Saturday, September 24th 2022

SiSoftware Tests the Ryzen 5 7600X, Ryzen 7 7700X and Ryzen 9 7950X

The first reliable benchmark figures of AMD's Ryzen 7000-series CPUs have arrived, courtesy of SiSoftware. The benchmark suite software developer has released benchmark figures for the Ryzen 5 7600X and Ryzen 9 7950X. Keep in mind that these benchmarks are limited to the different tests in SiSoftware Sandra. Also note that the graphs for the Ryzen 5 7600X have typos, as the SiSoftware wrote Ryzen 5 7760X instead of 7600X and the Core i5-12600K is listed as a Core i7 CPU. Starting with the 7600X, the CPU appears to perform similar to, or slightly slower than the Intel Core i5-12600K in the arithmetic tests. On the other hand, it handily crushes the older Ryzen 5 5600X in every test here, by somewhere between 17 and 36 percent depending on the test.

Moving on to the vector SIMD tests, AMD's Zen 4 architecture shows much greater performance improvements, beating the Intel Core i5-12600K in all but one of the tests, where it loses by a fairly small margin. Here it beats the Ryzen 5 5600X by anything from 28 to a massive 86 percent. Where AMD's Zen 4 architecture really kicks things up a notch is in the image processing test, at least compared to the Zen 3 architecture, thanks to its AVX512 capabilities. As such, it's over twice as fast in many of the tests, but it still loses out in half of the tests to Intel's Core i5-12600K. AMD has also improved the inter-thread/core latency in the same module, by a not insignificant amount. Where the Ryzen 5 7600X doesn't fare so well is when it comes to performance vs. power, largely due to the fact that AMD moved the TDP from 65 to 105 W, but it still offers better performance per Watt than Intel's current models.

Update 17:31 UTC: Updated with the Ryzen 7 7700X results.
Moving on to the Ryzen 9 7950X things are looking a lot more impressive, beating all the current competition by quite some margin. On average in the arithmetic test, the Ryzen 9 7950X beats its predecessor by anywhere from 30 to 45 percent, with the Intel Core i9-12900K falling even further behind. The latter wasn't unexpected, as the Ryzen 9 5950X was already beating it in this test. In the vector SIMD tests we're seeing similar results, with the Ryzen 9 7950X outclassing the competition by an average of 60 percent improved performance. Things are looking even better in the image processing test, with the Ryzen 9 7950X being twice as fast or faster than the Ryzen 9 5950X, in five out of eight tests. It does lose out to the Intel Core i9-12900K in one of the tests by a fair margin, but beats it in most of the other tests by an equally fair or sometimes even bigger margin.

As with the Ryzen 6 7600X, the inter-thread/core latency has been improved, but the inter-module latency has increased by almost 10 ns versus the Ryzen 9 5950X in SiSoftware's tests. Thanks to its huge overall increase in performance, the performance vs. power efficiency improves over the Ryzen 9 5950X, even though it's only by seven percent, once again thanks to AMD's change in TDP levels, this time from 142 to 230 Watt. It'll be interesting to see how Intel's 13th generation of Core i processors will compare, but based on the SiSoftware numbers, the Ryzen 9 7950X looks like it's going to be a performance beast when it comes to multitasking applications.

As SiSoftware had also tested the Ryzen 7 7700X, we thought it only prudent to add the results of the same tests that we did for the other two CPUs. It seems to be on par with Intel's Core i7-12700K in the arithmetic tests, but outperforms it with a reasonable margin in all of the vector SIMD tests. In the image processing tests it's some wins, some losses, but overall among all the tests, AMD comes out slightly on top of Intel. As the Ryzen 7 7700X is still a 105 W part, it performs the best in SiSoftwares performance vs. power comparison, being 39 percent more power efficient than the Ryzen 7 5800X.
Sources: SiSoftware Ryzen 5 7600X, SiSoftware Ryzen 9 7950X
Add your own comment

