CPU Maybe NOT AMD 7000

[theoldwizard1]

Well, now that AND 7000 chips are officially here, I have watched a few video reviews. I had been sort of holding out building a new SFF waiting for the 7000's, which all have integrated GPU (no "G" suffix/APU chips any more), but this video and other have changed my mind !

The MINIMUM power (TDP) of any of the Zen 4 is 105 WATTS ! This true even for the "bottom end" 6 core/12 thread 7600X ! Forget trying to build something "fanless". The high end in 170W, so it probably has an extra large cooler. Likely this will interfere with many small cases. I'm hopping that AMD brings out a "budget", lower power, 4 core/8 thread addition to the Zen 4 line up !

Also, the previous generation (Zen 3) 5800X3D, which also has a TDP of 105W, costs less, uses less expensive DDR4 RAM, older less expensive motherboards and preforms similar to the new (Zen 4) 7600X. Yes, you have to add graphics card.

Serious;y consider an AMD 5600G or 5700G if you plan on building in the next 6 months or so. Prices on Zen 3 parts should be dropping and DDR4 as well as mobo. Don't wait too long ! The supply is not going to last forever !!

 

[judokamak]

Why does so many people ignore ECO mode? In ECO mode 105w you get like 90% of the performance, which is 30(?)% better than previous gen.

If you are in the productivity & SFF this is the way to go.

If your primary use is gaming than 5800X3D is the obvious winner. At least until 7000x3D.

 

[confusis]

Why does so many people ignore ECO mode? In ECO mode 105w you get like 90% of the performance, which is 30(?)% better than previous gen.

If you are in the productivity & SFF this is the way to go.

If your primary use is gaming than 5800X3D is the obvious winner. At least until 7000x3D.

I paid for a CPU, I wanna use all of the CPU lol

I was hoping 7000 series was going to be better so I could pick up a 5800x3d on the used market :/

 

[judokamak]

I paid for a CPU, I wanna use all of the CPU lol

I was hoping 7000 series was going to be better so I could pick up a 5800x3d on the used market :/

Expect that in January when 7000x3d variants come out.

It's not that zen 4 is not awesome chip, it's that it's expensive (new platform, ram). I suspect things will start to move when RL comes out.

 

[Skripka]

Too hot and power hungry to care. Call me AMD, when you get off the Intel cool aid and care about efficiency....and then there's the reality that UEFI for the new boards won't be bug-free more or less until next summer.

 

[akisu]

The 7700X uses the same energy/FPS like the 5800X3D while gaming but is faster in all applications. Both CPUs are rated 105W and max drain of 142W TDP.
(use Google Translate, I am too lazy to search for an English benchmark )

If you are just intested in gaming and have already an AM4 system the 5800X3D is currently a good option. If you build something new go for the 7700X or bigger.
Btw you lose 5% of performance when you change to ECO mode.

 

[Thehack]

Too hot and power hungry to care. Call me AMD, when you get off the Intel cool aid and care about efficiency....and then there's the reality that UEFI for the new boards won't be bug-free more or less until next summer.

It's efficient. Turn on ECO mode.

Also, no one actually tests for efficiency. I haven't see any test with work unit done per watt-hour or joules. I think only computerbase.de glossed over efficiency.

"With 45 watts, more efficient than Ryzen 6000 Mobile

Would you like another comparison? With 45 watts, the Ryzen 7 7700X (8 cores) is over 20 percent faster in multi-core scenarios than the Ryzen 9 6900HS (8 cores) notebook APU, which is trimmed for maximum efficiency and also has 45 watts.


The new 8-core processor is also gaining the upper hand over Intel, although it depends heavily on which CPUs are compared in which watt class: At the top end, a Ryzen 9 7950X with just 65 watts beats the Core i9-12900K with full power Power consumption, at the bottom Ryzen 7 7700X and Core i9-12900K are close together at 88 watts. With even less power consumption, the race is once again clearly in favor of AMD. It is also clear that the Alder Lake CPUs don't stand a chance without E-Cores."

AMD Ryzen 7000 im Test: So schnell sind 7950X und 7700X: Leistungsaufnahme und Effizienz

Ryzen 9 7950X & Ryzen 7 7700X im Test: Leistungsaufnahme und Effizienz / TDP und PPT steigen deutlich

www.computerbase.de

Approximately 20% generational improvements on a hotrod CPU vs a low-power tuned CPU. If this is accurate, I would expect the low power versions to be more efficient.

CPUs are much more sophisticated than they are a few generations ago. TDP being a single number is not an accurate representation of how a CPU works in regards to power consumption.

If we really want to get technical, we should measure the efficiency of CPUs via work units* per joules and graph it on a chart against power targets. That should probably give us something a nice curve. Then we can find the most efficient point.

work unit = an pre-determined workload, ie rendering a scene.

