NEW/UPDATE: We just completed an in-depth benchmark and analysis of the Zen 5 efficiency. You can find that here -- although it was great in all-core rendering, it is not as good in gaming (and we have adjusted to further reduce the 9700X's place in our lists -- just skip Zen 5 for now): ruclips.net/video/6wLXQnZjcjU/видео.html Reminder: The 7800X3D remains more efficient than the 9700X in gaming by a long shot. Higher performance, same power. Also, we got the new 9600X in. It is working where the other one failed, but still has compatibility issues (as the 9700X did) that the 7000 series did not. Messy launch. We have brand new red, green, and yellow solder & project mats joining our existing blue! Support our testing directly by buying one! store.gamersnexus.net/products/gn-project-soldering-mat (use code THISISFINE for 10% off until August 14! Learn about Intel's issues here: ruclips.net/video/b6vQlvefGxk/видео.html Or watch our R7 3700X & R5 3600 revisit here: ruclips.net/video/WRK30P9_Tvg/видео.html
The red soldering mat really stole my attention during the video. Sadly I already have a soldering mat, and I'm not sure I need a second one... or do I? Hmm.
I see Toms Hardware has a review with wildly different results, they kinda look closer to what we were all expecting. Could there be issues with early BIOSs? But both you guys and HUB have been in contact with AMD the whole way so why wouldn't they have said anything, all seems very weird. I know both Steve's are vary thorough so 🤔
To be honest, I'm 100% fine with having the same performance with a lot less power. Pushing frequency and performance vs. old gen in narrative so much, isn't good for future (there is power wall to worry about after all). Please, don't punish 9700X performance just because it's not pushing boundaries on frequency side. Also, why no OC section ? I bet with some OC, it can outmatch 7700X no problem (BECAUSE it has efficiency budget for it - kind of like Core 2 from back in the day). Having a nice stable base is always better, than having CPUs pushed to the limits "by default". Thank you for great review. EDIT PS. @10:47 Steve... "frequency alone doesn't mean much for performance...", are you OK ? Frequency means a whole lot for performance, since basic formula for performance IS Frequency (MHz) x IPC. Unless you have IPC, you can't gain performance when frequency drops. So, having LOWER frequency and still have the same performance can be a big deal. As an example to prove my point, 9700X and 7700X are like Core 2 Duo E6300 and Pentium Extreme Edition 965 from 2006, it's extreme example (pun not intended), but I can't think of any other pair that showcases my point better.
video card memory has been improving faster than gpu performance - the 1080ti is almost memory anemic relative to its compute performance - aside from the addition of new accelerators (for raytracing, tensor products..) most of the improved get up and go that more modern cards have is due to the increased memory for more 4k
Thanks! Andrew added those probably around ... I don't remember! Maybe 2016 or 2017 now. Long time ago and they've been awesome. Super easy to edit with, too!
I believe if you boost power target on the 9700x as well it performs quite a bit better as well from research I've done, could be wrong. Recently got one for my upcoming full ATX build and I'm glad I went with it over the 7800x3d thanks to it's (slightly) roundabout gaming performance comparable to the 7800x3d as well as better workstation performance.
@@GamersNexus Starcraft!....You took me back down memory lane a decade or so. What a great game that was. I got my kids hooked on it for a short time when they were younger too.
You're the only outlet I could find that covers this wide variety of comparisons. I'm happy to see my 3700X, which is now THREE generations behind, still performs at 60-80% of the latest gen and does not actually require a costly upgrade whatsoever.
@@GamersNexus Please can you guys make your own VIEWPORT performance benchmark for blender. The render benchmarks are pretty useless for the average consumer. No one's buying these chips to render on.
Fyi, 7800x3d is now around $500 and 9800x3d is impossible to find at retail price.... while a 9700x has already dropped to $300 and is abundant at that price. With 6400 RAM, bios update, PBO and windows update, the 9700x is on par with 7800x3d. Seems like a win to me for new builders.
currently what im feeling rn. not a new builder but gonna definetely build a new pc for the new gpus coming out and the 9700x lowkey looks juicy in the market rn compared to the pricing of the X3Ds just worried it might not be the right decision
honestly since intel and their fabs have been so utterly schwacked by the latest 13/14th gen scandal.. perhaps AMD dialled the voltage down because now they feel safe competing on power and long term reliability alone. There was a LOT of FUD over longevity at higher wattage sub-14nm parts years ago by industry experts, many saying it will only be suitable for low clocked arm/phone stuff. Perhaps there is a shred of truth lingering even if it was mostly dooming. Perhaps my 3950x will finally degrade and die as an antique in the late 2020s and AMD doesnt want that for 9th gen, even if their Zen2/3/4 cpus will certainly outlive their relevance. 🤷♂ One thing I am more certain is; likely Intel went full Icarus with their fabs after the success of 12th gen.
Jayztwocents said he got blue screens while testing the new chips. So, probably mobos need updates and interesting to see the stability and perf on x870 boards.
As Administrator for Schools, the 9700X and 7700X are great, realy great. Have a Computerlab with 25 PC's and have your Media Guys have their training. We have problems keeping the room cool and getting the power in. 88 Watts vs 181 Watts for nearly the same performance is a real bonus for us.
If the power / cooling is a problem, you could've ran the 7700X in ECO mode aka 65W too. And it doesn't lose that much performance. Unless you REALLY needed the top performance from it.
There is no way these CPUs are working at 100% load all the time to warrant the change. Even if you had the most efficient CPUs in the world, monitors still produce a lot of heat. AC may be a necessity in these conditions.
This power draw reduction is going to be insane for SFF builds. [Edit] Came back after the efficiency deep dive video, and it's sad to see that the efficiency does not carry over in most workloads. Recommend you watch that video 😊.
Pointless if the highest performing ITX form-factor GPU is an RTX x060. If you need to quadruple your volume just to fit a graphics card, the question of volume requirement for CPU cooling becomes moot.
@@FO0TMinecraftPVP If this is not an attempt at humor, you need to put the crack pipe down. If this was supposed to be a joke, you should put the crack pipe down.
well they did kind of f up. Barely any uplifts.. wtf? What were they thinking? Waste of sand. This is the most disastrous launch of AMD in the past 10 years.
where is the same energy everyone had towards 14th gen of intel that was just a refresh of 13th; that gained basically same generational uplift; amd had 2 years to make a better product; and 5% is what they achieve in 2 years ? laughable
9700x is a perfect upgrade for my 5 liter SFF build. I'm using 7600 right now and it looks like 9700x uses the same power as 7600, but has 2 more cores and better ipc. That's a no brainer for me.
Every time there is a new CPU review, I am in awe of what an amazing processer the 5800X3D is, mainly its ability to breathe new life into old PC's. The fact that my 7-year-old PC with a 5800X3D can hang with some of the newest and greatest intel chips, all while using an old motherboard, inexpensive DDR4 memory, under 100watts of power AND running cool enough to only need a small inexpensive cooler never fails to put a smile on my face.
@@DurealzForReal I think the 5800X3D is a great chip, but people talk about like it's some old budget CPU that still throws a punch. It's modern CPU that launched a few month before Zen4, at a staggering $449 MSRP. It was never a budget CPU, even at the $300 mark it still wasn't a great deal. The $180 Ryzen 7600 beats it and with Microcenter selling the 7800X3D bundle for $499. You're way better off just selling your old AM4 platform for $150-250 and then taking the $300 you were going to spend on the 5800X3D and just get the 7800X3D bundle.
@@kingdom9214 The 7600 clocks high enough to beat it for raw FPS numbers, but the 5800X3D uses less power still, and has better 1% lows. Those matter a lot in heavy multiplayer games, especially.
As someone who uses a small form factor case, the lower TDP is what makes me interested. The 9700X seems like great performance at 65W as opposed to 105W for the previous 7700X.
@@mokahless Remember the X processors are just binned non-x cpus that are more stable with the same voltage allowing to higher clock, which means an undervolted 7700x will still be more power efficient than a 7700, so the comparision is still fair, the 9700x will be more powerfull at same wattage than the 7700
Thanks, Steve! This convinced me to just upgrade my AM4 rig instead of making the jump to a new platform. Driving home from Microcenter now with a 5700X3D, which based on the charts, should tide me over for a few more years (upgrading from a 3000 series).
Planning on buying a 5700X3D tomorrow coming from a 3600. Did you have any difficulty in updating the bios? My bios is F41 and I need to upgrade to an two versions before I can go to the latest along with doing something like Q Flash and EC FW tool which I'm too afraid to do
@@chiizuu752 Don't worry! The only thing that can go wrong is the power going out as the update is being applied. If you are really paranoid you can get a UPS I guess but it's not necessary. I went from a 3600 to a 5600 and then to a 5800X3D, and then I put that 5600 in a different PC that had a 3600. All in all, lots of BIOS updating and no issues. I've done it to many different PCs; all you have to do is download the file from the motherboard manufacturer's website, put it in a (ideally formatted and empty) flash drive, and then go to the BIOS and find the option to flash/update BIOS. Then you wait until it's done and that's it. Sidenote: don't get worried if the PC gets "stuck" on a black screen for a bit after you swap CPUs/update BIOS; in my experience the system needs a bit of time to get itself sorted - I don't know exactly what's happening but it seems like a short 'boot loop' and then the new CPU is recognized, your BIOS settings are reset and you're good to go. Good luck! Hope it all goes well for you :)
@@staticfloof4868 thanks! the note under F41 confused me for a few hours but I was able to update to the latest bios with no issues. Gave me quite a scare when it said it would reboot and then it shut down all of a sudden lmao
Thank you for including the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 CPU! It helps immensely seeing the differences. And also to choose the next upgrade (for my AM4 motherboard). I built my AM4 Ryzen PC in 2017. The year when the first Ryzen generation came out. And now it's crazy to think that on the same motherboard, thanks to Bios updates, i can install even an AMD R7 5800X3D (8c/16t) or even an AMD R9 5950X (16c/32t). With performance not far off from the latest high-end CPUs!
@@GamersNexus Why didn't you include the 7700 non-X though? Being the 7000 series 65W part, it seems it would be a more comparable comparison than the 7700X, no? Not in name, but in real generational uplift comparisons.
Honestly, given how much both CPUs and GPUs have just been cranking the power consumption to absolute insane levels, seeing a CPU go more the power efficiency route is seriously refreshing. Hope this will continue as a trend to make things more reasonable again, and if that means sacrificing some peformance that's honestly fine.
amd just REMOVED everything that made 9000 faster. no more clocks, no more transistors, no more cores, no 3d-vcache. they've literally GUTTED 9000 to not compete much because intel/qualcomm aren't competing at all too. all we've got is pure node shrink and some architecture improvements THAT DON'T WORK YET "because software is bad/old" - according to techtechpotato Mike Clark interview :/. thats it. then they'll just add it all back gradually and sell it as zen 6-7-8 "upgrades" for years. zen 8 or 10 would be what zen5 was supposed to be. thats how amd "platfrm longevity" works - seling the same stuff multiple times but less gutted. obviously thats NOT Mike Clark's fault, thats on amd AMD is doing intel now
@@rawdez_why? It's an improvement on their older design at a similar performance rate but with a massive reduction of power needed for it. That is exactly what needs to happen. Better performance with better wattage use. And if you increase wattage, and oc, you can get nearly 20-25% perform increase for the same or lower wattage use.
amd just REMOVED everything that made 9000 faster. no more clocks, no more transistors, no more cores, no 3d-vcache. they've literally GUTTED 9000 to not compete much because intel/qualcomm aren't competing at all too. all we've got is pure node shrink and some architecture improvements THAT DON'T WORK YET "because software is bad/old" - according to Mike Clark techtechpotato interview :/. thats it. then they'll just add it all back gradually and sell it as zen 6-7-8 "upgrades" for years. zen 8 or 10 would be what zen5 was supposed to be. thats how amd "platfrm longevity" works - seling the same stuff multiple times but less gutted. obviously thats NOT Mike Clark's fault, thats on amd AMD is doing intel now
Seems like AMD focused on efficiency to really boost their enterprise and laptop sales, which is where the real money is made for CPU companies. Going forward these efficiency improvements will make it into every new generation.
Let's not hide it, my old 5800x3d will be enough for gaming for a long time. What bothers me more is the successor of the Z1 Extreme. Every percent of performance will be useful there, Asus rog Ally is still a bit too slow
@@FO0TMinecraftPVP Saying Intel CPUs are more efficent then Zen era AMD cpus is quite Bogus. How is a 12900k/13900k/14900k more efficient then a 5800x3d/7800x3d? Sure pre Zen, Intel was more Efficient, but especially after Zen 2/Zen 3. Intel is less efficient then AMD, and That is noticeable in Intel laptops being Hotter and the fans running more loudly then Zen 2/3/4 AMD counterparts. Intel might have Cheaper CPUs now then AMD with their I3 and I5 non k skews, though pre Zen 3, AMD has always been more Cost efficient per performance then Intel, and More Peformance may be true on Intel's side depending on tasks, (Though the gaming kings of X3D exist) and Intel's CPUs are straight out less stable nowadays then AMD's, and I'm not even gonna pretend AMD is perfect in Stability, It's just Intel used to be more Stable, but when overclocking the crap outta Alder lake for 13th and 14th gen, they lost their sense of Stability.
I'm actually Ok with AMD keeping the performance similar while reducing the power significantly. We seen for few years a power creep that for some brands actually spiraled out of control.
There are PSUs on the market now that claim a higher power output than a common house circuit can even provide. Which informs us a few ways. Not the least of which is the ignorance of a typical consumer. They're buying products that simply cannot work as marketed. Buy our PSU and blow breakers! Or just burn your house down trying.
Not everyone is in USA buddy , in Europe and middle east power is freaking pricy . And with the end of petrodollar deal , your power bill is surely rise@@CommanderRiker0
Considering that we basically saw a 35-40% reduction in power consumption at the same performance, I'd say this is a huge win. Reviewers for years have been crying about high power consumption and now we have a chip that performs like an 8 core while drawing 6 core power. This isn't something to gloss over and deserves some appreciation.
Just discovered some of your old mountain biking videos, do you think those will ever make a come back? I could listen to you talk about computers while absolutely shredding every day 😂
Haha, they were really fun. No plans to bring them back now -- maybe if I ever find enough time. I still bike, but stopped recording because it was becoming a lot of work to film on the trail and in the studio. Needed that time to get away from the work!
@@GamersNexus since the video where Louiss helped steve learning fixing the apple board they mentioned the bikes and i want Steve to do some Rad Custom e-bike now lmao
@@GamersNexus enjoy the trails, they're good for taking your mind off things. I highly recommend a trip to Bentonville, AR sometime, yes it's Wal-Mart world but it's some amazing trails they've financed. Truly world class.
I’m seriously thinking there is a problem with windows with regards to zen 5. Linux performance has seen a HUGE uplift. The 9700 is trading blows with the 7900 in database, vid compression, crypto, and simulations. On Linux the 9700 is straight stomping the 7900 and 7950 in avx 512 workloads. The 9700 is top tier in Linux web server benchmarks. It’s doing all of this while SIPPING power. @gamersnexus phoronix and other Linux reviews shows this processor to be a major win. Is there something to this?
Maybe it excels in certain workloads, just not what GN's tests consist of. Or it could be some motherboard/bios bug. Regardless, even if it's only as fast as the 7700x it's still significantly more power efficient which is a win.
What if it's the other way around? Linux systems were MAJORLY under utilising and underperforming with the 7000 series CPUs, and now that they've improved it for the 9000 series, that's why there's a huge uplift? I lean more to this because let's face it, who is designing anything with Linux in mind? They know they're selling to Windows customers, so it makes more sense that everything was designed with Windows in mind.
This feels like throw back to AMD's 6800xt/7800xt situation. 7800xt had a very minor performance improvement, but lowered power consumption overall. While not mind blowing, I'll take small steps in the right direction over "one step forwards, two steps back" anyday.
Except the 7800xt is the RDNA 3 version of the 6700xt, n22 full and n32 full. The 7900xt is the RDNA 3 6800xt. This holds true for price, power draw, die size everything. The 6700xt launched at 480$ so the 7700xt with n22 full could have been 500$, I have no idea why they messed with the naming like they did. At the end of the day it's a meaningless label though, anyone spending 500$ on a gpu would have gone with the same card regardless of name. The 7900xt should have launched at less than 700$ though considering the 6800xt was 650$, if it dropped at 700$ as the 7800xt people would have likely received it better.
You are comparing a 7800 XT to a 6800 XT... The 7800 XT is placed 1 tier higher than it actually is. The 7800 XT IS the RX 6700 XT's predecessor. The currently named RX 7800 XT is actually a RX 7700 XT named 1-tier higher so they can charge more for less.
@@RNG-999 No, the 7800xt is the same MSRP as the 6700xt. It's also a standard generational increase of 30-50% faster along with 4gb more vram. They didn't rename it to charge more for less, the 6800xt msrp was 650$.
@RNG-999 I agree that AMDs naming scheme was wonky. The perspective I was taking was that regardless of performance tier in their respective generation, the 7800xt and 6800xt ultimately ended up falling into the same price category. The 7700xt was priced about $50 below the two. So this was more a comparison of value between whatever each generation was offering in that price category, not necessarily a comparison of MSRP.
I am curious to see how well Zen 5 overclocks. Zen 4 was pushed so close to its limits out of the box that overclocking wasn't all that practical. Perhaps AMD's intent with all the thermal and power headroom on Zen 5 is to let enthusiasts decide how much extra performance they want?
They should have called this one a 9700 and release a 9700X at ~85 TDP It being as good as the 7700X most of the time, sometimes better, while consuming 40% less is pretty amazing, it's just the targeted power segment is incomprehensible.
@@44R0Ndin12th gen is fine. Intel deserves shit right now but it doesn’t mean their non-fucked up hardware is bad now. 12700K and 7700X are similar but the latter has the point imo for being on a newer platform with a longer upgrade path. Gaming wise though you should only be considering 7600X or 7800X3D if you care about value there
@@lawrencekallal6640 they disabled pbo completely in the testing and i am wondering why? or is that standard for amd tests? do they also disable intel boosting then when testing?
I know what I'm doing, waiting a couple months to see if there are any further issues, then I'll look at upgrading any systems. Though I may just wait a year or so like I do when buying vehicles...lol
@@KingAlucard101 yea, but something tells me based on this review that the x3d cpu won’t offer the same level of performance to value ration the current gen has to offer. Purely speculative, but that is what I think. You still could be right though. Sounds like cpu companies are struggling with either making good value or stable products
Wait for these new CPUs to get optimization on a current batch of motherboards or for new batches/chipsets, RAM optimization & a $50 price cut across the board. That's when Zen5 will be perfect for purchase, but for now it's just another messy rushed launch
3 decades of delivering quality and state of the art CPU for consumers and enterprise and one slip up and everyone turns on them. Intel is not the problem.
@fergus247 Lol, "state of the art" my ass, they willingly withheld technology and delivered it piecemeal for absurd prices for a decade, because they had no competition. Their lack of investment on RnD was precisely the reason AMD was able to overtake them in recent times. They were selling chips with decades old tech for the price of brand new ones. Intel in the 21st century have always been frauds.
you guys are fucking awesome. the amount of testing and verification that goes into each of your videos is absolutely astounding. literally no one, not "professional" companies can ensure what you guys are with testing and showcasing for all consumers. seriously, i recommend you guys to anyone that needs any type of IT support. "Just watch some Gamers Nexus and you'll understand what i'm talking about." its awesome to see anyone w this level of quality assurance, companies show come to you guys prior to releases, keep it up.
I was looking to upgrade my workstation, and will all of the trouble Intel is having, I was looking at the 7900X3D. Though when I got to Micro Center, they had a bundle with a X670E MSI motherboard, 32 GB of DDR5-6000 and a 7950X3D for $699, it was an easy grab. Glad I saw it, because I was about to pay more for less CPU. It's built up on my bench right now for testing and migration, and it's so nice not having a furnace of a CPU anymore. I have it under a Deepcool Gammaxx 400 and it at most gets into the high 70s under a moderate load. Compared to my current i9-10850k that even a tiny whiff of a load that spikes one core to max boost at 5.1 GHz causes the CPU to go up into the 80s and 90s immediately. The 7950X3D has been boosting to 5.3-5.5 GHz on one of the CCDs. It'll be under a water cooler when I get it into my workstation, but it's nice to know it doesn't need it like the i9 does.
Honestly, getting the same speeds/fps/etc for half the power usage is great. That means less cost, cheaper cooler, less fan noise/power usage and it makes it possible for more compact builds or even passive cooling.
It would be more fair to compare this to 7700 non-X, which also has the TDP of 65W and actually delivers results pretty close to 7700X. The problem is that when you do that, the new chip looks even less impressive.
@@tommihommi1its an amazing improvement modern CPUs keep getting harder to cool. Less heat for the same power is invaluable for pushing higher clock without cooking the CPU and its really good for Laptops and Steamdeck etc. where energy efficiency is key.
Yeah it’s approaching something like an oil crisis kind of situation. They’re running too much damn power through that little thing like a muscle car when what we really need is a Toyota Corolla.
But isn't the 7800x3d already pretty ok for that? IDK it just renders all these other CPUs completely irrelevant. Unless you're rendering with a 7950x, the 7800x3d leaves everything else for completely dead on arrival. This 9700x... who is it for? Who buys this?
@hansolo631 they need to get the other chips out there first but we'll see what the 9800x3d will be like. They can't just make the 9800x3d ans say they'll just not release anything else.
It's so funny how much shade Steve was able to throw at intel in this review/benchmark video of a competitors lack luster new product. Great work Steve!
Still, for productivity and mostly graphic workloads, lower consumption (per work done, efficiency) and lower temps are very much appreciated (by some of us needing the CPUs mostly for work).
I also enjoy how the 9700x is now a 65 watt part.. for my A620i lightning board that's great to hear for future upgrades when I eventually need it. I may not even have to upgrade my mobo. Depending on Zen 6 compatability.
I think this is a huge plus, because cooling it is going to be easier and considering I live a country where energy isn't free I love lower power consumption. Especially considering GPU power usage is absolutely nuts these days.
i wonder if we will get a non X and what will the power consumptions be there. Or maybe the 9700X is already a non X b ut they named it with an X in the name, and then they will crank up the Power to get a Real 9700X but will have to name it different , for example 9700XT or wahtever xD
@@KoeiNLConsidering the NL im assuming ur a dutcbie as well. And I have to correct you. Unlike gas electricity really isn't that bad here. I have no problem running my ac during these hot summerdays with my 7900XT still overclocked. And especially a plus that in the weekends and from 21:00 during weekday we have nachtstroom
The fact that they have huge efficiency gains is great frankly. It's certainly not an upgrade for someone with a CPU from the last 1-2 generations, but, but someone like myself on the 3rd gen, it will be a huge upgrade.
Which leads to less heat, which means lower cooling requirements, which could also mean a cooler room, which could lead to more power savings. And less power, depending on where you are, could net a noticeably lower electric bill (someone in a different thread noted a possible $230+ reduction in places like Germany). There *is* worth… just not for me and many others.
@@TheCth777 Will be looking at the 16 core ryzen 9x3d if it comes out. And considering the UK electricity prices along with the fact I prefer my fans to be on the quieter side, it's more than wroth it.
@@sonicfind Indeed, it all adds up at the end of the day. From cooling requirements (granted I have the prior most expensive nocuta tower cooler) combined with various costs from other areas. If you're upgrading every generation then you've probably got money to burn anyway and it's not worth it for you. But if you're only upgrading when there has been a significant performance increase between your current and new CPUs, then it's more than worth it.
I like efficiency. Saves you money on the power supply, cooler, can get a smaller case, the room doesn't heat up like a there's a radiator. I say it's great.
@@quantum5661 Platform power for ryzen 9000 is 230W that's before PBO, the 9950x will be using 230W PPT, that's not so far from the 251W that intel allows before overclocking.
If you factor in the power efficiency, it's nice to get about the same performance (with a ~5-10% difference sometimes) for so much less power. As shown at 8:21, a 60W power difference in two chips that perform similarly will save you a lot of money (and heat/cooling) in the long run, especially in countries where electricity costs went double/triple or worse in these past few years. Might be a boring generation, but for this purpose it would be a welcome development.
Indeed. It's especially useful for small form factor builds. Don't need as much cooling. I'm eager to see the efficiency difference with the more powerful 9000 series, and the 3D variants.
@@Superscope64 I'm also eager to see what the 9600X would do, as they haven't posted theirs because it had issues. If it also has a nice drop in power, you could definitely get a sweet performance mini build going. I'm thinking maybe a dedicated Minecraft server that DOESN'T make a ton of noise like my current one running my old 4460 cpu.