72 Comments on SiSoftware Tests the Ryzen 5 7600X, Ryzen 7 7700X and Ryzen 9 7950X

#2
ZetZet
Man this generation is depressing me on both CPU and GPU sides. Nvidia barely lifted the performance/price (debatable if they did at all). And at the price 7600X comes in I would have hoped that it would demolish 12600K, not just match it for the most part. 12600K has already come down in price AND you can save a lot with DDR4.
Posted on Reply
#3
Lovec1990
i will wait and see what will Raptor lake bring on the table and for what price and then decide on 7700X or 13700
Posted on Reply
#4
Denver
ZetZetMan this generation is depressing me on both CPU and GPU sides. Nvidia barely lifted the performance/price (debatable if they did at all). And at the price 7600X comes in I would have hoped that it would demolish 12600K, not just match it for the most part. 12600K has already come down in price AND you can save a lot with DDR4.
The 4090 has twice the performance of the 3090ti, so of course a much better cost/fps will result. Even if it is not an affordable price for most. The annoying part is how big the difference is between the 4080 and 4090. it's totally ridiculous, just to leave room for a 4080ti/4080S.. And I don't think the 12600k will reach the potential that the 7600X has in gaming and emulation thanks to the AVX512.
Posted on Reply
#5
ZetZet
DenverThe 4090 has twice the performance of the 3090ti, so of course a much better cost/fps will result. Even if it is not an affordable price for most. The annoying part is how big the difference is between the 4080 and 4090. it's totally ridiculous, just to leave room for a 4080ti/4080S.. And I don't think the 12600k will reach the potential that the 7600X has in gaming and emulation thanks to the AVX512.
1.6X the performance and I think the prices of 3000 series were already extremely inflated. Let's not forget it has been two years since then.
Posted on Reply
#6
HD64G
Zen4 CPUs from what I see in those reviews will be a very big jump in performance vs the previous gen (as we knew alread the not big jump in the IPC increase isn't important when clocks are so much higher). As for efficiency, when they are limited to the Zen3's power limits they are much better. Now they are pushed for max performance. Mobile Zen4 CPUs will be a breakthough also me thinks. Good cooling and prices of the AM5 platform with DDR5 are the things to consider.
Posted on Reply
#7
ARF
DenverThe 4090 has twice the performance of the 3090ti, so of course a much better cost/fps will result. Even if it is not an affordable price for most. The annoying part is how big the difference is between the 4080 and 4090. it's totally ridiculous, just to leave room for a 4080ti/4080S.. And I don't think the 12600k will reach the potential that the 7600X has in gaming and emulation thanks to the AVX512.
So, intel doesn't use AVX-512, and somehow AMD thinks it will make use of it? How? When? Why?
HD64GZen4 CPUs from what I see in those reviews will be a very big jump in performance vs the previous gen (as we knew alread the not big jump in the IPC increase isn't important when clocks are so much higher). As for efficiency, when they are limited to the Zen3's power limits they are much better. Now they are pushed for max performance. Mobile Zen4 CPUs will be a breakthough also me thinks. Good cooling and prices of the AM5 platform with DDR5 are the things to consider.
It better be. Jumping from 105-watt straight to 170-watt is a serious business and better you have a justification for that ugly and terrible move.
Posted on Reply
#8
ZetZet
ARFSo, intel doesn't use AVX-512, and somehow AMD thinks it will make use of it? How? When? Why?
Emulators need it. That's about all I know.
Posted on Reply
#9
marios15
They also tested 7700X which is a much better apples-to-apples comparison with Zen3, as the power limit is the same.
Results are pretty good

unfortunately, no single thread comparison or measured power usage
And they don't specify RAM clocks..
Posted on Reply
#10
Darksword
This is not very impressive if it's only trading blows with Intel's last-gen part.
Posted on Reply
#11
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
HD64GZen4 CPUs from what I see in those reviews will be a very big jump in performance vs the previous gen (as we knew alread the not big jump in the IPC increase isn't important when clocks are so much higher). As for efficiency, when they are limited to the Zen3's power limits they are much better. Now they are pushed for max performance. Mobile Zen4 CPUs will be a breakthough also me thinks. Good cooling and prices of the AM5 platform with DDR5 are the things to consider.
What reviews?
Posted on Reply
#13
trsttte
ZetZetEmulators need it. That's about all I know.
They don't necessarily need it, but they're about one of the only consumer workloads that can benefit from them. The idea is that in the future more applications would make more use of those instructions but for now it hasn't happened yet.
Posted on Reply
#15
ARF
I am quite sure that 99.9% of the users don't need AVX-512. Even moreso, when intel doesn't support it and doesn't see the need to include it.
Posted on Reply
#16
Patriot
ARFI am quite sure that 99.9% of the users don't need AVX-512. Even moreso, when intel doesn't support it and doesn't see the need to include it.
In fact, they had it end of 2018 in the kind of launched Cannon-lake.
www.anandtech.com/show/13405/intel-10nm-cannon-lake-and-core-i3-8121u-deep-dive-review/4
Rocket lake had it, which is why the 11th gen outperforms 12th gen in certain things... and 12th gen has it, on p-cores only, it is not fused off just disabled because the e-cores don't have it and Intel would have to pay AMD for a scheduler patent.
Posted on Reply
#17
ZetZet
trsttteThey don't necessarily need it, but they're about one of the only consumer workloads that can benefit from them. The idea is that in the future more applications would make more use of those instructions but for now it hasn't happened yet.
English is not my first language, but I meant the people who use emulators, not the programs. :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#18
docnorth
ZetZetEnglish is not my first language, but I meant the people who use emulators, not the programs. :laugh:
No need to explain, it was easy to understand. Btw my English is probably worse.:(
Posted on Reply
#19
natr0n
I forgot sandra or whatever its called now existed.
Posted on Reply
#20
zaku49
ARFI am quite sure that 99.9% of the users don't need AVX-512. Even moreso, when intel doesn't support it and doesn't see the need to include it.
Yet there are some major uplifts in performance when using it, by limiting it's availability like intel has you're going to see a limitation in developers wanting to even play with it.

