Gonna guess the 9700x stays at 65w and a 120w version is released as a 9800x. This is essentially the same as what they did for Zen 2 and Zen 3. The 9800x would then slot in as an extra sku that wasn’t announced at Computex but could theoretically still launch with the rest of the lineup next month.
@@RaceT3ch Well if we've learned one thing, it's that these companies are never consistent with their naming schemes. Just look at the upcoming Ryzen 9000 laptop SKUs lul
With how things are segmented I don't know if there is enough space to where this would make sense for them to do, I am assuming that the 9700X will be priced at $400 keeping the launch price of the 7700X. With the 7900X launching at $550 and assuming that the 9900X will have the same price this only leaves $150 to fit a 9800X and 9800X 3D in. I guess they can price a 9800X at $450 and a 9800X 3D at $500 to fit these cpus neatly in.
Why not just ALSO release a Ryzen 7 9800x for another $70? I like the 65w part....I guess they'll probably making a 9700-vanilla and THAT is a 65w chip....if they go with 120w on the 9700x
Sound like they have gotten back the first sentiment from the review samples and or from hardware partners. And everyone say don't buy because old gen X3D is better. So now they are getting cold feet. And need to do something about it.
Dude there are so many ways AMD can deal with selling parts it's insane. Start with the fact that they have a common core chiplet they can move into production of a CPU that's selling well and then make less of parts that aren't. They can use sale prices to move parts. Or, and this might sound SHOCKING, but if the CPU has plenty of headroom they can simply say that they're allowing PBO to take the CPU up to 40% above TDP, and now you have a part that will run closer to 90W all core. OR, AMD could release a high power 8 core part. That's the magic of a single core chiplet for making many types of CPUs. AMD's been doing this for a long time, I think they'll figure it out without having to change specs on a part at the last minute and after they told the world what the parts are they're releasing which would probably delay it's launch too, because all those parts that are already in boxes would have to do what?
I would love them if they changed physical medium to those tiny usb pendrives. (ones like SanDisk Ultra Fit) just physically design them for stupid fast read speed, and put usb controler that does not understand how to write. cover the pads with insulation, fill it rest with solder. maybe give it 2GB of shared dram on console side.(if we want to allow play not just install) then there is no problem with leaving 4 random usb ports that are not ugly, and allow you to "install" or play straight from physical. no extra builk, no extra cost. cheap ones are 128GB each, cost not much more than BL. Security also above BL, as per what I wrote above. Harder to damage. can be much faster, and there is no problem with making bigger games, that BL cannot handle. Just slot 2/3/4 penrives at once. your whole game lib can be laptop brick sized stand with tiny pendrives.
The boxed 9700X CPUs with the 65 W TDP and boost frequencies printed on the packaging are already shipping in containers around the world, have there been examples where regional distributors had to put stickers with changed specs on existing items by hand?
The problem with disks is buy the physical media then spend 2 days downloading updates to fix a game that was unplayable at release. If developers had better release standards, and the physical disk was the final game it would be different
I've never seen a game patch larger than about 15GB, most are under 10GB and of those most are under 5GB. Your hyperbole works if you're in a country with frequent power outages or has horrible internet. My DL speed is about 120 MB/s. Some patch needs to be bigger than 7GB before it takes my system more than about a minute to DL an update. I can DL the largest I've seen in about 2 minutes. In fact the DLing of patches in INCREDIBLY trivial to me. The actual patching is what can take a while, and I have good quality PCIe gen4 NVMe and a 5800X3D so it's not like the processing power needed to make a patch isn't there. And having better release standards wouldn't change this. Games get features added, fixed for security issues which most software does and games are WAY bigger than most software and you wouldn't like the cost of the game if it was only security specialists writing game code.
The update I was talking about 120GB and it took hours. You're engaging in Hyperbole yourself, because I've never had an update that was only 5GB. It's so tiring arguing with people who are defending bad software for practices. I'm a software engineer worked on mission critical embedded systems. You're defending people releasing brokensoftware the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Videogame companies released complete software for decades. It's only since the PS3 generation that they decided "oh we'll just patch it after it released."
