Ryzen 9000X3D in bilico: li vedremo quest'anno o all'inizio del 2025?

Tra RDNA4 e Ryzen X3D, potrebbe essere un bel momento per appassionati ed AMD.

In realtà sono considerate ottime CPU da tutte le testate che ho letto eccetto questa.

Phoronix GNU/Linux
[I]
In total I ran*nearly 400 benchmarks across all the CPUs. When taking the geometric mean of all the raw performance results, the Ryzen 9 9950X came out to being 17.8% faster than the Ryzen 9 7950X. The Ryzen 9 9900X meanwhile was 21.5% faster than the Ryzen 9 7900X across this wide mix of workloads. The Ryzen 9 9950X was 33% faster than the Intel Core i9 14900K performance overall and even the Ryzen 9 9900X was 18% faster than the Core i9 14900K. For those still on AM4, the Ryzen 9 9950X was delivering 1.87x the performance of the Ryzen 9 5950X processor. These are some great gains found with the Ryzen 9 9900 series.

With the Intel Core benchmarks it's also worth mentioning that the testing was prior to the newly-released*Intel 0x129 microcode update*and I'll have more benchmarks with that change soon. As of writing the Core i9 14900K is retailing for around $550 USD while the Ryzen 9 9950X is set to retail for around 18% more but delivering 33% greater performance on a geo mean basis overall. The Ryzen 9 9900X meanwhile at $499 is around $50 less than the i9-14900K while overall delivering 18% better performance.

Making the Ryzen 9 9900 series results even more impressive was their power use. Over the span of all the benchmarks, the Ryzen 9 9950X had an average power use of 137 Watts and a peak of 201 Watts. The Ryzen 9 7950X meanwhile had a 142 Watt average and 236 Watt peak while the Core i9 14900K had a 156 Watt average and 347 Watt peak. Stunning power efficiency results with the Ryzen 9000 series.[/I]

Phoronix GNU/Linux

[I]When taking the geometric mean of those nearly 400 raw benchmark results, it sums up the greatness of Zen 5 with the Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X processors. The Ryzen 7 9700X delivered 1.195x the performance of the Core i5 14600K competition or 1.15x the performance of the prior generation Ryzen 7 7700X. The Ryzen 5 9600X came in at 1.35x the performance of the Core i5 14500 and 1.25x the performance of the Ryzen 5 7600X. Or if still on Zen 3 for comparison, the Ryzen 5 9600X was 1.82x the performance of the Ryzen 5 5600X.

The raw performance of these Ryzen 9000 series processors was extremely impressive. These new Zen 5 desktop processors showed significant uplift in areas such as gaming and single-threaded workloads commonly led by Intel like Python, NumPy, Cryptsetup, audio encoding, and web browser performance. The Zen 5 generational uplift also showed great strides in even better AVX-512 performance for helping more AI workloads to a lot of other strong finishes in technical computing and HPC workloads.

On average across the nearly 400 benchmarks the Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X were consuming 73 Watts on average and a peak of 101~103 Watts. The Ryzen 5 7600X meanwhile had a 92 Watt average and a 149 Watt peak while the Ryzen 7 7700X had a 99 Watt average and 140 Watt peak. The Core i5 14600K with being a power hungry Raptor Lake had a 127 Watt average and a 236 Watt peak. The power efficiency of these Zen 5 processors are phenomenal!

An noted the Linux support at launch for the Ryzen 9000 series is in great shape besides needing the RAPL/PowerCap support if you care about CPU power monitoring and then also AMD still having yet to upstream the LLVM/Clang*Znver5*target.
[/I]
Anandtech Windows

[I]AMD's first two Ryzen 9000 series processors, especially in the certainly excels over Intel's current 14th Gen Core series when factoring in performance per watt, and the underlying Zen 5 architecture has certainly exceeded expectations in the desktop.

In single-threaded tasks, Zen 5 is a clear winner over Zen 4, which we would expect to see given that Zen 5 packs a plethora of architecture improvements and also gets the advantage of being built on a newer process node with TSMC's N4P.

The caveat is in multi-threaded workloads compared to the previous Zen 4 chips. There just doesn't seem to be a lot of benefit from opting for a Ryzen 7 9700X over the Ryzen 7 7700, even with the former's slight clockspeed advantage. The classic catch with reusing a platform, as in the case with AM5, is that while there's faster CPU cores, there's not much in the way of additional memory bandwidth to help feed those CPU cores. AMD's performance uplifts largely pan out for lightly-threaded workloads, but we aren't seeing as large of gains for heavily threaded tasks.

Still, we are talking about 65 Watt chips. Or rather, more like 90 Watt chips once you factor in AMD's Package Power Tracking mechanisms. So TDPs may be a factor here, and it'll be something to look at in the future. As an aside, I still believe it would have been more advantageous for AMD to market the processors at 90 W with the PPT value, but I digress...

Overall, Zen 5's performance in single-threaded workloads, especially in rendering, certainly takes things up a notch. And from an architectural perspective, Zen 5 is clearly an improvement over Zen 4 in virtually every way possible.[/I]

Tom's hardware Windows

[I]The Zen 5-powered AMD Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X deliver large generational gaming improvements that exceed price-comparable Intel models. The processors also deliver class-leading single-threaded performance but still trail Intel in heavily threaded applications. Overall, Ryzen 9000 delivers impressive generational performance gains, but consume 40% less power than their predecessors, ultimately yielding a cooler, quieter and faster system.

Intel has drastically increased its power consumption over the last several generations as it seeks to retain its performance crown, but the resulting voltage-driven instability issues have generated plenty of unhappy customers. AMD is taking a completely divergent path with Ryzen 9000, dialing power consumption down by up to 40% while delivering tangible gen-on-gen performance gains that keep it on top in key criteria.

It's impressive to see AMD's 65/85W chips delivering big wins in gaming over Intel's 125/253W Core i5 and i7, ultimately resulting in cooler, quieter, and faster gaming systems.[/I]