AMD Ryzen 5 7600X and Ryzen 7 7700X Cinebench R23 scores leaked

[headtr1p]

Why it matters: A hardware leaker has tweeted supposed Cinebench R23 single-core scores for the upcoming Ryzen 5 7600X and Ryzen 7 7700X, and things look promising for AMD. Not only does the 7000 series trade blows with Intel's Alder Lake, but it potentially might give upcoming Raptor Lake chips a run for their money.

Hardware leaker Greymon55 tweeted single-core Cinebench R23 scores for the upcoming Ryzen 5 7600X and Ryzen 7 7700X processors. He claims that in the single-core test, the 7600X scores from 1900 to 1999, while the 7700X achieves a score of 2000 to 2099.

With Ryzen 7000's uplift in clock speeds and IPC (instructions per cycle), we see a healthy performance increase from the almost two-year old Ryzen 5000 series, with both of these mid-range Raphael CPUs comfortably outscoring any 5000 series chip with margins of over 25%.

This is a noteworthy single-core improvement from Zen 3 to Zen 4, but an equally interesting comparison is with Intel's 12th-gen Alder Lake and upcoming 13th-gen Raptor Lake.

Chart credit: VideoCardz

We can see the 7600X and 7700X matching and potentially beating Alder Lake, with the 7700X outscoring the 12700K and holding its own against the flagship 12900K in the single-core benchmarks. When we throw Raptor Lake into the mix -- all leaked benchmarks, likely from early samples of course -- things look slightly more favorable for Team Blue. The 7600X and 13600K look to be neck and neck, while the 13700K edges the 7700X by around 5%. Even though this is a small win for Intel, it does look like Zen 4 will be more competitive in terms of single-core performance.

Multi-core benchmarks could paint a different picture, as the core counts remain the same on the Ryzen 7000 SKUs, while Intel will continue to use their hybrid architecture on Raptor Lake, combining performance cores with efficiency cores for a bigger overall core count.

Ryzen 7000 will introduce the brand new AM5 platform, with DDR5 memory and PCIe 5.0 support out of the box. While these are exciting features, it does pose a higher entry cost, as users will need to buy a new 600-series motherboard and DDR5 memory. Price leaks appear to indicate that Ryzen 7000 SKUs will be more expensive than their Ryzen 5000 counterparts, too.

AMD is set to unveil the Ryzen 7000 series at 7PM ET on Monday, August 29 via livestream. At the very least we can expect to have clarity about the specifications, while it remains to be seen if AMD will reveal pricing at that time. The current expected release date is September 27, which just so happens to be on the same day Intel is scheduled to announce their next-gen Raptor Lake CPUs.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/95766-amd-ryzen-5-7600x-ryzen-7-7700x-cinebench.html

 

[CowsGotMilk]

Wow. How everything is just turned around... Few years ago, Intel was screaming to its fans, that having better single core performance is more worthy, than having more cores, which was casual as AMD offer. Now Intel is becoming core-count king with its hybrid designs...

But is there any worth having more than 8 performance cores? How many single apps does take advantage of 32 threads? In benchmarks it looks promising, but in reality? You don't run 30 apps at once.

 

[brucek]

Somewhat off topic, but does anyone know of a lightweight Windows CPU monitoring tool that can tell me for a given session for how much of it I had say 1+ cores in use, 4+ cores in use, 8+ cores in use, etc? I know there's detailed loggers out there but I'm looking for something simpler to use.

 

[owen420]

Somewhat off topic, but does anyone know of a lightweight Windows CPU monitoring tool that can tell me for a given session for how much of it I had say 1+ cores in use, 4+ cores in use, 8+ cores in use, etc? I know there's detailed loggers out there but I'm looking for something simpler to use.

yeah its called task manager.... right click in the processor area logical

 

[shady28]

Wow. How everything is just turned around... Few years ago, Intel was screaming to its fans, that having better single core performance is more worthy, than having more cores, which was casual as AMD offer. Now Intel is becoming core-count king with its hybrid designs...

But is there any worth having more than 8 performance cores? How many single apps does take advantage of 32 threads? In benchmarks it looks promising, but in reality? You don't run 30 apps at once.

Kind of Orwellian how these sites flip flop, get things wrong, and nobody notices.

Techspot 3900X review :
"Moreover under realistic gaming conditions there's almost no chance you'd be able to tell the difference between the 9900K, 3900X or 3700X, as the difference at 1440p with an RTX 2080 Ti was remarkably small."