Common bud 65w is not gonna save you shit..who are you kidding, plus INTEL does not pull 300 W unless running Cinebench. Majority of people who live in hot climates and do have expensive electricity have solar panels and do not give a s...about 65 W.. cause it's irrelevant.. maybe after a year you ll save for a coffee and a doughnut
I read the picture wrong. "It's INTEL".! edit: I have bought 2000 amd for work (and will continue with amd) for my home computer I bought Intel year ago 😢
Honestly power consumption is becoming a bigger deal for me personally. Its getting hotter and hotter where I live, and have been resorted to downclocking anyways. Gladly sacrifice some performance to save myself some literal sweat
I agree with you. As I get older I want my pc to not take a lot of space, be quiet and cool. These 400 watt intel chips are such a pain to deal with but those efficient amd chips are just it.
The funny thing is, running at the same speed while saving 30% power can sometimes be equal to running 15% faster with the same power consumption. But the first option sounds much more appealing😂
Seeing more and more benchmark results I come to the conclusion that AMD just labeled it wrong and it should be the non X variant. Then it would outperform the predecessor and a possible 9700X could outperform the 7700X when having the same power consumption. But maybe AMD goes the other way and brings a 9700 non X with amazing efficiency.
Looking at the impressive power figures and unimpressive performance figures. I think they will release XT versions with higher power and cooling demands. For more performance. And they will charge an additional premium looking at the current XT CPU’s
I am the only person who hype power efficiency ? this is a "we can improve it still" pass to me, i become very skeptical when they have very hot cpus, i like this trend of less inferno like machines
@@GamersNexusI assume any engineering/ science benchmark like SPECviewperf might be interesting for some the audience of the channel. I'm not sure how time consuming it is to add to the tests suite though
Honestly as someone who lives in a desert in California with outrageous energy costs, that performance at 80 watts at those temperatures 🤷♂️ if they iron out the bugs I’m in
@@tilapiadave3234Maybe they have a life that doesn't revolve around where is best operate a PC. You know, like 99.9% of people? So you buy what suits you, like any other consumer.
@@JanM2 If you live somewhere where you need to run a big AC for 20 hours a day to not croak, I can certainly see how 30 cents/kWh can become a problem.
The power efficiency gains seem exciting enough to justify the product line, especially for people in hot climates. But it's really alarming that a bad unit made it into the review sample pool.
The real market for the CPUs is always the datacenters (along w/ laptops). The efficiency improvement is amazing as power and cooling is what matters the most.
@@stanimir4197 Also I assume this would translate to performance gains every summer for gamers like me who don't have great AC. Most of these lab tests are done in a climate-controlled building.
I've been planning on getting a 9700X, and I'm still going to get one. Thank you all for doing an honest and objective review so that I know what I'm getting before I get it. Thumbs up!
The power consumption reduction while performing insanely well is mostly the point of these new, non-x3d chips. I find them quite attractive for servers. Especially since the better performing (and insanely hot + power hungry) alternatives tend to blow up... or corrode. Every product has it's niché, and clearly these are not their niché. I feel like they were under-represented. Definitely getting one for my at home servers.
@@jarnovilen5259 Nor is any consumer grade CPU. But you can still use them for servers. Unless you need more PCIE lanes, more than 256GB of ECC RAM and OoBM you don't need a Xeon or an Epyc for a server. Please educate yourself before replying on a topic you know nothing about.
@@jarnovilen5259 You must have missed that part of the problem with Intel 13th/14th gen is they ARE being used for servers. Because server-grade CPUs are designed for lots of slow cores whereas desktop is aiming for less faster ones, and some servers need the latter (eg gaming). So yes, they absolutely are used for servers. Also, most people aren't using expensive enterprise grade hardware for their home server.
derBauer used PBO to boost the Wattage and got dramatically better benchmarks. It was like a different chip. It's just held back on power. Feels like it would be good for ITX builds where you have to use a tiny air cooler
With all the rumours pre launch about the 9700x underwhelming performance at 65w I thought the recall was going to be relabelled them as 95w or 105w parts and a bios update. Apparently not. Looks like a long wait before Zen5 reaches a viable option, just like Zen 1 all over.
@@funguseaterAI We don't overclock any of them for reviews right now. It is not ignoring, but if we did it on one, we'd really need to do it on all of them to fairly represent it. Our focus currently is on testing dozens of CPUs across over a dozen benchmarks, which is our specialty. Multiply that by two for every overclocked CPU and you can understand why we do not focus on that for reviews at the moment. Both have their place. What I'm saying is, if we did the OCing, we'd have to cut the benchmark and CPU count. One takes the place of the other.
The full width AVX-512 performance on these cpus is incredible. Level1Techs and Phoronix are seeing both the 9700 and 9600 outperforming the 7950 by 30+ percent! It may not be a gaming cpu but for complex tasks the improvement is staggering.
AVX-512 is in reality is a terrible instruction set. I tested apps that supposedly get massive perfomance gains on my 12700K (it's OG 2021 sillicon with the AVX512 instructions) and the perfomance per watt is way worse than simply standard Big-Little in my case without AVX512. At stock, the floating point speed of my 12700K is significantly ahead of a 7700X (even with AVX512). Instead of wasting CPU power with the bloated AVX512, simply use more standard stuff since Haswell (the first CPU generation with AVX2 i think) and more cores and threads.
"complex tasks the improvement is staggering." AVX512 would help AI (Machine Learning) but for raw CPU is 100% pointless. Current CPUs are extremely choked by memory bandwidth anyways which is the main bottleneck. With current core counts, the problem is even worse. I consider AVX512 in general as a flop.
Bought a 5800X3D in feb "23 mainly for Flight Simulator, and I don't think I need to upgrade it any time soon. It'll easily hold out one or two more generations, and lately the games I've been playing aren't that demanding anymore anyway.
Phoronix had some interesting results - 9700X has about 15% better performance than 7700X while using 33% less power. The caveat is this was under Linux. Perhaps Windows needs to up their game?
windows' process scheduler has always sucked ass compared to Linux. It really really loves to juggle processes between cores while completely ignoring the fact that swapping a process to a different core is not a free operation at all. You can see it for yourself if you open the task manager while running any single-thread application that completely loads the core, the load will jump from one thread to the other constantly. Linux doesn't do such an aggressive balancing, at least as far as I know. Oh, one more anecdote that I remembered. Some time ago disabling 0th core on Ryzen CPUs actually improved performance in Windows for some fucking reason. Linux had no such oddities, as expected.
@@ms3862 Sadly they didn't test many games, mostly productivity/code compilation/scientific/content creation stuff and synthetic benchmarks. They test Unvanquished and Xonotic on page 15, though. I'd like to see some Linux benchmarks with 'mainstream' or commercial games, though.
Yeah, I was surprised to compare Phoronix' stats with gaming-focused (and generally Windows-focused) reviewers. Maybe Windows isn't using them well, maybe they're just not as good for gaming as they are for other tasks, which it is is still very unclear to me.
I don't think so. Non x variants i.e. R7 9700 are supposed to be the power efficient line at least by default. All the X means is the CPU is unlocked and slightly better binned while giving users free reign on overclocking or underclocking. AMD seems to have purposely set the 9000 series X variants to have lower default power draw and voltage for unknown reasons.
The interconnect that the CCDs rely on is great in terms of bandwidth and latency, but it's not nearly enough for the 3D chips to be able to communicate with each other. The 12-core and 16-core SKUs would suffer a massive latency penalty if using two 3D cache chips.
@@Megadeth1983Fan and stability issues, specially with non gaming tasks, pretty sure that is exactly why some people had problem with X3D chips since they have to run lower clocks to counter poorer ( compared to normal cache) heat dissipation with the 3D stacking, and the instability arose from the fact that CPU couldnt manage changing from Non X3D to X3D when needed to ofc this tech is new so it is gonna be unstable but the returns on it is great, I think AMDs 13th gen equivalent was 7000 series, since they struggled uplifts this generation also Jay in his video about his change from intel to AMD stated that his system was having issues with memory, and now steve says so but from the comments from J2C's video is clear that not every one is having those issues Well, AMD got a pass because Intel fucked up real bad, otherwise, people would have complained about it more, or maybe they will overall its kinda weird this happened when AMD literally took 2 years and the fact they delivered with their Laptop chips btw, low power consumption with lower performance uplift, it sounds not so bad but then again, comparison becomes harder
Looking at the Description of this Review, It's fair to say my 5950X is going to remain in my System for quite some time. AM4 is looking more and more like a Golden Socket as time passes. AT LEAST AMD is *Trying* to keep their Reputation intact with Products that actually 'Work' while being mostly efficent. Time will tell if AM5 becomes another Socket worth Investing in at EOL. Appreciate the Work Steve! Trying to stay positive while the world around us Burns.
Yep! I've benn running a 9590 in my main system since they were released, & have no plans to change it for another year or two, still great performance.
Love your guys' deep dives into CPU releases. You are the go-to channel as soon as a new chip launches, I always watch yours first. Thanks for being amazing. Also...I know this isn't a popular CPU, but if you could toss in the 7900X3D in some of the benchmarks I would be truly grateful and love you long time. Glad I got it on sale last month ($329!) since the 7000 series chips have gone up in price since then.
AMD: Puts efficiency as the top tier priority for AMD's performance cores. Intel: Efficiency? E-Cores are good enough! Customers need space heaters so they don't have..."wood to chop" in the Pat Gelsinger winter of discontent.
To be very fair, power efficiency is a great thing. Some people pay out the ass for their power, let's not pretend that because we're in the USA, that we're the center of the universe.
@@lazar.dilov.1 What planet are you living on? The average cost of a KWh in the EU is at €0.2847 vs the US at $0.1643. Myself in the UK, the average for where I live is £0.2957 per KWh. EU: $0.31 US: $0.16 UK: $0.38 So yes, it is more expensive and yes it can matter. @kgonepostl is correct.
It's even more about the cooling requirements. No-one runs an open test bench as a daily driver and nobody likes paying close to 120 currency units for a cooler and still experience throttling.
After 4 months later of this video and newer Motherboard Bios updates and Windows AMD updates and Motherboard drivers...the 9700X really does perform awesome.. and are closer and on pair with the 3d versions old and new ones in Productivity and in gaming still with power efficiency in mind. Also in some courtiers the Older 3d ones are still more expensive than the 9700x and to by the new 3d one is almost 3 to 4 thousand more in my country's currency. So its really a good Happy Medium for Me.
I don't completely share the picture you paint here. Considering the huge jump in efficiency this still seems like a big step. I do agree that they could have probably tuned a bit more in favor of performance, however that probably wouldn't fit the 65W TDP any more then. And the main competitor in the 7700X is at 105W in comparison, I consider those results impressive. But you are right, as long as there are no Zen5 X3D on the horizon, upgrading my 5800X3D doesn't seem to make too much sense. Even with new X3D it probably won't for at least another generation.
"And the main competitor in the 7700X is at 105W in comparison" Alder Lake i7-12700K is faster than a 7700X at the same wattages. Steve ignored the 12700K (with DDR5) all together but it's right around a 5800X3D for perfomance and more power efficient than the 13th gen and 14th gen i5 K chips.
Yeah, after trying to blame everyone else first and STILL doing as little as possible for affected customers after they finally admitted fault, they've earned the shade for at least the rest of the year.
What's amazing is _he never lets up._ I'm here at 21:25 with Steve saying, "We already knew Intel's sim time was slow because it wasn't able to run public relations simulations fast enough to bury the recent controversy."
It's because he sent them an email in which he spoke to them from a position of authority and they completely ignored him, because it was a ridiculous thing to do... Now his ego is bruised. He thinks Intel is some clown company like Asus, and that he can bring them onto his channel and mock them in an interview. Guy has delusions of grandeur...
I got an 5700x3D with an 4080S to update my getting dated 3600+2060S and it blew me out of the water with the performance gains! I’m more than satisfied with the setup and pretty sure I can get another 3-4 years !
@@jojimonty2506 I wanted to so bad Microcenter didn’t have 1 at the time! Im probably behind by like 4-10 fps because so it still surprisingly powerful compare to my old setup
Same. It's a very very good workhorse and for the investment I made (at the peak of the semiconductor crisis...I paid like 1300 euros for the CPU alone) it has returned its price manyfold. But the 9k generation might be the time I finally upgrade, personally.
I still have the same CPU since release and I am even more excited for Zen 6 with X3D Chip when it´s actually not feeling like a refresh like now. No dual CCDs anymore and that is what I am looking for (except up to 32 cores)
Similar situation with my 10850k but almost 5 gens old. Intel does unnecessarily release skus every year tho. I'd only upgrade for better 1% lows in games but it's still more than plenty of performance for day to day multitasking. Waiting out a few more gens.
