R0H1TThat's because the R7 is tapped out around 65-100W depending on the task. Beyond that no amount of power draw is scaling with any workload linearly, you'd need 4/8 more cores to make sense above those levels. This also why ADL or RPL can scale beyond 150W in some cases ~ because they have the extra cores that can be fed. With the R7 you're just pumping juice without getting much in return, if anything at all. It's probably already tapped out to max core clocks as well.

fevgatosThen it's obvious you haven't tried them.

Here is a video review, just take a look

fevgatosWhich is why I keep saying it's dumb to test Intel CPUS at 300-350 watts. Exactly cause they don't scale, nobody will be running them at that wattage. It's pointless. My 13900k at 260w scores 41.200, and then at 330w 42k. Why would I ever run it at 300+ like some reviewers are doing? :roll:

R0H1TDid you miss the one graph I showed from TPU, or this?

fevgatosPlease, go ahead and do the efficiency calculations on these. Youll realize that the difference between the 7950x and the 13900k is 10%.


At same "power" the 7950x draws much more than the Intel part. Dunno why, but that's what the review shows

Random example, POVray

7950x @ 145w = 12064
13900k @ 143w = 11365

Actual difference in efficiency, 6%.

But how is this relevant to the 7700x?

fevgatosYes, the 12900k is an i9, but it's basically the same configuration as the i7 13700k. 8p+8e cores. In fact the 13700k is both faster and more efficient.

A Computer GuyBut 12th gen cores aren't 13th gen cores so isn't that comparing apples to oranges using pears?

fevgatosWhich is why I keep saying it's dumb to test Intel CPUS at 300-350 watts. Exactly cause they don't scale, nobody will be running them at that wattage. It's pointless. My 13900k at 260w scores 41.200, and then at 330w 42k. Why would I ever run it at 300+ like some reviewers are doing? :roll:

fevgatosNo. 12th is worse than 13th gen in every metric, both performance and efficiency. So you could argue im doing the ryzen part a favor by comparing it to 12th gen, but doesn't matter, the difference in efficiency is so vast that I don't even need to test 13th gen, 12th gen beats it handily as well. See above, the guy tested 13th gen, at 84w he scored 24.5k.

AusWolfEqually, no one should be running the 7700X at stock TDP and/or maxing out the 95 °C temperature limit. :)

fevgatosYes, but id argue the 7700x even pulling like 120w is closer to it's sweetspot than lets say a 13700k pulling 300. I kid you not, going from 150 to 300 watts gives you like 5-6% performance.

R0H1TRyzen 2xxx also brough slightly better memory, better cache & marginally higher IPC ~ it's what zen was originally supposed to be launched as but they couldn't wait anymore!


It's good for Intel, good for competition, good for existing Intel users blah blah blah ~ wake me up when you have to change mobos next year :pimp:

DavenThis is similar to the 8th and 9th gen Coffee Lake transition where Intel was stuck with nothing new and just enabled hyper threading throughout the range.

So Intel is stuck again and just enabling more E cores on lower SKUs. Its the exact same chip as Raptor Lake. That means no change to IPC and Core i9 parts will only have slight core and memory clock speed increases.

The only change from past behavior is maintaining pin compatibility of the socket unlike the skylake/kaby lake to coffee lake/coffee lake refresh 1151 debacle.

The EXACT same thing could be accomplished if Intel just lowered 13th gen prices and made the 13900KS more widely available. But nope they want yearly model number changes to push/trick people into upgrading.

P4-630It sucks if you just jumped in LGA1700 when you just bought an 13th gen intel CPU.....

GicaLet's leave the nonsense. You can use a processor for 10 years as a home user. Or you can keep the motherboard and change 10 processors.
Ryzen 2000 was a much weaker update than the transition from 12th to 13th. If the rumors are correct, the 14th brings a huge boost to the i3 and i5. What does AMD sell like ryzen 3 currently?

R0H1TYou don't & I won't advocate upgrading every gen either but you don't have the ability to upgrade as often on the same socket as AMD which is a big net negative! Why do you need to change boards so often when you have virtually the same platform, memory & PCIe gen ~ going from say Intel 6xxx gen to 11th gen? The answer is you didn't, there was no technical reason, okay 1 forced upgrade was fine but we didn't need 3-4 except for greed. The same goes for 12th gen to 14th, you also shouldn't need to upgrade if you're moving to gen 15 because it's the same memory(ddr5) & PCIe gen (5.0) but that's likely not gonna happen!

Gica9900K in 2023 for under $200 (SH). I think you can find it for around $150 if you insist on keeping a motherboard with an expired life expectancy.

R0H1TYou're giving BS examples, someone with a 6700k couldn't upgrade to a 9700k 3 years down the line even though they were the exact same uarch! Who said anything about i9 or whatever?

R0H1TGood for you.

Darmok N JaladLikely because they don’t want to make a die that big. Isn’t that why Arrow Lake might only be 6 P cores? Intel did one generation of 10c (before e-cores anyway), and it didn’t last before they dropped back to 8C. I really wonder if AMD knew what Intel’s max die size target was, and they made Ryzen what it was to put even more pressure on Intel at the high end. We pretty much jumped from 4C/8T at the high end to 8/16, just like that. Intel had to go to e-cores just to keep desktop die sizes economical. They are making it work to some degree.

GicaI bought the motherboard on June 7, 2022. It entered its second year.
Why would I change it now?
Why would I change the processor (12500)?
You always cling to extremes. Most people don't buy i9/r9 initially, but they can upgrade years later to them at a much lower price.
Example:
8600K in 2018 at ~$225
9900K in 2023 for under $200 (SH). I think you can find it for around $150 if you insist on keeping a motherboard with an expired life expectancy.

But you can keep that base plate as long as you want.
Do I really need to remind you what mess AMD made with processors and compatibility on AM4? Those who wanted Ryzen 5000 at launch (very expensive) had to upgrade their motherboard as well, because the old models received compatibility a year later, and not from AMD but from the manufacturers.