News Two AMD Zen 5 CPUs may receive a significant performance uplift — Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 5 9600X rumored for 105W TDP option with next AGESA update

[Admin]

AMD is reportedly preparing a new AM5 AGESA microcode update to boost the TDP of its Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 5 9600X processors from 65W to 105W.

Two AMD Zen 5 CPUs may receive a significant performance uplift — Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 5 9600X rumored for 105W TDP option with next AGESA update : Read more

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

'Without PBO, we discovered that the Ryzen 7 9700X performs very similarly to its predecessor in most tasks, including multi-threaded performance. In our multi-threaded performance ranking, the 9700X was 7% faster than the 7700X. However, with PBO, that margin increased significantly to 22% in favor of the 9700X.'

I don't get this logic. I mean, it's great saying the 9700x with PBO is 22% ahead of it's previous gen model without PBO, and wow that's a big gap. But when PBO is enabled on the 7700x, what's the delta then? Back to 7%? It's not a fair comparison, and not enough to justify the mostly MEH Zen 5 CPU's and their maligned uplift from last gen.

 

[TechyInAZ]

The point was to demonstrate what adding power does to the 9700X and 9600X. It wasn't to point out how much faster the 9700X is vs the 7700X, with and without PBO.

 

[Giroro]

A 9700X with a higher TDP sounds like the kind of thing that AMD would call a 9800X and sell for more money.

 

[bit_user]

For example, in Cinebench 2024, we discovered that the 9700X performed 13% faster in the multi-threaded benchmark when we enabled Precision Boost Overdrive.

Yes, but the only other examples which will demonstrate such gains are also heavily-threaded tasks. The effect on gaming and single-threaded tasks showed PBO to offer negligible benefits. Hence, most users probably won't notice a difference.

IMO, this would do nothing to address the bigger problems undermining Zen 5, but I suppose it'll be nice for some.

 

[bit_user]

But when PBO is enabled on the 7700x, what's the delta then? Back to 7%?

No, certainly not. Enabling PBO on the 7700X only increased its Cinebench (MT) scores by a meager 2.5%!

​

One of Ryzen 9000's selling points is that it's much better at boosting, due to its intrinsic efficiency improvements.

It's not a fair comparison, and not enough to justify the mostly MEH Zen 5 CPU's and their maligned uplift from last gen.

In a way it's kind of fair, since they're using 9700X + PBO to approximate 9700X @ 105W, which is the same TDP the old 7700X had. Granted, the 9700X can use much more than 105 W under PBO, but going to 105 W probably gives you most of the gains to be had.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

In a way it's kind of fair, since they're using 9700X + PBO to approximate 9700X @ 105W,

Yeah, I see your point. 2.5% isn't much. I though it would be a bit more.

 

[Notton]

AMD should have released these as the 9600 and 9700. Direct upgrades for the respective 7600 and 7700 65W parts
Instead, they chose to shoot themselves in the foot.

 

[hannibal]

A 9700X with a higher TDP sounds like the kind of thing that AMD would call a 9800X and sell for more money.

Considering that they did have 3700x and 3800x... that sound more likely thing to happen!
Not all chips benefit from 105w... But if they bin chips that can actully get some benefits from higher wattage and sell those as 9800x... Then this rumour sounds more plausible!
All in all 105w does not make 9700x much faster. Couple of persents with huge ingrease in power usage!

 

[hannibal]

AMD should have released these as the 9600 and 9700. Direct upgrades for the respective 7600 and 7700 65W parts
Instead, they chose to shoot themselves in the foot.

AMD will release 9700 and 9600 later! When they collect enough chips that are not good enough for being 9700x and 9600x! There always are chips that are weaker, so we just have to wait maybe half a year and AMD will release those low cost low quality parts. Just like they have done with each and every release!

 

[logainofhades]

Zen 5 unfortunately is still a flop, for regular desktop users. Server side should be awesome, though. Hopefully the rumored cache improvements will make the upcoming x3d chips worth purchasing, for gamers.

 

[-Fran-]

Hm... If they add an "ECO" mode of 105W and keep the current as 65W alongside, then it'll be fine. Changing the default behaviour to 105W I do not like. Specially since people complaining about the performance of these CPUs is not really interested in the MT aspect of them. AMD swinging and missing like a blind child again?

Also, wasn't this also rumoured before the launch even? Am I remembering wrong? Well, not that it matters, I guess.

Regards.

 

[DS426]

AMD should have released these as the 9600 and 9700. Direct upgrades for the respective 7600 and 7700 65W parts
Instead, they chose to shoot themselves in the foot.

Greed entirely; moreoever, 9700X compares pretty closely to 7700 in performance in a lot of workloads and actually has similar performance-per-watt as well (actually worse in some cases, going against the "Zen 5 is SUPER efficient" marketing notion).

Folks, I want Zen 5 to be as awesome as AMD said it would be. So far -- at least with the 9600X and 9700X -- it's just not there. Zen 5 appears to be architected for bigger gains in professional and server/datacenter workloads; gaming is truly "meh" as Gamers Nexus and others have said (Hardware Unboxed probably not as kind, lol). GN actually shows how Zen 5 is boosting in comparison to Zen 4 counterparts, and generally it's lower, yet not with huge FPS-per-Watt gains.

I'm fine with saying that AMD knows there are issues (the delay illustrates this) and new AGESA will boost performance, BUT!: AMD actually changing the TDP on exisitng SKU's is really craptically as OEM's and SI's already have their cooling designs built out on these based on AMD's original guidance; in other words, it should be a thing that new AGESA "unlocks" but doesn't turn on by default. Interestingly, PBO has shown to run away on power consumption without significantly increasing performance in many gaming workloads, so I'm curious what else AMD is changing here to sort of raise the waterline on performance across the board without wrecking power efficiency.

