Original Link: https://www.anandtech.com/show/18693/the-amd-ryzen-9-7900-ryzen-7-7700-and-ryzen-5-5-7600-review-ryzen-7000-at-65-w-zen-4-efficiency



In Q3 of last year, AMD released the first CPUs based on its highly anticipated Zen 4 architecture. Not only did their Ryzen 7000 parts raise the bar in terms of performance compared with the previous Ryzen 5000 series, but it also gave birth to AMD's latest platform, AM5. Some of the most significant benefits of Zen 4 and the AM5 platform include support for PCIe 5.0, DDR5 memory, and access to the latest and greatest of what's available in controller sets. 

While the competition at the higher end of the x86 processor market is a metaphorical firefight with heavy weaponry, AMD has struggled to offer users on tighter budgets anything to sink their teeth into. It's clear Zen 4 is a powerful and highly efficient architecture, but with the added cost of DDR5, finding all of the components to fit under tighter budget constraints with AM5 isn't as easy as it once was on AM4.

AMD has launched three new processors designed to offer users on a budget something to get their money's worth, with performance that make them favorable for users looking for Zen 4 hardware but without the hefty financial outlay. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900, Ryzen 7 7700, and Ryzen 5 7600 processors all feature the Zen 4 microarchitecture and come with a TDP of just 65 W, which makes them viable for all kinds of users, such as enthusiasts looking for a more affordable entry-point onto the AM5 platform.

Of particular interest is AMD's new entry-level offering for the Ryzen 7000 series: the Ryzen 5 7600, which offers six cores/twelve threads for entry-level builders looking to build a system with all of the features of AM5 and the Ryzen 7000 family, but at a much more affordable price point. We are looking at all three of AMD's new Ryzen 7000 65 W TDP processors to see how they stack up against the competition, to see if AMD's lower-powered, lower-priced non-X variants can offer anything in the way of value for consumers. We also aim to see if AMD's 65 W TDP implementation can shine on TSMC's 5 nm node process with performance per watt efficiency that AMD claims is the best on the market.

Over the last year, since AMD unveiled its Zen 4 core, we've published several column inches on the microarchitecture, Ryzen 7000 processors, and the AM5 platform. Below is a list of our detailed Raphael (Zen 4) and Ryzen 7000 coverage:

Ryzen 9 7900, Ryzen 7 7700, Ryzen 5 7600, 65 W TDP from $229

Focusing on the latest 65 W-based Ryzen 7000 series processors, AMD is looking to offer better value throughout its series in addition to the various price drops on its X-class Zen 4 chips across the board. The new Ryzen 7000 non-X series chips are available across multiple configurations and price points, some of which show better power efficiency against previous generations of its processors and the decision to go back to bundling suitable coolers for even more value.

In contrast to AMDs top X-series SKUs, which require competent cooling due to the higher power consumption and higher thermal pressure placed on the IHS, the new 65 W models are designed with efficiency and performance per watt in mind. All of which is intended to make them (more) viable options for all types of system builders. To account for the lower TDP compared with the X-series SKUs, AMD has lowered their clockspeed expectations for these new SKUs. The boost clocks are still fairly high, reflecting what the silicon can do in lighter workloads; but the official base frequency clock speeds have been more significantly cut in order to keep the chips' power usage under control in more heavily multi-threded scenarios.

AMD Ryzen 7000 Series Line-Up
AnandTech Cores
Threads
Base
Freq
Turbo
Freq
Memory
Support
L3
Cache
TDP PPT MSRP
Ryzen 9 7950X 16C / 32T 4.5 GHz 5.7 GHz DDR5-5200 64 MB 170 W 230 W $699
 
Ryzen 9 7900X 12C / 24T 4.7 GHz 5.6 GHz DDR5-5200 64 MB 170 W 230 W $549
Ryzen 9 7900 12C / 24T 3.6 GHz 5.4 GHz DDR5-5200 64 MB 65 W 88 W $429
 
Ryzen 7 7700X 8C / 16T 4.5 GHz 5.4 GHz DDR5-5200 32 MB 105 W 142 W $399
Ryzen 7 7700 8C / 16T 3.6 GHz 5.3 GHz DDR5-5200 32 MB 65 W 88 W $329
 
Ryzen 5 7600X 6C / 12T 4.7 GHz 5.3 GHz DDR5-5200 32 MB 105 W 142 W $299
Ryzen 5 7600 6C / 12T 3.8 GHz 5.1 GHz DDR5-5200 32 MB 65 W 88 W $229

Starting with the top 65 W SKU from AMD, the Ryzen 9 7900 has twelve Zen 4 cores with a maximum boost clock speed of up to 5.4 GHz. In addition, it shares the same 64 MB L3 cache as the Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 9 7900X, but with a TDP over 100 Watts lower than the flagship model. The Ryzen 9 7900 is designed for content creators, gamers, and enthusiasts looking for a more affordable option.

Directly comparing the Ryzen 9 7900 to the Ryzen 9 7900X, the 65 W variant has a base clock speed of 3.6 GHz, which is a drop of around 23% compared to its X-series sibling. On the other hand, the boost clock speeds are much more similar, with a 5.4 GHz boost frequency on the Ryzen 9 7900, making things more palatable for enthusiasts.