I got a 9700x last week and i've had 0 issues. Running at 5600 Mhz with no tweaking done. Sounds like a board issue or lack of bios update to me. This thing has been a beast for me.
@@me2olive That bothers me more than if it wasn't... 90% of the dumb bashing of Stafield and Bethesda in general is just "jokes and memes" used as a cover for what it is basically misinformation and lies. Imagine if GN bashed a popular game on a made-up problem, or a popular brand of hardware. "Fractal cases cook your GPU, haha I know it's BS but it's a meme so it's fine!" PS: If anyone thinks that it's not true, find a list of "Todd Howard lies" and actually search for them in the original context, you'll find out that every single one of them is taken out of context, it's so blatant, I've seen people speculating for hundreds of comments on the "300 Endings for Fallout 3" one, under the video of the original interview, in which he explain exactly what he means by "300 endings"
A CPU generation spent on improving efficiency is never wasted, the gains will come down the line - the 9800X3D is likely to be a worthy upgrade from the 5800X3D. However, I'm still holding out for that X3D+G, an APU-class (12+ RDNA3+ cores iGPU) Ryzen chip with 3D V-Cache.
@@ms3862Zen 5 IPC is already above Intel. The 9700X efficency is way better than the 7700X (also the thermals compared to my 12700K are just plain bad).
Never before have I seen someone spike a corporation into the curb this hard in less than 15 seconds Sure, one could hardly ask for a better setup, but still
I think the problem is that AMD went ham on the 95° temperature limit just to push clocks to the max out of the box for Zen 4. So they must have figured that was not sustainable for Zen 5.
Why would it be? Intel ran laptop chips at 100C for years, they have upped it to 110C now. Just because a load of people lost their chit, because fancy cooling caused more power to up frequency rather than lower temps, doesn't make 95C bad. If you didn't like it changing a few BIOS settings lowered temps and power, or just buy the non-x chips or x3D.
just because they optimize it to run at 95 degrees doesn't mean you have to run it at 95 degrees. In fact, it might be detrimental to run it constantly at the thermal limit because that introduces thermal throttling. What's truly worrisome is that AMD might be running into the same mistake that Intel made, increasing voltages to the moon...
@@RobBCactive I'm talking about AMD setting the bar too high for Ryzen's own good and it was only a rather lavish attempt to keep up with Intel's own incompetent clock speed "inflation" even though AMD is ahead on IPC. AMD can't conceivably push performance up with the unreasonable 95° standard every 18 months with newer chips, they would be sacrificing their performance-per-watt targets gen on gen. So for Zen 5 there had to be some form of regression to undo the mistake that is max temperature out of the box. It's either that or we'd also be seeing Intel's instability problem crawl into AMD's CPUs. It is not worth the risk.
@@RobBCactive I agree with that though process. We already had the non x base variants. This is just a 9700 victim of AMD naming (and still worse value than existing 7700)
They also notice the impact of power prices going up all over the world, most dramaticaly in the professional space, and apply it company wide as a focus point for the brand. Actually smart move, I'm more interested in this than raw power (my 5800X3D is already more than enough for gaming as far as perf goes)
I'm realy glad they are reducing the power. I got a 5800X3D and 105 Watt is difficult to cool with a small SFF case. I got a 280mm AIO which still barely manages to cool everything in the summer with an ambient temperature of 30 degrees Celcius in my room. I hope the 9800X3D will be running on similar wattage as the 9700X.
NEW/UPDATE: We just completed an in-depth benchmark and analysis of the Zen 5 efficiency. You can find that here -- although it was great in all-core rendering, it is not as good in gaming (and we have adjusted to further reduce the 9700X's place in our lists -- just skip Zen 5 for now): ruclips.net/video/6wLXQnZjcjU/видео.html
Reminder: The 7800X3D remains more efficient than the 9700X in gaming by a long shot. Higher performance, same power. Also, we got the new 9600X in. It is working where the other one failed, but still has compatibility issues (as the 9700X did) that the 7000 series did not. Messy launch.
We have brand new red, green, and yellow solder & project mats joining our existing blue! Support our testing directly by buying one! store.gamersnexus.net/products/gn-project-soldering-mat (use code THISISFINE for 10% off until August 14!
Learn about Intel's issues here: ruclips.net/video/b6vQlvefGxk/видео.html
Or watch our R7 3700X & R5 3600 revisit here: ruclips.net/video/WRK30P9_Tvg/видео.html
The red soldering mat really stole my attention during the video. Sadly I already have a soldering mat, and I'm not sure I need a second one... or do I? Hmm.
I see Toms Hardware has a review with wildly different results, they kinda look closer to what we were all expecting. Could there be issues with early BIOSs? But both you guys and HUB have been in contact with AMD the whole way so why wouldn't they have said anything, all seems very weird. I know both Steve's are vary thorough so 🤔
To be honest, I'm 100% fine with having the same performance with a lot less power.
Pushing frequency and performance vs. old gen in narrative so much, isn't good for future (there is power wall to worry about after all).
Please, don't punish 9700X performance just because it's not pushing boundaries on frequency side.
Also, why no OC section ?
I bet with some OC, it can outmatch 7700X no problem (BECAUSE it has efficiency budget for it - kind of like Core 2 from back in the day).
Having a nice stable base is always better, than having CPUs pushed to the limits "by default".
Thank you for great review.
EDIT PS. @10:47 Steve... "frequency alone doesn't mean much for performance...", are you OK ?
Frequency means a whole lot for performance, since basic formula for performance IS Frequency (MHz) x IPC.
Unless you have IPC, you can't gain performance when frequency drops. So, having LOWER frequency and still have the same performance can be a big deal. As an example to prove my point, 9700X and 7700X are like Core 2 Duo E6300 and Pentium Extreme Edition 965 from 2006, it's extreme example (pun not intended), but I can't think of any other pair that showcases my point better.
Come on, don't be bad. AMD is just trying to Co-operate with Intel
so basically its the 10700k vs 11700k all over again waste of sand
It's clear that for x3d owners, the only upgrades are newer x3d chip
Always been true
it was no different for intel chips that stuck a large edram L3 under the lid. Improvements in IPC has no chance to beat a much larger cache
Its about +5% from 7800x3d 😂
@@inalpro442 new X3D isn't even announce yet 😑
What if they are also 2% faster 🥲
It honestly feels like X3D is like AMD's 1080Ti. After almost 3 years, still fast, still powerful, still efficient, and still dominating.
5800X3D will still beat a 2030 i3 CPU at this point lmao.
yeah, they shot themselves in the foot with the 7800x3d, cause its hard to top it, so further gens may not be able to beat it.
I had the exact same thought.
video card memory has been improving faster than gpu performance - the 1080ti is almost memory anemic relative to its compute performance - aside from the addition of new accelerators (for raytracing, tensor products..) most of the improved get up and go that more modern cards have is due to the increased memory for more 4k
Need 8000Mhz DDR5 on Intel to do proper comparisons
The blue bars on the sides showing how long the graphic will be shown is extremely helpful, such a great idea to add those!
Thanks! Andrew added those probably around ... I don't remember! Maybe 2016 or 2017 now. Long time ago and they've been awesome. Super easy to edit with, too!
helpful for what exactly?
we could watch videos for around 20 years without such "bars"
@@instantdislikechannel5699 So you can skip if you are not interested in that metric. Or if you already ready the graph yourself.
@@Cerberus1746 "chapters"...
@@instantdislikechannel5699youtube chapters suck on mobile. the snapping to them is way too overzealous
9700X: reset the power floor
9700X3D: boost the power target
i have celeron cpu, i edit videos on it
I believe if you boost power target on the 9700x as well it performs quite a bit better as well from research I've done, could be wrong. Recently got one for my upcoming full ATX build and I'm glad I went with it over the 7800x3d thanks to it's (slightly) roundabout gaming performance comparable to the 7800x3d as well as better workstation performance.
7800X3D is still such a great investment. At this point I'm only ever going to wait for the X3D processors.
AMD has definitely created a monster with those! Both for itself and Intel.
I can't wait to upgrade my CPU to a 5800X3D.
glad i just upgraded to one! one hell of a best!
Still on my 5600x. tempted to upgrade to 7800x3d but I'll wait for the 9000x3d
5800X3D here. Those CPUs sure will last a long time for gaming
Steve's RTS APM coming in clutch with sniping these bots. Thanks Steve
Old StarCraft habits die hard.
@@GamersNexus Starcraft!....You took me back down memory lane a decade or so. What a great game that was. I got my kids hooked on it for a short time when they were younger too.
@@TheCarGuyOnline I miss playing Starcraft 2. Age caught up with me and it was RIP my APM :(
@@MetalHead_75 hell I'm 38 I can still play RTS like I used to. Not old yet! :D
@@MetalHead_75 I am still playing SC2, only in diamond league but I'm still having fun even if I'm past my prime!
2024 really is becoming the year of "It's not [Awful brand]".
Lmao yup, at least its not Intel
The year of disappointment
I'll buy anything that's not intel at this point. What a joke
@@InvadeNormandy I'm glad I got a new Computer when I did.
@@SupraSav You know it sucks when its like "Eh this CPU ain't that good, but at least it ain't Intel." xD
You're the only outlet I could find that covers this wide variety of comparisons. I'm happy to see my 3700X, which is now THREE generations behind, still performs at 60-80% of the latest gen and does not actually require a costly upgrade whatsoever.
I still have a 3800xt. Thinking of upgrading to this
Man… that 5800x3d hanging out with the big bois 3 years later is still just mind numbing.
It will be a while before we see such a legend CPU again.
9800x3d? I anticipate it will outperform 7800x3d because that had voltage limitations.
I mean... the 7800x3d?
im so glad i bought 7 5800X3D just 2 months ago cuz i got only AM4
I've been using a 5800X3D for two years this month and will continue using it for probably another 4-5 years at this rate!
I'm still using a 5800X3d with a 4080S
What I find hilarious in the blender benchmarks is seeing the 12100F still holding after all this time down at the bottom. The little chip that could.
It's a good chip for the price it was!
@@GamersNexus Please can you guys make your own VIEWPORT performance benchmark for blender. The render benchmarks are pretty useless for the average consumer. No one's buying these chips to render on.
Golden Cove (12th gen) IPC in a nutshell.
I still use the 12100f, its mind boggling how porwerful it is for 50usd. There is no game I cant play with it
Fyi, 7800x3d is now around $500 and 9800x3d is impossible to find at retail price.... while a 9700x has already dropped to $300 and is abundant at that price. With 6400 RAM, bios update, PBO and windows update, the 9700x is on par with 7800x3d. Seems like a win to me for new builders.
currently what im feeling rn. not a new builder but gonna definetely build a new pc for the new gpus coming out and the 9700x lowkey looks juicy in the market rn compared to the pricing of the X3Ds
just worried it might not be the right decision
@@the_brallonjust built a PC with the 9700x and a 4070 super and honestly it preforms very well.
"May include blue screens" feel the burn, son
So that's why they're called TEAM BLUE
Intel even chose a blue box to highlight the matching blue screen there cpu's give off.
honestly since intel and their fabs have been so utterly schwacked by the latest 13/14th gen scandal.. perhaps AMD dialled the voltage down because now they feel safe competing on power and long term reliability alone. There was a LOT of FUD over longevity at higher wattage sub-14nm parts years ago by industry experts, many saying it will only be suitable for low clocked arm/phone stuff. Perhaps there is a shred of truth lingering even if it was mostly dooming. Perhaps my 3950x will finally degrade and die as an antique in the late 2020s and AMD doesnt want that for 9th gen, even if their Zen2/3/4 cpus will certainly outlive their relevance. 🤷♂
One thing I am more certain is; likely Intel went full Icarus with their fabs after the success of 12th gen.
@@StrikeWarlock nah hahaha
Jayztwocents said he got blue screens while testing the new chips. So, probably mobos need updates and interesting to see the stability and perf on x870 boards.
WE DID IT!!! WE HAVE OVER 9000 AMD CPUs!!!
Now wait for next gen to be called Ryzen Prime 1000 AIX series because AMD marketing
You forgot the Ryzen Prime 1000 AIX3D !
Don't give them any ideas
Just wait for the special edition ChatGPT edition
AMD Prime Rest AI Ultra Max 1217XS. The world's most stable CPU.
I think they'd get sued by IBM if they named them "AIX".