My final take: maybe TSMC 4nm doesn't provide the gains that AMD really needed, i.e. once Zen 5 is produced on TSMC 3nm, it'll finally be what it should have been all along??? It's been about 2 years since Zen 4 came out, so I totally understand and agree with AMD releasing their next [actually new] CPU products now, but I just can't help but wonder how different Zen 5 will look in 2 months from now (new AGESA), in 1+ year from now (new node), etc. What else can be said than AMD is terrible at launches and marketing?

 

[jokepoke69]

Maybe I am "missing something" [Bold print being a Moderator edit to replace offensive word]but what's the point of these... you overclock the 9700X and it goes from 65W to 105 or even more. Why would you need an AGESA for this and also why would this magically add performance compared to 7700X at 105W? I doubt there would be a groundbreaking difference AMD claimed.

How is different power limit patch going to fix a literal refresh? (At least thats how it looks so far based on HU, GN reviews)

Idk am I crazy?

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Zen 5 on TSMC 4nm is only good for Server/ Professional / NON-GAMING workloads so far.

Sad, but that's the reality of the situation.

 

[jokepoke69]

Zen 5 on TSMC 4nm is only good for Server/ Professional / NON-GAMING workloads so far.

Sad, but that's the reality of the situation.

For NON-GAMING workloads how? Based on HU video the uplift in common apps like Adobe, Blender etc. is minimal almost none. Unless decently cheaper than 7000 series it's waste of sand.

 

[Jagar123]

From what I see this is just going to make the CPU less efficient. Sure, multi-threaded workloads may be a few percentage points faster (some even 10%+ faster) but this won't fix the issue everyone is seeing with Zen 5. I am super disappointed with AMD with this release.

 

[Giroro]

but what's the point of these... you overclock the 9700X and it goes from 65W to 105 or even more. Why would you need an AGESA for this and also why would this magically add performance compared to 7700X at 105W? I doubt there would be a groundbreaking difference AMD claimed.

How is different power limit patch going to fix a literal refresh? (At least thats how it looks so far based on HU, GN reviews)

Idk am I crazy?

It's my understanding PBO doesn't technically give the CPU unlimited power. It increases the power to a ratio relative to it's TDB. I think this is the 88W PPT number next to the 65W TDP.
So by increasing the TDP, you would also be increasing the max power you can deliver to the CPU in PBO.

However in practice, the Mobo manufacturers usually unlock this cap, and let you set the max power as high as the board can handle, so the limiting factor for PBO is usually the chip's temperature. But that's for DIY.

An OEM is probably going to force you to use a 9700X at 65W with no PBO. This would give them (and maybe their customers) a choice to run the chip at 105W in an officially supported way - without having to deal with overclocking, warranty issues, etc.

 

[salgado18]

I think this is problematic. The CPUs are being sold as 65W, so almost any cheap cooler will suffice. But one BIOS update later, and the chip will run too hot for these coolers, increasing noise and possibly throttling under heavy loads. They really should let PBO do that task for them, and launch a 9600XT or something. Sound nice in enthusiast terms, but most users won't see the increased TDP coming.

 

[Papusan]

AMD did something similar with their GPU launch. Performance vs value was bad hence they throw out an new vbios right after launch. Typical AMD. They just can't make it correct.

There is only one or two options... AMD used inferior silicon for lower end SKUs or they want to upsell their more expensive models with this trashy 65W move for their 97/96xx X labled processors... Pick your poison.

Nvidia dropped it’s GeForce RTX 2060 from $349 to $299 in anticipation of the new Radeon card’s launch at $279. AMD responded by pushing out a new vBIOS to boost the performance of the RX 5600 XT.

vBIOS updates and drivers available for Radeon RX 5600 XT​

 

[jokepoke69]

AMD used inferior silicon for lower end SKUs or they want to upsell their more expensive models with this trashy 65W move for their X labled processors... Pick your poison.

The problem with the more expensive models is that there is hardly any improvement over last gen. We talkin 1-5% at best.

 

[Papusan]

The problem with the more expensive models is that there is hardly any improvement over last gen. We talkin 1-5% at best.

They still prefer that the consumers buy the more expensive chips even if they don't perform as adverticed. Trash down the TDP on the lower end 9000 series SKUs help on the profit margins.

 

[jokepoke69]

They still prefer that the consumers buy the more expensive chips even if they don't perform as adverticed. Trash down the TDP on the lower end 9000 series SKUs help on the profit margins.

I see that makes sense.

 

[bit_user]

AMD should have released these as the 9600 and 9700. Direct upgrades for the respective 7600 and 7700 65W parts
Instead, they chose to shoot themselves in the foot.

This narrative lacks imagination. What if AMD is planning a 9600 and 9700 that achieve better efficiency by limiting peak clock speeds (and possibly other things)?

The other problem with this concept of simply renaming the X-series CPUs is what to do about the performance 6-core and 8-core tiers filled by the 7600X and 7700X. Are you saying they should just leave these empty? Even while the 9600X and 9700X provide competent gaming options?

I'm afraid some people are just way too hung up on TDP, these days.

 

[bit_user]

Zen 5 unfortunately is still a flop, for regular desktop users.

This take sounds harsh to me. At least, for the single-chiplet versions, anyway. They provide some real performance gains and boost well without an expensive thermal solution. If AMD can drop the prices enough, I'm sure the 9600X and 9700X can each find a defensible spot in the market.