This late in the game and they give a "big spec boost"? Come on.... what's this BS about? The design would have been finalized last year. At this stage they would already be producing the CPUs for shipping and launch
So basically this is how the max tdp is going to work, it's going to be the same as the 7700, 7900 ect, when you enable pbo the tdp is going to massively skyrocket whilst without pbo it will stay at the 65w power limit
BS. The TDP is going to be 65W because AMD officially released this info and aren't going to change it. The ONLY thing AMD could do is if the CPU still has plenty of boost capability and power is still in the range of what they find acceptable for a 65W TDP part, so add about 35%, they'll allow PBO to take the CPU up to a higher power level. The 9700X though isn't going to go over 100W except on a manual OC.
I wonder if they are considering raising it to increase clocks even higher than advertised or is it that they aren’t able to hit advertised clocks with the 65 watt TDP limit which is around 90 watts if I remember correctly.
I honestly think that TDP boost will be for the X3D variant but i could be wrong obviously... Kinda sad indeed to see that trend of consumers not even owning their own musics, videos and now games. Soon we will not even own our own soul 💀
One of my observations of data posted by reviewers on prior X vs X3D chips is that the X3D might be better for gaming, but the X versions are often better for blender. Sometimes we can get over focused on just gaming vs getting work accomplished.
I agree. But you can run them in eco mode anyway. Gaming performance is the same and I lost 4-5% in heavy multithreating loads but power consumption went down from 115W to 88W on my 7700X.
@@mimon6706 true but then i don't want to spend more (relative to what im assuming 9700 non-x will cost) for less performance. I hope they make the 120w part 9800x
I don't understand what the fuss is about when the 5800x3d was better than the 7700x. The x3d parts seem to be coming out in a couple months anyway, just get those if you want the best gaming performance. The 9700xt is great at 65w (amd figures so most likely way higher anyway.)
6:59 Never interacted with this guy before and I am blocked however I'm not surprised that someone as anti-consumerist as this guy would use a block chain. We live in world...where no one can take even the smallest amount of criticism anymore.
I think a "9700XT" could overtake that 7800X3D if they can squeeze like 5 to 10% more performance out of that 9700X. But really the 9800X3D is what we want for big gains. Thumbs up!
Or think of it this way, the 9700x will be a 7800x3d that works in all games, since vcache doesn't help every single game, and works a lot better for non gaming too.
I will not buy console games anymore unless its physical copies, I will not pay $80+ for a game they can later take away digitally. Steam is the only place ive bought digital and I pray the games i own on it don't get taken away in the future with no compensation. Heck at least give credits or something rather than stealing something we paid money for.
My thoughts on the idea that "AMD is looking to have the 9700X at least match the 7800X3D in gaming performance is the reason for testing the 9700X with 120W TDP " is that this is a pointless gesture. Anyone with interests in the X3D chips will be waiting on the 9800X3D regardless of whatever performance the non-X3D provide. The big reason why the 7600X matched the 5800X3D is the move from DDR4 to DDR5, granting a major uplift in system memory bandwidth. Going from 7000 series to 9000 series may not see the same level of bandwidth improvements. The 9700X will lose to the 7800X3D just because of memory access time. The only potential compensation factor is any increase in the base cache specs for the 9000 series over the 7000 series. And if the 9000 series is coming in cheaper than the 7000 series when launched, this may mean the cache sizes have not seen a substantial increase.
I just bought the 7800X3D for 263 euros new from a store here in sweden that had a few with a discount during a live stream on youtube. Buut I can't determine if it was a good purchase or not. It's getting quite old by now.
It's a great price tbh, if for some reason 9000 x3d series will be much faster that you can still sell 7800x3d for a good money since it is/was best gaming cpu once...
@@madududzik8695 Yeah maybe you're right. But I'm not sure I need this kind of performance. It's likely to have gotten obsolete before I even get a GPU to get the most out of it since I own a 3070. Sure in quake champions it will smooth things out buut I think like a 7700 would've been enough still.