One year later, TPU review of the 11600K and test platform now using a 3080, at 1080P the 9900K shows on the chart with an 11% FPS advantage over 3900X at 1080P and 7.4% faster at 1440P.

They spun this article too. Look at the chart and compare to the headline. If the 7600X were an intel chip it would likely read "Early leak shows intel 7600X ties last gen AMD for single thread, gets crushed in multi thread"

Tell me I'm wrong.

 

[Puiu]

Kind of Orwellian how these sites flip flop, get things wrong, and nobody notices.

Techspot 3900X review :
"Moreover under realistic gaming conditions there's almost no chance you'd be able to tell the difference between the 9900K, 3900X or 3700X, as the difference at 1440p with an RTX 2080 Ti was remarkably small."

One year later, TPU review of the 11600K and test platform now using a 3080, at 1080P the 9900K shows on the chart with an 11% FPS advantage over 3900X at 1080P and 7.4% faster at 1440P.

They spun this article too. Look at the chart and compare to the headline. If the 7600X were an intel chip it would likely read "Early leak shows intel 7600X ties last gen AMD for single thread, gets crushed in multi thread"

Tell me I'm wrong.

They aren't saying that because the 7600x is not competing with the 13600k. The 13600k will most likely be priced closer to the 7700x.

 

[n0f8r]

"... for Team Green"

I think you're confusing NVidia and Intel. If you have to use "Team" labels I'd say Intel would be Team Blue, but that is confusing with IBM's nickname "Big Blue" - I dunno - The Register used to call Intel "Chipzilla" and AMD "Chimpzilla" but that feels very outdated now. Not sure what the colloquial name for Intel should be ...

 

[alvincalmkid]

Hm...core count increase become faster than usual

 

[Vulcanproject]

If AMD's parts are close enough I have to say I gotta go with them. They say they will support AM5 for a long cycle and they did with AM4. To the point you can run a Ryzen 5000 chip on the better first gen 2017 B350 and X370 AM4 boards with essentially no significant performance penalty. That's a stupendous deal for the owners of those boards who probably started out with a Ryzen 1600 or 1800X and five years later can lob on a 5800X3D.

Intel will have to show some seriously impressive performance advantages to stop me thinking about the future upgrade path of AM5. 10 percent isn't enough if I know I can put a vastly superior chip on a carefully picked early AM5 board in three or four years time.

 

[yRaz]

If AMD's parts are close enough I have to say I gotta go with them. They say they will support AM5 for a long cycle and they did with AM4. To the point you can run a Ryzen 5000 chip on the better first gen 2017 B350 and X370 AM4 boards with essentially no significant performance penalty. That's a stupendous deal for the owners of those boards who probably started out with a Ryzen 1600 or 1800X and five years later can lob on a 5800X3D.

Intel will have to show some seriously impressive performance advantages to stop me thinking about the future upgrade path of AM5. 10 percent isn't enough if I know I can put a vastly superior chip on a carefully picked early AM5 board in three or four years time.

I'm doing just that, replacing my 1800x with a 5800x3d and getting another 3-4 years put of it. 5800x3d, while expensive, is still cheaper than a new CPU, memory and motherboard. Not to mention the hassle of installation

 

[headtr1p]

"... for Team Green"

I think you're confusing NVidia and Intel. If you have to use "Team" labels I'd say Intel would be Team Blue, but that is confusing with IBM's nickname "Big Blue" - I dunno - The Register used to call Intel "Chipzilla" and AMD "Chimpzilla" but that feels very outdated now. Not sure what the colloquial name for Intel should be ...

100% correct. Luckily our editor also spotted this and it's fixed now!

 

[shady28]

They aren't saying that because the 7600x is not competing with the 13600k. The 13600k will most likely be priced closer to the 7700x.

The 13600K in leaks is around $350. The only leak we have of the 7700X so far indicated it was $450. That is roughly the expected price of a 13700K

So the 7600X - an enthusiast grade 'X' chip - is now competing against what, a 13400, or the last gen 12600K?

I mean using this logic, when the 5800X was reviewed it should have been announced that it lost to the 10900K. You can goal post shift to whatever comparison fits the narrative.