 

[Skripka]

It's efficient. Turn on ECO mode.

Also, no one actually tests for efficiency. I haven't see any test with work unit done per watt-hour or joules. I think only computerbase.de glossed over efficiency.

"With 45 watts, more efficient than Ryzen 6000 Mobile

Would you like another comparison? With 45 watts, the Ryzen 7 7700X (8 cores) is over 20 percent faster in multi-core scenarios than the Ryzen 9 6900HS (8 cores) notebook APU, which is trimmed for maximum efficiency and also has 45 watts.


The new 8-core processor is also gaining the upper hand over Intel, although it depends heavily on which CPUs are compared in which watt class: At the top end, a Ryzen 9 7950X with just 65 watts beats the Core i9-12900K with full power Power consumption, at the bottom Ryzen 7 7700X and Core i9-12900K are close together at 88 watts. With even less power consumption, the race is once again clearly in favor of AMD. It is also clear that the Alder Lake CPUs don't stand a chance without E-Cores."

AMD Ryzen 7000 im Test: So schnell sind 7950X und 7700X: Leistungsaufnahme und Effizienz

Ryzen 9 7950X & Ryzen 7 7700X im Test: Leistungsaufnahme und Effizienz / TDP und PPT steigen deutlich

www.computerbase.de

Approximately 20% generational improvements on a hotrod CPU vs a low-power tuned CPU. If this is accurate, I would expect the low power versions to be more efficient.

CPUs are much more sophisticated than they are a few generations ago. TDP being a single number is not an accurate representation of how a CPU works in regards to power consumption.

If we really want to get technical, we should measure the efficiency of CPUs via work units* per joules and graph it on a chart against power targets. That should probably give us something a nice curve. Then we can find the most efficient point.

work unit = an pre-determined workload, ie rendering a scene.

Gamers Nexus did it in their reviews this go around....and the results were very funny as Zen3 was better while costing far less and being stable and not buggy due to beta quality UEFI. They measured frames rendered per energy input...of course being US based they use W*h and not Joules like people should

 

[Thehack]

Gamers Nexus did it in their reviews this go around....and the results were very funny as Zen3 was better while costing far less and being stable and not buggy due to beta quality UEFI. They measured frames rendered per energy input...of course being US based they use W*h and not Joules like people should

They ran it at stock. It's unfortunate that the stock settings are over tuned for performance. It should've came out of the box with a lower power target. Early reports says ECO mode shows better performance than previous gen when considering the work load and power consumption. Today's ECO mode was last gen default mode. Maybe this is just the current market in general, as GPUs have risen in power consumption as well and this is the expected norm for consumers/enthusiasts.

Let's not kid ourselves here, if the engineers at AMD actually regressed in performance per watt, this would be a bulldozer 2.0 moment (if you're newer to the scene, bulldozer was AMD's flop where it regressed/stagnated in performance despite a process node advantage).

TDP has been meaningless, as temperature for the last couple generations. CPUs nowadays still boost if they see they have a power budget and a temp budget. If the CPU still has power headroom (based on the power target) and it is less than 95C, it is leaving performance on the table. These aren't phone SOCs, where performance tanks drastically when it reaches a throttle point. CPU boosts are very granular, similar to GPUs. Saying a CPU runs "hot" because it hits 95C is silly nowadays, in my opinion.

However, it does seem that the heatspreader design has poor performance relatively to bare die compared to last gen. This may be matter of physics, as now you have more concentrated hotspots and moving that heat to a heatspreader is difficult.

1 joule is 1 watt-sec, but watt-hour is a bit more intuitive since we have a frame of reference, like laptop batteries are 50-90 wh.

 

[Thehack]

@theoldwizard1 I would reconsider the meaning of TDP. There maybe an E version in the future that is lower power out of the box, but "TDP" are moving targets. II would wait for more tests and intel 13th gen, but at minimum, I am confident that the 7000 did not regress in performance/watt.

 

[wertzius]

You watched alot of videos and did not understand the point.
Ryzen 7000 is incredible efficient at low PPTs - it matches Intel CPUs at nearly half the wattage. Nobody pushes you to drive them stock. They are perfect to build a cool but fast SFF. Also during gaming (Surely 99% of the usecase here) they draw not more than 70W - Blender and Cinebench are not the real world.

 

[Skripka]

They ran it at stock. It's unfortunate that the stock settings are over tuned for performance. It should've came out of the box with a lower power target. Early reports says ECO mode shows better performance than previous gen when considering the work load and power consumption. Today's ECO mode was last gen default mode. Maybe this is just the current market in general, as GPUs have risen in power consumption as well and this is the expected norm for consumers/enthusiasts.