@@ChrisKadaver At least for gaming, a 7800x3d is highly unlikely to be obsolete until at the very least AM6 is out, so around 2028. You got a really good price on it, and you'll probably be able to resell it for around what you paid for it in a few years to help fund a 9800x3d around zen 6 launch, or possibly the 11800x3d. The 7800x3d won't be a significant limit on midrange gpus for at least another 2 gpu generations, looks like a midrange gpu over the next 2-3 years will be around 4070ti super/7900xt performance, so the 7800x3d should be plenty for a midrange gpu with nvidia 70 series or RDNA5.
Was the Intel issue really that bad? I remember AMD systems resetting and dead USB ports while AMD CPUs melted damaging not just the CPU but also the motherboard. I don't intend on upgrading from the 12900K until PCIe 6 lands. Always wait ~6 months after launch before buying.
The CPU issue you mentioned only happened to a handful of cpus while intel instability is hitting a pretty sizable portion of users. I haven't heard anything about dead USB ports, and I have a ryzen 1800x, 3800x 5950x and 7950x, as well as a 5700g and 5900hx. No resetting on any of the above systems either, except for when I loaded a sketchy overclock/undervolt.
@@PineyJustice That's why I asked if the Intel issue is that bad. I've not seen that many reports. If you are interested then simply google ryzen usb issue.
I find it funny that people are believing a marketing stooge whos purpose is to convince you to buy products. Zen 5 non-X3D SKUs will be able to match and beat the 7800X3D. From TPUs review of the 7800X3D it's 16% faster than a 7700X at 720p.
Chip development is getting close to that physical reality wall. We are told it's still great and hyped for the next (next) gen. To buy more. Offered new, probably useless AI modules, higher power limits and what not. But let's be real, the party is nearly over. Future has no limits... no, it really, really does have. Show me next gen X3D and I may consider. But just because I have 12600K and Intel gaming ladder sucks. You have to buy top productivity CPU to have the best gaming. WTF Intel? The rest - boooring. 60%+ chance wasted gen. GPU market highly likely too. One 600W oversized monster chip and the rest whatever.
if they do not increase the power people will praise the chip for out efficient it is. If they boost the power people will be happy with performance but complaining about efficient. Performance sells efficient is boring. Forget efficient crap and give us power.!
@dastan7194 I was 100% serious about waiting for the Zen6 X3D CPU, I was just joking about the name (as it sounds like Intels naming). I already have a Ryzen 7700 non-x. Going to Zen5 isn't a big enough jump in performance for me.
Gonna guess the 9700x stays at 65w and a 120w version is released as a 9800x. This is essentially the same as what they did for Zen 2 and Zen 3. The 9800x would then slot in as an extra sku that wasn’t announced at Computex but could theoretically still launch with the rest of the lineup next month.
I was thinking that too. This makes a lot of sense and is likely what will happen.
-800x is now reserved for x3d now, so dont expect a higher clock version
@@RaceT3ch Well if we've learned one thing, it's that these companies are never consistent with their naming schemes. Just look at the upcoming Ryzen 9000 laptop SKUs lul
With how things are segmented I don't know if there is enough space to where this would make sense for them to do, I am assuming that the 9700X will be priced at $400 keeping the launch price of the 7700X. With the 7900X launching at $550 and assuming that the 9900X will have the same price this only leaves $150 to fit a 9800X and 9800X 3D in.
I guess they can price a 9800X at $450 and a 9800X 3D at $500 to fit these cpus neatly in.
@@RaceT3chthere’s nothing stopping them. They had a 800X all the way until Zen 3 and the 950 has both a X and X3D variation.
Remember, just because you're not currently experiencing issues with your i9 doesn't mean you won't at any point in the future.
And if you do, intel doesn’t give a shit, they’ll just blame you for their engineering oversight
@@bigbo1764 That's true of ALL electronics.
Why not just ALSO release a Ryzen 7 9800x for another $70? I like the 65w part....I guess they'll probably making a 9700-vanilla and THAT is a 65w chip....if they go with 120w on the 9700x
Sound like they have gotten back the first sentiment from the review samples and or from hardware partners. And everyone say don't buy because old gen X3D is better. So now they are getting cold feet. And need to do something about it.