Due to the fact that the RPCS emulator sees a major uplift in using it tells me there's a lot of hidden potential in it.

Also, intel wants to lock it into their server market only because of $$.
Posted on Reply
#21
Valantar
zaku49Yet there are some major uplifts in performance when using it, by limiting it's availability like intel has you're going to see a limitation in developers wanting to even play with it.

Due to the fact that the RPCS emulator sees a major uplift in using it tells me there's a lot of hidden potential in it.
AVX-512 has been widely available on consumer platforms for half a decade, yet its adoption has been essentially nonexistent. That tells you all you need to know about its potential: for consumer applications it is very limited. Useful for a few specific workloads, but more generally not. Heck, even AVX2 isn't that common in the grand scheme of things, and it's been widely available for close to a decade now.

Memory bandwidth is a good analogue to AVX-512 in the consumer space. There have been consumer platforms delivering significantly improved memory bandwidth for a decade or more - ever since Intel launched its first 3-channel memory layout - yet for consumer applications that feature is essentially useless, as there are very few consumer workloads able to make use of more bandwidth. They do exist, but they're rare - just like AVX-512. And, just like AVX-512, memory bandwidth is treasured by server and HPC markets instead, where both the bandwidth and the ability to crunch insanely complex numbers actually has a use. Just because a capability exists doesn't mean it's actually useful in every situation.
Posted on Reply
#22
TheLostSwede
News Editor
marios15They also tested 7700X which is a much better apples-to-apples comparison with Zen3, as the power limit is the same.
Results are pretty good
Thanks, missed that, but I've added it to the news post now.
Posted on Reply
#23
ARF
ValantarAVX-512 has been widely available on consumer platforms for half a decade, yet its adoption has been essentially nonexistent. That tells you all you need to know about its potential: for consumer applications it is very limited. Useful for a few specific workloads, but more generally not. Heck, even AVX2 isn't that common in the grand scheme of things, and it's been widely available for close to a decade now.

Memory bandwidth is a good analogue to AVX-512 in the consumer space. There have been consumer platforms delivering significantly improved memory bandwidth for a decade or more - ever since Intel launched its first 3-channel memory layout - yet for consumer applications that feature is essentially useless, as there are very few consumer workloads able to make use of more bandwidth. They do exist, but they're rare - just like AVX-512. And, just like AVX-512, memory bandwidth is treasured by server and HPC markets instead, where both the bandwidth and the ability to crunch insanely complex numbers actually has a use. Just because a capability exists doesn't mean it's actually useful in every situation.
Speaking of memory bandwidth... Would a large 256-512 MB L3 or L2 cache next to the CPU cores help or the bottleneck in the execution is in the cores themselves?
I see that the 96 MB cache on the Ryzen 7 5800X3D doesn't help for anything outside games?
Posted on Reply
#24
JAB Creations
"The first reliable benchmark figures of AMD's Ryzen 7000-series CPUs have arrived

"Also note that the graphs for the Ryzen 5 7600X have typos"

So reliable they can't get the four-digit model number of just-announced products correct.
Posted on Reply
#25
Valantar
ARFSpeaking of memory bandwidth... Would a large 256-512 MB L3 or L2 cache next to the CPU cores help or the bottleneck in the execution is in the cores themselves?
I see that the 96 MB cache on the Ryzen 7 5800X3D doesn't help for anything outside games?
Not much, no - except for in server/HPC workloads. Much like AVX indeed!
JAB Creations"The first reliable benchmark figures of AMD's Ryzen 7000-series CPUs have arrived

"Also note that the graphs for the Ryzen 5 7600X have typos"

So reliable they can't get the four-digit model number of just-announced products correct.
Hey, not all reliable sources have copy editors :P This does seem like one of those somewhat rare cases where a reputable source has somewhat lacklustre quality control in terms of spell checking though.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 9th, 2024 01:29 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts