AMD Zen 4 Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 5 7600X Review: Retaking The High-End
by Ryan Smith & Gavin Bonshor on September 26, 2022 9:00 AM ESTSPEC2017 Multi-Threaded Results
Although single-threaded performance is important and Zen 4 has a clear advantage here, multi-threaded performance is also very important. Some variables to consider when evaluating multi-threaded performance is that desktop processor designs typically boost a single core higher, with the rest lagging in frequency behind to either stay under the thermal (TJMax) or power (TDP) envelopes. Some manufacturing processes are more efficient by design due to extensive R+D and product management, with Zen 4 looking to be much more in terms of perf per watt over Intel's Alder Lake architecture.
In the instance of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, it has a clear advantage over its predecessors in that it not only has a higher single core boost (5.7 GHz versus 4.9 GHz), but it also has a higher TDP than the Ryzen 9 5950X (170 W versus 105 W. This increase in TDP not only allows for a higher frequency, but it allows for a higher frequency spread across all of the cores when under full load.
Opening up our look at our SPECint2017 NT results, and we see a similar uplift in performance gains as we did in the single-threaded tests. In tests such as 500.perlbench_r, the Ryzen 9 7950 is 38% ahead of AMD's previous generation Ryzen 9 5950X, which is impressive. In 523_.xalanbmk_r, the Ryzen 9 7950 is 55% ahead of the Ryzen 9 5950X, and over 100% better in performance over the Zen 2-based Ryzen 9 3950X.
In our SPECfp2017 NT testing, certain workloads such as in 538.imagick_r showed massive increases in performance over previous generations, with a 30% uplift in performance over Zen 3. The difference here between Zen 3 and Zen 2 was marginal (10%), but Zen 4 is a more efficient core architectural design, with many improvements across the board playing a hand here; the switch to DDR5 versus DDR4, more cache per core, higher frequency, higher TDP, etc.
Overall AMD's Zen 4 architectural differences and improvements show that not only does AMD have the crown for single-threaded performance, but it's also ahead in multi-threaded performance too, at least from our SPEC2017 testing. As always when Intel or AMD makes a claim on IPC performance increases, AMD seems to be about right with claims of around 29% in ST performance and even more so in MT performance.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
205 Comments
View All Comments
RestChem - Wednesday, October 5, 2022 - link
Meh, time will out the ultimate price-points and all that, but as it emerges I really wonder what kind of users are looking to drop this kind of dollarses on high-end AMD builds. My gut is that they've priced themselves out of their primary demographic, and max TDP is right up there too, same as with their GPUs. When it comes down to a difference of a couple hundred bucks per build (assuming people build these with the pricey DDR5-6000 there's scant mobo support for through whatever AMD's integrated mem-OC profile scheme is) are there going to be enough users who just root hard enough for the underdog to build on these platforms, contra even high-end Alder Lake or (however much extra, reamins at time of writing to be seen) Raptor Lake builds? Before the announcements I was expecting AMD to get in cheap again, promise at least like performance for a bit of a discount, but it seems even those days are over and they want to play head-to-head. I wish them the best but I don't see them scoring well in that fight. Replytvdang7 - Thursday, October 6, 2022 - link
" I have a 1440p 144Hz monitor and I play at 1080p just because that's what I'm used to."Is this some kind of joke. We are supposed to listen to reviewers that are stuck in 2010 Reply
Hresna - Sunday, October 9, 2022 - link
I’m curious as to whether there’s any appreciable difference to a consumer as to whether a particular PCIe lane or USB port is provisioned by the CPU or the Chipset…. Like, is there a reliability, performance, or some other metric difference?I’m just curious why it’s a design consideration to even include them in the CPU design to begin with, unless it has to do with how the CPU lanes are multiplexed in/out of the CPU and somehow some of the lanes can talk inter-device via the chipset without involving the cpu… Reply
bigtree - Monday, October 10, 2022 - link
Where is octa channel memory? dual channel memory is a $300 CPU.Where is native Thunderbolt 4 support?
(mac minis have had thunderbolt 3 for over 5 years).
Cant even find one X670 Motherboard with 4x Thunderbolt 4 ports. And you want $300? Thunderbolt 4 should be standard on the cheapest boards. Its a $20 chip. Reply
Oxford Guy - Monday, October 10, 2022 - link
The mission of corporations is to extract profit for shareholders and protect the lavish lifestyles of the rich. It is not to provide value to the plebs. Do the absolute minimum is the mantra. ReplyRedGreenBlue - Tuesday, October 11, 2022 - link
That must be why Intel made Thunderbolt royalty-free and it’s now built into USB 4. ReplyOxford Guy - Wednesday, October 12, 2022 - link
It probably can afford to since states like Ohio are willing to bankroll half of the cost of its fabs. ReplyRedGreenBlue - Tuesday, October 11, 2022 - link
It’s built into USB 4 now. Just make sure it’s functional already because it might need a driver, AMD did that on the 600 series. Aside from that important fact, I don’t care if there aren't many boards with it. The thunderbolt ecosystem has been crap since the beginning. Peripheral makers didn’t take advantage of it because USB was a more common approach and intel didn’t make thunderbolt cheap to implement. The Mac Minis have it because Apple made a big bet on it when it came out. These days it’s nice to have but it’s a throw-away feature unless you have a niche product that needs it. It’s for niche purposes and that would have been a waste of pci lanes. I would’ve liked it for external GPU’s but intel effectively shut that down and I don’t know if they’ve opened the door to it again. USB is way more convenient. ReplyRedGreenBlue - Tuesday, October 11, 2022 - link
And 8 channel memory, like, this sounds like a joke. That’s for server or workstation cpus because of how many layers it takes for the wiring on the board and the pins on the socket. That’s part of why server and workstation boards are so expensive. If you need that much bandwidth you’re in the wrong market segment. Look at Threadripper chips. ReplyRedGreenBlue - Tuesday, October 11, 2022 - link
It would be appreciated if architecture reviews had the pipeline differences in a chart to compare across generations. Anandtech used to have that included and it gave a good comparison of different generations and competitor architectures. I can understand not including it in the product review but I don’t remember a chart being in the previous Zen 4 overview article. Reply