Well maybe those same people already have a setup and cannot afford to change it but they are still allowed to hold an opinion right?
-
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
AMD want to dramatically increase core count with Zen6 though (16c ccd), so it'll be tough to keep it on AM5 imo. Just imagine if Zen5 is the underwhelming dogpile we're left with on this platform
That’s the beauty of AMD’s glue. It’s flexible yet strong.
Soldato
More like they went 'rebadge..' a 7700, as that would be almost fully accurate anyway given the benchmarks and power draw.
AMD want to dramatically increase core count with Zen6 though (16c ccd), so it'll be tough to keep it on AM5 imo. Just imagine if Zen5 is the underwhelming dogpile we're left with on this platform
The R9s should be a bit less underwhelming but kind of amusing if this is essentially as good as it gets after all the people slating LGA1700 for being a dead-end platform :s
Last edited:
LGA1700 is dead end, seemingly both literally and figuratively.
Soldato
Zen 6 will be on AM5 and probably more.
We'll see. If the rumours are correct as to the configuration of the 12P only part coming to LGA1700 it may get the last laugh yet.
Intel are struggling with 24 cores so I can’t see how a 12 core saves Soc 1700.
12P / 24 threads using 2x 6P tiles.
probably more than a 14900
thenAMD has a habit of cutting prices a couple of months after launch but I think these will start dropping within a couple of weeks if sales are really bad.
I feel for anyone who went out and paid launch prices.
some folks will always pay launch prices. anyways I'm sure that AMD can afford a good price drop. (unless of course they have to replace them later).
Last edited:
Caporegime
I haven't seen the video yet but from that description i'm starting to wonder if the 11'th gen comparison is objectively true or is there an ulterior motive for it?
Its not as good as an upgrade from Zen 4 that a lot of us hoped but its still a good CPU and when people start clutching at the "its objectively worse that the previous generation" straws it starts to look more like they wished it is and need you to believe it is. I find that a little strange given also that quite a few reviews show very much better results than he did, i never read much in to that before but now its starting to look a bit sus.
I might comment more tomorrow when i have watched this.
Last edited:
Ulterior motive? As a 7950x owner, I'm not trying to make fun of AMD for no reason, such as just not liking them because I like Intel, which I don't.
I chose the 11th gen analogy, because it was also a recent generation of CPU launch, which turned out to be a niche product due to its: high prices, poorer efficiency than the previous generation for gamers/desktop users, having few scenarios where its performance was universally better than the product it replaced and just generally having performance that is broadly on par with the product it replaced for most people.
You may remember me making just as much fun of the 11900k at the time, you can check out my post history, I think I may have insulted 11th gen owners a little bit too much back then and caught a timeout.
For what it's worth, I don't think the 9700x/9600x are quite as much a waste of sand as Intel 11th gen was, but I do still think they are currently on the borderline waste of sand level.
I chose the 11th gen analogy, because it was also a recent generation of CPU launch, which turned out to be a niche product due to its: high prices, poorer efficiency than the previous generation for gamers/desktop users, having few scenarios where its performance was universally better than the product it replaced and just generally having performance that is broadly on par with the product it replaced for most people.
You may remember me making just as much fun of the 11900k at the time, you can check out my post history, I think I may have insulted 11th gen owners a little bit too much back then and caught a timeout.
For what it's worth, I don't think the 9700x/9600x are quite as much a waste of sand as Intel 11th gen was, but I do still think they are currently on the borderline waste of sand level.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2010
- Posts
- 2,100
Yeah, kinda wishing I'd bit the bullet when it was £470 a few weeks/a month ago lol
OTOH, I'm still pretty content with the performance of my 5950x for my 7900XT.... If I had a 4090 I'd be more tempted (7950x3D, not 9700X!)
Probably because Zen 5 architecture main focus is for workstations/ server space which has bigger margins then desktop , they want to eat into that space , so looks like they taking a hit with the desktop side
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 5,971
Unlike Nvidia who offer desktop great products too.
I'm starting to think Intel are going to eat AMD's dinner
on desktop this time around unless they pull something special off with the 9900X/9950X. Watching a review yesterday it seems like 9700X with PBO struggles to beat even the 14600K, which itself is obviously just a 13th gen rehash. Probably the X3D CPU's will take the gaming crown but for productivity/a general all round use system seems like Intel only have it to lose at the moment.
Last edited:
Even some of the productivity benchmarks are showing stagnation/regression so it’s not like it’s just gaming that sucks.