I think part of the problem is that AMD over promised a bit. I think Level1Techs did about right showing the performance and pointing out a few problems that need fixing. But some people just slated it without looking closer at what is going on. The IPC is better and the power usage should also be better but it did not translate into the numbers so something had to be going wrong somewhere with software etc but they did not look into it enough. Look at the linux numbers for example they show a decent uplift ( and in some isolated cases a massive uplift) so it has to be software be it drivers or windows being windows.
@@wfb.subtraktor311 look at Phoronix, they make great reviews on Linux but you may find their tests not useful if you are more of a casual gamer type user
Here's why the 9700x is better in EU at least: Avg. price 9700x - 380€ Avg. price 7800x3d - 570€ Avg. price 9800x3d - 650€ 9700x is 33% cheaper than 7800x3d, while being only about 10% slower in games and being 10-15% faster in productivity. Especially if you play at resolutions of 2K or even more importantly 4K, you won't have any gains at all in games by going with 7800x3d, but you still will get gains in productivity with the 9700x, so it's simply a better choice, it's cheaper and on balance has better overall performance than the 7800x3d for someone who games and does at least some productivity. The reason I mention the 9800x3d is...if you're gonna buy the 7800, then just add the "change" and get the 9800, at least you'll have the latest and greatest overkill CPU.
I just buillt a 9700X based computer for a customer ... no issues enabled pbo it runs really fast . beats the 2990WX 32 core threadripper in cinebench .. not bad for a 8 core . runs cooler and less power than the 7700x I like it
Did anyone say it had issues? I only recall people saying it wasn't that big of a jump over the 7000 series. 🤷 Edit: There's also such a thing as price to performance, and at the price I would still rather buy a 7700x or even non-x.
@@DingleBerryschnapps yes several of the reviewers had blue screens and instability issues running 6000 mhz memory on the same systems they had tested the 7000x on. Newest cpus are rarely the best bang for the buck but the 9000 series came out at the same price or less that the 7000 series launched it. But the 7000 series has gone down in price since then
@@DingleBerryschnapps "Did anyone say it had issues?" Gamers Nexus couldn't even make a review for the ryzen 5 because it was so broken it couldn't even post.
I just buillt a 7700 based computer for a customer ... no issues enabled pbo it runs really fast . beats the 2990WX 32 core threadripper in cinebench .. not bad for a 8 core . runs cooler and less power than the 7700x I like it
I have a 9700x in transit now. Since I'm still using a i7-7700k, I had about 10 years of tech to catch up on. While almost anything is an upgrade at this point(or is it?) the power consumption weighed heavily in it's favor. That said, the 7700 with my nv3070 is still getting the job done. Win11 is forcing my hand and I'm concerned about prices next year.
Unfortunately the 7800x3d is going for a minimum of $430 US, vs $300 for the 9700x. 9800x3d isn't in stock anywhere. So, I went for 9700x with some 6000cl28 memory which I got a pretty good discount on. Maybe I'll replace with an x3d part in a few years. I'll be doing a mix of 1440p gaming and productivity tasks so I think I'll be okay for awhile.
Did something similar. Saved a few bucks and got the 7700x. 9700x is a better cpu but for my needs I couldn’t justify the price increase. In 1440p and using a 7800xt, works like a charm.
People should actually read the title. He is asking a question and is saying "its not bad" its also not this amazing cpu that will melt your brain. Its a new CPU with some good features that will almost certainly start showing itself more in the future. Just the 7000s was not the best thing when it came out. People get far into a dichotomy of "if it doesnt give me 5billion extra fps its bad.
This is actually the first review I have seen on the 9700X. I was waiting till Bryan got a chance to toss out his review. He tossed in quite a few good recommendations. ASRock does to me have the best Bios team, they make sure the quality and longevity of their boards is solid.
Bought a 7700 non-X from Aliexpress for like $140 USD (taxes included) 6 months ago. -30 mV and +200 on clocks and so far it has been great. Sidegraded from a 5800X3D (for productivity).
Yeah but i'd probably want something more powerful for games that are very cpu demanding and unoptimized. Also a cpu that can handle a bunch of programs open, while being alt tabbed out of your game
@@Ladioz 14700 then. Unlike 14700K you don't have to worry mobo will automaticaly overclock it through the roof because only K CPUs can be overclocked . And just like K , it supports Quicksync which can be very useful in productivity. Another alternative is 14600K
This has been a great video, I'm on the fence between the 7700x and 9700x, my mix is probably going to be 70% productivity and 30% gaming, Microcenter has bundles available for both CPUs with identical MB and RAM but $50 more for the 9700x, or about 12.5% more. I think the 9700x will be the route I go.
For certain applications like what I need, 9700X actually beats out all other CPUs on the market. The lower thermal print allows it to be significantly overclocked single core wise.
Just bought a 9700x, b650m pro rs, gskill flare x5 6000 cl30 and a pure rock 2. i opted for the 9700x because of the lower energy consumption. with -40 mv all core i got 22200 points on cb r23. i think this is where this cpu shines. the 7700x was just 20 euros cheaper.
So the product isn't flawed, it's perfectly fine, just like the 7600/7700 are fine too - they're cheaper, so the first 1m 5s into the video, is bang on basically, it was mediocre because there's no performance improvement and it costs more. 9700X is a direct replacement for the 7700 - not the 7700X, the 7700, as they're the same power 65W. What is to blame on AMD, is releasing essentially a Zen4+ as a whole new Zen, setting consumer's expectations way too high with misleading benchmarks, then selling them for really poor value. So in short, AMD deserves the flack, their marketing department has really stuffed up.
No, this isn't a 7700 replacement. It's a 7700 by TDP but a 7700x by performance. That's what makes this chip different. They're giving you slightly better performance than the 7700x with the efficiency of the 7700.
@@---GOD--- how much more performamce 7700x give over 7700 ? 7 to 10 percent at Mt gaming is also similar. They are Same CPU just different tdp so efficency compression between them not make sense . 9700x gives sqme gaming performance and 10 percent Mt over 7700 at same power .
@@evalangley3985 no 7700x and 7700 is very close in performance but power gap is huge . 70 percent More power with an percent More perf. 9700x vs 7700 same gaming 10 percent Mt At same power How this is good improvement ? Nearly all improvement are come from node change for tdp and gaming also can't use it. It is disaster
I think Hardware Unboxed and Gamers Nexis reviews were spot on. They represent what the majority of gamers are going to do with there system as far as gaming. Tweeking, adjusting, with all manner of settings is not what most gamers are going to do with there systems. They just want something that works right out of the box with normal pc settings which is what GN and HUboxed did as they have done for many other CPU's in the past they have given great reviews on.
" Tweeking, adjusting, with all manner of settings is not what most gamers are going to do with there systems" - Actually, they will, that's the main advantage of having a gaming PC as opposed to a Xbox or PS. Also, it's not all manner of settings, it's literally 2-3 settings in BIOS which take about 20 seconds to click.
The main issue for the 9700x is Amazon doing sometime of flash sale on the 7700x, you have to keep checking the price day by day as it always changes, the lowest price seen for the 7700x was $210 usd with the two free game bundle, I picked one up and have in hand as delivered @ that price.