Dude there are so many ways AMD can deal with selling parts it's insane. Start with the fact that they have a common core chiplet they can move into production of a CPU that's selling well and then make less of parts that aren't. They can use sale prices to move parts.
Or, and this might sound SHOCKING, but if the CPU has plenty of headroom they can simply say that they're allowing PBO to take the CPU up to 40% above TDP, and now you have a part that will run closer to 90W all core.
OR, AMD could release a high power 8 core part. That's the magic of a single core chiplet for making many types of CPUs.
AMD's been doing this for a long time, I think they'll figure it out without having to change specs on a part at the last minute and after they told the world what the parts are they're releasing which would probably delay it's launch too, because all those parts that are already in boxes would have to do what?
highly doubt it, if anything a 9800X would be 120W altho even the Wattage figure sounds strange to me, should be more in line with 90 or 105 Watts.
That's my thought too. 5800X3D is at 105W. 120W seem a bit high, imo
I would love them if they changed physical medium to those tiny usb pendrives. (ones like SanDisk Ultra Fit)
just physically design them for stupid fast read speed, and put usb controler that does not understand how to write. cover the pads with insulation, fill it rest with solder. maybe give it 2GB of shared dram on console side.(if we want to allow play not just install)
then there is no problem with leaving 4 random usb ports that are not ugly, and allow you to "install" or play straight from physical. no extra builk, no extra cost.
cheap ones are 128GB each, cost not much more than BL. Security also above BL, as per what I wrote above. Harder to damage.
can be much faster, and there is no problem with making bigger games, that BL cannot handle. Just slot 2/3/4 penrives at once.
your whole game lib can be laptop brick sized stand with tiny pendrives.
The boxed 9700X CPUs with the 65 W TDP and boost frequencies printed on the packaging are already shipping in containers around the world, have there been examples where regional distributors had to put stickers with changed specs on existing items by hand?
The problem with disks is buy the physical media then spend 2 days downloading updates to fix a game that was unplayable at release.
If developers had better release standards, and the physical disk was the final game it would be different
2 days downloading an update? Are you still on ISDN?
@@TheKims82 33K6..
@@TheKims82
Hyperbole.
But the last Fortnite update did have to be downloaded overnight.
I've never seen a game patch larger than about 15GB, most are under 10GB and of those most are under 5GB.
Your hyperbole works if you're in a country with frequent power outages or has horrible internet.
My DL speed is about 120 MB/s. Some patch needs to be bigger than 7GB before it takes my system more than about a minute to DL an update. I can DL the largest I've seen in about 2 minutes.
In fact the DLing of patches in INCREDIBLY trivial to me. The actual patching is what can take a while, and I have good quality PCIe gen4 NVMe and a 5800X3D so it's not like the processing power needed to make a patch isn't there.
And having better release standards wouldn't change this. Games get features added, fixed for security issues which most software does and games are WAY bigger than most software and you wouldn't like the cost of the game if it was only security specialists writing game code.
The update I was talking about 120GB and it took hours. You're engaging in Hyperbole yourself, because I've never had an update that was only 5GB.
It's so tiring arguing with people who are defending bad software for practices. I'm a software engineer worked on mission critical embedded systems.
You're defending people releasing brokensoftware the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
Videogame companies released complete software for decades. It's only since the PS3 generation that they decided "oh we'll just patch it after it released."
This late in the game and they give a "big spec boost"?
Come on.... what's this BS about? The design would have been finalized last year.
At this stage they would already be producing the CPUs for shipping and launch
So basically this is how the max tdp is going to work, it's going to be the same as the 7700, 7900 ect, when you enable pbo the tdp is going to massively skyrocket whilst without pbo it will stay at the 65w power limit
BS. The TDP is going to be 65W because AMD officially released this info and aren't going to change it.
The ONLY thing AMD could do is if the CPU still has plenty of boost capability and power is still in the range of what they find acceptable for a 65W TDP part, so add about 35%, they'll allow PBO to take the CPU up to a higher power level. The 9700X though isn't going to go over 100W except on a manual OC.
I wonder if they are considering raising it to increase clocks even higher than advertised or is it that they aren’t able to hit advertised clocks with the 65 watt TDP limit which is around 90 watts if I remember correctly.
