• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Ryzen 9000 Zen 5 Single Thread Performance at 5.80 GHz Found 19% Over Zen 4

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
46,785 (7.63/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
An AMD Ryzen 9000 "Granite Ridge" desktop processor engineering sample with a maximum boost frequency of 5.80 GHz was found to offer an astonishing 19% higher single-threaded performance increase over an AMD Ryzen 9 7950X. "Granite Ridge" is codename for the Socket AM5 desktop processor family that implements the new "Zen 5" CPU microarchitecture. The unnamed "Granite Ridge" processor comes with an OPN code of 100-0000001290. Its CPU core count is irrelevant, as the single-threaded performance is in question here. The processor boosts up to 5.80 GHz, which means the core handling the single-threaded benchmark workload is achieving this speed. This speed is 100 MHz higher than the 5.70 GHz that the Ryzen 9 7950X processor based on the "Zen 4" architecture, boosts up to.

The single-threaded benchmark in question is the CPU-Z Bench. The mostly blurred out CPU-Z screenshot that reveals the OPN also mentions a processor TDP of 170 W, which means this engineering sample chip is either 12-core or 16-core. The chip posts a CPU-Z Bench single-thread score of 910 points, which matches that of the Intel Core i9-14900K with its 908 points. You've to understand that the i9-14900K boosts one of its P-cores to 6.00 GHz, to yield the 908 points that's part CPU-Z's reference scores. So straight off the bat, we see that "Zen 5" has a higher IPC than the "Raptor Cove" P-core powering the i9-14900K. Its gaming performance might end up higher than the Ryzen 7000 X3D family.



Many Thanks to TumbleGeorge for the tip.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
3,576 (0.72/day)
Processor AMD 5900x
Motherboard Asus x570 Strix-E
Cooling Hardware Labs
Memory G.Skill 4000c17 2x16gb
Video Card(s) RTX 3090
Storage Sabrent
Display(s) Samsung G9
Case Phanteks 719
Audio Device(s) Fiio K5 Pro
Power Supply EVGA 1000 P2
Mouse Logitech G600
Keyboard Corsair K95
Now that's an enticing bump if true. Time for the leaks...
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
6,991 (1.70/day)
Should wait for better benches, any way IMO the biggest show stopper would still be Strix point/Halo with up to 256bit wide memory support!
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
2,818 (0.45/day)
Location
US
Processor Intel Q9400
Motherboard asus p5q-pro
Cooling Ultra120
Memory 6GB ddr2
Video Card(s) NVS 290
Storage 3TB + 1.5TB
Display(s) Samsung F2380
Case Silverstone Fortress FT02B
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi
Power Supply 750W PC P&C
Software win 7 ultimate 64bit
another site that was reporting on this said that 14900k gets 942 points... they even complained that amd is still behind 14900k
which one is it?
1716957460735.png
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
3,576 (0.72/day)
Processor AMD 5900x
Motherboard Asus x570 Strix-E
Cooling Hardware Labs
Memory G.Skill 4000c17 2x16gb
Video Card(s) RTX 3090
Storage Sabrent
Display(s) Samsung G9
Case Phanteks 719
Audio Device(s) Fiio K5 Pro
Power Supply EVGA 1000 P2
Mouse Logitech G600
Keyboard Corsair K95
another site that was reporting on this said that 14900k gets 942 points... they even complained that amd is still behind 14900k
which one is it?
View attachment 349096
It's hard to compare from different sources and obviously bring salt. Anyways onto more leaks...
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
1,770 (0.44/day)
Intel has had historically higher scores than AMD in CPU-Z. Wait for more tests (not Geekbench etc) to get a clearer picture.
Also this was 14900K boosting to 6Ghz where as 9950X reportedly boosts to 5.8Ghz (likely at lower power than 14900K , too).
 