Finally a decent unbiased review that takes into account some of the strengths of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X. As of writing this (11/10/24) the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X is between £70-£100 cheaper than the 7800x3d here in the UK because the product is that good, but I cant help that the FOMO element has contributed towards price gouging, that price difference is enough for one more component of your build. For me I can get the The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X + a cooler for the same price as the 7800x3d - yes it might not be as good in raw 'gaming; performance but with some tweaks and for my own personal use case it makes sense to use what you describe as a hybrid CPU. We've been brainwashed a little by monstrously large channels slamming any other CPU other than the 7800x3d or Intel equivalent and that's OK to a certain extent but everyone seems to forget there's things called budgets and as you said, the cost of running and buying these components should be taken into account. You've got yourself a sub Bryan.
@@MarcoGPUtuber There was never a Radeon 9700 XT, just the 9700 Pro and non Pro, I remember this clear as day since I got scammed by OCuk, bought a 9700 Pro that had lower memory speeds since it was actually a 9700 flashed to a 9700 Pro, which explained why it was on such a steep discount. Ended up sticking a Arctic Cooling VGA Silencer on it, still have this frankenstein 9700 Pro to this day. The Radeon 9550, 9600 and 9800 which all came later did have an XT variant though.
Hello Phil. There is now an issue with different components sharing the same name now, as more and more components are released and only a finite amount of numbers to choose from.
I like my 9700X, it's a pretty good processor. Good at gaming, and very good at other stuff. The X3D's are just a little better at gaming, I agree with the data in this video. Thumbs up.
Thanx Bryan for this review. The results look surprising compared to other reviews, but the idea of checking the bios version is interesting. New BIOSes introduce a 105w power profile that is not enabled in your version, so this ASRock board seems to be a solid performer. Hopefully, this strange behavior of the 9000 series will be completely understood, so that we will be able to get the very best from it.
With the longevity of the AMx platforms, its still good value to plop in a cheaper 7000 series now, and then upgrade later if needed. I have a feeling that the 9000 series is going to experience some "fine wine" as they get the bios refined and we've already seen some gains with the windows update, and in combo with platform longevity this will be a good thing. Overall the 9000 series launch isn't bad at all, but the initial reviews and issues the reviewers had in combo with super high expectations dampened the whole thing.
Love the video! +1 from me.bif only I could give two points of feedback is that 1 - it wasn't clear which windows 10/11 and which version was used. 2 - the amount of games used was kind of small and I'd love some lightroom / Puget systems benchmarks as well.
It's great to see you dig a little deeper, unlike the vast majority of larger channels. I recently released a video with an optimization guide for the 9700X to help it match or exceed the performance of the 7800X3D but at a much lower price. It's a pretty amazing chip.
@@alanpatterson820 my results are available to look at, I tested 18 games including titles like Cyberpunk, COD: MW3, Black Myth, etc. … not exactly what I would call obscure games that no one plays. I also include the exact tweaks that I made to achieve these results.
@@kathleendelcourt8136 faster RAM has a much lower performance impact on X3D CPUs because of the extra L3 cache ... probably a good idea to understand how these chips function before commenting.
I got a 7700x at Micro Center for $220. With the 7800x3d priced close to $500 as well as the new 9800x3d I can’t help but feel good about buying the 7700x
Not surprised about the latest bios being worse. I had the same experience with my Asrock x670e motherboard and my ryzen 7950x. I reinstalled the bios that it was released with. I got better performance and higher overclock on memory and CPU.
Comparing the 9700X to the 7700X is apples to oranges. You need to compare the cpus with the same stock 65wTDP. In this case the proper comparison is the non-X 7700 with the 9700X.
@@Lightitupp1 Yes they should have and included a cooler. It was a shady move by AMD to even call this an "X" cpu in order to tout it's "efficiency" gains that were not as huge as initially presented. What this review should have done was set the 7700X to Eco-Mode (65wTDP) in BIOS to make a better comparison.
I chose Ryzen 9 7900X. I built my PC last weekend and this CPU is a monster. It's really good for rendering and running virtual machines and its price now is cheaper than 9700X, 7800x3d
Was strangling what CPU to pair my new 7800XT . And was think between 7700X or 7700. Now I saw this video, gonna go directly to 9700X. Less TDP , more efficient and since I run Linux only the last 6 years , this will have amazing performance . Better optimized on Linux , than on Windows ....
They are all great chips. The increased IPC and efficiency is really nice. Just have to wait till early next year, and the value will be there when the prices drop: they always do on AMD CPU's. Cheers for the vid.
Are the benchmarks done after the Windows 11 patch that solves some "problems" that Windows 11 had with Ryzen or with the new 24H2 version? Because it has already been seen in many tests that the performance of these Ryzen 9000 increases by more than 10% (and much more in many cases) ...
I believe Zen 5c main target audience is the production and businesses. AMD is releasing 192 cores epyc. AMD has 33% shares in server sector and pushing that number higher.
@@reiniermoreno1653 Yes. Zen 5c is just a compact variant of Zen 5 and Zen 5 must exist for Zen 5c to exist. The server sector is huge and is growing rapidly, about 10% annually.
Granted bios updates will help performance eventually, but as far as I know other media outlets used the best bios versions for their plattforms as well. The power draw numbers surprised me honestly, a little too good to be true
Thanks for this huge addition to what is known about the 9700x. Most reviewers under Windows showed minimal uplift from the 9700x in gaming, but showed more in productivity situations, but oddly, under Linux there was more uplift. Next, we learned that if you get the new Windows 24H2, both the 7700x and the 9700x benefit, but the 9700x benefits slightly more. Now, thanks to your tests, we know that the BIOS also matters. Taken together, there is probably a 10-15% uplift, which is about what AMD promised, not bad, but not huge. Still, considering that the chips are using the same node size, getting 10-15% is good. I think that when the dust settles (new Windows released, new 9900x motherboards released, BIOS updates for older boards), reviewers will converge an uplift in the 12% range, and the price differential will also move to 12%.
@@hiriotapa1983 No need for Linux to "take" market share. Microsoft is giving it away for free. They are working hard to prevent older hardware from being able to upgrade to Win 11, so I plan to convert my laptop to Linux. If it goes well, I'll convert my desktops as well.
I'm not overly invested in this topic. I have a 7900 and no reason to upgrade but the topic does keep my attention. I get the feeling the 9700 is going to be one of those chips where it makes sense to turn off hyper threading for the immediate future. It will have enough IPC that you can zone in on a workload better without hyper threading.
What evidence can you cite to support this? Feelings are not arguments. Long ago there was merit in the non-HT approach, during the early days of SB and other CPUs (I did a lot of testing back then), partly because turning off HT allowed for higher overclocks, but these days it's rare for this to be the case, and bare in mind modern CPUs all have auto-overclocking functionality essentially baked into the designs.
@@mapesdhs597 It depends on the application and it's scheduling but turning off HT can both help or hurt by as much as 10%. An instance I know of this happening for certain is nintendo switch emulators.
@@jurpo6 I know it can affect performance, though I hardly think Switch emulation matters here; my desire was for cited data. What actual references are people using when making these claims about ordinary gaming or productivity tasks? I'm not saying the OP is wrong, I'm just weary of people making claims like this by starting off with "I get the feeling" or "I just feel that". If we're going to make recommendations about purchasing decisions, they should be based on real data, not emotional concepts, though I've seen channel owners often use the same language. If they have the data to support a claim then it should be, "I conclude" or "I think", not, "I feel".
Thinking of buying a 7800x3d but now it's out of my budget now due to the price hike.. now thinking about the 7700x, how is it going there ? Is it worth it ?
