[nextpage title=”Introduction:”]
It’s already been almost two years since we wrote the review of AMD ZEN 4 processors, with samples of the Ryzen 9 7950X, Ryzen 9 7900X, Ryzen 7 7700X and Ryzen 5 7600X. Today, we welcome to the editorial team two new processors from the ZEN 5 generation: the Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X. A lot has changed over the past two years, especially in the BIOS of motherboards compatible with the AM5 socket. In fact, we’ll be testing these two new processors on a ROG X670E GENE motherboard, since the new AMD X870E chipsets are not yet available, even though several brands have already unveiled their future models.
So we’re going to concentrate on the performance gains between the previous generation ZEN 4 and these two new models built around ZEN 5. Thanks to AMD for making these two processors available to us. We encountered some performance problems during our tests, which we identified with AMD as being linked to a problem with the SOC voltage in the BIOS when we activated the EXPO profile at 6000 MT/s. By manually reducing the voltage in the BIOS of our ROG Crosshair X670E GENE, the problem was solved. We’ve escalated this problem on to the ASUS team, who are working on a fix. Only the GENE motherboard seems to be affected.
@cornerjack_occ BenchTable with Core 1 Aurora Silver, Quick Release, ROG X670E GENE, OBT V2, Benchtable from ElmorLabs, Dark Power 13 and chiller Eiszeit 2000. @Alphacool @ASUS France @ASUS ROG DACH @ROG France @AMD @be quiet! #xtreme #gaming #z790 #rog #asus #amd #alphacool #chiller
[nextpage title=”ZEN 5 architecture and Ryzen 9000: “]
As you may have noticed, we haven’t received the full range of new AMD processors. The brand seems to be offering a phased launch, which is why today we’re only testing the Ryzen 5 9600X and the Ryzen 7 9700X. Let’s review AMD’s announcements over the last few weeks before getting down to testing.
ZEN 5 architecture:
In June, Dr. Lisa Su unveiled four new processors scheduled for launch on July 31. In the end, this was pushed back to August 7 for the Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X. Initially, only the Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X will be available. These new Ryzen 9000s benefit from 4 nm etching by TMSC and are based on the new Zen 5 architecture. To be perfectly precise, it’s the CCDs (core compute die) that are etched in 4 nm.
Improved etch finesse means Ryzen 9000s benefit from greater energy efficiency than the previous generation. In fact, this is one of the advantages of this new generation highlighted by AMD.
ZEN 5: 4 processors so far
Although we already know about the four Ryzen 9000 processors, only two will be available for launch on August 7: the Ryzen 5 9600X and the Ryzen 7 9700X. As far as launch prices are concerned, AMD reports a price of $276 (€308.90) for the 9600X and $359 (€396.90) for the 9700X.
The Ryzen 5 9600X is the equivalent of the current Ryzen 5 7600X. It offers the same number of cores: 6c/12t. However, it uses new-generation ZEN 5 cores. In terms of frequency, this processor will operate with a single-core boost frequency of 5.4 GHz, i.e. 100 MHz more than the 7600X. The other big difference is in TDP, which drops from 105 to 65 watts for the 9600X! We should see an interesting gain in terms of temperature and, above all, power consumption.
The Ryzen 7 9700X features the same 8c/16t as the Ryzen 7700X, as well as a 100 MHz frequency gain over the previous generation. Here too, the TDP drops from 105 to 65 watts. It’s not hard to imagine that this type of TDP would have been chosen for the “future” Ryzen 5 9600 and Ryzen 7 9700.
These new processors feature virtually identical packaging to the previous generation. The colors are slightly darker, and no cooling system is available. For some time now, AMD and Intel have no longer offered a cooling unit in a bundle.
New chipsets coming soon:
These two processors will be tested on a ROG Crosshair X670E GENE motherboard, which of course remains perfectly compatible with its AM5 socket. AMD has already unveiled its new AMD 800 chipset, and a number of manufacturers have also unveiled their first motherboards. These include the AMD X870E, X870, B850 and B840 chipsets.
We should be able to unveil the first motherboards in the coming weeks.
[nextpage title=”Frequencies reached:”]
As with every new processor test, our first concern is to check whether the advertised frequencies are actually achieved. To do this, we’re going to use the Cinebench R23 benchmark. Two scenarios will be used: a single-core benchmark and a multi-core benchmark. The idea is to be able to judge the frequencies achieved and compare them with what AMD has announced in its slides.
It’s worth remembering that the Boost frequency in the bench is different for each processor. As AMD points out, when we talk about maximum Boost frequency, we’re talking about the maximum frequency achievable by one of the processor cores running a single-core(mono-threaded) workload. Boost max varies according to several factors: the load, the cooling system and therefore the temperature of your processor. It’s important to keep this in mind. Here are the frequencies we expect to reach on a single core during our Cinebench R23 run.