Joined
Nov 27, 2023
Messages
1,585 (6.77/day)
System Name The Workhorse
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 5900X
Motherboard Gigabyte Aorus B550 Pro
Cooling CPU - Noctua NH-D15S Case - 3 Noctua NF-A14 PWM at the bottom, 2 Fractal Design 180mm at the front
Memory GSkill Trident Z 3200CL14
Video Card(s) NVidia GTX 1070 MSI QuickSilver
Storage Adata SX8200Pro
Display(s) LG 32GK850G
Case Fractal Design Torrent
Audio Device(s) FiiO E-10K DAC/Amp, Samson Meteorite USB Microphone
Power Supply Corsair RMx850 (2018)
Mouse Razer Viper (Original)
Keyboard Cooler Master QuickFire Rapid TKL keyboard (Cherry MX Black)
Software Windows 11 Pro (23H2)
It’s a single synthetic benchmark, so we’d have to take it for what it is. But seeing as how Zen 5 is a major architecture upgrade a 15-20% clock for clock ST uplift is more than in line with what’s expected. This isn’t exactly that since a 100 MHz difference is there, but overall… it tracks.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2013
Messages
3,132 (0.79/day)
Location
Athens, Greece
System Name 3 desktop systems: Gaming / Internet / HTPC
Processor Ryzen 5 5500 / Ryzen 5 4600G / FX 6300 (12 years latter got to see how bad Bulldozer is)
Motherboard MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (1) / MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (2) / Gigabyte GA-990XA-UD3
Cooling Νoctua U12S / Segotep T4 / Snowman M-T6
Memory 16GB G.Skill RIPJAWS 3600 / 16GB G.Skill Aegis 3200 / 16GB Kingston 2400MHz (DDR3)
Video Card(s) ASRock RX 6600 + GT 710 (PhysX)/ Vega 7 integrated / Radeon RX 580
Storage NVMes, ONLY NVMes/ NVMes, SATA Storage / NVMe boot(Clover), SATA storage
Display(s) Philips 43PUS8857/12 UHD TV (120Hz, HDR, FreeSync Premium) ---- 19'' HP monitor + BlitzWolf BW-V5
Case Sharkoon Rebel 12 / CoolerMaster Elite 361 / Xigmatek Midguard
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Chieftec 850W / Silver Power 400W / Sharkoon 650W
Mouse CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Keyboard CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Software Windows 10 / Windows 10&Windows 11 / Windows 10
At 5.8GHz doesn't just equals 14900K. It equals an overclocked and unstable 14900K.
Also CPU-z benchmark is for years considered one of the Intel friendly ones.

While I doubt, I hope AMD to be considering bringing the X3D chips the same day with the regular ones. They can put a ridiculous high price if they want on them, but it will be stupid if they don't announce them together with the regular ones. They have to finally start understanding the power of marketing. Zen 5 will have a totally different, much higher level of acceptance, if an 8 core 9800X3D annihilates everything in gaming benchmarks with differences of 20-50%. If they fear internal competition, they can start that chip at $550. Zen 4 and AM5 would had much higher success if the X3D chips where introduced together with the new platform.
 

wolf

Better Than Native
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
7,993 (1.27/day)
System Name MightyX
Processor Ryzen 5800X3D
Motherboard Gigabyte X570 I Aorus Pro WiFi
Cooling Scythe Fuma 2
Memory 32GB DDR4 3600 CL16
Video Card(s) Asus TUF RTX3080 Deshrouded
Storage WD Black SN850X 2TB
Display(s) LG 42C2 4K OLED
Case Coolermaster NR200P
Audio Device(s) LG SN5Y / Focal Clear
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Corsair Dark Core RBG Pro SE
Keyboard Glorious GMMK Compact w/pudding
VR HMD Meta Quest 3
Software case populated with Artic P12's
Benchmark Scores 4k120 OLED Gsync bliss
Interesting if true, should mean the non X3D chips batt closer to a 14900K in games, without the power draw and instability. Then X3D chips will be something else again. Also looking forward to the bigger GPU / 256 bit memory chips based on this.
 