Commenting while I haven't watched the video! The 9000X are not bad products, they are just badly priced compared to the cpu's they are replacing! Plus they are not that much more powerful compared to the previous 7000 series counterpart!
I agree with you that if we had the 9700X and 7700X at the same price then it would be a no brainer which to buy. The higher 9xxx series cost however is to be expected, chips always release at a higher cost. The 7xxx series is in the channel with good supply so it will be a lower price for some time. To me the crazy thing is people do not understand how this works and expect a new chip to release at the lower price of an established production and supply line available chip.
I think I recall ASRock doing a BIOS update that allowed an unlocked multiplier on the i5 11400F or similar and Intel were not pleased or perhaps it was the i5 10400F? They are a pretty talented team with firmware
Well KitGuruTech channel agreed that for 7700X owners doesn't make much sense to upgrade to 9700X , for those below was worthy of consideration. Those channels that crapped on it must have watched it only as an upgrade to 7000 while KitGuruTech did that AND for those that are on 5000 and below. In the end when he looked at Pros and Cons ,Leo gave 8/10 worth buying. If the channel was cancelled , I haven't noticed it. A shame he hasn't used RTX4090 over 4080. There were some clear obvious bottlenecks at 1080p . Edit: Don't know if other channels did that, but using Ryzen Master , the 9700X can be overclocked by 500Mhz. That said,he did use High End of perhaps even Ultra High end board.
The only issue with the 9700x is the price. It's the same or more than the 7800x3d - so it doesn't make a single piece of sense for a PC Gamer. And it's no surprise businesses are struggling, my mortgage payment is 95% more than it was in 2021. Whilst my insurance, groceries, energy are all up by 40% too.
I've heard it out and I still stand by my tweet response that it's no more impressive than any single generation between 2000 and 7000 Intel Core i. Except now there's twice as many cores on the desktop socket than there should be.
As someone who's struggling between these 3 CPUs for my next 1440p build I'm glad I saw your video for some insights. I mostly do simulator games like Flight Simulator, for which I notice the X3D tends to be better than the others. I also eventually want to try some other games like adventure (think Ghost of Tsushima and Yakuza, maybe Baldur's Gate). But since I'll also do twitch streams and some video editing and other productivity, I wonder if something like the 9700X or 7700X would be the better option in the long run. Looking to pair my CPU with a GPU like 7900 GRE, 7900 XT or 4070 Ti Super.
I don't think you are approaching this question coherently. If you favor gaming performance, it's X3D. Either buy 7800X3D now or wait 9800X3D. X3D doesn't make a big difference in all games but when it does, it's often big one or produces excellent frame times. In addition big cache really good at less polished games like many Unity based are. No one bothers to test them, they all do same big budget multi-platform jogging simulators. I went from 5800X to 5800X3D and it's one the best upgrades I did. Drastic difference, especially in modded Unity games. If productivity is important, you go for more cores. There's not enough gap between these 8-cores, they are quite similar. Sure in some niche applications utilizing AVX512 the 9000-series is best choice, people who need AVX512 most certainly are aware they need it. If you don't know, you don't need it either. On gaming side there's no big downside going for more cores, you just don't get best gaming performance. 7900X has 50% more cores than 7700X, it's a big gap for relatively small amount of money. If you want both, you need to make some compromises, either cost or performance. 7950X3D can do both but it does have some quirks you might or might not have to deal with and it's expensive. If you can't afford or not willing to spend more than 9700X/7800X3D money, you kind have to pick between 7900X and 7800X3D.
Thank you for confirming what I have been assuming about the Ryzen 5. It is not a bad CPU series per se. It is just not great value compered to Ryzen 4
I didn't feel it was bad, and didn't really get that feeling from the reviews I've seen. But I do feel that buying new, the 7700X is better for the moment from a value perspective (aka current market prices). And if your already running a 7700X, it be similar to something that happened earlier when looking at Ryzen 1X00 to a Ryzen 2X00 - it really wasn't worth doing a single generation change.
Interesting My biggest concern for my next CPU is stutter The 0.1 percent lows shown here are significantly more useful to me than either average FPS or one percent lows. It really seems that AMD should have taken a couple of months to improve AGESA and Windows driver and released it with Windows 11 24H2.
Hmmm , *Nice benchmarks Bryan,* Thanks for that ! But all with all, *I will still buy, an 7800X3D !* With an *ASRock motherboard* of course ...... Probably the ' LIVE MIXER ' or *The ' RIPTIDE '* I also very much like the ' Steel Legend ' But I think it is, somewhat over priced (atm)
Hard to believe it, since just a couple weeks ago hardware unboxed did a 43 games comparison and it was only a 2% difference. Maybe you have power targets too different.
It seems there are a couple of things going on. On its merit as a chip - the 9700X is a good chip. Good performing 8 core chip, doesn’t mess about, games well with appropriate productivity. As an upgrade from AM4 in performance, it’s good enough to get you away from the non-X3D if you bought for productivity (bar 5950X) and is probably worth the platform upgrade because the upgraded DDR5/PCIe/USB goes along with it. Its (maybe) _better_ than the 5800X3D on paper for gaming but unless you really want the platform upgrade, the value isn’t there. If you already have AM5, there is no reason to move from 7000->9000 unless there is some special need for 9950. If you have 7800X3D already I doubt there is anything that would make the 9800X3D worth it because they already threw those at us over the last 12 months with great deals. I personally don’t see a market for 9000 series unless you are on 5600X or less and looking to upgrade now. There is nothing here for anyone that upgraded in the last two years and snagged a deal already.
Hey everyone, So I'm about to build my new pc...big event for me occures every 5-6years. So i can get the 9700x for 285USD atm and the damn 7800X3D is 410 USD. Got a Ashrock steel legend wifi B650+2x16GB ddr5 6000Mhz cl30 and a 360AIO. Gpu will be 7900xt or 8800xt(time will tell) Pc is used 90%for gaming. Am i right that the 9700x is a no brainer for me considering the price difference and that the performance gap disappears in 1440p gaming between the 2 processors? +9700x should not bottleneck either GPU options. Highly appreciate every reply.
A thing I’ve heard echoed from every computer RUclipsr, “update your bios”. I call BS. Don’t update the bios if everything is working properly, you only risk breaking everything, and having to reconfigure all of your bios settings, and possibly windows settings. I just built a new PC, and did 30 seconds of research to realize I actually wanted to downgrade my bios from the pre-installed one. Newer, is not always better. A lot of features are added for hardware that might have been released after your current hardware. You won’t get any benefit from an update like that, you just run the risk of breaking something that is currently working. I’ve got a 7800 X.3 D, I don’t need a new bios that supports Ryzen 9000 series, just saying.
I do expect Ryzen 9000 to improve over time, and like you said, Ryzen 7000 didn't start off too good, in most cases the DDR5 seemed to be doing most of the work, for gaming the 5800X3D outperformed most games at the time, but nowadays if you look at a 7700X vs a 5800X3D it's not too different, they trade blows. The 7800X3D smashes all the 9000 CPUs in gaming though, and I'm not sure if Ryzen 9000 will ever catch up through BIOS updates and other optimizations, but for productivity and tasks outside of gaming a 9700X is probably better. Ryzen 9000 is already better now than when it launched, so expect it to only get better.
When a new generation of CPUs comes out and is described as "not bad" by one of the most positive reviewers, you know it wasn't a great improvement over the prior iteration.