As Administrator for Schools, the 9700X and 7700X are great, realy great. Have a Computerlab with 25 PC's and have your Media Guys have their training. We have problems keeping the room cool and getting the power in. 88 Watts vs 181 Watts for nearly the same performance is a real bonus for us.
I was thinking the same! These would be really nice school power work stations!
If the power / cooling is a problem, you could've ran the 7700X in ECO mode aka 65W too. And it doesn't lose that much performance. Unless you REALLY needed the top performance from it.
@@Winnetou17 Schools rarely run on custom built computers, so it's likely they were OEMs that didn't have the options exposed.
So is it worth buying new CPUs and RAM to save those 30 watts per pc under actual regular loads?
There is no way these CPUs are working at 100% load all the time to warrant the change. Even if you had the most efficient CPUs in the world, monitors still produce a lot of heat. AC may be a necessity in these conditions.
like the honesty of your reviews.. please do not cease... refreshing and reinforcing that some integrity still exists....
This power draw reduction is going to be insane for SFF builds.
[Edit] Came back after the efficiency deep dive video, and it's sad to see that the efficiency does not carry over in most workloads. Recommend you watch that video 😊.
That's what I'm thinking, my next build is going to be mini itx, this is getting me pumped for not needing aio.
There are nice passive cases that this CPU might fit just right.
And even bigger of a market, just imagine how this will translate to laptop platforms
Well ok but didn't you have the option of eco mode or the non-x r7 7700?
Pointless if the highest performing ITX form-factor GPU is an RTX x060. If you need to quadruple your volume just to fit a graphics card, the question of volume requirement for CPU cooling becomes moot.
17:17
The entire Intel lineup right now is a giant cluster...
Gold
14:48 is priceless. Also 21:25
me: If a flock of crows is called murder, what do they call a flock of Intel CPUs?
GN: 17:17
me: Oh, I see
STAY ON INTEL!
They are still better in EVERY WAY.. They are CHEAPER, have more performance and are energy efficient unlike amd who are so behind
@@FO0TMinecraftPVP so you're an intel spammer huh?
@@FO0TMinecraftPVP If this is not an attempt at humor, you need to put the crack pipe down. If this was supposed to be a joke, you should put the crack pipe down.
AMD has a free pass this generation unless they f it up.
Just like when AMD had the opportunity to outsell Nvidia when the 40 series released.
well they did kind of f up. Barely any uplifts.. wtf? What were they thinking? Waste of sand. This is the most disastrous launch of AMD in the past 10 years.
where is the same energy everyone had towards 14th gen of intel that was just a refresh of 13th; that gained basically same generational uplift; amd had 2 years to make a better product; and 5% is what they achieve in 2 years ? laughable
@@KoItai1And that 5% uplift could be achieved or surpassed by overclocking your 13th gen 🤣
@@KoItai1the difference is that we can use our motherboards for 2 more future generations. My intel z790 board is basically useless.
9700x is a perfect upgrade for my 5 liter SFF build. I'm using 7600 right now and it looks like 9700x uses the same power as 7600, but has 2 more cores and better ipc. That's a no brainer for me.
I’d recommend 7800x3d
@@tylermclellan9430 same
more like no brain
@@tylermclellan9430 65w vs 120w
literally 7800x3d is cheaper and like 20% faster
Every time there is a new CPU review, I am in awe of what an amazing processer the 5800X3D is, mainly its ability to breathe new life into old PC's. The fact that my 7-year-old PC with a 5800X3D can hang with some of the newest and greatest intel chips, all while using an old motherboard, inexpensive DDR4 memory, under 100watts of power AND running cool enough to only need a small inexpensive cooler never fails to put a smile on my face.
its a 2 year old chip and your comparing it to the rest of your pc... it is still a 320USD CPU and reflects its pricepoint
@@DurealzForReal I think the 5800X3D is a great chip, but people talk about like it's some old budget CPU that still throws a punch. It's modern CPU that launched a few month before Zen4, at a staggering $449 MSRP. It was never a budget CPU, even at the $300 mark it still wasn't a great deal. The $180 Ryzen 7600 beats it and with Microcenter selling the 7800X3D bundle for $499. You're way better off just selling your old AM4 platform for $150-250 and then taking the $300 you were going to spend on the 5800X3D and just get the 7800X3D bundle.
@@kingdom9214 The 7600 clocks high enough to beat it for raw FPS numbers, but the 5800X3D uses less power still, and has better 1% lows. Those matter a lot in heavy multiplayer games, especially.
@@kingdom9214 I would LOVE to see your benchmarrks where the 7600 beats it. Stop lying.
@kingdom9214 in these tests, the 5800x3D beat the 7600 almost across the board
I can't believe my 5800X 3D is still up there at the top of the charts.
AM4ever lol
It’s actually not worth to upgrade it, 2 gens passed and 5800x3d still better than any non 3d
Best purchase I've made for my PC, went from 2600X to 5800X3D
@@jonnili I’m to same.
Best purchase I've made for my PC, went from 1600X to 5800X3D.
5800x3D is still a great CPU for gaming
Yep, sounds like I can safely skip another gen
As someone who uses a small form factor case, the lower TDP is what makes me interested. The 9700X seems like great performance at 65W as opposed to 105W for the previous 7700X.
Or just get the 7700 non-X? Even if the 9700X was released as a 105W part, there would still have been an eventual 65W 8-core part.
They have eco-mode for 65w operation, at little loss. GN has done videos on this.
Stop coping, this launch is trash
@@Lionheart1188 so is intel 13th and 14th gens combined. Your point?
@@mokahless Remember the X processors are just binned non-x cpus that are more stable with the same voltage allowing to higher clock, which means an undervolted 7700x will still be more power efficient than a 7700, so the comparision is still fair, the 9700x will be more powerfull at same wattage than the 7700
Thanks, Steve! This convinced me to just upgrade my AM4 rig instead of making the jump to a new platform. Driving home from Microcenter now with a 5700X3D, which based on the charts, should tide me over for a few more years (upgrading from a 3000 series).
That is the best move for AM4 owners.
Planning on buying a 5700X3D tomorrow coming from a 3600. Did you have any difficulty in updating the bios? My bios is F41 and I need to upgrade to an two versions before I can go to the latest along with doing something like Q Flash and EC FW tool which I'm too afraid to do
@@chiizuu752 Don't worry! The only thing that can go wrong is the power going out as the update is being applied. If you are really paranoid you can get a UPS I guess but it's not necessary. I went from a 3600 to a 5600 and then to a 5800X3D, and then I put that 5600 in a different PC that had a 3600. All in all, lots of BIOS updating and no issues.
I've done it to many different PCs; all you have to do is download the file from the motherboard manufacturer's website, put it in a (ideally formatted and empty) flash drive, and then go to the BIOS and find the option to flash/update BIOS. Then you wait until it's done and that's it.
Sidenote: don't get worried if the PC gets "stuck" on a black screen for a bit after you swap CPUs/update BIOS; in my experience the system needs a bit of time to get itself sorted - I don't know exactly what's happening but it seems like a short 'boot loop' and then the new CPU is recognized, your BIOS settings are reset and you're good to go.
Good luck! Hope it all goes well for you :)
@@staticfloof4868 thanks! the note under F41 confused me for a few hours but I was able to update to the latest bios with no issues. Gave me quite a scare when it said it would reboot and then it shut down all of a sudden lmao
Thank you for including the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 CPU! It helps immensely seeing the differences. And also to choose the next upgrade (for my AM4 motherboard).
I built my AM4 Ryzen PC in 2017. The year when the first Ryzen generation came out. And now it's crazy to think that on the same motherboard, thanks to Bios updates, i can install even an AMD R7 5800X3D (8c/16t) or even an AMD R9 5950X (16c/32t). With performance not far off from the latest high-end CPUs!
Yeah, it was wild for me to go from an $80 r5 1600, to a $200 5800X. The value is insane. I'm excited to get a 9800X3D in a couple years.
Happy to help with that! The 1600 was an insanely good CPU for the price!
@@GamersNexus Why didn't you include the 7700 non-X though? Being the 7000 series 65W part, it seems it would be a more comparable comparison than the 7700X, no? Not in name, but in real generational uplift comparisons.
Honestly, given how much both CPUs and GPUs have just been cranking the power consumption to absolute insane levels, seeing a CPU go more the power efficiency route is seriously refreshing. Hope this will continue as a trend to make things more reasonable again, and if that means sacrificing some peformance that's honestly fine.
amd just REMOVED everything that made 9000 faster. no more clocks, no more transistors, no more cores, no 3d-vcache. they've literally GUTTED 9000 to not compete much because intel/qualcomm aren't competing at all too. all we've got is pure node shrink and some architecture improvements THAT DON'T WORK YET "because software is bad/old" - according to techtechpotato Mike Clark interview :/. thats it.
then they'll just add it all back gradually and sell it as zen 6-7-8 "upgrades" for years. zen 8 or 10 would be what zen5 was supposed to be. thats how amd "platfrm longevity" works - seling the same stuff multiple times but less gutted. obviously thats NOT Mike Clark's fault, thats on amd
AMD is doing intel now
nope, its not "fine", too high on copium/shillium, fanboy
@@rawdez_why? It's an improvement on their older design at a similar performance rate but with a massive reduction of power needed for it.
That is exactly what needs to happen. Better performance with better wattage use.
And if you increase wattage, and oc, you can get nearly 20-25% perform increase for the same or lower wattage use.
amd just REMOVED everything that made 9000 faster. no more clocks, no more transistors, no more cores, no 3d-vcache. they've literally GUTTED 9000 to not compete much because intel/qualcomm aren't competing at all too. all we've got is pure node shrink and some architecture improvements THAT DON'T WORK YET "because software is bad/old" - according to Mike Clark techtechpotato interview :/. thats it.
then they'll just add it all back gradually and sell it as zen 6-7-8 "upgrades" for years. zen 8 or 10 would be what zen5 was supposed to be. thats how amd "platfrm longevity" works - seling the same stuff multiple times but less gutted. obviously thats NOT Mike Clark's fault, thats on amd
AMD is doing intel now
This is nothing new. Zen 5 could do over 5ghz across all cores at 1.2v which draws little to no power
Seems like AMD focused on efficiency to really boost their enterprise and laptop sales, which is where the real money is made for CPU companies. Going forward these efficiency improvements will make it into every new generation.
STAY ON INTEL!
They are still better in EVERY WAY.. They are CHEAPER, have more performance and are energy efficient unlike amd who are so behind
@@FO0TMinecraftPVP what
@@LeLe-pm2pr probably some kind of trolling.
Let's not hide it, my old 5800x3d will be enough for gaming for a long time. What bothers me more is the successor of the Z1 Extreme. Every percent of performance will be useful there, Asus rog Ally is still a bit too slow
@@FO0TMinecraftPVP Saying Intel CPUs are more efficent then Zen era AMD cpus is quite Bogus. How is a 12900k/13900k/14900k more efficient then a 5800x3d/7800x3d? Sure pre Zen, Intel was more Efficient, but especially after Zen 2/Zen 3. Intel is less efficient then AMD, and That is noticeable in Intel laptops being Hotter and the fans running more loudly then Zen 2/3/4 AMD counterparts. Intel might have Cheaper CPUs now then AMD with their I3 and I5 non k skews, though pre Zen 3, AMD has always been more Cost efficient per performance then Intel, and More Peformance may be true on Intel's side depending on tasks, (Though the gaming kings of X3D exist) and Intel's CPUs are straight out less stable nowadays then AMD's, and I'm not even gonna pretend AMD is perfect in Stability, It's just Intel used to be more Stable, but when overclocking the crap outta Alder lake for 13th and 14th gen, they lost their sense of Stability.
I honestly watch some of these videos that don't help me in any way simply to hear Steve's commentary, he's so entertaining
I'm actually Ok with AMD keeping the performance similar while reducing the power significantly. We seen for few years a power creep that for some brands actually spiraled out of control.
The performance progress is inevitable. So it is not ok. It may only be just bearable, no more.
There are PSUs on the market now that claim a higher power output than a common house circuit can even provide. Which informs us a few ways. Not the least of which is the ignorance of a typical consumer. They're buying products that simply cannot work as marketed. Buy our PSU and blow breakers! Or just burn your house down trying.
The difference between 65W or 120W its like 12 dollars / year for me. I would absolutely prefer more performance over efficiency.
heat dude. @@CommanderRiker0
Not everyone is in USA buddy , in Europe and middle east power is freaking pricy . And with the end of petrodollar deal , your power bill is surely rise@@CommanderRiker0
Considering that we basically saw a 35-40% reduction in power consumption at the same performance, I'd say this is a huge win. Reviewers for years have been crying about high power consumption and now we have a chip that performs like an 8 core while drawing 6 core power. This isn't something to gloss over and deserves some appreciation.