Joined
May 19, 2011
Messages
77 (0.02/day)
I just hope power and thermals are good… The never-ending pursuit of diminishing returns is getting old. Intel has somehow managed to drag AMD into a new, pointless clock-speed race starting with Zen 3. I hope they’ve managed to keep things under control for Zen 5.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2013
Messages
3,132 (0.79/day)
Location
Athens, Greece
System Name 3 desktop systems: Gaming / Internet / HTPC
Processor Ryzen 5 5500 / Ryzen 5 4600G / FX 6300 (12 years latter got to see how bad Bulldozer is)
Motherboard MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (1) / MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (2) / Gigabyte GA-990XA-UD3
Cooling Νoctua U12S / Segotep T4 / Snowman M-T6
Memory 16GB G.Skill RIPJAWS 3600 / 16GB G.Skill Aegis 3200 / 16GB Kingston 2400MHz (DDR3)
Video Card(s) ASRock RX 6600 + GT 710 (PhysX)/ Vega 7 integrated / Radeon RX 580
Storage NVMes, ONLY NVMes/ NVMes, SATA Storage / NVMe boot(Clover), SATA storage
Display(s) Philips 43PUS8857/12 UHD TV (120Hz, HDR, FreeSync Premium) ---- 19'' HP monitor + BlitzWolf BW-V5
Case Sharkoon Rebel 12 / CoolerMaster Elite 361 / Xigmatek Midguard
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Chieftec 850W / Silver Power 400W / Sharkoon 650W
Mouse CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Keyboard CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Software Windows 10 / Windows 10&Windows 11 / Windows 10
Intel has somehow managed to drag AMD into a new, pointless clock-speed race starting with Zen 3.
AMD tried to promote it's chips as super efficient. They did that keeping 12 and 16 core chips at 8 core chips power consumption levels. Then users online where praising Intel's chips for being 1% faster in single threaded benchmarks and games while using twice the power. What was expected from AMD to do, other than offer users what they wanted? That +1% performance for a +50% power increase.
Intel didn't drag AMD to anything. Users and tech press did. They are so desperate to keep offering wins to Intel, that they made efficiency look like a secondary, unimportant feature.

another site
Tom's is pro-Intel at least 20+ years now. The title that, that article uses, is what Intel trolls post left and right from yesterday.
 
Joined
May 11, 2018
Messages
1,057 (0.47/day)
CPU-Z Bench isn't really a very good representative of games, and as others have noticed, that score is more in line with a 13900k...
 
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
1,597 (0.81/day)
System Name Personal Gaming Rig
Processor Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI X670E Carbon
Cooling MO-RA 3 420
Memory 32GB 6000MHz
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 ICHILL FROSTBITE ULTRA
Storage 4x 2TB Nvme
Display(s) Samsung G8 OLED
Case Silverstone FT04
another site that was reporting on this said that 14900k gets 942 points... they even complained that amd is still behind 14900k
which one is it?
I suppose that 14900k isn't running at Intel baseline ?


Animated GIF
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Messages
2,064 (0.31/day)
Location
Toronto, Ontario
System Name The Expanse
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D
Motherboard Asus Prime X570-Pro BIOS 5013 AM4 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.Ca.
Cooling Corsair H150i Pro
Memory 32GB GSkill Trident RGB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34-1T (B-Die)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX 24GB (24.6.1)
Storage WD SN850X 2TB / Corsair MP600 1TB / Samsung 860Evo 1TB x2 Raid 0 / Asus NAS AS1004T V2 14TB
Display(s) LG 34GP83A-B 34 Inch 21: 9 UltraGear Curved QHD (3440 x 1440) 1ms Nano IPS 160Hz
Case Fractal Design Meshify S2
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi + Logitech Z-5500 + HS80 Wireless
Power Supply Corsair AX850 Titanium
Mouse Corsair Dark Core RGB SE
Keyboard Corsair K100
Software Windows 10 Pro x64 22H2
Benchmark Scores 3800X https://valid.x86.fr/1zr4a5 5800X https://valid.x86.fr/2dey9c
At 5.8GHz doesn't just equals 14900K. It equals an overclocked and unstable 14900K.
Also CPU-z benchmark is for years considered one of the Intel friendly ones.

