Sounds a lot like intel 14th gen minus the dying chips
NotTodayGlowies
It was released for efficiency. It’s 65w TDP instead of a 105w TDP. Honestly, it should’ve been called the 9700 instead of the 9700X and people wouldn’t be disappointed.
Jeoshua
It’s strange that people are taking an efficiency-focused chip and pretending it’s the halo product of Zen 5.
NotJustBibbit
It’s to be more efficient (to do the opposite of intel). They want the CPU to have the same performance but 40W less power usage
Snow-Crash-42
I hope the 9950x will be good though. And the 3D versions too.
Computica
Don’t most tech companies do a tick-tock development path? 9xxx series seems like optimization compared to 7xxx series.
angrycat537
Well, just got new 5700x for 150 euros, so cpu market is great if you ask me. That cpu (5800x) was like 400 a few years ago…
tomagfx
AMD when it releases a much more energy efficient chip with the same performance as a chip that consumes 40 more watts, giving it a ton of overhead for overclocking, but the community hates them for it:
DreSmart
looks like intel “Alder lake” 3rd refresh
XWasTheProblem
Is this hysteria really warranted? We’ve seen **one** chip from Zen 5 so far and it’s not even bad, just maybe underwhelming in terms of performance.
Niner-Sixer-Gator
AMD missed a good opportunity to stick it to Intel, it’s like every time they take a step forward, they take two steps backwards, same thing with their GPUs, the 6000 series was a huge step up, and then they went backwards with the 7000 series 🤦🏿♂️🤯😵💫
widedisplay7726
i said the same thing in another post and people downvoted me to obilivion. Seriously tho, if you complain that it’s good, get a 7700 instead. Same thing and also 65W TDP.
I’m more excited for the 9900X and 9950X tho, those don’t have lower tdp.
deefop
What are you talking about?
Look, the 9600x and 9700x seem underwhelming in terms of performance, but they’re also running at significantly lower power, and that’s not meaningless.
For the 9600x, on average at 1080p(with a 4090), it’s 8.5% slower than the 7800x3d in games, according to Tech power up. It’s like 2.5% slower in applications. But it’s launching at $280, whereas the 7800x3d is selling around $370. So for basically 30% more money for the 78003xd, you’re getting less than 10% more gaming performance, and roughly equivalent multi-thread/application performance. The value proposition there is actually not terrible compared to what’s already on the market.
The 9700x is launching pretty much at the 7800x3d market price, but the 9700x is similarly a bit slower in gaming, but faster in MT compared to the 7800x3d, for the same price.
My guess is that the pricing for these SKU’s will probably drop a bit(which is tradition with all of AMD’s launched in the last 8 or so years), but even at launch price, it’s not the meme lineup people are painting it to be. It’s just not giving you 7800x3d gaming performance for $280, which I guess is what a lot of people were hoping for.
But come on: with a 4090 at 1080p, the 7800x3d is like 8.5% faster, at 1440p the 7800x3d is like 5% faster, and that’s again assuming you have a 4090.
Most people don’t have 4090’s, so at the end of the day you’ll hardly ever notice a difference except at very low resolutions.
Honestly, the real issue for the 9600x is that the 7600x is like 100 bucks cheaper in a lot of cases, so the value proposition for the 7600x is better than the 9600x, similarly to how the 9600x is better value than the 7800x3d.
Edit: ALSO, your thread title is fucking braindead regardless of the zen5 launch. The CPU market, even with Intel shitting the bed, has pretty much never been better. You can get onto AM5 for extremely reasonable prices, and again, you aren’t going to see an absurd difference between the 7600x and zen5 unless you’re in fairly CPU limited scenarios.
The CPU market is in a very good place in terms of what the end consumer can get their hands on.
sirflappington
We’ve reached a point where moore’s law doesn’t apply anymore and expecting a significant jump in performance isn’t realistic. Intel tried to get around the limitation by pumping more voltage into their CPU and increasing clock speed but we know how that went. AMD managed to get similar performance while significantly lowering the power requirements and I’ll happily use these processors when I upgrade my personal rig or my server. Maybe it’s disappointing to the people chasing the most powerful tech, but for the vast majority of consumers, these CPUs are actually pretty good.
Tubaenthusiasticbee
sooooo what exactly is the problem here?
illicITparameters
Isnt this the same 13700K 14700K meme?
Yall clowns.
Croakie89
Written by a 13/14 gen Intel owner
michaelbelgium
Great timeing as amd doesn’t have any competition, even less now cuz intel fucked up.
Also first time in idk how many years – or since ever – a new generation is more efficient and cheaper than the previous one.
GalaxLordCZ
Me when I only look at raw performance and ignore everything else.
lordbalazshun
just enable PBO (and remove power limits)? as far as i can tell from the der8auer video, it helps a lot, and makes the 9700x way faster than the 7700x, and none of the other reviewers used PBO (as far as i can tell).
jembutbrodol
Me looking at my 13 gen intel:
Pls dont die…. Pls dont die
Carlos_Tellier
I’m happy seeing goofy’s trial legacy live on
Terranosuchus
I’m confused is the chip good or bad?
ShowBoobsPls
OP you did a mistake. Criticizing AMD is only allowed here if you shit on Intel first
rmpumper
* for the third time.
