News AMD Ryzen 9000 CPU family compared in Cinebench — purported scores for the 9900X, 9700X, and 9600X shared

[Admin]

Cinebench results of AMD's Ryzen 9900X, 9700X, and 9600X get published ahead of reviews.

AMD Ryzen 9000 CPU family compared in Cinebench — purported scores for the 9900X, 9700X, and 9600X shared : Read more

 

[TheHerald]

I wish I had bet money on this! 9600x around 12600k performance....

 

[bit_user]

IMO, the single-threaded improvement is most interesting, especially given the lack of clockspeed increases.

As for the multi-threaded cases, I wonder if it's being held back by the speed of the DDR5 memory being used. The MT case should benefit from the compound effect of Zen 5's IPC improvements and the efficiency improvements touted by AMD. Therefore, I'd expect it to improve by more than the single-threaded case.

 

[bit_user]

I wish I had bet money on this! 9600x around 12600k performance....

BTW, the R5 9600X is rated at 65 W, while the i5-12600K is rated at 125W.

Also, what's your source for an authoritative score for the i5-12600K? In this WCCFTech article, they list a score of 15982, which 17037 beats by 6.6%.

AMD Ryzen 7 9700X & Ryzen 5 9600X "Zen 5" CPUs Tested At Both Default & PBO Configs, 2% Uplift in Cyberpunk

AMD's Ryzen 7 9700X & Ryzen 5 9600X "Zen 5" CPUs have been tested in newly leaked benchmarks at both default & PBO configurations.

wccftech.com

On single-threaded CineBench R23 performance, the above WCCFTech article shows the R5 9600X being 4.0% faster than even the i5-14600K (they don't list a ST score for the i5-12600K). If we take the ST score from the Toms article, the gap jumps to 8.0%!

 

[TheHerald]

BTW, the R5 9600X is rated at 65 W, while the i5-12600K is rated at 125W.

And that is relevant to the performance, how?

BTW, the R5 9600X is rated at 65 W, while the i5-12600K is rated at 125W.

Also, what's your source for an authoritative score for the i5-12600K? In this WCCFTech article, they list a score of 15982, which 17037 beats by 6.6%

Both TPU and tomshardware.com have the 12600k at 17 to 18k. The 16k is definitely false, but let's say it's correct. Still a 6.6% difference is what I call minor, no?

The 17k you are using btw is with PBO.

 

[bit_user]

And that is relevant to the performance, how?

It's a multi-threaded benchmark, which is going to be power-limited on the i5-12600K.

The 17k you are using btw is with PBO.

Oh, good catch. Yes, Toms just took the PBO score. That explains the discrepancy between the two articles.

So, I guess we'd have to know how much power it's using in PBO mode, or just stick with the WCCFTech "(default)" scores.

 

[TheHerald]

It's a multi-threaded benchmark, which is going to be power-limited on the i5-12600K.


Oh, good catch. Yes, Toms just took the PBO score. That explains the discrepancy between the two articles.

So, I guess we'd have to know how much power it's using in PBO mode, or just stick with the WCCFTech "(default)" scores.

According to TPU the 600k scores 17500 while limited to 125w.

 

[Reality_checker]

Not final, but also unlikely to get a lot better.

The 9950X is the only interesting SKU anyway.

 

[-Fran-]

I wish they reported the clocks and power draw while testing CB. Well, in the leak at least...

Not too much longer for getting official numbers, so all points to this being a decent enough uplift with a lot of bragging rights on the efficiency department (I think).

Regards.