far im planning on getting the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X CPU and i have RTX 3070 GPU but im still lost if its a good cpu or not
Is this the comment section where folks complain about a really nicely designed chip because they think gamers are the only chip purchasers in the world. Relax, the 3d chips will be coming.
Almost like gamers forget that game DEVELOPERS exist. How do they think games get created? By playing games? Most CPUs are sold for productivity, not leaser. Gamers can't seem to wrap their head around this concept.
This. Honestly the reviewers have kinda frustrated me because they have basically focused only on Gaming. It has been clear since the 5800X3D that if you want a gaming powerhouse you need to wait for the X3D variant. Use cases matter and if you only account for one of them you are being pretty stupid.
Oh man I was really taken off guard by the comments here haha. I think a lot of people maybe just hyper focused on it not being as good as they'd like for their use case, while LMG is more excited about it being an actual generation bump and not just stalemating out in the dreaded intel tick-tock cycle of the late 2010s.
That and they skipped over the part where he goes over and over that its the X3D chips beating it out in gaming performance and the part where he said if youre waiting to upgrade from those, youre waiting on the Zen5 X3D....
@@SomeUserNameBlahBlah except the 7950x beats the 9950x in some productivity tasks lmao.
Also its a fact that when it comes to gaming improvement they have regressed. . A 7700x matches or beats 5800x3d in games, the 9950x cannot compete with the 7800x3D lmao
@@nameless.0190 I don't think anyone was expecting it to. The X3D parts have a lot more cache and have been powerhouses in gaming workloads. That is not what these 16 core parts are for. If you want a great gaming chip wait for the new X3D parts or get the 7800X3D like Linus said. These high core count parts are intended more for professional workloads. Yes Threadripper is better but these are a lot cheaper so they can really fill that niche of I need to get some work done but I don't want to sell my firstborn.
I think the biggest reason to get one of these chips for me is oculus running in the background hogging resources
Honestly, I think power efficiency is a HUGE deal. Its why I went with the 5600x3D for my upgrade from a 3600. Keeping temps down in my room matters.
I really don't think it's that big of a difference for the cpu. The gpu though, you'll feel it if you go high end.
Do you think they will make a desktop with the zen5c cores?
I understand they are for mobile, but how do they perform on desktop? I know they can’t turbo up past 3.1 or 3.5 GHz, but considering the architectural improvements, it would be nice to see it in a small form factor
Will they ever come out for server chips?
Genuinely what is the point of the labs if major new chip releases get relegated to the unboxing channel?
The website. Linus has said plenty of times they want the labs site to have all the useful data people want to look at but they'll only use it in LMG videos where the story is interesting enough. A chip with a small uplift in producivity and all so inconsistent with gaming results that no 2 reviewers are getting consistent results and no one is recommending for gaming clearly doesn't need dozens of gaming graphs in LMGs opinion.
uh? Do you even know how it works this is an unboxing slash preview the review will come smh
LMG should launch a labs channel if you they could make it work. Just test some whacky stuff and so on. And more in-depth sometimes. We want fun from LMG, we go for info on others like hub.
@@Djuntas- they've addressed this on the WAN show they don't think there's enough audience for that kind of content to make sense for them as a buisness and would impact in the rest of their channels, to the point where they cant even justify having a voice actor on the labs site videos, they'll incorporate labs results into their videos where it makes sense but most labs content will be on the labs site
@@Drunken_Horse Thats fair, their choice, but imo they could churn out low production videos testing stuff. LMG is slave to their own standards. HUB or GN does not haft to have 3 editors and 5 staff people for 1 video etc.
Wonder if the they put an couple of extra layers on the desk and throw down gym mats as soon as Linus shows up on set.
5:18 "Not to mention their HUGE architectural improvements..."
*shows graphs with improvements ranging from 9% to -0.5%*
Is the "HUGE improvements" in the room with us right now, Linus?
I don't think you are taking the nearly 50% DROP in power consumption into account when they make their recommendations. It's 5% faster while using 50% less power. That's a HUGE architectural improvement. It's not in this video since they don't compare to the 7900's (this is a Short Circuit, after all, not a full review). But compared to the Intel, it's almost half the power and similar performance.
@@WhiteG60 Is 50% power consumption drop in the room with us? Efficiency during gaming compared to 7000 is actually worse, while for most productivity workloads is around 5% better.
@@WhiteG60 Please watch Gamer Nexus's deep dive and Hardware Unboxed re-reviews. The new chips offer minimal improvements, while actually being LESS efficient!
@@WhiteG60 Source? Or are you part of AMD's marketing team?
@@WhiteG60 50%? Where? The graphs shown at 6:50 have the average power draw at 197w and peak at 200w. Looking back at LTTs 7950x review video they showed peak of 208 and averages of 174w. That's not what I'd call a "50% DROP in power consumption". According to my math, that's at best a 4% drop.