I would agree but we need to see it's full power.
Now if only GPU's and monitors could do the same :~)
Good news for handheld gaming PC.
This is not a huge win or a win in the slightest.
Huh? It literally draws more power than the 7800x3d while being a bit faster overall and much slower in gaming.
Just discovered some of your old mountain biking videos, do you think those will ever make a come back? I could listen to you talk about computers while absolutely shredding every day 😂
Haha, they were really fun. No plans to bring them back now -- maybe if I ever find enough time. I still bike, but stopped recording because it was becoming a lot of work to film on the trail and in the studio. Needed that time to get away from the work!
@@GamersNexus since the video where Louiss helped steve learning fixing the apple board they mentioned the bikes and i want Steve to do some Rad Custom e-bike now lmao
@@GamersNexus Fully support this. Once fun things turn into jobs, at least for me, those things become less and less fun.
@@GamersNexus enjoy the trails, they're good for taking your mind off things. I highly recommend a trip to Bentonville, AR sometime, yes it's Wal-Mart world but it's some amazing trails they've financed. Truly world class.
@@GamersNexusbike vlogging channel?
I’m seriously thinking there is a problem with windows with regards to zen 5. Linux performance has seen a HUGE uplift. The 9700 is trading blows with the 7900 in database, vid compression, crypto, and simulations. On Linux the 9700 is straight stomping the 7900 and 7950 in avx 512 workloads. The 9700 is top tier in Linux web server benchmarks. It’s doing all of this while SIPPING power. @gamersnexus phoronix and other Linux reviews shows this processor to be a major win. Is there something to this?
W for Linux
Maybe it excels in certain workloads, just not what GN's tests consist of. Or it could be some motherboard/bios bug. Regardless, even if it's only as fast as the 7700x it's still significantly more power efficient which is a win.
What if it's the other way around? Linux systems were MAJORLY under utilising and underperforming with the 7000 series CPUs, and now that they've improved it for the 9000 series, that's why there's a huge uplift?
I lean more to this because let's face it, who is designing anything with Linux in mind? They know they're selling to Windows customers, so it makes more sense that everything was designed with Windows in mind.
@@DanteLovesPizzaLol sorry bud, even the old CPUs are ahead of windows tests on Linux. Look at test data more and less tugging the ganja.
@@DanteLovesPizza, if only there was a way to find out rather than making uneducated guesses! *cough*phoronix*cough*
This feels like throw back to AMD's 6800xt/7800xt situation. 7800xt had a very minor performance improvement, but lowered power consumption overall.
While not mind blowing, I'll take small steps in the right direction over "one step forwards, two steps back" anyday.
Except the 7800xt is the RDNA 3 version of the 6700xt, n22 full and n32 full. The 7900xt is the RDNA 3 6800xt. This holds true for price, power draw, die size everything. The 6700xt launched at 480$ so the 7700xt with n22 full could have been 500$, I have no idea why they messed with the naming like they did. At the end of the day it's a meaningless label though, anyone spending 500$ on a gpu would have gone with the same card regardless of name. The 7900xt should have launched at less than 700$ though considering the 6800xt was 650$, if it dropped at 700$ as the 7800xt people would have likely received it better.
You are comparing a 7800 XT to a 6800 XT...
The 7800 XT is placed 1 tier higher than it actually is.
The 7800 XT IS the RX 6700 XT's predecessor. The currently named RX 7800 XT is actually a RX 7700 XT named 1-tier higher so they can charge more for less.
@@RNG-999 No, the 7800xt is the same MSRP as the 6700xt. It's also a standard generational increase of 30-50% faster along with 4gb more vram. They didn't rename it to charge more for less, the 6800xt msrp was 650$.
@RNG-999 I agree that AMDs naming scheme was wonky. The perspective I was taking was that regardless of performance tier in their respective generation, the 7800xt and 6800xt ultimately ended up falling into the same price category. The 7700xt was priced about $50 below the two. So this was more a comparison of value between whatever each generation was offering in that price category, not necessarily a comparison of MSRP.
@@PineyJustice Yup, the name changing was pretty scummy (and confusing) of them.
I am curious to see how well Zen 5 overclocks. Zen 4 was pushed so close to its limits out of the box that overclocking wasn't all that practical. Perhaps AMD's intent with all the thermal and power headroom on Zen 5 is to let enthusiasts decide how much extra performance they want?
All CPU nowadays are pushed to the limits so overclocking is:
A Too risky
B for the small gains.
That is not quite true. The 7600x oc'd very well when you do it the old fashion way.
It should do around 5.4GHz what I have seen so far. In this video it did 4.5GHz stock in blender so substantial improvement.
They should have called this one a 9700 and release a 9700X at ~85 TDP
It being as good as the 7700X most of the time, sometimes better, while consuming 40% less is pretty amazing, it's just the targeted power segment is incomprehensible.
This. X variants should be much higher all core boost than 4.5Ghz.
Either that or have a higher PBO option than the base.
7700X never was that good in the first place (the i7-12700K exists).
@@saricubra2867 Exist(ed), have fun with your TSV oxidation.
@@44R0Ndin12th gen is fine. Intel deserves shit right now but it doesn’t mean their non-fucked up hardware is bad now. 12700K and 7700X are similar but the latter has the point imo for being on a newer platform with a longer upgrade path. Gaming wise though you should only be considering 7600X or 7800X3D if you care about value there
@@lawrencekallal6640 they disabled pbo completely in the testing and i am wondering why? or is that standard for amd tests? do they also disable intel boosting then when testing?
My 5800x3d might be the single greatest PC purchase I've ever made.
Hehe, for me, it was either Celeron 300A /oc to 735 mhz, or i7 920 which went from like 2008 to 2015 or so. But 5800X3D is moving up the ranks.
Yep
I bought 5900x when 5800x3d came out and i regret not waiting that few days .. now i want to upgrade
I know what I'm doing, waiting a couple months to see if there are any further issues, then I'll look at upgrading any systems. Though I may just wait a year or so like I do when buying vehicles...lol
If you just gonna game get the 7800x3d the cpu is honestly the GOAT
@@AT-ng2fo exactly or wait for the 9800X3D just depends
@@KingAlucard101 yea, but something tells me based on this review that the x3d cpu won’t offer the same level of performance to value ration the current gen has to offer. Purely speculative, but that is what I think. You still could be right though. Sounds like cpu companies are struggling with either making good value or stable products
Wait for these new CPUs to get optimization on a current batch of motherboards or for new batches/chipsets, RAM optimization & a $50 price cut across the board. That's when Zen5 will be perfect for purchase, but for now it's just another messy rushed launch
Waiting for 9800X3D here, 7700X is still doin me right.
Steve is savage. "2nd most positive thing is even though I looked everywhere, I can't find the word intel anywhere on the box."
Insults Intel for being awful, and insults AMD for not giving him more positive things to say. That's our Steve!
3 decades of delivering quality and state of the art CPU for consumers and enterprise and one slip up and everyone turns on them. Intel is not the problem.
@@fergus247 A serious defect combined with multiple levels of deception is far from just a "slip up".
@fergus247 Lol, "state of the art" my ass, they willingly withheld technology and delivered it piecemeal for absurd prices for a decade, because they had no competition. Their lack of investment on RnD was precisely the reason AMD was able to overtake them in recent times. They were selling chips with decades old tech for the price of brand new ones.
Intel in the 21st century have always been frauds.
you guys are fucking awesome. the amount of testing and verification that goes into each of your videos is absolutely astounding. literally no one, not "professional" companies can ensure what you guys are with testing and showcasing for all consumers. seriously, i recommend you guys to anyone that needs any type of IT support. "Just watch some Gamers Nexus and you'll understand what i'm talking about." its awesome to see anyone w this level of quality assurance, companies show come to you guys prior to releases, keep it up.
So true.
Lol Steve posting from his second account
I was looking to upgrade my workstation, and will all of the trouble Intel is having, I was looking at the 7900X3D. Though when I got to Micro Center, they had a bundle with a X670E MSI motherboard, 32 GB of DDR5-6000 and a 7950X3D for $699, it was an easy grab. Glad I saw it, because I was about to pay more for less CPU.
It's built up on my bench right now for testing and migration, and it's so nice not having a furnace of a CPU anymore. I have it under a Deepcool Gammaxx 400 and it at most gets into the high 70s under a moderate load. Compared to my current i9-10850k that even a tiny whiff of a load that spikes one core to max boost at 5.1 GHz causes the CPU to go up into the 80s and 90s immediately. The 7950X3D has been boosting to 5.3-5.5 GHz on one of the CCDs.
It'll be under a water cooler when I get it into my workstation, but it's nice to know it doesn't need it like the i9 does.
Honestly, getting the same speeds/fps/etc for half the power usage is great. That means less cost, cheaper cooler, less fan noise/power usage and it makes it possible for more compact builds or even passive cooling.
Yeah I agree. But like on graph didn’t go up so = bad
@@We_Are_I_Amthat's an absolutely tiny improvement for a full generation with such huge changes to the design
@@tommihommi1 No its not lol Its amazing they have in one gen, 40% power saving and temps lower than anything else.
It would be more fair to compare this to 7700 non-X, which also has the TDP of 65W and actually delivers results pretty close to 7700X. The problem is that when you do that, the new chip looks even less impressive.
@@tommihommi1its an amazing improvement modern CPUs keep getting harder to cool. Less heat for the same power is invaluable for pushing higher clock without cooking the CPU and its really good for Laptops and Steamdeck etc. where energy efficiency is key.
With the ever increasing power requirements, i think a power reset is what was needed. They have more overhead to work with in future.
Agreed. While the launch wasn't great, the overall direction isn't bad.
Yeah it’s approaching something like an oil crisis kind of situation. They’re running too much damn power through that little thing like a muscle car when what we really need is a Toyota Corolla.
But isn't the 7800x3d already pretty ok for that? IDK it just renders all these other CPUs completely irrelevant. Unless you're rendering with a 7950x, the 7800x3d leaves everything else for completely dead on arrival. This 9700x... who is it for? Who buys this?
@hansolo631 they need to get the other chips out there first but we'll see what the 9800x3d will be like. They can't just make the 9800x3d ans say they'll just not release anything else.
Benchmarks with PBO, power limits upped, and a 360 rad would be interesting to see if the efficiency can be traded off for a significant gain.
It's so funny how much shade Steve was able to throw at intel in this review/benchmark video of a competitors lack luster new product. Great work Steve!
Still, for productivity and mostly graphic workloads, lower consumption (per work done, efficiency) and lower temps are very much appreciated (by some of us needing the CPUs mostly for work).
The difference in power consumption compared to the prior gen is insane.
I also enjoy how the 9700x is now a 65 watt part.. for my A620i lightning board that's great to hear for future upgrades when I eventually need it. I may not even have to upgrade my mobo. Depending on Zen 6 compatability.
Yeah! Really impressive in that gategory!
I think this is a huge plus, because cooling it is going to be easier and considering I live a country where energy isn't free I love lower power consumption. Especially considering GPU power usage is absolutely nuts these days.
i wonder if we will get a non X and what will the power consumptions be there.
Or maybe the 9700X is already a non X b ut they named it with an X in the name, and then they will crank up the Power to get a Real 9700X but will have to name it different , for example 9700XT or wahtever xD
@@KoeiNLConsidering the NL im assuming ur a dutcbie as well. And I have to correct you. Unlike gas electricity really isn't that bad here. I have no problem running my ac during these hot summerdays with my 7900XT still overclocked. And especially a plus that in the weekends and from 21:00 during weekday we have nachtstroom
NGL I'm here to help with the algorithm because like most of us, I'm waiting for the Zen5 X3D CPUs but neverless, Thanks Steve!
Who asked?
who asked for you to ask?
Use power to compare CPUs it's always the best comparison. Thank you!
The fact that they have huge efficiency gains is great frankly. It's certainly not an upgrade for someone with a CPU from the last 1-2 generations, but, but someone like myself on the 3rd gen, it will be a huge upgrade.
Are you considering paying the $50 extra to save a little power under normal use cases? Just doesn’t seem worth it to me.
Which leads to less heat, which means lower cooling requirements, which could also mean a cooler room, which could lead to more power savings.
And less power, depending on where you are, could net a noticeably lower electric bill (someone in a different thread noted a possible $230+ reduction in places like Germany).
There *is* worth… just not for me and many others.
