• 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

AMD releases a cpu that isn't squeezed dry at default and the vocal audience sulks about it.
It is a little funny. People have been complaining for years about both AMD and Intel (along with motherboard vendors) pushing their silicon to the ragged edge out of the box and sacrificing both efficiency and thermals to squeeze out every last point from launch day benchmark results. Yet we're seeing today exactly why that's been the case. Any talk about power efficiency and much-improved thermals is buried under an avalanche of relatively underwhelming performance benchmarks. I doubt AMD (or Intel) will make this mistake again.

Those 30-40% less power computation numbers in Cinebench was in the R23 release, Anandtech tested the Cinebench 2024 version and found not much difference in power wattage. Is the Cinebench 2024 more accurate or just different no idea.

Anandtech

Just looking at the other reviews on YT, so just a bit weird seeing many reviewers discussing how much lower wattage the 9700x is but then others suggesting the 7700x is similar.
That Anandtech test is using the 7700 non-X, not the 7700X. The former is a 65W part with a lower power cap. The 7700X is a lot more power-hungry out of the box.

j55er4T.png
 
It is a little funny. People have been complaining for years about both AMD and Intel (along with motherboard vendors) pushing their silicon to the ragged edge out of the box and sacrificing both efficiency and thermals to squeeze out every last point from launch day benchmark results. Yet we're seeing today exactly why that's been the case. Any talk about power efficiency and much-improved thermals is buried under an avalanche of relatively underwhelming performance benchmarks. I doubt AMD (or Intel) will make this mistake again.


That Anandtech test is using the 7700 non-X, not the 7700X. The former is a 65W part with a lower power cap. The 7700X is a lot more power-hungry out of the box.

j55er4T.png

I think it's more what it's priced at, 6/8 cores are like in no mans land you don't buy them for multi threaded workloads ? And gaming isnt much difference 7700x and power difference isn't as wide

Current pricing 7700x and 7800x3d are better buys imo
 
Last edited:
WTF is going on here???? How much did AMD pay Linus?

Polar opposite review...



Linus has looked like he's been shilling for AMD for 3 or so years now, and AMD is literally paying Linus money to make videos, so... no conflict there obviously, plus Linus owns shares in AMD... so no conflict there either obviously

When the 4090 came out and obliterated everything, Linus said he prefer the slower AMD GPU and LTT's 4090 review was the basically the only negative review of that GPU in the industry. And now LTT's 9700 review is one of the only positive reviews
 
Last edited:
Linus has looked like he's been shilling for AMD for 3 or so years now, and AMD is literally paying Linus money to make videos, so... no conflict there obviously, plus Linus owns shares in AMD... so no conflict there either obviously

When the 4090 came out and obliterated everything, Linus said he prefer the slower AMD GPU and LTT's 4090 review was the basically the only negative review of that GPU in the industry. And now LTT's 9700 review is one of the only positive reviews
Linux has been a dick for as long as he's been on the Internet.
 
That guru3d review had a nice chart on wattage but with combined entire pc system and with 4090 graphics card
decent-wattage.jpg


That 4090 graphics though quick googling shows it can consume 33watts in idle and obviously 400+watts more in use, I do wonder though if without that 4090 graphics if the idle and Youtube 4K 45/55 watts could go down lower to 25/35 watts.
 
As others have said the results are a bit meh but the price/performance/efficiency[65w] of the Ryzen 5 9600X looks like a pretty appealing combo IMO. Makes for a compelling option for those after a mid-range PC/CPU.

Curious to see how the higher spec Ryzen 9's stack up when they're released.
 
Last edited:
Is it though? Pretty much the same performance, memory issues, I'm sure the price difference would more than make up for saving 2p a day on electricity. If I were spending ~ £200/300 on a CPU I wouldn't be buying 9000 series
 
Last edited:
You can see why they decided to have it in eco mode out of the box extra power doesn't do much for gaming where it's mostly gonna be judged on

Makes the 7800x3d look even more amazing at it's current price of £329.99
HeEyrlt.jpeg
 
Last edited:
As others have said the results are a bit meh but the price/performance/efficiency[65w] of the Ryzen 5 9600X looks like a pretty appealing combo IMO. Makes for a compelling option for those after a mid-range PC/CPU.

Curious to see how the higher spec Ryzen 9's stack up when they're released.
Price to performance is terrible on the 9600X, it’ll be nearly the same price as the 7800X3D.
 
Back
Top Bottom