AMD Ryzen 9 7900 12-core/24-thread processor in CPU-Z

The 61% drop in TDP between the Ryzen 9 7900 (65 W) and Ryzen 9 7900X (170 W) may pose some questions surrounding raw performance throughput. Certainly, the 7900 is going to see lower performance in heavily multi-threaded workloads; you still need a lot of power to light up a dozen Zen 4 cores at 5GHz+. The up side to this, however? Having a lower TDP makes it more viable in systems with space constraints. Not only this, but it also means it's easier to cool and alleviates some budget needed for purchasing a high-end cooler, which could be spent on faster DDR5 memory, storage, or discrete graphics.

Moving down the stack to the Ryzen 7 series, the Ryzen 7 7700 has the same core and thread count as the existing Ryzen 7 7700X, but with a 100 MHz hit to boost clock speeds. Meanwhile there's the base frequency of 3.6 GHz, which does constitute a drop in raw frequency of 900 MHz. Other features include a total cache of 40 MB, 32 MB of L3 cache, and 8 MB of L2 cache.

Overall, the Ryzen 7 7700 sees a 40 W drop in TDP versus its 105 TDP of its X-series counterpart, which is notably smaller than the drop on the 7900 parts. So the Zen 4 hardware isn't being asked to give up quite as much performance headroom here.


Slide from AMD's Ryzen 7000 65 W Slide Deck: Performance-Per-Watt is the focus

The final SKU from AMD's Ryzen 7000 65 W offerings is the Ryzen 5 7600. The Ryzen 5 7600 is the entry-level model of AMD's latest high-performance AM5 platform, with six cores and a maximum boost clock speed of 5.1 GHz. It shares many of the characteristics of the Ryzen 5 7600X, including 32 MB of L3 cache with 6 MB of L2 cache; this is 1 MB per core which is a benefit of Zen 4 over the 512 KB of L2 cache per core on Zen 3. The other benefit is the price, of which the Ryzen 5 7600 is very attractive, with an entry-level price of $229, down from the $299 MSRP (and $269 street price) of the 7600X. This allows users looking to opt for a Zen 4 and TSMC 5 nm processor an even more affordable option to consider opting for.

Like the rest of the Ryzen 7000 family, all three of the new 65 W SKUs also include an integrated GPU made of two RDNA2-based CUs, in order to provide basic levels of integrated graphics. While more than satisfactory for simple desktop needs, these shouldn't be confused with having the same levels of graphical power as their Ryzen series of APUs.

Finally, it's also worth reminding everyone that, as has been the case for several processor generations now, TDP is not the maximum power consumption value for either AMD or Intel – nor is the definition of TDP even identical between the two. For AMD, the metric to watch is Package Power Tracking (PPT), which is the power level that the CPU socket allows the CPU to draw in terms of power. On the AM5 platform, AMD defines PPT as being 1.35x the TDP – so in the case of today's 65 W Ryzen processors, that means an 88 W socket power limit.

Test Bed and Setup

Per our processor testing policy, we take a premium category motherboard suitable for the socket and equip the system with a suitable amount of memory running at the manufacturer's maximum supported frequency. This is also typically run at JEDEC sub-timings where possible. It is noted that some users are not keen on this policy, stating that sometimes the maximum supported frequency is relatively low, or faster memory is available at a similar price, or that the JEDEC speeds can be prohibitive for performance.

While these comments make sense, ultimately, very few users apply memory profiles (either XMP or other) as they require interaction with the BIOS. Most users will fall back on JEDEC-supported speeds - this includes home users and industry who might want to shave off a cent or two from the cost or stay within the margins set by the manufacturer. Where possible, we will extend out testing to include faster memory modules either at the same time as the review or at a later date.

The Current CPU Test Suite

For our AMD Ryzen 9 7900, Ryzen 7 7700, and Ryzen 5 7600 testing, we are using the following test system:

AMD Ryzen 7000 Series System (DDR5)
CPU Ryzen 9 7900 ($429)
12 Cores, 24 Threads
65 W TDP

Ryzen 7 7700 ($329)
8 Cores, 16 Threads
65 W TDP

Ryzen 5 7600 ($229)
6 Cores, 12 Threads
65 W TDP
Motherboard GIGABYTE X670E Aorus Master (BIOS 813b)
Memory G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo
2x16 GB
DDR5-5200 CL44
Cooling EK-AIO Elite 360 D-RGB 360 mm AIO
Storage SK Hynix 2TB Platinum P41 PCIe 4.0 x4 NMve
Power Supply Corsair HX1000
GPUs AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT, Driver 31.0.12019
Operating Systems Windows 11 22H2

Our updated CPU suite for 2023 includes various benchmarks, tests, and workloads designed to show variance in performance between different processors and architectures. These include UL's latest Procyon suite with both office and photo editing workloads simulated to measure performance in these tasks, CineBench R23, Dwarf Fortress, Blender 3.3, and C-Ray 1.1.  

Meanwhile, we've also carried over some older (but still relevant/enlightening) benchmarks from our CPU 2021 suite. This includes benchmarks such as Dwarf Fortress, Factorio, and Dr. Ian Cutress's 3DPMv2 benchmark.