While I doubt, I hope AMD to be considering bringing the X3D chips the same day with the regular ones. They can put a ridiculous high price if they want on them, but it will be stupid if they don't announce them together with the regular ones. They have to finally start understanding the power of marketing. Zen 5 will have a totally different, much higher level of acceptance, if an 8 core 9800X3D annihilates everything in gaming benchmarks with differences of 20-50%. If they fear internal competition, they can start that chip at $550. Zen 4 and AM5 would had much higher success if the X3D chips where introduced together with the new platform.
You will not be getting X3D chips the same time as regular just based on production. I don't see this changing!
 
Joined
May 14, 2024
Messages
23 (0.35/day)
Location
Hungary
Processor Ryzen 7700X
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B650E-E Gaming Wifi
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 w/ offset kit
Memory Kingston Fury Beast DDR5-6000 CL36 @ CL28
Video Card(s) ASUS x Noctua RTX 4080
Storage Samsung 980Pro 2TB NVME + Kingston KC3000 2TB NVME
Display(s) LG OLED 42C3 + Benq GW 2780-1
Case Fractal Design Define R6
Audio Device(s) Onkyo TX-SR505 /w onboard audio
Power Supply Fractal Design Ion 850W Platinum
Mouse Razer Viper 8K
Keyboard Ventaris K600
For the record: the 2CCD solutions historically have had the upper hand in boost clock:

7950X: 5750Mhz
7700X: 5550Mhz
7700: 5350Mhz
7800X3D: 5050Mhz

Not to mention the AMD firstly let the Zen4 to boost even more with the base 100Mhz clock tuning. This door was closed after the AGESA 1.0.0.3, after that only the eCLK tuning remained.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2019
Messages
2,700 (1.49/day)
System Name Not a thread ripper but pretty good.
Processor Ryzen 9 5950x
Motherboard ASRock X570 Taichi (revision 1.06, BIOS/UEFI version P5.50)
Cooling EK-Quantum Velocity, EK-Quantum Reflection PC-O11, EK-CoolStream PE 360, XSPC TX360
Memory Micron DDR4-3200 ECC Unbuffered Memory (4 sticks, 128GB, 18ASF4G72AZ-3G2F1)
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon RX 5700 & EK-Quantum Vector Radeon RX 5700 +XT & Backplate
Storage Samsung 2TB 980 PRO 2TB Gen4x4 NVMe, 2 x Samsung 2TB 970 EVO Plus Gen3x4 NVMe, AMD Radeon RAMDisk
Display(s) 2 x 4K LG 27UL600-W (and HUANUO Dual Monitor Mount)
Case Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic Black (original model)
Power Supply Corsair RM750x
Mouse Logitech M575
Keyboard Corsair Strafe RGB MK.2
Software Windows 10 Professional (64bit)
Benchmark Scores Typical for non-overclocked CPU.
another site that was reporting on this said that 14900k gets 942 points... they even complained that amd is still behind 14900k
which one is it?
View attachment 349096
Is that in consideration of Intel's new baseline profile? (I'm guessing probably not)
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
1,133 (0.50/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5950X
Motherboard Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Hero WiFi
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer II 420
Memory 32Gb G-Skill Trident Z Neo @3806MHz C14
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX2070
Storage Seagate FireCuda 530 1TB
Display(s) Samsung G9 49" Curved Ultrawide
Case Cooler Master Cosmos
Audio Device(s) O2 USB Headphone AMP
Power Supply Corsair HX850i
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Cherry MX
Software Windows 11
When AMD first released the Zen2 architecture, CPU-Z's author (or Intel) decided that he didn't like the Zen2 out-performing the Intel chip at the time, so a new benchmark version was released, reducing the AMD scores (Intel scores stayed the same) by some 15%. I have never taken the CPU-Z benchmark seriously after that, as it's apparently just an Intel sponsored benchmark.
 

