AMD's Ryzen 5 9500F is generating plenty of buzz. We tested this cut-down 9600X - same cores, no iGPU, and slightly lower clocks - to see if it's a smart, affordable upgrade for your next build.
AMD Ryzen 5 9500F Review: Budget 7500F Replacement?
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
With DDR5 prices doubling, testing entry level CPU seems like a waste of time. You don't update from weak CPU to another weak CPU. And You definetely not buy new entry level system, with weak CPU, now, that AI integrators are hording on nand and ddr. Defeats the purpose of entry level system - price.
Better to wait It out.
Better to wait It out.
Lew Zealand
Posts: 2,936 +4,012
There is no 9400F.
The 7600X has a higher cost per frame than the 9500F, making the 9500F a better value.
What were you saying again?
The Pentium has a far better cost per frame then any I7.
Does that make it the better CPU?
Lew Zealand
Posts: 2,936 +4,012
Show me the numbers for your ridiculous example and I'll give you an answer.
Thatsdisgusting
Posts: 502 +587
FS, wrong assumption cuz fps/$ is gonna be 0.
You know, when you divide zero, you get zero... 0FPS/50$, etc...
The average shows that the difference is small and with the 7600X being better in other areas it's the better chip.
What were you saying again?
Lew Zealand
Posts: 2,936 +4,012
Ah, changing your argument. Will internet wonders never cease? Buy whatever makes you happy for whichever argument you prefer to use this time.
thewelshbrummie
Posts: 53 +32
Technically speaking, that's wrong. Though I assume you're not talking about the 9th Gen Intel part but the subject of this article, AMDs 9500F.
It is something that AMD needs to keep in mind though, that copying other companies model numbers isn't a good look. Take the GPUs going from the 7700 replacement being named the 9070. That's a hypothetical Nvidia model number if they keep going with the current naming system they use. All that does is make a 9070 look better & newer than a 5070. Which it is, but it's pretty misleading as it may not be obvious to some that those are products from different companies (especially for someone ordering a complete SI system).
Again, I assume on the context you mean the AMD 9500F, not the old Intel product.
The key take from the article is that penny pinching isn't necessarily the best option unless you're willing to gamble with zero warranty. Especially for very little performance gain per dollar over existing options. And the 9500F currently doesn't have that going for it - same price but with no warranty or cooler? Pass.
For context, I bought a 14500T via eBay a year ago for a low-power build that I'd intended on cooling without active cooling (I.e. heatpipe cooling only, so I needed a CPU with a max turbo TDP of sub-105W which I have). My CPU is fine but it was a gamble to get a CPU pulled from an OEM system with no recourse if it was faulty. It's run perfectly since July but the lack of warranty was a concern and not something I'd do for any other reason.
I was given a dual core Intel G chip (can't remember which) and a board (free) a few years ago.
Cost: 0
FPS: low
Cost per frame: infinite
While I agree with your argument there is a limit to cost per frame and I find the 9500F not worth it.
Similar threads