Please pay close attention to our information, as we’ve encountered a multithreaded performance problem with the RYZEN 7 9700X.
Test with Ryzen 5 9600X :
Here we go with the smallest of the ZEN 5 processors, the Ryzen 5 9600X. As you can see, we’ve opened several windows to check frequency and temperature.
In single-threaded mode, we can see that core #1 reaches a frequency of 5455 MHz, which is higher than the 5.4 GHz announced by AMD. The reason is undoubtedly the cooler temperatures brought about by our liquid cooling.
A single CCD encloses the 6 cores, and on our multithreaded Cinebench run , the core frequencies stabilize at 4900/4950 MHz. It’s also worth noting that each CCD has a higher-performance core than the others, which can be identified in Ryzen Master by a small yellow star.
Test with Ryzen 7 9700X :
This is where we came up against performance concerns. In single-core mode, we can see that core #1 reaches a frequency of 5530 MHz, which is higher than the 5.5 GHz announced by AMD. So far, so good.
On our very first multithreaded Cinebench run , the core frequencies stabilize at 4375/4425 MHz, which seems to us to be very low indeed, far too low. Looking at AMD’s reviewer guide and comparing against the performance of the Ryzen 7 7700X, our score is lower, which is not logical. After several exchanges with AMD, we identified the SOC voltage as the problem. When our EXPO memory profile is activated, the SOC voltage, despite being set to AUTO in the BIOS, seems to be too high, preventing the cores from reaching higher frequencies.
By opting for a manual SOC voltage of 1.0 volt, frequencies rise from 4625 to 4675 MHz, thus improving the score and coming close to AMD’s reviewer guide. We’ve also contacted ASUS, who will be checking this on their own, and are working on a fix. Only the ROG Crosshair X670E GENE model seems to be affected.
[nextpage title=”Cinebench, Geekbench and CPUZ benchmarks:”]
As we said in the introduction, we’re (once again) busy updating all our graphics using the latest chipset drivers from Intel, AMD and now, of course, INTEL. The idea, of course, is to regularly update our test graphics so as to be consistent with OS, BIOS and chipset updates. The gaming part of our tests will arrive in the days to come with the new BIOS and chipset.
- Motherboard: ROG Crosshair X670E GENE (BIOS 2204)
- Processor: AMD Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X
- Memory: 32 GB GSKill 6000 MT/s CL30 (EXPO profile)
- Graphics card: NVIDIA RTX 3070 Ti
- Cooling system: Alphacool Core 1 CPUwaterblock and Eiszeit 2000 chiller
- Operating system: Windows 11 64 Bits
Let’s start with a CPU benchmark staple, the Cinebench series. We’ve opted for Cinebench R15, for the R20 version and for R23, the most widely used version today. Scores will be given in single-core and multi-core. In other words, the benchmark tests performance on a single processor core and then on all available cores.
To do this, we’re going to use Benchmate, which has just been updated to version 12.1.0 and can be downloaded here. The advantage of Benchmate is that it already contains a whole series of benchmarks, and what’s more, it’s recognized and certified when you want to encode your results on the Hwbot site.
As a reminder, before you start reading these results, be sure to take a look at the previous page to understand the operating frequencies of these Ryzen ZEN 5.
Cinebench R15 Single Core and Multi Core:
A benchmark widely used by overclockers to compare processor performance. It also allows you to judge the optimizations of your OS and memory kit by setting a frequency and trying to score as many points as possible. Even if it’s a little less used today with the arrival of R20 and R23, it remains a reference for comparing CPUs, since it was one of the first benchmarks used by the community.
Here we go, and we start with a big surprise as our two samples of the day take first and third place respectively in this ranking. We knew that AMD had announced a very significant gain, and we can already see it.
In multi-threaded mode, the positions within the graphics are logical, even if the Ryzen 7 9700X is slightly behind the Ryzen 7 7700X. The reason is undoubtedly the lower frequencies compared to the Ryzen 7 7700X when all 8 cores are called upon.
Cinebench R20 Single Core and Multi Core :
Cinebench R20 offers similar tests to the R15 version with SingleThread and MultiThread. Freshly released in March 2019, it offers a more complex benchmark than the R15 version, which had become a little too easy for CPUs with many cores. Cinebench R20 requires eight times more computing power than the R15 version, and four times more memory. It’s already more akin to a stress benchmark, since it forces your CPU to be stable for the duration of the benchmark.
The same applies to Cinebench R20, where the gains are very interesting: the Ryzen 5 9600X scores 858 points and the Ryzen 7 9700X 871 points. This puts them just behind Intel’s top-of-the-range products.
In multi-core, it’s the number of cores that once again speaks for itself, as do their frequencies. Our two ZEN 5 processors outperform their previous-generation equivalents.