On a tangent, would the short selling (from what I gather is the borrowing with interest and selling to others on the plan that the share price drops relatively in the future) of tech stocks affect the products being produced by tech companies? e.g. if people want to hold onto their shares, they can't be bought back and given back to their actual owners they were borrowed from, so poor performance - weather true or not - is likely to get people to sell at a lower price...
AMD said the 9700x wouldn't beat the 7800x 3Din gaming. Why does everyone keep thinking it would? "Zen 4 3D" is on average 23% faster than "Zen 4" without 3D. Zen 5 was projected to be 16% faster than Zen 4 in IPC. There is no mention of 3D CPUs on this IPC of gaming tests. Being in the middle of that is exactly where it should be. Pretty simple math 16% < 23% "Zen 4 3D" has around +7% than normal Zen 5.
Sometimes you'd better look twice 😉 ... Thanks and good news that the new Ryzen series are an interesting future upgrade path. Anyway my Ryzen 5 7600 (non X) has been a bargain and will be fast enough for quite a long time.
Okay we gotta chat.. Why are people obsessed with comparing a 9700x to a 7800X3D? Its firstly a x700 variant. Much like there was a 5700X and X3D and its not a x800 variant at all. Why would it be made to compete with a 7800X3D let alone x800 specific anyway? So no, it's not a failure. When we see a 9800X3D THEN it'll make sense to compare.
Are u using 23H2 branch predictor update ? or Windows 11 24H2 ??? Are u using the 105Watts mode? Just bios ? May you run with 105W mode on? Also with Windows 24H2 patch?
My issue is that so many different issues has come forward with this launch: 1. Windows 11 bloatware and features limiting the cpu. 2. BIOS affecting performance 3. Ram speed mattering a lot more 4. Core parking as well as voltages having a bigger affect on performance it's getting out of hand.😂
What I am trying to say is so many reviewers have been tricking the heck out of the thing and optimizing the software to show off how good it could be if you put as much effort, it's not a out of the box experience I tell ya.
Ryzen 7 9700x is at least better than my 4790k because it has more cores and threads. Right now, I play games at 1080p with a1080ti and 16gb 1600 RAM. When I replace my current system with modern up-to-date parts, I will have more 1% higher FPS and higher overall FPS.
Couldn't have gotten it wrong, not at least with testing done and a review posted on embargo date. AMD never sent any review units. Womp. Small channels FTL. But always a fan of the YES man bringing the benchmarks!
Hi Brian, thx for your great work as always. Did you see any differences between the 7700X and the 9700X in Windows "snapyness"? When I switched from the 3700X to the 5900X I felt a high improvement in handling windows (multiple browser tabs etc.). Maybe it was only because of switching from 8 to 12 cores but the IPC increase and the shared L3 cache was a thing.
So all this to tell me I should just get the 7800x3d and be done :D If they slash the price of 9700x by 100$ then OK. But at this time they both cost the same for me :/
Value is my number 1 deciding factor. Then fps to value ratio is my second factor. 7600x on sale in Aus is a much better deal than a 9600x (even when they were both new), therefore I see no reason to purchase 9600x for my usage and find 9000 series to be a big let down. If i buy a 7600x, b650m and ddr5 6000mhz cl30, then i can upgrade to the latest generation of AM5 CPU in a few years time. This is the best value purchase as you can extend the lifetime of the mobo.
@@microwavedav an example could be the 7600x vs 7800x3d. While 7600x is cheaper and has more value/fps, the 7800x3d still has a great value/fps but for non gaming tasks it's value is worse? Idk but that's kind of how I meant value as my first pick in terms of overall power efficiency, fps, upgrade path, mobo + ram cost as a whole, and then secondly just the value/fps comparison. But hard to explain haha
ahh i get you. so it's like for you, the "value" priority is more contextual and can concern future value (energy savings, upgradability), while the value/fps is your immediate, present value? kinda like how walking is magnitudes more efficient and cheaper, but you would still use a car for its convenience?
Hold on... I notice something here which is a bit unusual in your testing, TECHYESCITY -- why are you using 5% lows? Instead of the standard of 1% lows? Is there some practical reason for this? Do you consider this a more accurate representation of player experience? What's the deal, exactly?
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
I think part of the problem is that AMD over promised a bit. I think Level1Techs did about right showing the performance and pointing out a few problems that need fixing. But some people just slated it without looking closer at what is going on. The IPC is better and the power usage should also be better but it did not translate into the numbers so something had to be going wrong somewhere with software etc but they did not look into it enough. Look at the linux numbers for example they show a decent uplift ( and in some isolated cases a massive uplift) so it has to be software be it drivers or windows being windows.
As a Linux user who was looking at upgrading to a 9700X, do you know where I could find those Linux numbers?
@@wfb.subtraktor311level1techs
@@wfb.subtraktor311 I think it was Level1Techs that tested it under Linux.
@@wfb.subtraktor311 phoronix is all you need
@@wfb.subtraktor311 look at Phoronix, they make great reviews on Linux but you may find their tests not useful if you are more of a casual gamer type user
7800x3d is going for $600 right now on Newegg compared to the 9700x at $340. I’ll probably just get a 9700x at this point
I'm probably going to do the same. $600+ is outrageous
same.
Same bc the 7600x3d is very close in gaming but we don’t know when more games make use of 8 cores
gd idea AND the 9800x3d is going for even more, here in uk its £500 insane..
Here's why the 9700x is better in EU at least:
Avg. price 9700x - 380€
Avg. price 7800x3d - 570€
Avg. price 9800x3d - 650€
9700x is 33% cheaper than 7800x3d, while being only about 10% slower in games and being 10-15% faster in productivity. Especially if you play at resolutions of 2K or even more importantly 4K, you won't have any gains at all in games by going with 7800x3d, but you still will get gains in productivity with the 9700x, so it's simply a better choice, it's cheaper and on balance has better overall performance than the 7800x3d for someone who games and does at least some productivity.
The reason I mention the 9800x3d is...if you're gonna buy the 7800, then just add the "change" and get the 9800, at least you'll have the latest and greatest overkill CPU.
I just buillt a 9700X based computer for a customer ... no issues enabled pbo it runs really fast . beats the 2990WX 32 core threadripper in cinebench .. not bad for a 8 core . runs cooler and less power than the 7700x I like it
Did anyone say it had issues? I only recall people saying it wasn't that big of a jump over the 7000 series. 🤷
Edit:
There's also such a thing as price to performance, and at the price I would still rather buy a 7700x or even non-x.
@@DingleBerryschnapps yes several of the reviewers had blue screens and instability issues running 6000 mhz memory on the same systems they had tested the 7000x on. Newest cpus are rarely the best bang for the buck but the 9000 series came out at the same price or less that the 7000 series launched it. But the 7000 series has gone down in price since then
@@DingleBerryschnapps "Did anyone say it had issues?"
Gamers Nexus couldn't even make a review for the ryzen 5 because it was so broken it couldn't even post.
I just buillt a 7700 based computer for a customer ... no issues enabled pbo it runs really fast . beats the 2990WX 32 core threadripper in cinebench .. not bad for a 8 core . runs cooler and less power than the 7700x I like it
@@DingleBerryschnappsMost RUclipsrs declared the 9700x a failure because it wasn't the world's fastest gaming CPU.