We have also updated our pool of games going forward into 2023 and beyond, including the latest F1 2022 racing game, the CPU-intensive RTS Total War: Warhammer 3, and the popular Hitman 3.



CPU Benchmark Performance: Power And Office

Our previous sets of ‘office’ benchmarks have often been a mix of science and synthetics, so this time we wanted to keep our office section purely on real-world performance. We've also incorporated our power testing into this section too.

The biggest update to our Office-focused tests for 2023 and beyond include UL's Procyon software, which is the successor to PCMark. Procyon benchmarks office performance using Microsoft Office applications, as well as Adobe's Photoshop/Lightroom photo editing software, and Adobe Premier Pro's video editing capabilities. Due to issues with UL Procyon and the video editing test, we haven't been able to properly run these, but once we identify a fix with UL, we will re-test each chip.

We are using DDR5 memory on the 12th and 13th Gen Core parts, as well as the Ryzen 7000 series, at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5600B CL46 - Intel 13th Gen
  • DDR5-5200 CL44 - Ryzen 7000
  • DDR5-4800 (B) CL40 - Intel 12th Gen

All other CPUs such as Ryzen 5000 and 3000 were tested at the relevant JEDEC settings as per the processor's individual memory support with DDR4.

Power

The nature of reporting processor power consumption has become, in part, a bit of a nightmare. Historically the peak power consumption of a processor, as purchased, is given by its Thermal Design Power (TDP, or PL1). For many markets, such as embedded processors, that value of TDP still signifies the peak power consumption. For the processors we test at AnandTech, either desktop, notebook, or enterprise, this is not always the case.

Modern high-performance processors implement a feature called Turbo. This allows, usually for a limited time, a processor to go beyond its rated frequency. Exactly how far the processor goes depends on a few factors, such as the Turbo Power Limit (PL2), whether the peak frequency is hard coded, the thermals, and the power delivery. Turbo can sometimes be very aggressive, allowing power values 2.5x above the rated TDP.

AMD and Intel have different definitions for TDP that are, broadly speaking, applied the same. The difference comes from turbo modes, turbo limits, turbo budgets, and how the processors manage that power balance. These topics are 10000-12000 word articles in their own right, and we’ve got a few articles worth reading on the topic.

(0-0) Peak Power

Regarding peak power, all three AMD's Ryzen 7000 65 W series for desktop topped out around 90 W under full load. This figure of 90 W was consistent throughout our power testing, which is within a couple Watts of AMD's Power Package Tracking (PPT) limits (~88W).

Looking at the power consumption of the Ryzen 9 7900 in more detail, we can see how it behaved under full load when running a workload using yCruncher. As we can see from the above graph, when the workload is called, and strain is placed on the Ryzen 9 7900, it immediately rose to 90 W and remained relatively consistent throughout the benchmark. and remained at the 90 W mark for around 193 seconds.

This was the same duration the benchmark took to complete, meaning that the Ryzne 9 7900 remained at its peak power for the full duration.

Office/Web

(1-1) Google Octane 2.0 Web Test

(1-2) UL Procyon Office: Word

(1-3) UL Procyon Office: Excel

(1-4) UL Procyon Office: PowerPoint

(1-5) UL Procyon Office: Outlook

(1-6) UL Procyon Photo Editing: Image Retouching

(1-7) UL Procyon Photo Editing: Batch Processing

(1-8) Kraken 1.1 Web Test

In our office and productivity benchmarks, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, as expected, performed the best out of the three chips. All three chips in each of the office-based workloads comfortably beat out the Ryzen 9 5950X, which is impressive given the Ryzen 5 7600 is a 6C/12T part at 65 W TDP beating out a much beefier Ryzen 9 5950X that is a 16C/32T part, albeit on an older architecture.



CPU Benchmark Performance: Science

Our Science section covers all the tests that typically resemble more scientific-based workloads and instruction sets. For our 2023 CPU suite, we've also added SciMark 2.0 which measures numerical kernels and various computational routines found in numeric coding.

We are using DDR5 memory on the 12th and 13th Gen Core parts, as well as the Ryzen 7000 series, at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5600B CL46 - Intel 13th Gen
  • DDR5-5200 CL44 - Ryzen 7000
  • DDR5-4800 (B) CL40 - Intel 12th Gen

All other CPUs such as Ryzen 5000 and 3000 were tested at the relevant JEDEC settings as per the processor's individual memory support with DDR4.

Science

(2-1) 3D Particle Movement v2.1 (non-AVX)

(2-2) 3D Particle Movement v2.1 (Peak AVX)

(2-3) yCruncher 0.78.9506 ST (250m Pi)

(2-4) yCruncher 0.78.9506 MT (2.5b Pi)

(2-4b) yCruncher 0.78.9506 MT (250m Pi)

(2-5) SciMark 2.0: Composite

(2-5b) SciMark 2.0: Monte Carlo

(2-5c) SciMark 2.0: Fast Fourier Transform

(2-5d) SciMark 2.0: Sparse Matrix Multiply

(2-5e) SciMark 2.0: Dense LU Matrix Factorization

(2-5f) SciMark 2.0: Jacobi Successive Over-Relaxation

(2-6) Primesieve 1.9.0: High Core Count

Given that all of AMD's Ryzen 7000 series line-up includes AVX-512 support, it stretches above the non-AVX-512 enabled chips in our 3DPM v2.1 AVX benchmark. Looking at the general consensus in our other tests where multi-threaded performance is essential, all three 65 W Ryzen 7000 SKUs perform well considering their lower power limits, but it does underscore why AMD (and Intel) have higher TDP chips as well.



