There's been a surprising amount of buzz around AMD's new Ryzen 5 9500F – especially for a chip that, at least for now, is only officially sold in China. So, we picked one up to find out whether it's worth considering for your next upgrade. If history repeats itself, as it did with the previous-generation 7500F, this CPU will likely make its way to other markets soon. When that happens, it's worth knowing exactly what it brings to the table.
So, what is the Ryzen 5 9500F? In short, it's a slightly trimmed-down version of the 9600X with the integrated graphics removed. Think of it as to the 9600X what the 7500F was to the 7600X. The base clock drops from 3.9 GHz to 3.8 GHz – a minor 2.5% decrease – while the boost clock falls from 5.4 GHz to 5.0 GHz, a 7% reduction.
AMD has also stripped out the integrated RDNA2 GPU with its two compute units. On the plus side, unlike the 9600X, the 9500F should include a box cooler – though if you're ordering from AliExpress (as we did), you probably won't receive the cooler.
Everything else remains the same. The 9500F is still a 65W part, built around a single CCD with 6 cores and 12 threads, a full 32MB of L3 cache, and 28 PCIe 5.0 lanes – 4 of which are reserved as a link to the chipset.
At present, the Ryzen 9600X can be purchased for around $200, while in Australia it's closer to $370 AUD. The 9500F should be considerably cheaper than that, but since its availability is limited, you're looking at around a 12% discount – for example, we paid $325 Australian, delivered to our door.
Given that the 9500F should be only about 7% slower, that 12% discount sounds fair – though you're missing the iGPU, which can be handy at times. Anyway, let's see how the 9500F performs. For this, we'll be using our standard AM5 test system with the Gigabyte X670E Aorus Master and DDR5-6000 CL30 memory.
For comparison, we have a range of 6-core / 12-thread AM5 processors, as we recently updated all of this data, and we'll soon be adding some competing Intel parts to the mix.
Test System Specs
| CPU |
AMD Ryzen 5 9500F
AMD Ryzen 5 9600X AMD Ryzen 5 7600X AMD Ryzen 5 7600 AMD Ryzen 5 7500F AMD Ryzen 5 7400F AMD Ryzen 5 8400F |
| Motherboard | Gigabyte X670E master [BIOS F38e] - ReBAR enabled |
| Memory | G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-6000 [CL30-38-38-96] |
| Graphics Card | Asus ROG Astral GeForce RTX 5090 32GB |
| ATX Case | MSI MEG Maestro 700L PZ |
| Power Supply | Kolink Regulator Gold ATX 3.0 1200W |
| Storage | TeamGroup T-Force Cardea Z44Q 4TB |
| Operating System | Windows 11 24H2 |
| Display Driver | Nvidia GeForce Game Ready Driver 581.42 |
Benchmarks
Cinebench 2024 Behavior
First, here's how the Ryzen 5 9600X behaves during the Cinebench multi-core workload. We observed an average all-core frequency of 5 GHz, and when using the Arctic Freezer 36, the CPU temperature peaked at just 74°C, with a package power draw of 88 watts. In the single-core test, the maximum CPU frequency reached 5.45 GHz.
Under the same conditions, the 9500F maintained an average core clock of 4.75 GHz, making the 9600X about 5% faster in this test. The peak core temperature dropped by 4°C to 70°C, and package power decreased slightly from 88 watts to an average of 86 watts. Finally, in the single-core test, the 9500F reached up to 5.05 GHz, leaving the 9600X roughly 8% faster for this workload.
Baldur's Gate 3
Now for some gaming benchmarks. Please note that we won't cover every game tested, as the data tends to become repetitive. Starting with Baldur's Gate 3, the 9500F was 7% slower than the 9600X when tested with the Medium preset, and 4% slower when using Ultra. This puts its performance very close to the 7600X, and around 6 – 7% better than the 7500F.
Cyberpunk 2077
Next, we have Cyberpunk 2077, which isn't a particularly strong title for Zen 5, as Zen 4 processors often perform slightly better here. As a result, the 9500F only managed to match the 7400F, coming in just below the 7500F. It was also 7% slower than the 9600X using the Medium preset, and 5% slower when using the Ray Tracing Ultra preset.
Counter-Strike 2
Moving on to Counter-Strike 2, the 9500F performs quite well, delivering 8% greater performance than the 7600X with the Medium preset and matching it when set to Ultra. This placed it about 7% slower than the 9600X, which aligns with what we'd expect in a game like this.
Marvel Rivals
Performance in Marvel Rivals is interesting. The 9500F only manages to match the 7600 in this game, averaging 173 FPS using the Medium preset, making it 8% slower than the 9600X. However, when switching to the more GPU-limited Ultra settings, the 9500F ends up just a few frames behind the 9600X and slightly ahead of the 7600X.
Rainbow Six Siege
The 9500F's performance in Rainbow Six Siege is very strong, especially when using the Medium preset. Here, it achieved an average of 469 FPS, making it 16% faster than the 7500F and 10% faster than the 7600X. Meanwhile, it was only 6% slower than the 9600X – an impressive result overall. With the Ultra preset, it remained 6% slower than the 9600X but still managed to outperform the 7600X, coming in 10% faster than the 7500F.
Space Marine 2
Next, in Space Marine 2, the 9500F was just 4% slower than the 9600X – or only 2% slower when using Ultra settings. This placed it roughly on par with the 7600X, resulting in a solid overall showing.
Assetto Corsa Competizione
Finally, in ACC, the 9500F performed exceptionally well, coming in just 2% slower than the 9600X when using the Medium preset. That meant it was 14% faster than the 7500F. Using the Epic preset, the margin increased slightly to 16%, making the 9500F noticeably faster than the 7500F in this title.
Shader Compilation
Marvel Rivals (Shaders)
For shader compilation performance, the 9500F was 5% slower than the 9600X, taking 332 seconds to complete the workload. This placed it roughly on par with the Ryzen 5 7600 and about 2% faster than the 7500F.
Stalker 2 (Shaders)
A similar pattern appeared when measuring shader compilation time in Stalker 2, where the 9500F was again 5% slower than the 9600X and matched the 7600's performance.
The Last of Us (Shaders)
In The Last of Us Part 1, shader compilation performance was also 5% slower than that of the 9600X, taking nearly 17 minutes to complete the task – essentially identical to the 7600.
Performance Summary
Wrapping up the testing, across 12 games the 9500F was on average 5% slower than the 9600X using Medium settings and 3% slower with Ultra settings, which is exactly what we expected given that the 9500F runs 5 – 7% lower in clock speeds.
This also means that, on average, the 9500F was about 5% faster than the 7500F – consistent with other Zen 5 vs. Zen 4 comparisons.
Cost Per Frame (Sort of...)
As noted earlier, current pricing from AliExpress makes the 9500F only about $45 cheaper than locally sourced 9600X processors. At that point, it's not worth buying, since a mere $45 AUD saving isn't worth essentially forgoing your warranty. Getting a replacement part through AliExpress could be difficult – especially if the CPU dies 6 months after purchase.
In terms of cost per frame, the 9500F offers only an 8 – 9% saving compared to the 9600X, yet it's about 55% more expensive than the 7500F, which can be purchased and delivered from AliExpress for just $200 AUD. That's the kind of discount where taking the risk of buying from an overseas retailer actually makes sense.
A Predictable Performer
So, there you have it. The Ryzen 5 9500F holds no surprises – it's exactly what we expected: a slightly down-clocked 9600X without integrated graphics. Performance, thermals, and power draw all line up neatly with that description. The silver lining is that AMD hasn't cut corners on the thermal interface material this time, unlike what we saw with the 7400F and 8400F.
The real issue is pricing. Right now, the 9500F just isn't compelling enough. In Australia, the smarter buy is the 9600X, or the 7600 if you're trying to save some cash. On paper, the 9500F and 7600 might look similar in cost per frame, but the 7600 wins hands down thanks to its included box cooler and local warranty.
At the moment, the 9500F is only available through AliExpress – and that comes with trade-offs. You lose both the cooler and local warranty, and if you're going that route anyway, the 7500F is the better deal. You can grab it for just $200 AUD, which is hard to beat.
Until the 9500F drops to around $200 AUD or close to it, there's no reason to buy it. However, if it does reach that price point, it will become the new value option for AM5 users. Don't expect anything groundbreaking though, it's a very minor upgrade from the 7500F.
Meanwhile, Intel's Core i5-12400F can be had for $190 AUD from AliExpress or about $200 locally, making it another strong value contender. We'll be putting the 12400F and 7500F head-to-head soon, so stay tuned for that comparison.
For now, that wraps up our look at the 9500F. Let us know what you think of this CPU – is it something you'd consider for a future upgrade?