• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

OcUK Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X review thread

Soldato
Joined
9 Nov 2009
Posts
24,993
Location
Planet Earth
Ryzen 5 9600X


Ryzen 7 9700X


Group Test


Youtube Reviews

 
Last edited:
Great Linux performance though especially at 65W:
(Their site might time out though).

Think I said this before, this is
Firstly a server design.
Secondly a server design.
And at least...
Thirdly a server design.

Never mind leapfrogging design teams, AMD are now big though that they should have competing design team. Never forget how the mobile team saved Intel's posterior back in the P4 days.

Guess this does explain the launch prices not being crazy!

But Linux probably already got Kernel updates months ago,and Windows is just being Windows.

Zen5 is a big change in the basic design with a doubled front end,native AVX512 performance,etc so I would expect most optimisations will be for the Zen1 to Zen4 lineage. Couple that with the seemingly rushed launch,with various bugs,etc - it's probably been released before it was ready. This would also explain why the 800 series motherboards are nowhere to be seen.

This happened with Zen1,so I am not surprised with the issues. AMD never seems to learn,although there are rumours the next Intel release is potentially decent - it might be AMD knows this and has rushed it out.

I do hope this isn't another Phenom moment.

Die size is supposed to have shrunk from 71.0mm² to 70.6mm². So basically the same.
TPU says:

So at most 6% more transistors. So impressive that they managed to gain as much FP and AVX512 as they did but the whole design says
AMD penny-pinching strikes again!
Looking at Zen4 dies shots (since this is the same size) I get things like this:
67HCNVx.jpeg

I am sure with some moving of a few bits, they could easily have squeezed 90mm² into each CCD. Or even 80mm².

Whereas a 80mm² or 90mm² part could have squeezed in more int resources, or more cache. And the die costs wouldn't have been that much more (at $15,000 per 4NP wafer, about an extra $6 per CCD).

Point being, penny-wise might have been pound-foolish if the penny-pinching ended up with a part which doesn't sell as well.

That is AMD for you,but at the same time they are quite capacity constrained and we are getting at best a half node shrink. It seems Nvidia and Intel buying up the extra capacity Apple does not use,is leading to them having to make some trade-offs.

But,then AMD should have priced this far cheaper - under £300 for the Ryzen 9 9700X.

However,the cynic in me,makes me wonder whether they think that because Intel has big issues, that they can sell everything they can make. This is the same company which released the RX7900XT at £900,because Nvidia attempted an RTX4080 12GB.
 
Last edited:
The Ryzen 7 9700X costs more than a Ryzen 7 7800X3D and as much as a Ryzen 9 7900X3D! :cry:

They have copied Nvidia in jacking up the price of the new generation to sell the old generation without further discounts.

Gamersnexus also reported lots of issues,so my advice for anyone is just to wait until the new chipsets are out and AMD has pushed out some AGESA updates. I can understand with Zen1 which this was the case,but there is zero excuse for AMD to have rushed it out. No excuse to be a BETA tester at the prices they want to charge.

Makes me wonder,whether the new Intel CPUs being released will be better than expected.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom