News AMD Ryzen 9 7900, Ryzen 7 7700, and Ryzen 5 7600 Review: Zen 4 Gets More Affordable

[Admin]

We put AMD's three new lower-power 65W Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 processors through our full gamut of CPU benchmarks.

AMD Ryzen 9 7900, Ryzen 7 7700, and Ryzen 5 7600 Review: Zen 4 Gets More Affordable : Read more

 

[zecoeco]

Aside from the performance, these chips are exceptionally power efficient.
The reason for this performance gap in multi-threaded benchmarks is the lack of a hybrid architecture (more cores), and intel is in advantage for that
I expect Zen 5 to adapt the LITTLE.big architecture, yes, late but hopefully a much better implementation than intel's.
The combination of dense Zen4c cores and Zen5 cores will be exciting.

 

[baboma]

@Paul Alcorn: Did you test the non-X CPUs w/ the bundled coolers? What were their thermal numbers? TIA.

Edit: I don't see a test bench configuration for AMD CPUs? Also, test bench for Intel is mislabeled as for 12th-gen.

 

[baboma]

I'm taking the Amazon pricing as a benchmark, as other vendors (read: NewEgg) tend to follow Amazon pricing.

Apparently, 7900X and 7600X pricing are now raised back to original MSRP, while the 7700X remains at the $345 sale price. If this holds, the article's assumption, that the non-X CPUs' street pricing will drop from MSRP, will not likely happen.

7900X https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B0BBJ59WJ4

7700X https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B0BBHHT8LY

7600X https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B0BBJDS62N

Also, no low-end Ryzen 3.

 

[-Fran-]

Thanks for the review!

As per in other times: could you also offer DDR4 benches alongside whenever you claim "but Intel also supports DDR4" when talking prices. Or at least a reference to an article doing a deep dive in for the DDR5 and DDR4 differences with Intel 13th gen and 12th gen. Specially the i5 and i7 parts. I know you've done it for the i9, but the i9 has higher cache, so it can hide latency and bandwidth differences ever-so-slightly better.

Also, Intel, it seems, didn't sample the press their non-K parts and they've already released them. It also seems they've cut down cache in some models which may impact their performance (hence "value"). Will you bench some of them any time soon?

Regards.

 

[salgado18]

Aside from the performance, these chips are exceptionally power efficient.
The reason for this performance gap in multi-threaded benchmarks is the lack of a hybrid architecture (more cores), and intel is in advantage for that
I expect Zen 5 to adapt the LITTLE.big architecture, yes, late but hopefully a much better implementation than intel's.
The combination of dense Zen4c cores and Zen5 cores will be exciting.

AMD doesn't need big.LITTLE. Just look at the Ryzen 9 7900 vs the Core i7-13700. Both have a base TDP of 65W, but while the Ryzen can keep clock speeds of 3.7GHz, the Intel needs to lower down to 2.0/1.5GHz. If such a Ryzen lowers down to 2.0GHz, it could be below 40W. big.LITTLE is just Intel trying to keep up with their powerful OR efficient cores, against AMD's powerful AND efficient cores.

Which makes me mad that there are so few mobile offerings using Ryzens. Is Intel offering their chips for free (again) or something?

 

[Elusive Ruse]

Thanks for the review!

As per in other times: could you also offer DDR4 benches alongside whenever you claim "but Intel also supports DDR4" when talking prices. Or at least a reference to an article doing a deep dive in for the DDR5 and DDR4 differences with Intel 13th gen and 12th gen. Specially the i5 and i7 parts. I know you've done it for the i9, but the i9 has higher cache, so it can hide latency and bandwidth differences ever-so-slightly better.

Also, Intel, it seems, didn't sample the press their non-K parts and they've already released them. It also seems they've cut down cache in some models which may impact their performance (hence "value"). Will you bench some of them any time soon?

Regards.

This is the only comparison I have found yet.

View: https://youtu.be/e5X0RuduRdU

 

[Coffee Fueled Curmudgeon]

Motherboard makers still going to make damn sure they cover the costs of AMD supporting a platform for longer than they'd like.