I have a 9700x in transit now. Since I'm still using a i7-7700k, I had about 10 years of tech to catch up on. While almost anything is an upgrade at this point(or is it?) the power consumption weighed heavily in it's favor. That said, the 7700 with my nv3070 is still getting the job done. Win11 is forcing my hand and I'm concerned about prices next year.
Unfortunately the 7800x3d is going for a minimum of $430 US, vs $300 for the 9700x. 9800x3d isn't in stock anywhere. So, I went for 9700x with some 6000cl28 memory which I got a pretty good discount on. Maybe I'll replace with an x3d part in a few years. I'll be doing a mix of 1440p gaming and productivity tasks so I think I'll be okay for awhile.
Did something similar. Saved a few bucks and got the 7700x. 9700x is a better cpu but for my needs I couldn’t justify the price increase.
In 1440p and using a 7800xt, works like a charm.
People should actually read the title. He is asking a question and is saying "its not bad" its also not this amazing cpu that will melt your brain. Its a new CPU with some good features that will almost certainly start showing itself more in the future. Just the 7000s was not the best thing when it came out. People get far into a dichotomy of "if it doesnt give me 5billion extra fps its bad.
This is actually the first review I have seen on the 9700X. I was waiting till Bryan got a chance to toss out his review. He tossed in quite a few good recommendations. ASRock does to me have the best Bios team, they make sure the quality and longevity of their boards is solid.
Once again, Tech Yes City delivering the most reliable information. Brian never fails on reliable metrics. IMO, he's the gold standard for Tech YT.
Bought a 7700 non-X from Aliexpress for like $140 USD (taxes included) 6 months ago. -30 mV and +200 on clocks and so far it has been great. Sidegraded from a 5800X3D (for productivity).
If your mainly gaming just buy a 7800x3d, undervolt it for even more performance and lower power usage.
Yeah but i'd probably want something more powerful for games that are very cpu demanding and unoptimized. Also a cpu that can handle a bunch of programs open, while being alt tabbed out of your game
7800x3d is also $200 more expensive than the price I can get 9700x for (microcenter)
@@paoweeo In the UK the 7800x3d is £10 more than the 9700x around £350 ATM, prices can change quickly
@@paalosordoni7932 fortunately at microcenter , 9700x , b650, and 32gb ram ddr5 is only $450. Meanwhile 7800x3d is $420
@@Ladioz
14700 then.
Unlike 14700K you don't have to worry mobo will automaticaly overclock it through the roof because only K CPUs can be overclocked .
And just like K , it supports Quicksync which can be very useful in productivity.
Another alternative is 14600K
This has been a great video, I'm on the fence between the 7700x and 9700x, my mix is probably going to be 70% productivity and 30% gaming, Microcenter has bundles available for both CPUs with identical MB and RAM but $50 more for the 9700x, or about 12.5% more. I think the 9700x will be the route I go.
The 9700x bundle is 430 if you haven't checked.
For certain applications like what I need, 9700X actually beats out all other CPUs on the market. The lower thermal print allows it to be significantly overclocked single core wise.
Just went from an i9-9900k to a 9700x that i got new for £280 on a xmas sale... loving it so far 🎉
Which store was that?
Just bought a 9700x, b650m pro rs, gskill flare x5 6000 cl30 and a pure rock 2. i opted for the 9700x because of the lower energy consumption. with -40 mv all core i got 22200 points on cb r23. i think this is where this cpu shines. the 7700x was just 20 euros cheaper.
I Just had to replace ram. Gskill did not work stable as i thought. Kingston ram runs better. Cb23 ist now 24300 :)
So the product isn't flawed, it's perfectly fine, just like the 7600/7700 are fine too - they're cheaper, so the first 1m 5s into the video, is bang on basically, it was mediocre because there's no performance improvement and it costs more. 9700X is a direct replacement for the 7700 - not the 7700X, the 7700, as they're the same power 65W. What is to blame on AMD, is releasing essentially a Zen4+ as a whole new Zen, setting consumer's expectations way too high with misleading benchmarks, then selling them for really poor value. So in short, AMD deserves the flack, their marketing department has really stuffed up.
Thanks meaniehead! between that and my current understanding of the situation, I no longer need to even watch the video! Way to kill TYC :P
No, this isn't a 7700 replacement. It's a 7700 by TDP but a 7700x by performance. That's what makes this chip different.
They're giving you slightly better performance than the 7700x with the efficiency of the 7700.
The 9700x is the replacement for.... the 7700x...
Stop Gaslighting...
@@---GOD--- how much more performamce 7700x give over 7700 ? 7 to 10 percent at Mt gaming is also similar. They are Same CPU just different tdp so efficency compression between them not make sense . 9700x gives sqme gaming performance and 10 percent Mt over 7700 at same power .
@@evalangley3985 no 7700x and 7700 is very close in performance but power gap is huge . 70 percent More power with an percent More perf. 9700x vs 7700 same gaming
10 percent Mt
At same power
How this is good improvement ?
Nearly all improvement are come from node change for tdp and gaming also can't use it. It is disaster
6:00 no gamersmelt was harmed
Who even takes that clickbaiter seriously?
His whining like voice putting me off.
as legit as userbenchmark, insane clickbait
@@johanjacobs9240 Definitely
AMDs dead?! Intel CPUs are turning into bombs?! This windows update doubles performance in games?!?!
I think Hardware Unboxed and Gamers Nexis reviews were spot on. They represent what the majority of gamers are going to do with there system as far as gaming. Tweeking, adjusting, with all manner of settings is not what most gamers are going to do with there systems. They just want something that works right out of the box with normal pc settings which is what GN and HUboxed did as they have done for many other CPU's in the past they have given great reviews on.
" Tweeking, adjusting, with all manner of settings is not what most gamers are going to do with there systems" - Actually, they will, that's the main advantage of having a gaming PC as opposed to a Xbox or PS. Also, it's not all manner of settings, it's literally 2-3 settings in BIOS which take about 20 seconds to click.
The main issue for the 9700x is Amazon doing sometime of flash sale on the 7700x, you have to keep checking the price day by day as it always changes, the lowest price seen for the 7700x was $210 usd with the two free game bundle, I picked one up and have in hand as delivered @ that price.
Considering the very good 1% lows and the Cinebench score it offers some advantages over the X3D in that games will load faster and play very well.
Finally a decent unbiased review that takes into account some of the strengths of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X.
As of writing this (11/10/24) the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X is between £70-£100 cheaper than the 7800x3d here in the UK because the product is that good, but I cant help that the FOMO element has contributed towards price gouging, that price difference is enough for one more component of your build.
For me I can get the The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X + a cooler for the same price as the 7800x3d - yes it might not be as good in raw 'gaming; performance but with some tweaks and for my own personal use case it makes sense to use what you describe as a hybrid CPU.
We've been brainwashed a little by monstrously large channels slamming any other CPU other than the 7800x3d or Intel equivalent and that's OK to a certain extent but everyone seems to forget there's things called budgets and as you said, the cost of running and buying these components should be taken into account.
You've got yourself a sub Bryan.
Just built with the 9700x and it's been great. Good fps at 4k. I'm actually very happy with it.
The Radeon 9700 was awesome. Oh, wrong video, moving on 😅
Loved the XT variant.
You could flash your 9600 bios on models with the correct ram. Who remembers using the Floppy PSU connection to power these weapons back in the day?
