can you interpret this differently?
Probably severely sweating to figure some positive twist
-
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
- Thread starter CAT-THE-FIFTH
- Start date
Probably severely sweating to figure some positive twist
I think the AMD team will look at the reviews to date and go yeah, ok. I think they will be very pleased about the 9000 series. Performance ok with big drop in power comsumption. Higher chips should have plenty of performance also with a nice power drop. After all, if the user wants more that's there as well.
The 9000 series could be an example to how things are done.
Especially as AMD only have themselves to beat on both metrics
.
The 9000 series could be an example to how things are done.
Especially as AMD only have themselves to beat on both metrics
.
The Ryzen 7 9700X costs more than a Ryzen 7 7800X3D and as much as a Ryzen 9 7900X3D! 
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.
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:
I think the AMD team will look at the reviews to date and go yeah, ok. I think they will be very pleased about the 9000 series. Performance ok with big drop in power comsumption. Higher chips should have plenty of performance also with a nice power drop. After all, if the user wants more that's there as well.
The 9000 series could be an example to how things are done.
Especially as AMD only have themselves to beat on both metrics
If they had positioned the new chips that way then yeah, but the uplifts from their slides seem at the least, very misleading (e.g. the 6600 based comparisons)
It’s not a big drop in power consumption though, all AMD have done is release 65w non X chips as X versions, when you compare a 65w 8 core zen 4 to 65w 8 core zen 5 it’s just 7% faster at the same power so 7% more efficientI think the AMD team will look at the reviews to date and go yeah, ok. I think they will be very pleased about the 9000 series. Performance ok with big drop in power comsumption. Higher chips should have plenty of performance also with a nice power drop. After all, if the user wants more that's there as well.
The 9000 series could be an example to how things are done.
Especially as AMD only have themselves to beat on both metrics
TBH I think that there is more to it than that. Who is going to beat that efficiency?
That happens with every AMD release, but it is current prices new shiny's scalped for the impatient.The Ryzen 7 9700X costs more than a Ryzen 7 7800X3D and as much as a Ryzen 9 7900X3D!
I'm in two minds about it: it always looks bad every AMD release but if the alternative is that AMD never reduce prices during a generation I won't like that either!
And Zen5 should drop very fast since the increases are next to nothing especially for 22 months!
Once Zen5 is the same prices as Zen4 is now - and provided Zen4 hasn't gone on a firesale in-between - then will be the slightly better buy but this really is the smallest increase since Zen1 to Zen1+ which was no more than a refresh and optimisation.
The penny pinchers will be happy that die size stayed the same but while these should sell well in servers, on desktop spending even an extra 10mm² might have made all the difference on desktop - and in the end probably made AMD more money since they wouldn't have to reduce prices as quickly to get sales.
The Ryzen 7 9700X costs more than a Ryzen 7 7800X3D and as much as Ryzen 9 7900X3D!
They have copied Nvidia in jacking up the price of the new generation to sell the old generation without further discounts.
Resetting the starting price.
Both the products you name were much more expensive and slowly drained down. The 7700X it's "replacing" was more expensive.
Gets the old reduced products shifted and gives a thick layer of future discounting room while they build up stock of the new products instead of the classic getting wiped out at launch and painful restocking if they price competitively at the start.
Soldato
I remember getting the lowest Athlon XP chip of the range, the 1500+ or something, which was only a few hundred Mhz slower than the top chip but much cheaper.. Very good performance for the price at the time
Caporegime
The 7900X3D is a pretty tough sell. Only 6 cores 3D cache with the scheduling issues of 2 CCDs so it's got pretty cheap.The Ryzen 7 9700X costs more than a Ryzen 7 7800X3D and as much as a Ryzen 9 7900X3D!
Now it's cheap it's not quite so bad.
Last edited:
can you interpret this differently?
You didn’t read the small print did you.
To be fair what content i.e. some files will show different results with compression to others, settings and/or encoder used, etc. can make a big difference and in some cases will switch around results AMD vs Intel when it comes to those - but those results don't bare any reality to the most common real world results. Similar with Tomshardware which shows the 14700K in very poor light vs these CPUs, especially in gaming, which is not reflected in reality and similarly uses this "geomean" terminology which isn't in general use.
Yes, TPU quote the TSMC figures for N4P:
So not even the 22% which TSMC promised - although TSMC probably had some caveats with that promise anyhow.
Speaking of TPU: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-9700x/23.html
The do have the plain 7700 in their figures:
So worse in ST and gaming, somewhat better in MT - and then only 4.6% (15.7 / 15.0).
Strix Point and especially Strix Point Halo look nice but I'm not in the market for a laptop!
Asrock Aqua 7900XTX says HiBloody Nitro I have will try to eat nearly 500W if you let it!!!
Soldato
Another decent review here showing wattage benchmarks:
Load:
Idle:
Load:
Idle:
Soldato
Cant forget this review
Something wrong with their 14700K idle - mine is like the other 14th gen at around 4 watt with stock settings.
EDIT: Looks like they've got the 14700 and 14900 swapped around in the data at several points actually.
Last edited:
After the way the reviews have gone I expect the prices on these will drop very fast.
I had a look on OCUK at these just now and considering its launch day they have only been viewed 125 times in 6 hours for both CPUs combined.
Last edited:
Seems a fair variance in the review results as well - I'd have thought AMD would have managed it better but it is as if the review samples are of quite different chip quality.
That is aside from those who are still trying to cope with these CPUs not being the massive gains certain people like MLID were touting... why anyone still uses the likes of certain YouTubers for information boggles my mind after the number of times they've been exposed as a sham, but I guess it fits with what they want to believe rather than the reality.
Last edited: