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 Single-Threaded Results
SPEC2017 is a series of standardized tests used to probe the overall performance between different systems, different architectures, different microarchitectures, and setups. The code has to be compiled, and then the results can be submitted to an online database for comparison. It covers a range of integer and floating point workloads, and can be very optimized for each CPU, so it is important to check how the benchmarks are being compiled and run.
We run the tests in a harness built through Windows Subsystem for Linux, developed by Andrei Frumusanu. WSL has some odd quirks, with one test not running due to a WSL fixed stack size, but for like-for-like testing it is good enough. Because our scores aren’t official submissions, as per SPEC guidelines we have to declare them as internal estimates on our part.
For compilers, we use LLVM both for C/C++ and Fortan tests, and for Fortran we’re using the Flang compiler. The rationale of using LLVM over GCC is better cross-platform comparisons to platforms that have only have LLVM support and future articles where we’ll investigate this aspect more. We’re not considering closed-sourced compilers such as MSVC or ICC.
clang version 10.0.0
clang version 7.0.1 (ssh://git@github.com/flang-compiler/flang-driver.git
24bd54da5c41af04838bbe7b68f830840d47fc03)
-Ofast -fomit-frame-pointer
-march=x86-64
-mtune=core-avx2
-mfma -mavx -mavx2
Our compiler flags are straightforward, with basic –Ofast and relevant ISA switches to allow for AVX2 instructions.
To note, the requirements for the SPEC licence state that any benchmark results from SPEC have to be labelled ‘estimated’ until they are verified on the SPEC website as a meaningful representation of the expected performance. This is most often done by the big companies and OEMs to showcase performance to customers, however is quite over the top for what we do as reviewers.
Starting off with single-threaded performance in SPECint2017, we can see that AMD's new Zen 4 core performs when compared directly with its previous Zen 3 and even more so, its Zen 2 microarchitecture. In 500.perlbench_r, the Ryzen 9 7950X has a 27% uplift over the previous Zen 3 based Ryzen 9 5950X, with a massive 94% uplift in single-threaded performance over the Zen 2 based Ryzen 9 3950X. This in itself is impressive, with similar levels of performance increase in other SPECint2017 tests such as a 23% increase over the previous generation in 525.x264_r and 30% in the 548.exchange2_r test.
The performance increase can be explained by a number of variables, including the switch from DDR4 to DDR5 memory, as well as a large increase in clock speed.
Moving onto our SPECfp2017 1T results, we see a similar increase in performance as in the previous set of 1T-tests. Focusing on the 503.bwaves_r, we are seeing an uplift of 37% over Zen 3. Interestingly, the performance in 549.fotonik3d, we see an increase of around 27% over the Ryzen 9 3950X, although Intel's Alder Lake architecture which is also on DDR5 is outperforming the Ryzen 9 7950X.
Perhaps the biggest increase in Zen 4's improvement in IPC over Zen 3 is through doubling the L2 cache on the 7950X (16MB) versus the 5950X (8MB). Similarly, both the Ryzen 9 7950X and 5950X have a large pool of L3 cache (64MB), but the 7950X boosts up to 5.7 GHz on a single core providing the core temperature is below 50°C, or 5.6 GHz if above 50°C.
As it stands at the time of writing, AMD's Ryzen 9 7950X is the clear leader in single-core IPC performance, with a pretty comprehensive increase in IPC performance over Zen 3. Although Intel's Alder Lake (12th Gen) provided gains over AMD's Ryzen 5000 series in a multitude of ways including frequency, optimizations, and its complex hybrid architecture. There is no doubt that the latest Zen 4 microarchitecture using TSMC's 5 nm node gives AMD the single-thread performance crown, and in terms of single-threaded applications, it's the most powerful x86 desktop processor right now.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
205 Comments
View All Comments
phoenix_rizzen - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link
The Spec graphs are hard to read as you don't have the CPUs listed in the correct order. You should switch dark blue to be 5950X and light blue to be 3950X. Right now you have the CPUs (graphs) listed as:Intel
7950X
3950X
5950X
It really should be:
Intel
7950X
5950X
3950X
That would make it a lot easier to see the generational improvements. Sort things logically, numerically. :) Reply
Otritus - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link
@Ryan Smith please do this. I was also having difficulty reading the Spec graph. ReplyGavin Bonshor - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link
I apologize for doing it this way. I promise I'll sort it in the morning (UK based) Replyyeeeeman - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link
Retaking the high end for 1 month. Replyyeeeeman - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link
TBH, what I am most excited about is the zen 4 laptop parts, like the phoenix apu, with 8 zen 4 cores, rdna 3 igpu, lpddr5, 4nm cpu, 5nm gpu, that should bring some clear improvements over the 4000 series ryzen which are still amazingly good. 5000 and 6000 series haven't brought much improvements over the 4000 series, like my 4800H, so I am curious to see what the 7000 series will bring. Already dreaming about a fully metal body, slim laptop, 14-16 inch, OLED, 90Hz minimum, laminated screen, preferably touch and 360 hinge, 1.5kg top. that will be nice. Replyabufrejoval - Wednesday, September 28, 2022 - link
Since you're hinting that Intel will change things, there is much less of a chance for Intel to catch up in the mobile sector on 10nm.For the laptops I see a different story at almost every five Watts of permissible power for the CPUside of things. But much less change between the 4000-7000 Zen generations at the same energy settings.
Any hopes for a more-than-casual gaming iGPU can't but fail, because AMD can't overcome the DRAM bandwidth limitations, unless they were to start with stuff like extra channels of RAM on the die carrier like Apple (or HBM).
And that basically leaves 13% of IPC improvements, some efficiency gains but much less clock gains, because that's mostly additional Wattage on the desktop parts, not available on battery.
I haven't tried the 6800U yet, but even if it were to be 100% better than my 5800U, that's still too slow a GPU to drive my Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 13ACN notebook's 2560x1600 display full throttle. Even 4x speed won't change that, it just takes a 250 Watt GPU to drive that resolution more like 350 Watts for 4k.
I just bought a nice 3k 90Hz OLED 5825U based 14" notebook (Asus Zenbook 14) for one of my sons, full metal slim but without touch for less than €1000 including taxes and he's completely stunned by the combination of display brightness (he tends to use it outside) and battery life.
As long as you think of it as a 2D machine that will do fine display Google Earth in 3D, you'll be happy. If you try to turn it into a gaming laptop it's outright grief or severe compromises.
And I just don't see how a dGPU on an APU makes much sense, because you just purchase capabilities twice without the ability to combine them in something that actually works. Those hybrid approaches were only ever good in theory. Reply
Makaveli - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link
"I have a 1440p 144Hz monitor and I play at 1080p just because that's what I'm used to."*Insert ryan reynolds meme
Buy why? Reply
Gavin Bonshor - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link
Because I fear that if I drop below 144 Hz in any title, that my life wouldn't be able to cope. Maybe I just need to upgrade from an RX 5700 XT? ReplyMakaveli - Tuesday, September 27, 2022 - link
Ah yes its time.Go RDNA3 Reply
kryn5 - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link
"Despite modern-day graphics cards, especially the flagships, now at the level where 1440p and 4K gaming is viable, 1080p is still a very popular resolution to play games at; I have a 1440p 144Hz monitor and I play at 1080p just because that's what I'm used to."I... what? Reply