@@TheCth777 Will be looking at the 16 core ryzen 9x3d if it comes out. And considering the UK electricity prices along with the fact I prefer my fans to be on the quieter side, it's more than wroth it.
@@sonicfind Indeed, it all adds up at the end of the day. From cooling requirements (granted I have the prior most expensive nocuta tower cooler) combined with various costs from other areas. If you're upgrading every generation then you've probably got money to burn anyway and it's not worth it for you. But if you're only upgrading when there has been a significant performance increase between your current and new CPUs, then it's more than worth it.
Bought my 5800X3D at MSRP launch pricing. Turns out it's a pretty good option even two years later. :P
Same. Might even turn out to be a better buy than when I got a 1080 Ti.
It's still an amazing chip for sure.
I waited just long enough to get mine at the historic low $290, and it is essentially impossible to give up. Wonderful chip.
5800X3D has cemented itself as the GOAT!
I like efficiency. Saves you money on the power supply, cooler, can get a smaller case, the room doesn't heat up like a there's a radiator. I say it's great.
True. And it's silent as well. Love it :)
i like amd's efficiency because it means intel will finally have to stop blasting 200-300 watts like a nut
I wonder what would happen if you cranked the power up to 11 on this thing.
Nah i need that heat for winter and crypto mining.
@@quantum5661 Platform power for ryzen 9000 is 230W that's before PBO, the 9950x will be using 230W PPT, that's not so far from the 251W that intel allows before overclocking.
bro 3 months later looking at the prices of the 7800 X3D I wanna cry..
If you factor in the power efficiency, it's nice to get about the same performance (with a ~5-10% difference sometimes) for so much less power. As shown at 8:21, a 60W power difference in two chips that perform similarly will save you a lot of money (and heat/cooling) in the long run, especially in countries where electricity costs went double/triple or worse in these past few years.
Might be a boring generation, but for this purpose it would be a welcome development.
Indeed. It's especially useful for small form factor builds. Don't need as much cooling.
I'm eager to see the efficiency difference with the more powerful 9000 series, and the 3D variants.
@@Superscope64 I'm also eager to see what the 9600X would do, as they haven't posted theirs because it had issues. If it also has a nice drop in power, you could definitely get a sweet performance mini build going. I'm thinking maybe a dedicated Minecraft server that DOESN'T make a ton of noise like my current one running my old 4460 cpu.
Common bud 65w is not gonna save you shit..who are you kidding, plus INTEL does not pull 300 W unless running Cinebench. Majority of people who live in hot climates and do have expensive electricity have solar panels and do not give a s...about 65 W.. cause it's irrelevant.. maybe after a year you ll save for a coffee and a doughnut
Precisely. So weird that we see these big yt tech channels downplaying this. It is massive.
This is AMD's RTX 4060 moment
Thanks Steve!
Back to you, Steve!
I read the picture wrong. "It's INTEL".! edit: I have bought 2000 amd for work (and will continue with amd) for my home computer I bought Intel year ago 😢
Honestly power consumption is becoming a bigger deal for me personally. Its getting hotter and hotter where I live, and have been resorted to downclocking anyways. Gladly sacrifice some performance to save myself some literal sweat
I agree with you.
As I get older I want my pc to not take a lot of space, be quiet and cool. These 400 watt intel chips are such a pain to deal with but those efficient amd chips are just it.
Yeah, also power is f'ing expensive. In the long run it will save a lot of money.
Might as well get the non-x Zen4. Same TDP as Zen5, performance within single % digit range and way lower prices.
Please don't bro. You are just dying to buy new stuff. It's a shit consumerist behavior. You were never resorting to downclocking on 5nm AMD.
@@skmrgoo5717 I still use 5950x as my main but Intel chips were not 400watt. They were 150w in practice and 400w in Cinebench.
Like the blender benchmark! Nice chart.
The funny thing is, running at the same speed while saving 30% power can sometimes be equal to running 15% faster with the same power consumption. But the first option sounds much more appealing😂
It was typically slightly faster for 40% less power (about 88W vs 148W). I'm excited to see overclocking videos.
@@ericmollison2760 derbauer did PBO benchmarking with great results according to some other comments
Seeing more and more benchmark results I come to the conclusion that AMD just labeled it wrong and it should be the non X variant.
Then it would outperform the predecessor and a possible 9700X could outperform the 7700X when having the same power consumption.
But maybe AMD goes the other way and brings a 9700 non X with amazing efficiency.
Looking at the impressive power figures and unimpressive performance figures.
I think they will release XT versions with higher power and cooling demands. For more performance.
And they will charge an additional premium looking at the current XT CPU’s
I am the only person who hype power efficiency ? this is a "we can improve it still" pass to me, i become very skeptical when they have very hot cpus, i like this trend of less inferno like machines
Same, I prefer air cooling over AIO and R9 seems very easy to cool and cheaper to build around than 150-300w cpu
You're not, so the efficiency gains really impressed me
You're not alone. Power efficiency is a lost art these days, and seeing these gains in that regard is really solid.
Same, I will throw my intel in the bin for this one i think
I'm like 90% sure the typo on the IHS was a Photoshop.
I always expect great analysis, but am still amazed how great your work shows! Thank you GN!
The addition of the CFD benchmark is a blessing, thanks
Thanks for letting us know! Any other requests to add?
@@GamersNexusI assume any engineering/ science benchmark like SPECviewperf might be interesting for some the audience of the channel. I'm not sure how time consuming it is to add to the tests suite though
Steve: New AMD review!
Me: Watching this video while accepting a delivery for my 7600 cpu
7600 is an amazing CPU still
oh hey we got the same cpu, mine's intel though
@@gnobber7134 my condolences
I went 6700 to 7600
7600 is amazing. I’ll be using mine for a very long time 1440p
Honestly as someone who lives in a desert in California with outrageous energy costs, that performance at 80 watts at those temperatures 🤷♂️ if they iron out the bugs I’m in
MOVE
Americans complaining about 30ct/kwh as outrageous energy costs lmao
@@tilapiadave3234Maybe they have a life that doesn't revolve around where is best operate a PC. You know, like 99.9% of people? So you buy what suits you, like any other consumer.
@@bligh1156 Maybe they are typical AMD fan-twerps live in their mum's basement and love their sister a bit too much :)
@@JanM2 If you live somewhere where you need to run a big AC for 20 hours a day to not croak, I can certainly see how 30 cents/kWh can become a problem.
"It's boring, but it's not a total disaster..." What a line.
I love my 5800X3D, will wait until AM6 with DDR6 for a full platform overhaul.
Opening was savage for both CPU manufacturers xD
The power efficiency gains seem exciting enough to justify the product line, especially for people in hot climates. But it's really alarming that a bad unit made it into the review sample pool.
The real market for the CPUs is always the datacenters (along w/ laptops). The efficiency improvement is amazing as power and cooling is what matters the most.
@@stanimir4197 Also I assume this would translate to performance gains every summer for gamers like me who don't have great AC. Most of these lab tests are done in a climate-controlled building.
@@MtnNerd the power consumption is rather low, so 10C in the difference won't be any noticeable performance imo (unless the cooling is truly poor)
@@stanimir4197 yes it will
But the 7000 series is also less power efficient than the 5000s, so they're basically just fixing that in the 9000 series.
That’s a great idea! Betting is always more fun with friends around, and those bonuses for referring them seem pretty generous.
I've been planning on getting a 9700X, and I'm still going to get one. Thank you all for doing an honest and objective review so that I know what I'm getting before I get it. Thumbs up!
The power consumption reduction while performing insanely well is mostly the point of these new, non-x3d chips. I find them quite attractive for servers. Especially since the better performing (and insanely hot + power hungry) alternatives tend to blow up... or corrode. Every product has it's niché, and clearly these are not their niché. I feel like they were under-represented. Definitely getting one for my at home servers.
Ryzen CPUS are not for servers. AM5 platform does not qualify for that.
@@jarnovilen5259 Nor is any consumer grade CPU. But you can still use them for servers. Unless you need more PCIE lanes, more than 256GB of ECC RAM and OoBM you don't need a Xeon or an Epyc for a server. Please educate yourself before replying on a topic you know nothing about.
@@jarnovilen5259 You must have missed that part of the problem with Intel 13th/14th gen is they ARE being used for servers. Because server-grade CPUs are designed for lots of slow cores whereas desktop is aiming for less faster ones, and some servers need the latter (eg gaming). So yes, they absolutely are used for servers.
Also, most people aren't using expensive enterprise grade hardware for their home server.
@@alexatkin Home server is technically not a server. And I did not talk about Intel CPUs.
@@jarnovilen5259 Home servers are servers.
derBauer used PBO to boost the Wattage and got dramatically better benchmarks. It was like a different chip. It's just held back on power. Feels like it would be good for ITX builds where you have to use a tiny air cooler
Roman is a cooling solutions engineer, Steve is a journalist. That's the difference 😉
@@erkinalpand gamer nexus is for gamers?
Wendal does different stuff too.
No does one dual gpu stuff, expect me....
stock settings are important for fruit to fruit comparison. an overclock video would be nice though to follow this up
With all the rumours pre launch about the 9700x underwhelming performance at 65w I thought the recall was going to be relabelled them as 95w or 105w parts and a bios update.
Apparently not.
Looks like a long wait before Zen5 reaches a viable option, just like Zen 1 all over.
@@funguseaterAI We don't overclock any of them for reviews right now. It is not ignoring, but if we did it on one, we'd really need to do it on all of them to fairly represent it. Our focus currently is on testing dozens of CPUs across over a dozen benchmarks, which is our specialty. Multiply that by two for every overclocked CPU and you can understand why we do not focus on that for reviews at the moment. Both have their place. What I'm saying is, if we did the OCing, we'd have to cut the benchmark and CPU count. One takes the place of the other.
The full width AVX-512 performance on these cpus is incredible. Level1Techs and Phoronix are seeing both the 9700 and 9600 outperforming the 7950 by 30+ percent! It may not be a gaming cpu but for complex tasks the improvement is staggering.
AVX-512 is in reality is a terrible instruction set. I tested apps that supposedly get massive perfomance gains on my 12700K (it's OG 2021 sillicon with the AVX512 instructions) and the perfomance per watt is way worse than simply standard Big-Little in my case without AVX512.
At stock, the floating point speed of my 12700K is significantly ahead of a 7700X (even with AVX512).
Instead of wasting CPU power with the bloated AVX512, simply use more standard stuff since Haswell (the first CPU generation with AVX2 i think) and more cores and threads.
"complex tasks the improvement is staggering."
AVX512 would help AI (Machine Learning) but for raw CPU is 100% pointless.
Current CPUs are extremely choked by memory bandwidth anyways which is the main bottleneck. With current core counts, the problem is even worse.
I consider AVX512 in general as a flop.
Bought a 5800X3D in feb "23 mainly for Flight Simulator, and I don't think I need to upgrade it any time soon. It'll easily hold out one or two more generations, and lately the games I've been playing aren't that demanding anymore anyway.
if you play in 4k then that cpu will last you a very long time
Phoronix had some interesting results - 9700X has about 15% better performance than 7700X while using 33% less power. The caveat is this was under Linux. Perhaps Windows needs to up their game?
windows' process scheduler has always sucked ass compared to Linux. It really really loves to juggle processes between cores while completely ignoring the fact that swapping a process to a different core is not a free operation at all. You can see it for yourself if you open the task manager while running any single-thread application that completely loads the core, the load will jump from one thread to the other constantly. Linux doesn't do such an aggressive balancing, at least as far as I know.
Oh, one more anecdote that I remembered. Some time ago disabling 0th core on Ryzen CPUs actually improved performance in Windows for some fucking reason. Linux had no such oddities, as expected.
In which games was that???
@@ms3862 Sadly they didn't test many games, mostly productivity/code compilation/scientific/content creation stuff and synthetic benchmarks. They test Unvanquished and Xonotic on page 15, though. I'd like to see some Linux benchmarks with 'mainstream' or commercial games, though.
Yeah, I was surprised to compare Phoronix' stats with gaming-focused (and generally Windows-focused) reviewers. Maybe Windows isn't using them well, maybe they're just not as good for gaming as they are for other tasks, which it is is still very unclear to me.
Windows needs to stop harakiri on their most important piece of software.
They have already gotten away with too much BS with windows.
Totally happy with my 7600X. Perfect upgrade path to 7800X3D. Glad i went AM5 for my first pc build...
I made the same decision to go for 7600x for my first build as well, glad that I did
Same same .
can't wait for more cases reviews, Steve!
I don't think it's wasted opportunity, the energy efficiency is insane, a godsend for ITX builds.
This. Energy efficiency is also a very important point.
7800x3d is the fastest in gaming while using 50 watts.. what more do you need..
I don't think so. Non x variants i.e. R7 9700 are supposed to be the power efficient line at least by default.
All the X means is the CPU is unlocked and slightly better binned while giving users free reign on overclocking or underclocking.
AMD seems to have purposely set the 9000 series X variants to have lower default power draw and voltage for unknown reasons.
The why name it 9700x? Should be 9700 but AMD naming
Not all of us live in shoeboxes. I like my full ATX cases. Tower of power!
I want an 9950X3D with 3D-V-Cache on BOTH CCDs!
I think you'll get it with unlocked multipliers
and more than 24 PCIe lanes!
The interconnect that the CCDs rely on is great in terms of bandwidth and latency, but it's not nearly enough for the 3D chips to be able to communicate with each other. The 12-core and 16-core SKUs would suffer a massive latency penalty if using two 3D cache chips.
Not going to happen, but eventually Zen 6 should give you 16 cores with the cache inside 1 CCD.
@@Megadeth1983Fan and stability issues, specially with non gaming tasks, pretty sure that is exactly why some people had problem with X3D chips since they have to run lower clocks to counter poorer ( compared to normal cache) heat dissipation with the 3D stacking, and the instability arose from the fact that CPU couldnt manage changing from Non X3D to X3D when needed to
ofc this tech is new so it is gonna be unstable but the returns on it is great, I think AMDs 13th gen equivalent was 7000 series, since they struggled uplifts this generation
also Jay in his video about his change from intel to AMD stated that his system was having issues with memory, and now steve says so but from the comments from J2C's video is clear that not every one is having those issues
Well, AMD got a pass because Intel fucked up real bad, otherwise, people would have complained about it more, or maybe they will
overall its kinda weird this happened when AMD literally took 2 years and the fact they delivered with their Laptop chips
btw, low power consumption with lower performance uplift, it sounds not so bad but then again, comparison becomes harder
Looking at the Description of this Review, It's fair to say my 5950X is going to remain in my System for quite some time.
AM4 is looking more and more like a Golden Socket as time passes.
AT LEAST AMD is *Trying* to keep their Reputation intact with Products that actually 'Work' while being mostly efficent.
Time will tell if AM5 becomes another Socket worth Investing in at EOL.
Appreciate the Work Steve! Trying to stay positive while the world around us Burns.
"with Products that actually 'Work' " the 9600x was so broken it couldn't be reviewed.
Yep! I've benn running a 9590 in my main system since they were released, & have no plans to change it for another year or two, still great performance.
Yep, my 5950x will get me to AM6. Then hopefully there will be a good upgrade path within AM6 as there was with AM4.
Love your guys' deep dives into CPU releases. You are the go-to channel as soon as a new chip launches, I always watch yours first. Thanks for being amazing. Also...I know this isn't a popular CPU, but if you could toss in the 7900X3D in some of the benchmarks I would be truly grateful and love you long time. Glad I got it on sale last month ($329!) since the 7000 series chips have gone up in price since then.
Efficiency is king right now for laptops and scale. If you are a pc bulk builder this saves time and money on cooling equipment
If you are a bulk PC builder not getting a shed ton of returns with broken CPUs also saves time and money
Surprisingly, Intel doesn't with their economy cores 😂.
AMD: Puts efficiency as the top tier priority for AMD's performance cores.
Intel: Efficiency? E-Cores are good enough! Customers need space heaters so they don't have..."wood to chop" in the Pat Gelsinger winter of discontent.
To be very fair, power efficiency is a great thing. Some people pay out the ass for their power, let's not pretend that because we're in the USA, that we're the center of the universe.
I mean power is definitely not expensive in EU for sure
@@lazar.dilov.1 What planet are you living on? The average cost of a KWh in the EU is at €0.2847 vs the US at $0.1643.
Myself in the UK, the average for where I live is £0.2957 per KWh.
EU: $0.31
US: $0.16
UK: $0.38
So yes, it is more expensive and yes it can matter. @kgonepostl is correct.
It's even more about the cooling requirements. No-one runs an open test bench as a daily driver and nobody likes paying close to 120 currency units for a cooler and still experience throttling.
@@lazar.dilov.1
Yes it is. It's expensive basically everywhere.
@@libaf5471
Also noise factor. A higher TDP will require more cooling, which means either a significantly larger cooler, fans or higher fan rpm.
With the lower power consumption this is truly the "Zen" CPU
After 4 months later of this video and newer Motherboard Bios updates and Windows AMD updates and Motherboard drivers...the 9700X really does perform awesome.. and are closer and on pair with the 3d versions old and new ones in Productivity and in gaming still with power efficiency in mind. Also in some courtiers the Older 3d ones are still more expensive than the 9700x and to by the new 3d one is almost 3 to 4 thousand more in my country's currency. So its really a good Happy Medium for Me.
There was a lot of shade thrown at Intel in this review. And yet it never got old.
"not fast enough to run the PR simulations" xD
The double shade at Starfield and Intel was my favorite, "you won't know if the blue screens are caused by Intel or the game"
I don't completely share the picture you paint here. Considering the huge jump in efficiency this still seems like a big step. I do agree that they could have probably tuned a bit more in favor of performance, however that probably wouldn't fit the 65W TDP any more then. And the main competitor in the 7700X is at 105W in comparison, I consider those results impressive.
But you are right, as long as there are no Zen5 X3D on the horizon, upgrading my 5800X3D doesn't seem to make too much sense. Even with new X3D it probably won't for at least another generation.
Just wait for AM6. Your X3D will definitely last til then.
"And the main competitor in the 7700X is at 105W in comparison"
Alder Lake i7-12700K is faster than a 7700X at the same wattages.
Steve ignored the 12700K (with DDR5) all together but it's right around a 5800X3D for perfomance and more power efficient than the 13th gen and 14th gen i5 K chips.
I wanted to ask "why are you so savage in the intro" but realistically Intel did it to itself and it deserves it...
Yeah, after trying to blame everyone else first and STILL doing as little as possible for affected customers after they finally admitted fault, they've earned the shade for at least the rest of the year.
What's amazing is _he never lets up._ I'm here at 21:25 with Steve saying, "We already knew Intel's sim time was slow because it wasn't able to run public relations simulations fast enough to bury the recent controversy."
@ValkisCalmor Yeah, but it IS mostly the motherboard manufacturers and overclockers fault though
@@Tugela60 50c has been deposited into your account.
It's because he sent them an email in which he spoke to them from a position of authority and they completely ignored him, because it was a ridiculous thing to do... Now his ego is bruised. He thinks Intel is some clown company like Asus, and that he can bring them onto his channel and mock them in an interview. Guy has delusions of grandeur...
Brilliant as usual when it comes to your reviews 🙏
Those spikes in the frequency graph are like hands reaching up and saying, "Moar powerrrr..."!
move move that electronssss babeeee
could ask Intel a thing or two about UNLIMITED POWER
I got an 5700x3D with an 4080S to update my getting dated 3600+2060S and it blew me out of the water with the performance gains! I’m more than satisfied with the setup and pretty sure I can get another 3-4 years !
Definitely switch the 5700x3d for a 5800x3d will pair nicely with your 4080s
@@jojimonty2506 why? Its the exact same part but with higher efficiency and less than 10% performance drop due to lower clocks.
@@jojimonty2506 I wanted to so bad Microcenter didn’t have 1 at the time! Im probably behind by like 4-10 fps because so it still surprisingly powerful compare to my old setup
It’s hard to believe that I’m now 2 generations behind… 5950x still absolutely crushes everything I throw at it.
Same. It's a very very good workhorse and for the investment I made (at the peak of the semiconductor crisis...I paid like 1300 euros for the CPU alone) it has returned its price manyfold.
But the 9k generation might be the time I finally upgrade, personally.
I still have the same CPU since release and I am even more excited for Zen 6 with X3D Chip when it´s actually not feeling like a refresh like now.
No dual CCDs anymore and that is what I am looking for (except up to 32 cores)
hardware improvements are becoming really incremental these days. Hardly any reason to upgrade before 3-5 generations difference
I'm still on 3700X, with a 4070Ti. Runs Cyberpunk 2077 with path tracing and DLSS quality at 1440p no issue.
Similar situation with my 10850k but almost 5 gens old. Intel does unnecessarily release skus every year tho. I'd only upgrade for better 1% lows in games but it's still more than plenty of performance for day to day multitasking. Waiting out a few more gens.
I got a 9700x last week and i've had 0 issues. Running at 5600 Mhz with no tweaking done. Sounds like a board issue or lack of bios update to me. This thing has been a beast for me.
My 7800X3D is very relieved.
Waiting for last supported Gen on B650-E until I upgrade.
lol at the starfield segment XD..
I know it was part of the joke, but if anyone's seeing "blue screens" in Starfield that's 100% not the game. Crashes sure, but not blue screens.
@@me2olive That bothers me more than if it wasn't... 90% of the dumb bashing of Stafield and Bethesda in general is just "jokes and memes" used as a cover for what it is basically misinformation and lies.
Imagine if GN bashed a popular game on a made-up problem, or a popular brand of hardware. "Fractal cases cook your GPU, haha I know it's BS but it's a meme so it's fine!"
PS: If anyone thinks that it's not true, find a list of "Todd Howard lies" and actually search for them in the original context, you'll find out that every single one of them is taken out of context, it's so blatant, I've seen people speculating for hundreds of comments on the "300 Endings for Fallout 3" one, under the video of the original interview, in which he explain exactly what he means by "300 endings"
A CPU generation spent on improving efficiency is never wasted, the gains will come down the line - the 9800X3D is likely to be a worthy upgrade from the 5800X3D.
However, I'm still holding out for that X3D+G, an APU-class (12+ RDNA3+ cores iGPU) Ryzen chip with 3D V-Cache.
Efficiency is nice but it doesn't make people upgrade, zen5 will sell poorly
@@ms3862Zen 5 IPC is already above Intel. The 9700X efficency is way better than the 7700X (also the thermals compared to my 12700K are just plain bad).
This channel is the only one where you have such amounts of information, I use the wrong review to decide if I‘ll get the 5700X3D
Never before have I seen someone spike a corporation into the curb this hard in less than 15 seconds
Sure, one could hardly ask for a better setup, but still
I'm actually really glad they are taking some generations to reduce power usage and cooling package sizes..... on both cpu and gpus
They have previously done both same time, better efficiency AND better performance. So ZEN 5 is not a success.
I think the problem is that AMD went ham on the 95° temperature limit just to push clocks to the max out of the box for Zen 4.
So they must have figured that was not sustainable for Zen 5.
Why would it be? Intel ran laptop chips at 100C for years, they have upped it to 110C now.
Just because a load of people lost their chit, because fancy cooling caused more power to up frequency rather than lower temps, doesn't make 95C bad.
If you didn't like it changing a few BIOS settings lowered temps and power, or just buy the non-x chips or x3D.
just because they optimize it to run at 95 degrees doesn't mean you have to run it at 95 degrees. In fact, it might be detrimental to run it constantly at the thermal limit because that introduces thermal throttling. What's truly worrisome is that AMD might be running into the same mistake that Intel made, increasing voltages to the moon...
@@RobBCactive I'm talking about AMD setting the bar too high for Ryzen's own good and it was only a rather lavish attempt to keep up with Intel's own incompetent clock speed "inflation" even though AMD is ahead on IPC.
AMD can't conceivably push performance up with the unreasonable 95° standard every 18 months with newer chips, they would be sacrificing their performance-per-watt targets gen on gen. So for Zen 5 there had to be some form of regression to undo the mistake that is max temperature out of the box.
It's either that or we'd also be seeing Intel's instability problem crawl into AMD's CPUs. It is not worth the risk.
@@RobBCactive I agree with that though process. We already had the non x base variants. This is just a 9700 victim of AMD naming (and still worse value than existing 7700)
They also notice the impact of power prices going up all over the world, most dramaticaly in the professional space, and apply it company wide as a focus point for the brand. Actually smart move, I'm more interested in this than raw power (my 5800X3D is already more than enough for gaming as far as perf goes)
I'm realy glad they are reducing the power. I got a 5800X3D and 105 Watt is difficult to cool with a small SFF case. I got a 280mm AIO which still barely manages to cool everything in the summer with an ambient temperature of 30 degrees Celcius in my room. I hope the 9800X3D will be running on similar wattage as the 9700X.