CPU Benchmark Performance: Simulation

Simulation and Science have a lot of overlap in the benchmarking world. The benchmarks that fall under Science have a distinct use for the data they output – in our Simulation section, these act more like synthetics but at some level are still trying to simulate a given environment.

In the encrypt/decrypt scenario, how data is transferred and by what mechanism is pertinent to on-the-fly encryption of sensitive data - a process by which more modern devices are leaning to for software security.

We are using DDR5 memory on the 12th and 13th Gen Core parts, as well as the Ryzen 7000 series, at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5600B CL46 - Intel 13th Gen
  • DDR5-5200 CL44 - Ryzen 7000
  • DDR5-4800 (B) CL40 - Intel 12th Gen

All other CPUs such as Ryzen 5000 and 3000 were tested at the relevant JEDEC settings as per the processor's individual memory support with DDR4.

Simulation

(3-1) Dwarf Fortress 0.44.12 World Gen 65x65, 250 Yr

(3-1b) Dwarf Fortress 0.44.12 World Gen 129x129, 550 Yr

(3-1c) Dwarf Fortress 0.44.12 World Gen 257x257, 550 Yr

(3-2) Dolphin 5.0 Render Test

(3-3) Factorio v1.1.26 Test, 10K Trains

(3-3b) Factorio v1.1.26 Test, 10K Belts

(3-3c) Factorio v1.1.26 Test, 20K Hybrid

(3-4) John The Ripper 1.9.0: Blowfish

(3-4b) John The Ripper 1.9.0: MD5

In our simulation-based tests, the AMD Ryzen 7000 65 W SKUs start to break away from each other as single-core IPC performance isn't as crucial as multi-threaded performance in some cases.

The 65 W implementation on the 6C/12 Ryzen 5 7600 starts to show its limitations as a hex-core part, with the Ryzen 9 7900 (12C/24T) performing above our expectations in the majority of our simulation tests.

As expected, the Ryzen 7 7700 (8C/16T) sits in the middle of the three Ryzen 7000 65 W series processors in regards to performance, but it also sits in the middle in terms of specifications, core count, and pricing.



CPU Benchmark Performance: Rendering And Encoding

Rendering tests, compared to others, are often a little more simple to digest and automate. All the tests put out some sort of score or time, usually in an obtainable way that makes it fairly easy to extract. These tests are some of the most strenuous in our list, due to the highly threaded nature of rendering and ray-tracing, and can draw a lot of power.

If a system is not properly configured to deal with the thermal requirements of the processor, the rendering benchmarks are where it would show most easily as the frequency drops over a sustained period of time. Most benchmarks in this case are re-run several times, and the key to this is having an appropriate idle/wait time between benchmarks to allow for temperatures to normalize from the last test.

One of the interesting elements of modern processors is encoding performance. This covers two main areas: encryption/decryption for secure data transfer, and video transcoding from one video format to another.

In the encrypt/decrypt scenario, how data is transferred and by what mechanism is pertinent to on-the-fly encryption of sensitive data - a process by which more modern devices are leaning to for software security.

We are using DDR5 memory on the 12th and 13th Gen Core parts, as well as the Ryzen 7000 series, at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5600B CL46 - Intel 13th Gen
  • DDR5-5200 CL44 - Ryzen 7000
  • DDR5-4800 (B) CL40 - Intel 12th Gen

All other CPUs such as Ryzen 5000 and 3000 were tested at the relevant JEDEC settings as per the processor's individual memory support with DDR4.

Rendering

(4-1) Blender 3.3 BMW27: Compute

(4-1b) Blender 3.3 Classroom: Compute

(4-1c) Blender 3.3 Fishy Cat: Compute

(4-1d) Blender 3.3 Pabellon Barcelona: Compute

(4-1e) Blender 3.3 Barbershop: Compute

(4-3) POV-Ray 3.7.1

(4-4) V-Ray Renderer

(4-5) C-Ray 1.1: 4K, 16 Rays Per Pixel

(4-6) CineBench R23 Single Thread

(4-6b) CineBench R23 Multi-Thread

Focusing on rendering performance, the entry-level Ryzen 5 7600 starts to fall behind in comparison to the other SKUs. Even in terms of CineBench R23 single-threaded performance, it sits below Intel's 12th Gen Alder Lake chips (albeit in a very packed field). Meanwhile in the multi-threaded test, it is blown away by the parts with 10 cores and above.

The real surprise is how well the Ryzen 9 7900 performs, as it is consistently better than the previous generation Ryzen 9 5950X, and even trades blows with the Intel Core i9-12900KS processor in quite a few tests. The Ryzen 7 7700 also performs well, but with just 8C/16T, and at 65 W, it basically bridges the gap directly in the middle between the Ryzen 9 7900 and the Ryzen 5 7600.