 

[Puiu]

The 13600K in leaks is around $350. The only leak we have of the 7700X so far indicated it was $450. That is roughly the expected price of a 13700K

So the 7600X - an enthusiast grade 'X' chip - is now competing against what, a 13400, or the last gen 12600K?

I mean using this logic, when the 5800X was reviewed it should have been announced that it lost to the 10900K. You can goal post shift to whatever comparison fits the narrative.

We have no idea what the price will be. I've seen numbers ranging between 300 to 450$ (450$ being the canadian listing without VAT, but I would ignore this listing, it's clearly way too much).

I would be surprised if AMD didn't price the CPUs according to market conditions. Right now the 5700x can be found on newegg for 260$. Somewhere around 350-370$ seems much more realistic for the 7700x. Anything else would also make the future 3D chips too expensive (slated to launch just a few month after).

It's not the numbers or letters that dictate which CPUs get compared. Also don't expect the 13400 to be around 200$ like previous gen. Intel is most likely moving the numbers and pricing up by one notch with the 13400 replacing the 12600K (currently 250$ on newegg).

On the current market the 5600x is at the same price point as the 12400 and the 5700x is near the 12600k.

 

[shady28]

We have no idea what the price will be. I've seen numbers ranging between 300 to 450$ (450$ being the canadian listing without VAT, but I would ignore this listing, it's clearly way too much).

I would be surprised if AMD didn't price the CPUs according to market conditions. Right now the 5700x can be found on newegg for 260$. Somewhere around 350-370$ seems much more realistic for the 7700x. Anything else would also make the future 3D chips too expensive (slated to launch just a few month after).

It's not the numbers or letters that dictate which CPUs get compared. Also don't expect the 13400 to be around 200$ like previous gen. Intel is most likely moving the numbers and pricing up by one notch with the 13400 replacing the 12600K (currently 250$ on newegg).

On the current market the 5600x is at the same price point as the 12400 and the 5700x is near the 12600k.

AMD will have to lower its prices to compete with the lower tier intel, yes.

This is no different than when the 10850K and 10900K went to $300 - $350 to compete in price with the 5800X.

So AMD will need to lower the 7600X to $250 to compete with 12600K / 13400 and lower the 7700X to $300-$350 to compete with the 13600K.

I mean, this chart is basically telling you that you could have gotten better than 7600X performance last year with a 12600K.

It's interesting to see how this is being spun into a win for AMD, which was kind of the original point.

 

[Thanthan]

One thing I’m very interested in is seeing performance in real engineering applications… I have literally no clue whether more performance cores or more potential multithreaded throughput (depending on instruction set, since intel doesn’t support AVX 512) will be better for my uses o.O gods I’m so conflicted about this generation of hardware… might just go AMD to prep a drop in upgrade in another two years…

 

[shady28]

Somewhat off topic, but does anyone know of a lightweight Windows CPU monitoring tool that can tell me for a given session for how much of it I had say 1+ cores in use, 4+ cores in use, 8+ cores in use, etc? I know there's detailed loggers out there but I'm looking for something simpler to use.

Actually you can record it throughout the day using performance monitor. Tell it to record CPU usage and save to disk. Forget it's there and let it run for a few days.

 

[Puiu]

One thing I’m very interested in is seeing performance in real engineering applications… I have literally no clue whether more performance cores or more potential multithreaded throughput (depending on instruction set, since intel doesn’t support AVX 512) will be better for my uses o.O gods I’m so conflicted about this generation of hardware… might just go AMD to prep a drop in upgrade in another two years…

if AVX 512 is what you need then you kinda have to go for Zen4.

As for which CPU you'll need (ignoring AVX 512 support) you'll have to wait and see some benchmarks for the applications you use. Engineering applications can vary wildly on what they need. Some are IPC sensitive, some need a ton of threads, some are memory and cache sensitive and others just need a good GPU

If you also need ECC memory then only AMD supports it.

 

[Crunch]

I'm doing just that, replacing my 1800x with a 5800x3d and getting another 3-4 years put of it. 5800x3d, while expensive, is still cheaper than a new CPU, memory and motherboard. Not to mention the hassle of installation

Also doing that. 3700X >> 5800X3D

 

[Fastturtle]

Still not seeing enough performance boost over my r5 3600xt to even be worth the cost of upgrading.

My next build will be an Epyc so I can have enough ram to handle everything in memory. Remember kids, RAM is faster then any drive in the system so more is better and as even at 128GB, I'm hitting that limit hard, I need more ram