The upfront sting to offset people holding on to the board for longer isn't going away, it pretty obviously a response to the sales impact of longevity.

Looking forward to seeing the comparisons for budget builds between the 13500 and 7600 given how strong the 13400 is in terms of trading blows with more expensive chips.

Even some £200 motherboards (that aren't gash) would be nice....

 

[RodroX]

mmmmm, if zen 4 mobos goes down in price, and you are not in a hurry, will you still go and buy one of this new 7000 cpus?, knowing what the 7000 X3D may bring to table (specially gaming wise).....
Perhaps only as a place holder till the new X3D comes out.

But I still don't see any reason to buy AM5 with the high platform price. And don't get me wrong, I would love to have a faster CPU than my beloved R5 3600 in a newer platform. I could use more performance in some tasks. I just don't feel like getting a new CPU for my end of the road AM4 system. And intel is a end of the road platform too.

 

[-Fran-]

mmmmm, if zen 4 mobos goes down in price, and you are not in a hurry, will you still go and buy one of this new 7000 cpus?, knowing what the 7000 X3D may bring to table (specially gaming wise).....
Perhaps only as a place holder till the new X3D comes out.

But I still don't see any reason to buy AM5 with the high platform price. And don't get me wrong, I would love to have a faster CPU than my beloved R5 3600 in a newer platform. I could use more performance in some tasks. I just don't feel like getting a new CPU for my end of the road AM4 system. And intel is a end of the road platform too.

Sorry to say, but that doesn't make much sense... If you're not in need for more I/O or need PCIe4/5 for something specific, slapping a 5800X3D will give you 2 gens worth of CPU performance for about half the cost of a platform upgrade (similar priced CPU+DDR5+MoBo).

I don't disagree with waiting for the new VCache versions, but if you don't want to spend the extra money, I don't see why it's so bad to just get the 5800X3D now and skip 2 more gens.

Regards.

 

[RodroX]

Sorry to say, but that doesn't make much sense... If you're not in need for more I/O or need PCIe4/5 for something specific, slapping a 5800X3D will give you 2 gens worth of CPU performance for about half the cost of a platform upgrade (similar priced CPU+DDR5+MoBo).

I don't disagree with waiting for the new VCache versions, but if you don't want to spend the extra money, I don't see why it's so bad to just get the 5800X3D now and skip 2 more gens.

Regards.

I want, and I indeed need more connectivity. Sadly more than my current mobo can deliver. So the 5800X3D is not an option by itself.

If I had a 570/550 mobo, perhaps. Besides where I live the 5800X3D is almost imposible to get. And when available, way more expensinve than it should.

 

[PlaneInTheSky]

You'll also need to purchase pricey DDR5 memory, which isn't a great pairing with chips in this price range.

AM5 is a complete no-go for anyone on a budget. The chips are expensive, the mobo are expensive, and you're required to buy expensive DDR5. For people who already own DDR4, this is a huge wasted cost.

AMD seems completely uninterested in providing good value at this point.

AMD has no answer at all to the i3 13100 and i5 13400, which both support DDR4.

 

[Brian D Smith]

Sadly, if a writer on this site cannot use the term 'overclock' in a review...they don't know what to write.
This is ALL about efficiency...and they still have to use the word 'overclock' in every paragraph.

Anyway....nice cooler aside,..why not just use the existing CPU and Zen Master to set the existing CPU to 65w?

 

[alceryes]

AM5 is a complete no-go for anyone on a budget. The chips are expensive, the mobo are expensive, and you're required to buy expensive DDR5. For people who already own DDR4, this is a huge wasted cost.

AMD seems completely uninterested in providing good value at this point.

AMD has no answer at all to the i3 13100 and i5 13400, which both support DDR4.

Those 13th gen Intel chips you mentioned are the last generation of chips to grace the LGA 1700 socket. 14th gen and beyond will NOT work on any Intel board you purchase today - dead end.
AM5 is a brand-new platform that should see at least 3 generations of AMD CPUs (if not 4) on it. Support for PCIe 5 GPUs, PCIe 5 NVMe SSDs, and DDR 5 ensure that it will be a platform to build on for years to come. Of course, all this new technology comes at a new (high) price.
If you already have an Intel board and DDR 4 RAM then, yes, upgrading your current CPU to breathe new life into your system may be the best choice. But, if you've got the funds, are on a few generations old Intel system, and are eyeing a full system upgrade, picking up an LGA 1700 platform would be a big mistake in terms of future upgradability.

 

[PlaneInTheSky]

14th gen and beyond will NOT work on any Intel board you purchase today - dead end

Good lord who cares. No budget conscious user who buys a 13th gen CPU will buy a 14th gen a year later for a minuscule performance difference.

People on a budget stick with their system for years.

This idea that the average user is upgrading yearly from CPU gen to CPU gen is complete baloney, because it makes no economic sense. Steam hardware surveys prove this, once people built their PC, they pretty much only upgrade the GPU and that's about it. And with current GPU prices, it's doubtful people will even do that.

 

[alceryes]

Good lord who cares. No budget conscious user who buys a 13th gen CPU will buy a 14th gen a year later for a minuscule performance difference.

People on a budget stick with their system for years.

This idea that the average user is upgrading yearly from CPU gen to CPU gen is complete baloney. Steam hardware surveys prove this.

Kinda my point. You want something that will be valid for years AND has upgrade options 5 years down the road. LGA 1700 will not - period.

I mean, if you're dead set against AMD that's fine. But in that case, do yourself a favor and keep waiting a bit longer until Intel's next socket comes out at least.

Edit - And just as I posted this I was checking out some news and some leaked roadmaps have the Raptor Lake refresh still on LGA 1700. Maybe there will be a half-gen upgrade path after all. 🤷‍♂️

 

[PlaneInTheSky]

Kinda my point. You want something that will be valid for years AND has upgrade options 5 years down the road.

Right, that's LTT his argument too.

But I've been around PC long enough to know no one thinks like that. No one says to themsevles "yes, this motherboard is twice the price, but it will still have CPU upgrades in 5 years".

In 5 years motherboards will look very different. They will likely all have 10Gbit/s+ ethernet, will have USB-C by default on all ports, will have PCIe 6.0+, will have DDR6, etc.

You are much better off buying an affordable motherboard today, and just getting a newer one with all the new features in 5 years from now, than throwing your money away on the "promise" that AMD will still support your ancient board in 5 years.

 

[PlaneInTheSky]

Btw, this idea of spending money on a platform for the promise of subsequent CPU upgrades, fell flat on its face when Windows 11 was released, and suddenly tons of motherboards from a few years ago were no longer supported. For Windows 12 Microsoft might demand a TPM 3.0 requirement, and your expensive old motherboard won't support it.

 

[alceryes]

Btw, this idea of spending money on a platform for the promise of subsequent CPU upgrades, fell flat on its face when Windows 11 was released, and suddenly tons of motherboards from a few years ago were no longer supported. For Windows 12 Microsoft might demand a TPM 3.0 requirement, and your expensive old motherboard won't support it.

Luckily, Windows 10 is still fully supported through Oct 14, 2025. Those with systems that don't support Windows 11 are still happily on Windows 10. Windows 11 is just Windows 10 with window dressing. Totally unnecessary.

Not gonna derail this thread anymore. We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[TerryLaze]

AMD doesn't need big.LITTLE. Just look at the Ryzen 9 7900 vs the Core i7-13700. Both have a base TDP of 65W, but while the Ryzen can keep clock speeds of 3.7GHz, the Intel needs to lower down to 2.0/1.5GHz. If such a Ryzen lowers down to 2.0GHz, it could be below 40W. big.LITTLE is just Intel trying to keep up with their powerful OR efficient cores, against AMD's powerful AND efficient cores.