Gaming + streaming: X3D or no X3D?
amd so bad that review landed here ?
What
This is a new architecture, with more changes and new features over the previous generation since arguably Zen 1.
Zen 5 already shows a lot more than a 3% performance improvement in some applications, as well as in Linux rather than Windows. Clearly this architecture has at least some potential to improve performance in a variety of applications by more than 10%. Performance in some games even in Windows is up to 18% faster already. If there's one game which can already run that much faster than the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, then there will most likely be more games that will see a more than 10% improvement. That's not amazing, but these chips have been made using only a very slightly improved version of the same manufacturing process, and using the same I/O chiplets and motherboard platform.
Sometimes it takes a while for software to actually properly utilize new architectural features. Chip companies prefer to find ways to improve performance without requiring new software optimizations, but when they run out of ways of improving performance without requiring significant changes to software, they are more likely to introduce new features which will require more changes to software for new performance to be gained. Sometimes it takes so long for those optimizations to happen that the first chips to include those changes will already be very old by the time that happens, but often software companies won't even think about optimizing for new architectural features until those features become extremely common in existing hardware.
I hope the X3D versions are good...
... it will force the 7800X3D cheaper.
So a +~3% gen on gen performance uplift is "slaying the dragon"... No Cyberpunk 2077, No starfield (AMD sponsored title too!), no Last of us Part 1. The truth is that the 9950X can't even slay the 7950X.
@@mycosys Its like Debauer said. If you have to run the tests 10 times with different settings to get one good result you can't throw out 90% of the data
Because its not a gaming CPU?
@@nulanoAll CPU’s can game that’s a stupid comment.
@@ZackSNetwork Thats like saying "all cars can dragrace" to complain someone didnt test that in detail in a review for a family car, there are CPUs specifically designed with gaming in the forefront, and there are ones that are designed with other sensibilities in mind first.
Linus I appreciate the graph and talk but I want to see some action of the core chips running a marathon.
Is it Naruto in thumbnail?
Eminem
The video is very detailed but I didn't understand one thing. The question of consumption and temperatures. The 7xxx generation (not 3d) had obvious issues with temperatures. Whatever heatsink you put on they were always at 95 degrees. How do these behave? If one wanted to make a workstation (particularly for blenders) how should one dissipate it and what should one expect? Above all, would it be manageable with air? Maybe with a peerless assassin?
How much did AMD pay you for this?
Why does every review feel like an ad these days here. GN and HU gave insightful reviews and these chips did not fare that well at all. Of course on LTT any such critical thinking seems absent. Lose the silly hair and try to look at these from the perspective of the consumer.
Because this is not a review, this is the unboxing channel. The fact they have graphs at all is an outlier.
@@Braiam "AMD slayed the dragon" is the title... that was one hell of a box!
@@TeunSegers The dragon here is Intel's offering, not AMD.
Have you explored the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X from GCC Gamers in the UAE?
Gotta love the "uh this must be sponsored because linus is on the enthusiastic side" and the "well he has been sponsored by amd for years" then they magically seem to forget that they've also done numerous sponsors from intel, and i've heard some harsh things from their own mouths about both, deservedly so.
Of course its not like its worth arguing with these people, when you're at the point when linus of all freaking people is a shill, and steve from GN of all freaking people is 'rage bait' like brother, you *need* to be on the internet less lol. On the internet, remember, there's always 2 sides, the wrong people, and the other wrong people. But when you're neither your worse so y'know.
I say all this not because i'll change someones mind (thats what they go to twitter for right?) I say it so you can realize these people are the minority, and most people happen to just... Not be rage mongerers, and are capable of enjoying other people lmao.
"But But But Steve says it's bad because it's not 20% better and 20% cheaper than the last gen even if his graphs showed that they are the best productivity chips now"
@@Drunken_Horse all that waffle is not going to change the fact that Zen 5% is a disappointment.
@@nameless.0190 no one said its not. Everyone was expecting a bigger performance uplift in producivity and gaming and that's exactly how a lot of channels are reporting it, it's the "It doesn't smash every other mainstream chip therefore it's bad" that's the bad take. If your about to build the top performing producivity system this is the top mainstream chip and the pricing isn't crazy compared to the market how is that a bad thing? Now if X3D doesn't compete that's the time to get annoyed
@@Drunken_Horse Linus didn't _say_ Zen 5 is not disappointing, but certainly implied it in this video.
Zen 5 isn't exactly bad, it's just a lot weaker than what AMD claimed, and they ought to be called out for it. Linus is going way too easy on AMD, considering the misleading/inaccurate performance they showed in their Zen 5 announcement presentation.