Cinebench R23 Single Core and Multi Core:
How does this new version differ from its predecessors? First of all, it’s more realistic when it comes to the score obtained according to the processor used. As a reminder, Cinebench only tests the capabilities of your processor in single or multi-thread mode. But the main difference is that, by default, the benchmark lasts 10 minutes! MAXON’s idea with Cinebench R23 is to offer a benchmark that provides a certain stability in terms of temperature and boost frequencies. We’ll be testing the fast version here.
The same applies to our two ZEN 5 processors, which continue to outperform their rivals, the Intel i5-14600K and i7-14700K.
With the R23 version of Cinebench, there’s no change in the organization of our graphics, even if the gain between the Ryzen 7 7700X and Ryzen 7 9700X is very slight.
Geekbench 3.4.4 Single Core and Multi Core :
This is a benchmark available in several revisions. Version 5 has become increasingly popular in recent months, and is often used for CPU performance leaks. It provides two scores: one single-core and one multi-core. The versions used for testing are 3.4.4 and 5.2.5. Please note that to take full advantage of these two benchmarks, a license is required, and we’re running the bench in 64-bit.
On this new benchmark, the logic continues with our two ZEN 5 processors on the top two steps of the podium.
The graphs follow one another, and the hierarchy remains the same. Our two processors of the day find it much harder to compete with the blue ones, as they are equipped with additional E-core cores.
GeekBench 5.2.5 Single Core and Multi Core :
The latest version of the GeekBench software, it is becoming increasingly widespread and used by journalists. Like the version above, it lets you test memory and processor performance. We decided to add this extra benchmark, but why? The CPU benchmark uses new tests that more closely simulate the tasks facing processors in the face of recent applications. Geekbench 5 also increases the memory used in the benchmark to better reflect the impact of this parameter on CPU results.
No change under Geekbench 5, with the top two places for our duo of the day.
Once again, our Ryzen 7 9700X struggles to outperform its predecessor, the Ryzen 7 7700X, due to lower frequencies when using all cores.
CPU-Z 17.01.64 benchmark in Single Thread and Multi Thread :
A new benchmark we’ve just added, as it’s increasingly used by brands to showcase processor performance. To use it, simply download the latest version of CPU-Z, currently 2.0.2. Then go to the “Bench” tab to check single-thread and multi-thread performance. The benchmark version we used is 17.01.64.
As this first series of tests draws to a close, it’s clear that these new ZEN 5 processors perform very well on single-threaded tasks, putting them right at the top of the table and, above all, challenging Intel processors. On multithreaded benchmarks , however , it’s a completely different story. The Intel i5-14600K and i7-14700K processors are far ahead, thanks to the addition of E-core. But what bothers us a little more is how close our ZEN 5 scores are to the previous generation. We’d have liked to see a greater gain.
[nextpage title=”Synthetic benchmarks:”]
Let’s start with a series of synthetic benchmarks we use regularly. We’ve opted for the CPU scores of the benchmarks in the 3DMark series. The idea is to isolate only the CPU score by creating a custom test .
Here are the results for Fire Strike and Time Spy. In Fire Strike, for both the “standard” and “ultra” versions, the physics (CPU) test is identical. As a result, you’ll only see the Fire Strike score. For Time Spy and Time Spy Extreme, on the other hand, the tests are different, so you’ll get both scores. These scores are of great interest to overclockers, enabling them to choose the platform that offers the best performance for breaking the most records.
Fire Strike CPU score :
Let’s start with 3DMark Fire Strike, one of the most widely used benchmarks today. It consists of two graphics tests, a CPU test and a fourth test combining GPU and CPU. Don’t forget to deactivate the demo, which makes no contribution to the final score and prolongs the benchmark’s duration (unnecessarily) .
It was to be expected that there would be no surprises in the 3D Mark tests, with a slight gain over the previous generation ZEN 4.
CPU score in Time Spy :
The second test is 3DMark Time Spy. Although this one is performed in 1440p, its main feature is that it uses DirectX 12. It consists of two graphics tests and a CPU test. As with Fire Strike, don’t forget to disable the demo. These first two benchmarks are provided by UL Benchmark.
The same applies to the Fire Strike test, where our Ryzen 7 9700X fails to outperform the previous generation.
CPU score in Time Spy Extreme :
The second test is 3DMark Time Spy. Although this one is performed in 2160p, its main feature is that it uses DirectX 12. It consists of two graphics tests and a CPU test. As with Fire Strike, don’t forget to disable the demo.
We finish with the CPU score under Time Spy Extreme and, for the first time, it’s the Ryzen 5 9600X that comes in very slightly behind the Ryzen 5 7600X.
[nextpage title=”Power consumption: “]
As far as the power consumption tests are concerned, we didn’t modify anything and wanted to know how our configuration would react by default. Basically, we installed the CPU and loaded the XMP profile. Then we carried out our various readings and benchmarks.