Encoding

(5-2) 7-Zip 1900 Compression

(5-2b) 7-Zip 1900 Decompression

(5-2c) 7-Zip 1900 Combined Score

(5-3) WinRAR 5.90 Test, 3477 files, 1.96 GB

(5-4) x264, Bosphorus 1080p

(5-4b) x264, Bosphorus 4K

As we saw in our rendering tests, the same thing can be said about performance in encoding. The Ryzen 9 7900 offers the highest levels of performance (as expected), with the Ryzen 5 7600 being one of the slowest chips we've tested so far since we updated our test suite for 2023. The Ryzen 7 7700 once again bridges the gap between the other two Ryzen 7000 65 W SKUs.

Despite not offering world-beating levels of performance, all three chips are running with a 65 W TDP and given the results, even the Ryzen 5 7600 performs above our expectations here.



CPU Benchmark Performance: Legacy Tests

In order to gather data to compare with older benchmarks, we are still keeping a number of tests under our ‘legacy’ section. This includes all the former major versions of CineBench (R15, R11.5, R10) as well as Geekbench 4 and 5. We won’t be transferring the data over from the old testing into Bench, otherwise, it would be populated with 200 CPUs with only one data point, so it will fill up as we test more CPUs like the others.

We are using DDR5 memory on the 12th and 13th Gen Core parts, as well as the Ryzen 7000 series, at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5600B CL46 - Intel 13th Gen
  • DDR5-5200 CL44 - Ryzen 7000
  • DDR5-4800 (B) CL40 - Intel 12th Gen

All other CPUs such as Ryzen 5000 and 3000 were tested at the relevant JEDEC settings as per the processor's individual memory support with DDR4.

Legacy

(6.1) CineBench R10 ST

(6.1b) CineBench R10 MT

(6-2) CineBench R11.5 ST

(6-2b) CineBench R11.5 MT

(6-3) CineBench R15 ST

(6-3b) CineBench R15 MT

(6-4) CineBench R20 ST

(6-4b) CineBench R20 MT

(6-5) Geekbench 4.0 ST

(6-5b) Geekbench 4.0 MT

(6-6) Geekbench 5 ST

(6-6b) Geekbench 5 MT

(6-8) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 480p Discord

(6-8b) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 720p YouTube

(6-8c) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 4K60 HEVC

Our legacy tests are quite outdated, or they aren't a good fit for other sections in our CPU reviews. Still, the Ryzen 7000 65 W CPUs perform well, and trade blows with various SKUs; the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 at 65 W is out performing the Intel Core i5-12600K and is trading blows with the Core i7-12700K, which is still impressive.



Gaming Performance: 720p And Lower

The reason we test games in CPU reviews at lower resolutions such as 720p and below is simple; titles are more likely to be CPU bound than they are GPU bound at lower resolutions. This means there are more frames for the processor to process as opposed to the graphics card doing the majority of the heavy lifting.

There are some variances where some games will still use graphical power, but not as much CPU grunt at these smaller resolutions, and this is where we can show where CPU limitations lie in terms of gaming.

We are using DDR5 memory on the Ryzen 7000 series 65 W SKUs, as well as the other Ryzen 7000 processors tested, at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5600B CL46 - Intel 13th Gen
  • DDR5-5200 CL44 - Ryzen 7000
  • DDR5-4800 (B) CL40 - Intel 12th Gen

All other CPUs such as Ryzen 5000 and 3000 were tested at the relevant JEDEC settings as per the processor's individual memory support with DDR4.

Civilization VI

(a-1) Civilization VI - 480p Min - Average FPS

(a-2) Civilization VI - 480p Min - 95th Percentile

World of Tanks

(b-1) World of Tanks - 768p Min - Average FPS

(b-2) World of Tanks - 768p Min - 95th Percentile

Borderlands 3

(c-1) Borderlands 3 - 360p VLow - Average FPS

(c-2) Borderlands 3 - 360p VLow - 95th Percentile

Grand Theft Auto V

(e-1) Grand Theft Auto V - 720p Low - Average FPS

(e-2) Grand Theft Auto V - 720p Low - 95th Percentile

Red Dead Redemption 2

(f-1) Red Dead 2 - 384p Min - Average FPS

(f-2) Red Dead 2 - 384p Min - 95th Percentile

F1 2022

(g-1) F1 2022 - 720p Low - Average FPS

(g-2) F1 2022 - 720p Low - 95th Percentile

Hitman 3

(h-1) Hitman 3 - 720p Low - Average FPS

(h-2) Hitman 3 - 720p Low - 95th Percentile

Total War: Warhammer 3

(i-1) Total War Warhammer 3 - 720p Low - Average FPS

Cyberpunk 2077

(k-1) Cyberpunk 2077 - 720p Low - Average FPS

(k-2) Cyberpunk 2077 - 720p Low - 95th Percentile

We saw relatively decent performance across the board at very low resolutions of 720p and below, with low to minimal settings selected to bring raw CPU performance into play as opposed to discrete graphics. In most titles, the 65 W Ryzen 7000 CPUs trade blows well compared to other SKUs from both AMD and Intel, despite their power limitations.