ARF

Joined
Jan 28, 2020
Messages
4,358 (2.67/day)
Location
Ex-usa | slava the trolls
When AMD first released the Zen2 architecture, CPU-Z's author (or Intel) decided that he didn't like the Zen2 out-performing the Intel chip at the time, so a new benchmark version was released, reducing the AMD scores (Intel scores stayed the same) by some 15%. I have never taken the CPU-Z benchmark seriously after that, as it's apparently just an Intel sponsored benchmark.

Absolutely. After version 1.78.3, CPU-Z became extremely uninteresting, hence I accept 1.78.3 as the "true" CPU-Z benchmark.

Nevertheless, I think AMD is extremely passive and doesn't do anything in its fundamental interests.
Why not release an AMD sponsored benchmark called x86-64-Z, or something like this?
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
21,552 (6.00/day)
Location
The Washing Machine
Processor i7 8700k 4.6Ghz @ 1.24V
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) ASRock RX7900XT Phantom Gaming
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Gigabyte G34QWC (3440x1440)
Case Fractal Design Define R5
Audio Device(s) Harman Kardon AVR137 + 2.1
Power Supply EVGA Supernova G2 750W
Mouse XTRFY M42
Keyboard Lenovo Thinkpad Trackpoint II
Software W10 x64
Absolutely. After version 1.78.3, CPU-Z became extremely uninteresting, hence I accept 1.78.3 as the "true" CPU-Z benchmark.

Nevertheless, I think AMD is extremely passive and doesn't do anything in its fundamental interests.
Why not release an AMD sponsored benchmark called x86-64-Z, or something like this?
How is that good advertising? 'Look we have an optimized for AMD benchmark here, let's see if we win!'

It is much more powerful advertising to beat Intel on their own turf. A truly good processor should be able to, right? Now that doesn't mean I'm saying use CPU Z. But you wouldn't want 'AMD-Z' for the very same reason.
 

ARF

Joined
Jan 28, 2020
Messages
4,358 (2.67/day)
Location
Ex-usa | slava the trolls
How is that good advertising?

Yes.

'Look we have an optimized for AMD benchmark here, let's see if we win!'

It is much more powerful advertising to beat Intel on their own turf. A truly good processor should be able to, right? Now that doesn't mean I'm saying use CPU Z. But you wouldn't want 'AMD-Z' for the very same reason.

CPU-Z can always release a new version in which the intel processors are up to 100% faster. Don't underestimate them.
What I want is a truely neutral benchmark, which can happen only if it is AMD sponsored.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
3,598 (1.32/day)
Processor R5 5600X
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX B550-I GAMING
Cooling Alpenföhn Black Ridge
Memory 2*16GB DDR4-2666 VLP @3800
Video Card(s) EVGA Geforce RTX 3080 XC3
Storage 1TB Samsung 970 Pro, 2TB Intel 660p
Display(s) ASUS PG279Q, Eizo EV2736W
Case Dan Cases A4-SFX
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse Corsair Ironclaw Wireless RGB
Keyboard Corsair K60
VR HMD HTC Vive
AMD tried to promote it's chips as super efficient. They did that keeping 12 and 16 core chips at 8 core chips power consumption levels.
Which 8-core chips runs at 230W power limit? That is what 7900X and 7950X have.
 
Joined
May 11, 2018
Messages
1,057 (0.47/day)
It's strange that there are so different results out there for stock 14900k in reviews - is this again motherboard schenanigans overcklocking at default settings? The most widely published number is also a pre-release "leak" from September 2023, with the score of 978, clearly an overclock.
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
178 (0.13/day)
Is that in consideration of Intel's new baseline profile? (I'm guessing probably not)
It's not but it's a single thread workload so it's not as if you go above 253W in those on a 14900K. CPU-Z single thread is irrelevant anyway.
 
Top