@@MarcoGPUtuber There was never a Radeon 9700 XT, just the 9700 Pro and non Pro, I remember this clear as day since I got scammed by OCuk, bought a 9700 Pro that had lower memory speeds since it was actually a 9700 flashed to a 9700 Pro, which explained why it was on such a steep discount. Ended up sticking a Arctic Cooling VGA Silencer on it, still have this frankenstein 9700 Pro to this day. The Radeon 9550, 9600 and 9800 which all came later did have an XT variant though.
Using the 9250 was fun back then (specially playing OOT @1024x768).
Hello Phil.
There is now an issue with different components sharing the same name now, as more and more components are released and only a finite amount of numbers to choose from.
I like my 9700X, it's a pretty good processor. Good at gaming, and very good at other stuff. The X3D's are just a little better at gaming, I agree with the data in this video. Thumbs up.
Thanx Bryan for this review. The results look surprising compared to other reviews, but the idea of checking the bios version is interesting. New BIOSes introduce a 105w power profile that is not enabled in your version, so this ASRock board seems to be a solid performer. Hopefully, this strange behavior of the 9000 series will be completely understood, so that we will be able to get the very best from it.
Thanks for the review.. cheers.
Three months in - at the current difference in price of more than 200 USD, the 9700x is the one to go for, for me.
With the longevity of the AMx platforms, its still good value to plop in a cheaper 7000 series now, and then upgrade later if needed. I have a feeling that the 9000 series is going to experience some "fine wine" as they get the bios refined and we've already seen some gains with the windows update, and in combo with platform longevity this will be a good thing. Overall the 9000 series launch isn't bad at all, but the initial reviews and issues the reviewers had in combo with super high expectations dampened the whole thing.
Love the video! +1 from me.bif only I could give two points of feedback is that 1 - it wasn't clear which windows 10/11 and which version was used. 2 - the amount of games used was kind of small and I'd love some lightroom / Puget systems benchmarks as well.
You should add Warhammer 40K Space Marine 2 to your CPU benchmark suite Brian. It's a good one.
It's great to see you dig a little deeper, unlike the vast majority of larger channels. I recently released a video with an optimization guide for the 9700X to help it match or exceed the performance of the 7800X3D but at a much lower price. It's a pretty amazing chip.
No way does the 9700X match or exceed the 7800X3D. You must be cherry picking some obscure titles, no one plays,
@@alanpatterson820 my results are available to look at, I tested 18 games including titles like Cyberpunk, COD: MW3, Black Myth, etc. … not exactly what I would call obscure games that no one plays. I also include the exact tweaks that I made to achieve these results.
@@alanpatterson820 Dude used a faster memory kit for the 9700X and called it a win.
@@kathleendelcourt8136 Classic AMD Marketing.
@@kathleendelcourt8136 faster RAM has a much lower performance impact on X3D CPUs because of the extra L3 cache ... probably a good idea to understand how these chips function before commenting.
I got a 7700x at Micro Center for $220. With the 7800x3d priced close to $500 as well as the new 9800x3d I can’t help but feel good about buying the 7700x
Just built a new game PC. Got the 9700x and the 7900xt. I'm quite pleased with the performance.
Thanks for bringing the bios issue.
Always great to see a new tech yes vid pop up. Bryan still waiting for that linux vid!
Let me know if you need a hand esp next time you're in Melbs
Not surprised about the latest bios being worse. I had the same experience with my Asrock x670e motherboard and my ryzen 7950x. I reinstalled the bios that it was released with. I got better performance and higher overclock on memory and CPU.
Comparing the 9700X to the 7700X is apples to oranges. You need to compare the cpus with the same stock 65wTDP. In this case the proper comparison is the non-X 7700 with the 9700X.
Then they should have called it the 9700
@@Lightitupp1 Yes they should have and included a cooler. It was a shady move by AMD to even call this an "X" cpu in order to tout it's "efficiency" gains that were not as huge as initially presented. What this review should have done was set the 7700X to Eco-Mode (65wTDP) in BIOS to make a better comparison.
I chose Ryzen 9 7900X. I built my PC last weekend and this CPU is a monster. It's really good for rendering and running virtual machines and its price now is cheaper than 9700X, 7800x3d
should have gotten the 7800x3d
@@jurpo6 i don't play game bro. I use it for work and 7900x helps me a lot.
Was strangling what CPU to pair my new 7800XT . And was think between 7700X or 7700. Now I saw this video, gonna go directly to 9700X. Less TDP , more efficient and since I run Linux only the last 6 years , this will have amazing performance . Better optimized on Linux , than on Windows ....
They are all great chips. The increased IPC and efficiency is really nice. Just have to wait till early next year, and the value will be there when the prices drop: they always do on AMD CPU's. Cheers for the vid.
Is there a difference in 1440p gaming between the 9700X and 9600X ?
Will the 9600X have the same 1440p frame rate as the 9700X ?
Great reviews, lets see if HUB picks up on the Bios issue?
Are the benchmarks done after the Windows 11 patch that solves some "problems" that Windows 11 had with Ryzen or with the new 24H2 version?
Because it has already been seen in many tests that the performance of these Ryzen 9000 increases by more than 10% (and much more in many cases) ...
Nobody got it wrong: new thing perform similarly to the old thing make new thing pointless product, but add 200 dollars on top makes new product bad.
I believe Zen 5c main target audience is the production and businesses. AMD is releasing 192 cores epyc. AMD has 33% shares in server sector and pushing that number higher.
The 9000 series (strix point) is completely Zen 5, there's no Zen C core
@@reiniermoreno1653 Yes. Zen 5c is just a compact variant of Zen 5 and Zen 5 must exist for Zen 5c to exist. The server sector is huge and is growing rapidly, about 10% annually.
Granted bios updates will help performance eventually, but as far as I know other media outlets used the best bios versions for their plattforms as well. The power draw numbers surprised me honestly, a little too good to be true
Thanks for this huge addition to what is known about the 9700x. Most reviewers under Windows showed minimal uplift from the 9700x in gaming, but showed more in productivity situations, but oddly, under Linux there was more uplift. Next, we learned that if you get the new Windows 24H2, both the 7700x and the 9700x benefit, but the 9700x benefits slightly more. Now, thanks to your tests, we know that the BIOS also matters. Taken together, there is probably a 10-15% uplift, which is about what AMD promised, not bad, but not huge. Still, considering that the chips are using the same node size, getting 10-15% is good. I think that when the dust settles (new Windows released, new 9900x motherboards released, BIOS updates for older boards), reviewers will converge an uplift in the 12% range, and the price differential will also move to 12%.
There are no gains between versions, only problems with Windows Defender / Security which now have been addressed.
About time for Linux to go more mainstream and take some market share away from Windows
@@hiriotapa1983 No need for Linux to "take" market share. Microsoft is giving it away for free. They are working hard to prevent older hardware from being able to upgrade to Win 11, so I plan to convert my laptop to Linux. If it goes well, I'll convert my desktops as well.
I'm not overly invested in this topic. I have a 7900 and no reason to upgrade but the topic does keep my attention. I get the feeling the 9700 is going to be one of those chips where it makes sense to turn off hyper threading for the immediate future. It will have enough IPC that you can zone in on a workload better without hyper threading.
What evidence can you cite to support this? Feelings are not arguments. Long ago there was merit in the non-HT approach, during the early days of SB and other CPUs (I did a lot of testing back then), partly because turning off HT allowed for higher overclocks, but these days it's rare for this to be the case, and bare in mind modern CPUs all have auto-overclocking functionality essentially baked into the designs.