The biggest limitation of power came in our Total War Warhammer 3 benchmark, where limited power did seem to handicap performance at 720p more than we've seen in other games so far.



Gaming Performance: 1080p

Moving along, here's a look at a more balanced gaming scenario, running games at 1080p with maximum image quality.

We are using DDR5 memory on the Ryzen 7000 series 65 W SKUs, as well as the other Ryzen 7000 processors tested, at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5600B CL46 - Intel 13th Gen
  • DDR5-5200 CL44 - Ryzen 7000
  • DDR5-4800 (B) CL40 - Intel 12th Gen

All other CPUs such as Ryzen 5000 and 3000 were tested at the relevant JEDEC settings as per the processor's individual memory support with DDR4.

Civilization VI

(a-7) Civilization VI - 1080p Max - Average FPS

(a-8) Civilization VI - 1080p Max - 95th Percentile

World of Tanks

(b-3) World of Tanks - 1080p Standard - Average FPS

(b-4) World of Tanks - 1080p Standard - 95th Percentile

(b-5) World of Tanks - 1080p Max - Average FPS

(b-6) World of Tanks - 1080p Max - 95th Percentile

Borderlands 3

(c-7) Borderlands 3 - 1080p Max - Average FPS

(c-8) Borderlands 3 - 1080p Max - 95th Percentile

Grand Theft Auto V

(e-7) Grand Theft Auto V - 1080p Max - Average FPS

(e-8) Grand Theft Auto V - 1080p Max - 95th Percentile

We have highlighted a few odd results in our GTA V 1080p testing, including the Ryzen 9 7950X, Ryzen 5 7600X, and the Core i5-12600K. We are planning to re-test these processors within the next couple of days, and we will add these results when we have retested them.

Red Dead Redemption 2

(f-7) Red Dead 2 - 1080p Max - Average FPS

(f-8) Red Dead 2 - 1080p Max - 95th Percentile

We have highlighted some odd results in our RDR2 1080p testing, including the Ryzen 9 7950X and the Ryzen 5 7600X. We are planning to re-test these processors within the next couple of days, and we will add these results when we have retested them.

F1 2022

(g-3) F1 2022 - 1080p Ultra High - Average FPS

(g-4) F1 2022 - 1080p Ultra High - 95th Percentile

Hitman 3

(h-3) Hitman 3 - 1080p Ultra - Average FPS

(h-4) Hitman 3 - 1080p Ultra - 95th Percentile

Total War: Warhammer 3

(i-2) Total War Warhammer 3 - 1080p Ultra - Average FPS

Cyberpunk 2077

(k-3) Cyberpunk 2077 - 1080p Ultra - Average FPS

(k-4) Cyberpunk 2077 - 1080p Ultra - 95th Percentile

Moving onto our testing at 1080p, and in most of the games tested, we see the Ryzen 9 7900, Ryzen 7 7700, and Ryzen 5 7600 in a better light. It's quite impressive that all three chips retain a large amount of their performance despite being limited with a 65 W TDP (90 W under load), which shows they have more than enough processing power for most titles on the market.

The only negative we saw came in Cyberpunk 2077, where all three displayed solid performance levels about average frame rates but fell behind a little in 5% low (95th percentile) frames.



Gaming Performance: 1440p

In our Ryzen 7000 series review, we saw users commenting about testing games for CPU reviews at 1440p, so we have duly obliged here. Those interested in 1440p performance with minimal image quality – particularly the esports crowd – will be glad to know that we will be testing at this resolution going forward into 2023 and beyond.

We are using DDR5 memory on the Ryzen 7000 series 65 W SKUs, as well as the other Ryzen 7000 processors tested, at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5600B CL46 - Intel 13th Gen
  • DDR5-5200 CL44 - Ryzen 7000
  • DDR5-4800 (B) CL40 - Intel 12th Gen

All other CPUs such as Ryzen 5000 and 3000 were tested at the relevant JEDEC settings as per the processor's individual memory support with DDR4.

Civilization VI

(a-3) Civilization VI - 1440p Min - Average FPS(a-4) Civilization VI - 1440p Min - 95th Percentile

Borderlands 3

(c-3) Borderlands 3 - 1440p VLow - Average FPS(c-4) Borderlands 3 - 1440p VLow - 95th Percentile

Grand Theft Auto V

(e-3) Grand Theft Auto V - 1440p Low - Average FPS(e-4) Grand Theft Auto V - 1440p Low - 95th Percentile

Red Dead Redemption 2

(f-3) Red Dead 2 - 1440p Min - Average FPS(f-4) Red Dead 2 - 1440p Min - 95th Percentile

F1 2022

(g-5) F1 2022 - 1440p Ultra High - Average FPS(g-6) F1 2022 - 1440p Ultra High - 95th Percentile

Hitman 3

(h-5) Hitman 3 - 1440p Ultra - Average FPS(h-6) Hitman 3 - 1440p Ultra - 95th Percentile

Total War: Warhammer 3

(i-3) Total War Warhammer 3 - 1440p Ultra - Average FPS

We noticed some discrepancies in our Cyberpunk 2077 testing at 1440p and 4K; we will publish these results once we identify the issue. We plan to re-test the affected CPUs over the coming week and will update this review with the aforementioned graphs when/if we can resolve the issue.