For power consumption, we used the Cinebench R23 benchmark. This is a multi-threaded benchmark. The idea is to measure the average power consumption of our different processors. Please note that we’re talking about the overall power consumption of the configuration. At present, we’re not yet in a position to measure CPU consumption independently and correctly, but we’re working on it. We still have a few points to optimize before we can be fully convinced of the accuracy of our readings.
Unsurprisingly, our two processors of the day are the best performers on this chart. The difference is obvious against the Ryzen 5 7600X and Ryzen 7 7700X. It’s worth noting, however, that since the arrival of the new BIOS, this power consumption has improved, and we’ll be re-testing all our different AMD processors to bring them up to date. In fact, we retested our Ryzen 5 7600X with the new BIOS, and it now consumes 198 watts.
[nextpage title=”Overclocking the Ryzen 7 9700X:”]
Overclocking the Ryzen 7 9700X:
Having encountered some minor performance issues with the Ryzen 7 9700X when activating the EXPO profile, we wanted to see how it would react by increasing the frequency on all 8 cores. To do this, we used the latest version of Ryzen Master. First, we increased the frequency of the 8 cores to 5000 MHz, keeping the original voltage. In a Cinebench R23 run, the voltage is actually 1.16 volts. The result is a score of 22487 points, a gain of 9%, while maintaining cool temperatures and reducing power consumption from 145.3 to 152 watts.
Still without touching the voltage, we easily pass 5200 MHz on all cores to obtain a score of 23517 points (gain of 14%) and a power consumption that climbs to 163 watts, which is still just right.
To continue climbing, and reach 5400 MHz, we changed the loadline calibration in the BIOS to level 7. We increased the voltage to 1.20 volts, which still corresponded during the benchmark to a voltage of 1.16 volts. Result: a score of 24386 points (18% gain), but with higher temperatures and power consumption flirting with 200 watts. In the coming weeks, we’ll be publishing a special report on overclocking ZEN 5 processors.
[nextpage title=”The last word:”]
So, what do we think of these two new ZEN 5-based processors, Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X? Without being a revolution, these two examples have shown great promise on several points. Let’s start with performance in single-threaded tasks, where this new generation performs as well as, or even much better than, their direct Intel rivals, the i5-14600K and i7-14700K. In some benchmarks, the Ryzen 7 9700X even managed to take first place! On multithreaded tasks, performance was more subdued against the (older) Ryzen 5 7600X and Ryzen 7 7700X. Even if the results are slightly better, the gains are far less significant than those obtained in single-threaded mode, which leads us to ask: “Are these new Ryzen 9000X really X models ?
AMD Ryzen 9600X and 9700X or Ryzen 9600 and 9700?
As we said, performance improves in multithreaded mode, but not significantly, as our Ryzen 7 9700X sometimes lags behind the Ryzen 7 7700X. And yet, the cores of this ZEN 5 architecture perform better than those of ZEN 4.
Why is that? We get either identical or slightly better results, but with a multithreaded frequency of 5.2 GHz for the Ryzen 7 7700X and 4.7 GHz for the Ryzen 7 9700X. Proof that these perform better. But it’s when we overclock the cores of our Ryzen 7 9700X to 5.2 GHz that we finally see much better performance, with a gain of almost 18% over the Ryzen 7 7700X.
The choice of a 65-watt TDP is a credit to AMD, given Intel’s current troubles, but it reminds us of the non-X versions of the Ryzen 7000. We don’t see how AMD could possibly offer non-X Ryzen 9000s in the future, or even lower frequencies.
Overclocking enabled us to see that AMD could have chosen to raise the frequency of multithreaded cores a little higher, in order to make a bigger difference to ZEN 4, but this would have deprived them of a gain in terms of power consumption and temperature. Thanks to overclocking, you’ll be able to find the best compromise for your needs and, above all, for your cooling system.
Since the arrival of AGESA 1.0.8.0, AMD BIOS have undergone a number of improvements, including the use of memory kits at frequencies of 8000 MT/s. You can judge the gains in this news on the new AMD BIOS.
Finally, and this is the crux of the matter at the moment, the launch prices are very attractive. Whereas the Ryzen 5 7600X and Ryzen 7 7700X were priced at 369 and 489 euros respectively, AMD Europe has announced a price of 308.90 euros for the Ryzen 5 9600X and 396.90 euros for the Ryzen 7 9700X. These prices put them just below their rivals from Intel, but let’s not forget that Intel’s E-core processors still have a comfortable lead in multithreaded tasks . Once we’ve sorted out the BIOS issue and we have the other processors in the ZEN 5 range in our possession, we’ll be bringing you a dossier devoted to gaming performance.
Our thanks to AMD for making this Ryzen 5 9600X and the Ryzen 7 9700X available.