Let's not kid ourselves here, if the engineers at AMD actually regressed in performance per watt, this would be a bulldozer 2.0 moment (if you're newer to the scene, bulldozer was AMD's flop where it regressed/stagnated in performance despite a process node advantage).

TDP has been meaningless, as temperature for the last couple generations. CPUs nowadays still boost if they see they have a power budget and a temp budget. If the CPU still has power headroom (based on the power target) and it is less than 95C, it is leaving performance on the table. These aren't phone SOCs, where performance tanks drastically when it reaches a throttle point. CPU boosts are very granular, similar to GPUs. Saying a CPU runs "hot" because it hits 95C is silly nowadays, in my opinion.

However, it does seem that the heatspreader design has poor performance relatively to bare die compared to last gen. This may be matter of physics, as now you have more concentrated hotspots and moving that heat to a heatspreader is difficult.

1 joule is 1 watt-sec, but watt-hour is a bit more intuitive since we have a frame of reference, like laptop batteries are 50-90 wh.

Oh, Der Bauer already thinks that a large bit of of the problem is the IHS. By delidding (and locking and clocks/voltage, to keep consistency) he was able to drop 20C. The IHS is an extra 1.5mm thick above the SAM--which was necessary from AMD to maintain cooler compatibility. There's an extra full 1mm of solid metal at least that could be shaved off the IHS(!)...but then AM4 cooler compatibility would have been broken.

 

[Legion]

This is just how it is these days. Just tune to whatever your preferences are.
If you want 100w you can have it, 65w, no problem. it's not difficult !!!
If you want balls to the wall, you can have it as well ofc

 

[theoldwizard1]

This is just how it is these days. Just tune to whatever your preferences are.
If you want 100w you can have it, 65w, no problem. it's not difficult !!!
If you want balls to the wall, you can have it as well ofc

Not exactly ! When the Zen 3 part supply dries up, there won't be any 65W CPU/APU available !

AMD needs something to compete with their own 5700G, which is currently selling for $235 on Amazon !

 

[Legion]

Not exactly ! When the Zen 3 part supply dries up, there won't be any 65W CPU/APU available !

AMD needs something to compete with their own 5700G, which is currently selling for $235 on Amazon !

It's honestly looking likely that the APU as we've known them (on desktop) may very well die with the 5xxxg SKU's, there's nothing on AMD's roadmap to suggest otherwise.
As for 65w you'll have to tune it yourself from a higher end SKU(for the time being at least) If you want to wait, they may (or may not) release lower wattage parts next year

 

[judokamak]

Edit: just saw another user posted a thread with this video earlier

 

[T_Tank]

To be fair Intel and Nvidia are releasing space heaters to this next gen that guzzle power.

Least with amd they say it runs at 95c all day cause that's where it maximizes its boost. Ya dial the sucker back to 4.5ghz and it will probably be in line with the last gen ryzen pulling less wattage

 

[hadron999]

Obviously you only read the "canned" reviews by the low tech gamer sites, and not the ones that did thorough testing.

Read this review in particular:

Ryzen 7600X and 7950X review: Zen 4 starts off expensive but impressive

Thermal behavior is a bit odd, but there’s lots to like about these new CPUs.

arstechnica.com

Look at the differences between running a 7600x at stock 105W tdp and at eco 65 W tdp. Almost negligible in performance. IMHO, AMD marketing screwed up BIG time by not releasing these as 65W (7600x,7700x) and 105 W (7900x,7950x) TDP cpu's. But they decided to copy INTEL and let stock settings be above the optimum efficiency curve for marginal gain. I wonder if this could be one of the reasons why Robert Hallock left AMD.

 

[theoldwizard1]

My hope is that AMD will release a Ryzen 3 7xxx that will run at 65W with no tuning. With larger caches and DDR5, this would likely beat most of today's 5000 Series chips.

 

[akisu]

My hope is that AMD will release a Ryzen 3 7xxx that will run at 65W with no tuning. With larger caches and DDR5, this would likely beat most of today's 5000 Series chips.

Do you remember any Ryzen 3 5xxx Chip? No? Me either. They skipped the 4 core chip in that Generation. There is the Ryzen 3 4100 (released in 2022!), which is more or less an 4300G chip without graphics. But as APU chip it has less cache. I am not sure what your hope is but AMD wasn't building anything like that the last couple years. They only release from time to time some old chips in the budget market. So right now you can get a Zen 2 chip as newest Ryzen 3. So far there was no Zen3 and Zen3+ yet. Maybe when Ryzen 9000 is available there will be also be a release of your hope Ryzen 3 7xxx.

I am sorry to destroy your hope. More likely they will release a Ryzen 5 6xxxG/7xxxG as more affordable chip next year. Maybe that could be interesting for you.