Focusing on the rest of our results at 1440p, and with our AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT doing most of the grunt work, the Ryzen 7000 65 W series processors performed very well; without much variation between the rest of the chips on test, meaning that we have hit a bottleneck.

This means that users looking to pair the Ryzen 9 7900, Ryzen 7 7700, and Ryzen 5 7600 processors with a high-performance GPU can viably game at 1440p, as gaming at this resolution is more dependent on graphical power than CPU power.



Gaming Performance: 4K

Last, we have our 4K gaming results.

We are using DDR5 memory on the Ryzen 7000 series 65 W SKUs, as well as the other Ryzen 7000 processors tested, at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5600B CL46 - Intel 13th Gen
  • DDR5-5200 CL44 - Ryzen 7000
  • DDR5-4800 (B) CL40 - Intel 12th Gen

All other CPUs such as Ryzen 5000 and 3000 were tested at the relevant JEDEC settings as per the processor's individual memory support with DDR4.

Civilization VI

(a-5) Civilization VI - 4K Min - Average FPS(a-6) Civilization VI - 4K Min - 95th Percentile

World of Tanks

(b-7) World of Tanks - 4K Max - Average FPS(b-8) World of Tanks - 4K Max - 95th Percentile

Borderlands 3

(c-5) Borderlands 3 - 4K VLow - Average FPS(c-6) Borderlands 3 - 4K VLow - 95th Percentile

Grand Theft Auto V

(e-5) Grand Theft Auto V - 4K Low - Average FPS(e-6) Grand Theft Auto V - 4K Low - 95th Percentile

Red Dead Redemption 2

(f-5) Red Dead 2 - 4K Min - Average FPS(f-6) Red Dead 2 - 4K Min - 95th Percentile

F1 2022

(g-7) F1 2022 - 4K High - Average FPS(g-8) F1 2022 - 4K High - 95th Percentile

Hitman 3

(h-7) Hitman 3 - 4K High - Average FPS(h-8) Hitman 3 - 4K High - 95th Percentile

Total War: Warhammer 3

(i-4) Total War Warhammer 3 - 4K High - Average FPS

We noticed some discrepancies in our Cyberpunk 2077 testing at 1440p and 4K; we will publish these results once we identify the issue. We plan to re-test the affected CPUs over the coming week and will update this review with the aforementioned graphs when/if we can resolve the issue.

Much like our results at 1440p, 4K is a very GPU-dependent resolution, shown in our testing. The only actual variance in results came in our Civilization VI testing, a CPU-intensive turn-based strategy. Despite this, all three  Ryzen 7000 65 W processors performed well, surpassing much beefier and power-hungrier chips such as the Ryzen 9 5950X and Intel 12th Gen Core chips we tested.



Conclusion

Ever since we reviewed the Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 5 7600X processors back in September, it was clear that AMD had a solid architecture on their hands with Zen 4, as it showed double-digit improvements to performance over the Ryzen 5000 (Zen 3) series. Although the Ryzen 9 7950X showed inherently higher levels of power consumption and core temperatures in comparison to the Ryzen 9 5950X, AMD's design choice by opting to boost cores up to high frequencies such as 5.7 GHz is one that was worth implementing to maximize outright performance. But that doesn't mean Zen 4 is a one-trick pony.

With the Ryzen 7000 65 W family, AMD is looking to change the dynamic that users need to consume oodles of power to achieve high levels of performance. To do that, they're launching three SKUs, including the Ryzen 9 7900 (12C/24T), Ryzen 7 7700 (8C/16), and Ryzen 5 7600 (6C/12T).

Along similar lines, we recently looked at how the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and Intel Core i9-13900K scale when adjusting the Power Package Tracking (PPT) and Thermal Design Power (TDP) to lower levels, to see how much limiting power to the cores has on overall performance. When it comes to AMD, the overall consensus of our CPU power scaling results showed that AMD's Zen 4 core architecture is very efficient, even at lower power levels. So it's easy to see why AMD has released 65 W SKUs based on its ability to deliver leading performance-per-watt efficiency than it ever has previously. That was, of course, with the Ryzen 9 7950X, which is a 16-core and 32-thread part, but does all of that efficiency translate when shaving off some of those cores and threads?

Ryzen 7000 at 65 W: Performance Analysis

Diving into how the Ryzen 9 7900 ($429), Ryzen 7 7700 ($329), and the Ryzen 5 7600 ($229) performed in our updated CPU suite, we were pretty impressed with the overall performance on offer, despite being limited to a 65 TDP limit. Although power consumption on the CPU package was around 90 W at full load, this is still considerably lower than other processors the trio of 65 W Ryzen 7000 chips was pitted against.

(4-1) Blender 3.3 BMW27: Compute

Taking one of our results in Blender 3.3 as an example (BMW27), we can see that the AMD Ryzen 7900 performs better than the Ryzen 9 5950X, even at 65 W. This is superb performance-per-watt efficiency compared to the previous generation, especially given it's 12C/24T at 65 W versus 16C/32T Zen 3 at 105/140W. In the case of the Ryzen 7 7700, it still performed well and sat between the Intel Alder Lake 12th Gen Core i5-12600K and Core i7-12700K; despite conceding power, cores, and threads all around.