Second time was when they released 7700X with 65W TDP and named it 7700.
skyvoyager9
Honestly consumers deserve this. Stop buying shit just because it’s “new”. AMD and every other tech company have learned no matter what they release people will buy it religiously because it’s new, so why bother trying to make massive improvements?
melexx4
Even with PBO (unlocked power limits/overclock) the 9700X is not much faster than the 7700X in **video games**.
28 Comments
Sounds a lot like intel 14th gen minus the dying chips
It was released for efficiency. It’s 65w TDP instead of a 105w TDP. Honestly, it should’ve been called the 9700 instead of the 9700X and people wouldn’t be disappointed.
It’s strange that people are taking an efficiency-focused chip and pretending it’s the halo product of Zen 5.
It’s to be more efficient (to do the opposite of intel). They want the CPU to have the same performance but 40W less power usage
I hope the 9950x will be good though. And the 3D versions too.
Don’t most tech companies do a tick-tock development path? 9xxx series seems like optimization compared to 7xxx series.
Well, just got new 5700x for 150 euros, so cpu market is great if you ask me. That cpu (5800x) was like 400 a few years ago…
AMD when it releases a much more energy efficient chip with the same performance as a chip that consumes 40 more watts, giving it a ton of overhead for overclocking, but the community hates them for it:
looks like intel “Alder lake” 3rd refresh
Is this hysteria really warranted? We’ve seen **one** chip from Zen 5 so far and it’s not even bad, just maybe underwhelming in terms of performance.
AMD missed a good opportunity to stick it to Intel, it’s like every time they take a step forward, they take two steps backwards, same thing with their GPUs, the 6000 series was a huge step up, and then they went backwards with the 7000 series 🤦🏿♂️🤯😵💫
i said the same thing in another post and people downvoted me to obilivion. Seriously tho, if you complain that it’s good, get a 7700 instead. Same thing and also 65W TDP.
I’m more excited for the 9900X and 9950X tho, those don’t have lower tdp.
What are you talking about?
Look, the 9600x and 9700x seem underwhelming in terms of performance, but they’re also running at significantly lower power, and that’s not meaningless.
For the 9600x, on average at 1080p(with a 4090), it’s 8.5% slower than the 7800x3d in games, according to Tech power up. It’s like 2.5% slower in applications. But it’s launching at $280, whereas the 7800x3d is selling around $370. So for basically 30% more money for the 78003xd, you’re getting less than 10% more gaming performance, and roughly equivalent multi-thread/application performance. The value proposition there is actually not terrible compared to what’s already on the market.
The 9700x is launching pretty much at the 7800x3d market price, but the 9700x is similarly a bit slower in gaming, but faster in MT compared to the 7800x3d, for the same price.
My guess is that the pricing for these SKU’s will probably drop a bit(which is tradition with all of AMD’s launched in the last 8 or so years), but even at launch price, it’s not the meme lineup people are painting it to be. It’s just not giving you 7800x3d gaming performance for $280, which I guess is what a lot of people were hoping for.
But come on: with a 4090 at 1080p, the 7800x3d is like 8.5% faster, at 1440p the 7800x3d is like 5% faster, and that’s again assuming you have a 4090.
Most people don’t have 4090’s, so at the end of the day you’ll hardly ever notice a difference except at very low resolutions.
Honestly, the real issue for the 9600x is that the 7600x is like 100 bucks cheaper in a lot of cases, so the value proposition for the 7600x is better than the 9600x, similarly to how the 9600x is better value than the 7800x3d.
Edit: ALSO, your thread title is fucking braindead regardless of the zen5 launch. The CPU market, even with Intel shitting the bed, has pretty much never been better. You can get onto AM5 for extremely reasonable prices, and again, you aren’t going to see an absurd difference between the 7600x and zen5 unless you’re in fairly CPU limited scenarios.
The CPU market is in a very good place in terms of what the end consumer can get their hands on.
We’ve reached a point where moore’s law doesn’t apply anymore and expecting a significant jump in performance isn’t realistic. Intel tried to get around the limitation by pumping more voltage into their CPU and increasing clock speed but we know how that went. AMD managed to get similar performance while significantly lowering the power requirements and I’ll happily use these processors when I upgrade my personal rig or my server. Maybe it’s disappointing to the people chasing the most powerful tech, but for the vast majority of consumers, these CPUs are actually pretty good.
sooooo what exactly is the problem here?
Isnt this the same 13700K 14700K meme?
Yall clowns.
Written by a 13/14 gen Intel owner
Great timeing as amd doesn’t have any competition, even less now cuz intel fucked up.
Also first time in idk how many years – or since ever – a new generation is more efficient and cheaper than the previous one.
Me when I only look at raw performance and ignore everything else.
just enable PBO (and remove power limits)? as far as i can tell from the der8auer video, it helps a lot, and makes the 9700x way faster than the 7700x, and none of the other reviewers used PBO (as far as i can tell).
Me looking at my 13 gen intel:
Pls dont die…. Pls dont die
I’m happy seeing goofy’s trial legacy live on
I’m confused is the chip good or bad?
OP you did a mistake. Criticizing AMD is only allowed here if you shit on Intel first
* for the third time.
Second time was when they released 7700X with 65W TDP and named it 7700.
Honestly consumers deserve this. Stop buying shit just because it’s “new”. AMD and every other tech company have learned no matter what they release people will buy it religiously because it’s new, so why bother trying to make massive improvements?
Even with PBO (unlocked power limits/overclock) the 9700X is not much faster than the 7700X in **video games**.
I’m looking forward to the new mobile chips.