Ryzen at 65W TDP will use 88W , intel at 65W TDP will use 65W TDP.
Also the clock numbers each company states for base power are based on completely different metrics using completely different software.
So you can't really compare them, we would need to find a benchmark that actually shows real clocks when running different apps to see what's really going on.
https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3491-explaining-precision-boost-overdrive-benchmarks-auto-oc

Package Power Tracking (“PPT”): The PPT threshold is the allowed socket power consumption permitted across the voltage rails supplying the socket. Applications with high thread counts, and/or “heavy” threads, can encounter PPT limits that can be alleviated with a raised PPT limit.

1. Default for Socket AM4 is at least 142W on motherboards rated for 105W TDP processors.
2. Default for Socket AM4 is at least 88W on motherboards rated for 65W TDP processors.

Which makes me mad that there are so few mobile offerings using Ryzens. Is Intel offering their chips for free (again) or something?

Mobile needs specialized things especially from the iGPU, since most of them have a dual GPU setup the inbuild GPU for power saving has to actually be useful for power saving and quicksync destroys in power efficiency.
Also since most of them have a dual GPU setup the actual gaming performance of the iGPU is pretty useless.
Only the models that don't have an extra GPU are good candidates for ryzen but in those models they want the cheapest chips possible.

 

[ottonis]

The headline should be: "Zen4 gets an efficiency wonder", rather than "Zen4 gets more affordable" .

 

[Elusive Ruse]

Right, that's LTT his argument too.

But I've been around PC long enough to know no one thinks like that. No one says to themsevles "yes, this motherboard is twice the price, but it will still have CPU upgrades in 5 years".

In 5 years motherboards will look very different. They will likely all have 10Gbit/s+ ethernet, will have USB-C by default on all ports, will have PCIe 6.0+, will have DDR6, etc.

You are much better off buying an affordable motherboard today, and just getting a newer one with all the new features in 5 years from now, than throwing your money away on the "promise" that AMD will still support your ancient board in 5 years.

I actually think like that, I always build my PC with the next 5-6 years in mind, your myopic view is not a shared among everyone, so stop spamming every AMD thread with the same posts and act like your word is gospel.

 

[Elusive Ruse]

Those 13th gen Intel chips you mentioned are the last generation of chips to grace the LGA 1700 socket. 14th gen and beyond will NOT work on any Intel board you purchase today - dead end.
AM5 is a brand-new platform that should see at least 3 generations of AMD CPUs (if not 4) on it. Support for PCIe 5 GPUs, PCIe 5 NVMe SSDs, and DDR 5 ensure that it will be a platform to build on for years to come. Of course, all this new technology comes at a new (high) price.
If you already have an Intel board and DDR 4 RAM then, yes, upgrading your current CPU to breathe new life into your system may be the best choice. But, if you've got the funds, are on a few generations old Intel system, and are eyeing a full system upgrade, picking up an LGA 1700 platform would be a big mistake in terms of future upgradability.

Exactly, AM4 served us well and for a long time; AM5 might not last that long but I hope it does. Regardless, change is here and AMD decided to go for it. Intel needed a big win after a battering it received over the past few generations and good for them and us the consumers. However, pretending immediate and long-term future is not DDR5 is just a coping mechanism at this point

 

[ottonis]

I actually think like that, I always build my PC with the next 5-6 years in mind, your myopic view is not a shared among everyone, so stop spamming every AMD thread with the same posts and act like your word is gospel.

I agree. I still use a Sandy Bridge based PC from 2011 as my daily workhorse for everything office, email and some occasional photoshop and video editing. It also runs older but nice looking games very well (with a 1060 3GB GTX).

 

[TerryLaze]

I agree. I still use a Sandy Bridge based PC from 2011 as my daily workhorse for everything office, email and some occasional photoshop and video editing. It also runs older but nice looking games very well (with a 1060 3GB GTX).

So what exactly is it that you agree with?!
If intel brought out a 2022 CPU compatible with the sandy bridge socket you would keep the mobo you have now and put a new cpu in it?
Even if it would only use 4 cores and only up to 4Ghz or so?!
You are agreeing with planeinthesky here, saying that you build a system and that's it until you worked it to the ground and then you go for a new system.