Looking at the entry-level six-core part, the Ryzen 5 7600, the lack of cores, threads, and power, the combination of the three did take the legs away from it a little bit, especially in heavy multi-threaded workloads.

(4-6b) CineBench R23 Multi-Thread

While single-threaded performance isn't much of a concern due to the superior levels of IPC performance with AMD's 5nm-fabbed Zen 4 core, multi-threaded performance isn't as detrimental to the Ryzen 5 7600 as going from 105 W to 65 W may seem. In CineBench R23's multi-threaded test, the Ryzen 5 7600 at 65 W and the Ryzen 5 7600X (105 W) are rather comparable in overall performance. There's a minor performance hit, but not enough to make it black and white.

Looking at the Ryzen 9 7900, it marginally beats out the Ryzen 9 5950X and sits just below the Intel Core i9-12900KS, a power-hungry yet very rapid top-of-the-range desktop processor from last year. The Ryzen 7 7700 again sits between the Core i7 and Core i5 K-series Alder Lake (12th Gen) processors.

(c-7) Borderlands 3 - 1080p Max - Average FPS

Turning our attention to gaming performance, all three AMD Ryzen 7000 65 W SKUs perform well at 1080, 1440p, and 4K resolutions. Of course, the key to this performance is using a top-tier graphics card such as the Radeon RX 6950 XT, but the performance is still notably good. All three AMD models perform consistently well in Borderlands 3 at 1080p maximum settings despite being limited to 65 W TDPs.

This tells us that the CPU performance from Zen 4 at 65 W, even with fewer cores than other chips on test, is powerful enough for AAA titles when paired with a high-performing graphics card. Of course, users on a budget may want to pair up a Ryzen 5 7600 with a card such as an AMD Radeon RTX 6600, and it's going to be a different proposition to what we're testing with, but we test with an RX 6960 XT for parity in our results.

Closing Thoughts: Ryzen 7000 at 65 W is Highly Efficient

For a budget gaming PC, the Ryzen 5 7600 ($229) is an interesting proposition when paired up with a B650 motherboard and an affordable pair of DDR5 memory sticks, such as Corsair's Vengeance 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) kit. Intel also has its own 13th Gen Core 65 W series processors coming to the market, with similar pricing on a core-to-thread count basis with AMDs. The advantage of AMD's Ryzen 7000 65 W SKUs is that they are unlocked, so users can overclock them and squeeze out additional performance. The disadvantage is that the Ryzen 7000 series is only compatible with DDR5 memory. In contrast, Raptor Lake supports DDR5 and DDR4, which must be factored in for users on a stringent budget.


AMD CEO Dr. Lisa Su presented the Ryzen 7000 series back in September 2022

From a performance perspective, the Ryzen 9 7900 and Ryzen 7 7700 are shooting it out with processors with more expensive MSRPs, which also adds to the value proposition. In terms of power efficiency, all of the Ryzen 7000 65 W SKUs shows incredible performance, despite being power limited and running at 100 W under maximum load, at least from our experience in testing them.

If video editing, content creation, and rendering are desired, and performance is critical, the Ryzen 9 7950X is the go-to chip if AM5 is essential, but the Ryzen 9 7900 competes in gaming. It's cheaper while still offering solid performance in compute-heavy workloads. The Ryzen 9 7900 loses out in raw compute power against the flagship bearing Ryzen 9 7950X, but the Ryzen 9 7900 uses much less energy to achieve what we think is a solid level of performance.

Another avenue offering additional value to users is AMD has bundled coolers with each of the three Ryzen 7000 65 W CPUs. Included with the Ryzen 9 7900 and Ryzen 7 7700 is AMD's Wrath Prism cooler with RGB LED lighting that can be customized via AMD's Wraith Prism LED software. The entry-level Ryzen 5 7600 is an AMD Wraith Stealth cooler, which is smaller by design and practical to keep the CPU cool under load, but without the pizazz of RGB. Bundling coolers with its more affordable CPUs means users can spend their budget on a premium AIO cooler through better memory, storage, or graphics, which will have a positive impact on performance.

 

Overall, AMD and the Ryzen 9 7900 ($429), Ryzen 7 7700 ($329), and Ryzen 5 7600 ($229) all represent different propositions to users looking for a solid low-powered desktop processor to build a system with. They also represent different levels within the market, including the entry-level with the Ryzen 5 7600, the mid-range with the Ryzen 7 7700, and the middle to high-end of the market with the Ryzen 9 7900. All three produce the goods, even at 65 W in terms of performance-per-watt efficiency, and it's good to see that AMD doesn't just kick it at the higher-end (Ryzen 9 7950X); it also proves Zen 4 can deliver the goods in power-limited situations too.

The levels of efficiency with Zen 4 at 65 W are awe-inspiring, but the next step on the Zen 4 train is Ryzen 7000 X3D, which is due sometime in February. How its 3D L3 V-Cache laden chips deliver is an entirely different proposition, but one we look forward to seeing pan out in real-time.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now