@@mapesdhs597 It depends on the application and it's scheduling but turning off HT can both help or hurt by as much as 10%. An instance I know of this happening for certain is nintendo switch emulators.
@@jurpo6 I know it can affect performance, though I hardly think Switch emulation matters here; my desire was for cited data. What actual references are people using when making these claims about ordinary gaming or productivity tasks? I'm not saying the OP is wrong, I'm just weary of people making claims like this by starting off with "I get the feeling" or "I just feel that". If we're going to make recommendations about purchasing decisions, they should be based on real data, not emotional concepts, though I've seen channel owners often use the same language. If they have the data to support a claim then it should be, "I conclude" or "I think", not, "I feel".
I decided to get a 7700X since the 7800X3D jumped up in price recently and the 9700X isn't good value right now. Great video!
Thinking of buying a 7800x3d but now it's out of my budget now due to the price hike.. now thinking about the 7700x, how is it going there ? Is it worth it ?
Commenting while I haven't watched the video! The 9000X are not bad products, they are just badly priced compared to the cpu's they are replacing! Plus they are not that much more powerful compared to the previous 7000 series counterpart!
*Really hope there is performance gains after BIOS optimizations with all the other board manufacturers*
I agree with you that if we had the 9700X and 7700X at the same price then it would be a no brainer which to buy. The higher 9xxx series cost however is to be expected, chips always release at a higher cost. The 7xxx series is in the channel with good supply so it will be a lower price for some time.
To me the crazy thing is people do not understand how this works and expect a new chip to release at the lower price of an established production and supply line available chip.
AMD hoping these tech tubers can con 13th and 14th Intel users to throw their PCs in the garbage and buy AMD.
this changes everything. amazing video tech yes man
Thanks for testing. Have heard consistently it's goated this series for Linux gaming, makes me wonder what is going on precisely.
Those 1% low advantages will only get relatively better as you increase resolution.
7700 non x enters the chat
I think I recall ASRock doing a BIOS update that allowed an unlocked multiplier on the i5 11400F or similar and Intel were not pleased or perhaps it was the i5 10400F? They are a pretty talented team with firmware
Well KitGuruTech channel agreed that for 7700X owners doesn't make much sense to upgrade to 9700X , for those below was worthy of consideration.
Those channels that crapped on it must have watched it only as an upgrade to 7000 while KitGuruTech did that AND for those that are on 5000 and below.
In the end when he looked at Pros and Cons ,Leo gave 8/10 worth buying.
If the channel was cancelled , I haven't noticed it.
A shame he hasn't used RTX4090 over 4080.
There were some clear obvious bottlenecks at 1080p .
Edit:
Don't know if other channels did that, but using Ryzen Master , the 9700X can be overclocked by 500Mhz.
That said,he did use High End of perhaps even Ultra High end board.
The only issue with the 9700x is the price. It's the same or more than the 7800x3d - so it doesn't make a single piece of sense for a PC Gamer.
And it's no surprise businesses are struggling, my mortgage payment is 95% more than it was in 2021. Whilst my insurance, groceries, energy are all up by 40% too.
I've heard it out and I still stand by my tweet response that it's no more impressive than any single generation between 2000 and 7000 Intel Core i. Except now there's twice as many cores on the desktop socket than there should be.
As someone who's struggling between these 3 CPUs for my next 1440p build I'm glad I saw your video for some insights. I mostly do simulator games like Flight Simulator, for which I notice the X3D tends to be better than the others. I also eventually want to try some other games like adventure (think Ghost of Tsushima and Yakuza, maybe Baldur's Gate). But since I'll also do twitch streams and some video editing and other productivity, I wonder if something like the 9700X or 7700X would be the better option in the long run. Looking to pair my CPU with a GPU like 7900 GRE, 7900 XT or 4070 Ti Super.
I don't think you are approaching this question coherently.
If you favor gaming performance, it's X3D. Either buy 7800X3D now or wait 9800X3D. X3D doesn't make a big difference in all games but when it does, it's often big one or produces excellent frame times. In addition big cache really good at less polished games like many Unity based are. No one bothers to test them, they all do same big budget multi-platform jogging simulators. I went from 5800X to 5800X3D and it's one the best upgrades I did. Drastic difference, especially in modded Unity games.
If productivity is important, you go for more cores. There's not enough gap between these 8-cores, they are quite similar. Sure in some niche applications utilizing AVX512 the 9000-series is best choice, people who need AVX512 most certainly are aware they need it. If you don't know, you don't need it either. On gaming side there's no big downside going for more cores, you just don't get best gaming performance. 7900X has 50% more cores than 7700X, it's a big gap for relatively small amount of money.
If you want both, you need to make some compromises, either cost or performance. 7950X3D can do both but it does have some quirks you might or might not have to deal with and it's expensive. If you can't afford or not willing to spend more than 9700X/7800X3D money, you kind have to pick between 7900X and 7800X3D.
Thank you for confirming what I have been assuming about the Ryzen 5. It is not a bad CPU series per se. It is just not great value compered to Ryzen 4
I didn't feel it was bad, and didn't really get that feeling from the reviews I've seen. But I do feel that buying new, the 7700X is better for the moment from a value perspective (aka current market prices). And if your already running a 7700X, it be similar to something that happened earlier when looking at Ryzen 1X00 to a Ryzen 2X00 - it really wasn't worth doing a single generation change.
I wonder how performance will be once the new motherboards come out.
Spot on price is the biggest issue with these new parts.
7800X3d is almost twice the price of the 9700x here in Europe.
I'm thinking about upgrading my 8700k. Cpus last so long before needing an upgrade. I might go team AMD and get this 9700x.
Interesting
My biggest concern for my next CPU is stutter
The 0.1 percent lows shown here are significantly more useful to me than either average FPS or one percent lows.
It really seems that AMD should have taken a couple of months to improve AGESA and Windows driver and released it with Windows 11 24H2.
Hmmm , *Nice benchmarks Bryan,* Thanks for that ! But all with all, *I will still buy, an 7800X3D !*
With an *ASRock motherboard* of course ...... Probably the ' LIVE MIXER ' or *The ' RIPTIDE '* I also very much like the ' Steel Legend ' But I think it is, somewhat over priced (atm)
It seems like anyone with over 1 million subscribers goes right into big tech's pocket.
You mean like AMD? They are part of big tech and they are trying to lie and screw over consumers
I thinkI will be riding my 5700x for a few years yet. 10% boost per generation is not enough value for my limited money.
Hard to believe it, since just a couple weeks ago hardware unboxed did a 43 games comparison and it was only a 2% difference.
Maybe you have power targets too different.
It seems there are a couple of things going on. On its merit as a chip - the 9700X is a good chip. Good performing 8 core chip, doesn’t mess about, games well with appropriate productivity. As an upgrade from AM4 in performance, it’s good enough to get you away from the non-X3D if you bought for productivity (bar 5950X) and is probably worth the platform upgrade because the upgraded DDR5/PCIe/USB goes along with it. Its (maybe) _better_ than the 5800X3D on paper for gaming but unless you really want the platform upgrade, the value isn’t there.
If you already have AM5, there is no reason to move from 7000->9000 unless there is some special need for 9950. If you have 7800X3D already I doubt there is anything that would make the 9800X3D worth it because they already threw those at us over the last 12 months with great deals.