I honestly think that TDP boost will be for the X3D variant but i could be wrong obviously...
Kinda sad indeed to see that trend of consumers not even owning their own musics, videos and now games. Soon we will not even own our own soul 💀
One of my observations of data posted by reviewers on prior X vs X3D chips is that the X3D might be better for gaming, but the X versions are often better for blender.
Sometimes we can get over focused on just gaming vs getting work accomplished.
Hey bro, on the timeline you have commented as 9970x but it should be 9700x :)
I like disc for consoles too.
Using less power is good but it gets to the point where power efficiency starts affecting performance AMD needs to focus on Balances.
We need to get air con in the uk for the 1 week we get that hot LOL
I sure hope they don't. I was really excited to see 9700x at 65w tdp. If it goes up, Im not getting it
I agree. But you can run them in eco mode anyway. Gaming performance is the same and I lost 4-5% in heavy multithreating loads but power consumption went down from 115W to 88W on my 7700X.
@@mimon6706 true but then i don't want to spend more (relative to what im assuming 9700 non-x will cost) for less performance. I hope they make the 120w part 9800x
I don't understand what the fuss is about when the 5800x3d was better than the 7700x. The x3d parts seem to be coming out in a couple months anyway, just get those if you want the best gaming performance. The 9700xt is great at 65w (amd figures so most likely way higher anyway.)
6:59 Never interacted with this guy before and I am blocked however I'm not surprised that someone as anti-consumerist as this guy would use a block chain. We live in world...where no one can take even the smallest amount of criticism anymore.
The Ryzen 7 9700x is over 60% slower than Intel in multicore ??
I think a "9700XT" could overtake that 7800X3D if they can squeeze like 5 to 10% more performance out of that 9700X. But really the 9800X3D is what we want for big gains. Thumbs up!
Or think of it this way, the 9700x will be a 7800x3d that works in all games, since vcache doesn't help every single game, and works a lot better for non gaming too.
I will not buy console games anymore unless its physical copies, I will not pay $80+ for a game they can later take away digitally. Steam is the only place ive bought digital and I pray the games i own on it don't get taken away in the future with no compensation. Heck at least give credits or something rather than stealing something we paid money for.
Does anyone know if 15 series Intel CPUs will be backward compatible like the 12, 13, and 14 series chipsets?
No. 15th gen will on the new socket LGA 1851. No backwards compatability possible.
My thoughts on the idea that "AMD is looking to have the 9700X at least match the 7800X3D in gaming performance is the reason for testing the 9700X with 120W TDP " is that this is a pointless gesture. Anyone with interests in the X3D chips will be waiting on the 9800X3D regardless of whatever performance the non-X3D provide. The big reason why the 7600X matched the 5800X3D is the move from DDR4 to DDR5, granting a major uplift in system memory bandwidth. Going from 7000 series to 9000 series may not see the same level of bandwidth improvements. The 9700X will lose to the 7800X3D just because of memory access time. The only potential compensation factor is any increase in the base cache specs for the 9000 series over the 7000 series. And if the 9000 series is coming in cheaper than the 7000 series when launched, this may mean the cache sizes have not seen a substantial increase.
I'm itching for x3d
They should let this thing use 105w at least
I just bought the 7800X3D for 263 euros new from a store here in sweden that had a few with a discount during a live stream on youtube. Buut I can't determine if it was a good purchase or not. It's getting quite old by now.
It's a great price tbh, if for some reason 9000 x3d series will be much faster that you can still sell 7800x3d for a good money since it is/was best gaming cpu once...
@@madududzik8695 Yeah maybe you're right. But I'm not sure I need this kind of performance. It's likely to have gotten obsolete before I even get a GPU to get the most out of it since I own a 3070. Sure in quake champions it will smooth things out buut I think like a 7700 would've been enough still.
@@ChrisKadaver At least for gaming, a 7800x3d is highly unlikely to be obsolete until at the very least AM6 is out, so around 2028. You got a really good price on it, and you'll probably be able to resell it for around what you paid for it in a few years to help fund a 9800x3d around zen 6 launch, or possibly the 11800x3d. The 7800x3d won't be a significant limit on midrange gpus for at least another 2 gpu generations, looks like a midrange gpu over the next 2-3 years will be around 4070ti super/7900xt performance, so the 7800x3d should be plenty for a midrange gpu with nvidia 70 series or RDNA5.
Was the Intel issue really that bad? I remember AMD systems resetting and dead USB ports while AMD CPUs melted damaging not just the CPU but also the motherboard. I don't intend on upgrading from the 12900K until PCIe 6 lands.
Always wait ~6 months after launch before buying.
you don't need pcie 6.
nothing needs pcie 6, there's no exist benefit yet.
The CPU issue you mentioned only happened to a handful of cpus while intel instability is hitting a pretty sizable portion of users. I haven't heard anything about dead USB ports, and I have a ryzen 1800x, 3800x 5950x and 7950x, as well as a 5700g and 5900hx. No resetting on any of the above systems either, except for when I loaded a sketchy overclock/undervolt.
@@PineyJustice That's why I asked if the Intel issue is that bad. I've not seen that many reports. If you are interested then simply google ryzen usb issue.
@@ae86409888 That's why I said I wouldn't be upgrading until we get PCIe 6.
Pcie 6 is for data centers. It has no applications for desktop. Gen 5 ssds are still crazy expensive and offer minimal gains over fast gen 4s.
can make a 65W 8 core 9700 and 120W 9700X
Intel would need to be 15+% faster across the board for me to consider buying that platform at reasonable thermals and power draw. I'm decided on am5.
I remember when AMD locked the 7000 series to 5.5 unless u owned a Asus motherboard
I find it funny that people are believing a marketing stooge whos purpose is to convince you to buy products. Zen 5 non-X3D SKUs will be able to match and beat the 7800X3D. From TPUs review of the 7800X3D it's 16% faster than a 7700X at 720p.
AMD says 9800X will be best bang for the buck.
I have a 5700x3D...I love it, and if the 7800x3D is anything to go off of, the Ryzen 7 9700x could be a good upgrade for me.
I just went from a 5800x to a 7800x3d, decent jump in gaming performance for sure.
There is no need man
in sept they are releasing the 9800x3d. I would get that.
Just wait for 9800X3D, that would be a really good upgrade if you need it.
Chip development is getting close to that physical reality wall. We are told it's still great and hyped for the next (next) gen. To buy more. Offered new, probably useless AI modules, higher power limits and what not. But let's be real, the party is nearly over. Future has no limits... no, it really, really does have.
Show me next gen X3D and I may consider. But just because I have 12600K and Intel gaming ladder sucks. You have to buy top productivity CPU to have the best gaming. WTF Intel? The rest - boooring. 60%+ chance wasted gen. GPU market highly likely too. One 600W oversized monster chip and the rest whatever.
Looks like this 9700 going in ps6 at this point.
These x3d parts are going console so far
if they do not increase the power people will praise the chip for out efficient it is. If they boost the power people will be happy with performance but complaining about efficient. Performance sells efficient is boring. Forget efficient crap and give us power.!
release another 9700XT or something similar /w 120TDP increase another 100 USD extra for AMD ez money
7800x3d is better then 9800x for gaming unless they changed it
I'm not buying this gen CPU's, I'll wait for the Ryzen 10800X3D.
lol 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@dastan7194 Let's hope to God they don't call it that🤣🤣
@@rudolffvanzyl you were joking about waiting or you are serious about this? 🤣🤣🤣
@dastan7194 I was 100% serious about waiting for the Zen6 X3D CPU, I was just joking about the name (as it sounds like Intels naming). I already have a Ryzen 7700 non-x. Going to Zen5 isn't a big enough jump in performance for me.
@@rudolffvanzyl ah, alright then, I have now i5-10400f, so im 100% buying 9800X3D and it will be a big jump for me in performance
I appreciate your modesty with the sleeveless thing.
mb
Only reason I embrace digital distribution is because I want as little plastic waste in the world as possible.
you cant scratch a download, F physical media.
AMD sucks
Well no.
classic babyrage crying intel fanboy