I personally don’t see a market for 9000 series unless you are on 5600X or less and looking to upgrade now. There is nothing here for anyone that upgraded in the last two years and snagged a deal already.
Id have no problems getting a 9700x if I had some productivity things to do plus some games.. Price needs to come down a bit.
Hey everyone,
So I'm about to build my new pc...big event for me occures every 5-6years.
So i can get the 9700x for 285USD atm and the damn 7800X3D is 410 USD.
Got a Ashrock steel legend wifi B650+2x16GB ddr5 6000Mhz cl30 and a 360AIO. Gpu will be 7900xt or 8800xt(time will tell)
Pc is used 90%for gaming.
Am i right that the 9700x is a no brainer for me considering the price difference and that the performance gap disappears in 1440p gaming between the 2 processors?
+9700x should not bottleneck either GPU options.
Highly appreciate every reply.
A thing I’ve heard echoed from every computer RUclipsr, “update your bios”.
I call BS. Don’t update the bios if everything is working properly, you only risk breaking everything, and having to reconfigure all of your bios settings, and possibly windows settings.
I just built a new PC, and did 30 seconds of research to realize I actually wanted to downgrade my bios from the pre-installed one. Newer, is not always better. A lot of features are added for hardware that might have been released after your current hardware. You won’t get any benefit from an update like that, you just run the risk of breaking something that is currently working.
I’ve got a 7800 X.3 D, I don’t need a new bios that supports Ryzen 9000 series, just saying.
Well I play on 4k so my Ryzen 9 7900X3D is gonna last years. Hopefully till AM6 comes out.
I do expect Ryzen 9000 to improve over time, and like you said, Ryzen 7000 didn't start off too good, in most cases the DDR5 seemed to be doing most of the work, for gaming the 5800X3D outperformed most games at the time, but nowadays if you look at a 7700X vs a 5800X3D it's not too different, they trade blows.
The 7800X3D smashes all the 9000 CPUs in gaming though, and I'm not sure if Ryzen 9000 will ever catch up through BIOS updates and other optimizations, but for productivity and tasks outside of gaming a 9700X is probably better.
Ryzen 9000 is already better now than when it launched, so expect it to only get better.
When a new generation of CPUs comes out and is described as "not bad" by one of the most positive reviewers, you know it wasn't a great improvement over the prior iteration.
On a tangent, would the short selling (from what I gather is the borrowing with interest and selling to others on the plan that the share price drops relatively in the future) of tech stocks affect the products being produced by tech companies? e.g. if people want to hold onto their shares, they can't be bought back and given back to their actual owners they were borrowed from, so poor performance - weather true or not - is likely to get people to sell at a lower price...
Yep the initial reviews was not complete . Need to find newer reviews . Amd fault for marketing but 9700x with all tweaks and updates should be good
AMD said the 9700x wouldn't beat the 7800x 3Din gaming.
Why does everyone keep thinking it would?
"Zen 4 3D" is on average 23% faster than "Zen 4" without 3D.
Zen 5 was projected to be 16% faster than Zen 4 in IPC. There is no mention of 3D CPUs on this IPC of gaming tests.
Being in the middle of that is exactly where it should be.
Pretty simple math
16% < 23% "Zen 4 3D" has around +7% than normal Zen 5.
Sometimes you'd better look twice 😉 ... Thanks and good news that the new Ryzen series are an interesting future upgrade path. Anyway my Ryzen 5 7600 (non X) has been a bargain and will be fast enough for quite a long time.
Okay we gotta chat.. Why are people obsessed with comparing a 9700x to a 7800X3D? Its firstly a x700 variant. Much like there was a 5700X and X3D and its not a x800 variant at all. Why would it be made to compete with a 7800X3D let alone x800 specific anyway?
So no, it's not a failure. When we see a 9800X3D THEN it'll make sense to compare.
Are u using 23H2 branch predictor update ? or Windows 11 24H2 ???
Are u using the 105Watts mode?
Just bios ?
May you run with 105W mode on? Also with Windows 24H2 patch?
SF2 Music to close out the show. Nice!
My issue is that so many different issues has come forward with this launch:
1. Windows 11 bloatware and features limiting the cpu.
2. BIOS affecting performance
3. Ram speed mattering a lot more
4. Core parking as well as voltages having a bigger affect on performance
it's getting out of hand.😂
What I am trying to say is so many reviewers have been tricking the heck out of the thing and optimizing the software to show off how good it could be if you put as much effort, it's not a out of the box experience I tell ya.
Ryzen 7 9700x is at least better than my 4790k because it has more cores and threads. Right now, I play games at 1080p with a1080ti and 16gb 1600 RAM. When I replace my current system with modern up-to-date parts, I will have more 1% higher FPS and higher overall FPS.
7700x was a higher clocked and power usage 5700x with ddr5 imo, 9700x brings the x7xx series back to where it should be
Couldn't have gotten it wrong, not at least with testing done and a review posted on embargo date. AMD never sent any review units. Womp. Small channels FTL. But always a fan of the YES man bringing the benchmarks!
how would you make it more efficient and more consistent with power draw and fps?
Hi Brian, thx for your great work as always. Did you see any differences between the 7700X and the 9700X in Windows "snapyness"? When I switched from the 3700X to the 5900X I felt a high improvement in handling windows (multiple browser tabs etc.). Maybe it was only because of switching from 8 to 12 cores but the IPC increase and the shared L3 cache was a thing.
So all this to tell me I should just get the 7800x3d and be done :D If they slash the price of 9700x by 100$ then OK. But at this time they both cost the same for me :/
Just upgrade my gear to 9700x. At price of 300 it is pretty sweet, oc to 5.6easily.
would love to see a blender render comparison, which is faster, the 9950x or a rtx 3070
Question, why is the chips PCB blue? That seems wrong, is it on my end? Should be green, right?
Value is my number 1 deciding factor. Then fps to value ratio is my second factor. 7600x on sale in Aus is a much better deal than a 9600x (even when they were both new), therefore I see no reason to purchase 9600x for my usage and find 9000 series to be a big let down.
If i buy a 7600x, b650m and ddr5 6000mhz cl30, then i can upgrade to the latest generation of AM5 CPU in a few years time. This is the best value purchase as you can extend the lifetime of the mobo.
quick question, how does value and fps:value ratio differ? are they not inherently the same thing?
i did the same but use Ryzen 9 7900X and it is a monster, such a very good CPU with cheap price
@@microwavedav an example could be the 7600x vs 7800x3d. While 7600x is cheaper and has more value/fps, the 7800x3d still has a great value/fps but for non gaming tasks it's value is worse? Idk but that's kind of how I meant value as my first pick in terms of overall power efficiency, fps, upgrade path, mobo + ram cost as a whole, and then secondly just the value/fps comparison. But hard to explain haha
ahh i get you. so it's like for you, the "value" priority is more contextual and can concern future value (energy savings, upgradability), while the value/fps is your immediate, present value? kinda like how walking is magnitudes more efficient and cheaper, but you would still use a car for its convenience?
Hi can you please test the 9700X with DDR5-8000 and good timings?
Hold on... I notice something here which is a bit unusual in your testing, TECHYESCITY -- why are you using 5% lows? Instead of the standard of 1% lows? Is there some practical reason for this? Do you consider this a more accurate representation of player experience? What's the deal, exactly?
I have one paired with my 4070 Ti Super and ım loving it