WEBVTT

00:00:00.040 --> 00:00:07.279
AMD's ryzen 9000 is a true generational step forward I'm talking bigger level

00:00:04.480 --> 00:00:13.120
one cache tsmc's new and improved 49m finfet process and a double digigit IPC

00:00:10.400 --> 00:00:18.320
uplift thanks to its Zen 5 architecture and the best part they're claiming they

00:00:15.160 --> 00:00:22.640
finally got a non x3d chip that can on

00:00:18.320 --> 00:00:26.640
average beat their Giga Chad 5800 x3d

00:00:22.640 --> 00:00:29.119
all while using less power as for

00:00:26.640 --> 00:00:33.440
Intel well they're in the middle of an absolute dump fire to the point where I

00:00:31.960 --> 00:00:39.600
actually think the more interesting question is whether team red can slay

00:00:37.120 --> 00:00:43.520
themselves or whether you should just skip this launch until they inevitably

00:00:41.600 --> 00:00:46.760
come out with an x3d variant of these ships that is so strong it makes me

00:00:45.480 --> 00:00:53.199
forget to to segue to our sponsor MSI need a

00:00:51.039 --> 00:00:58.079
laptop MSI's got you covered with their summer sale event check out their sweet

00:00:55.559 --> 00:01:02.399
deals on laptops like this cyborg 14 using the link in the video description

00:01:00.519 --> 00:01:09.000
because of AMD's staggered launch we're only looking at the ryzen 5 9600 x and

00:01:05.119 --> 00:01:11.159
ryzen 79700 x today compared to last gen

00:01:09.000 --> 00:01:15.960
they boost slightly higher and level one caches increased but the other caches

00:01:13.520 --> 00:01:20.799
are otherwise untouched as our core counts compared to last generation

00:01:18.439 --> 00:01:25.439
however thanks to tsmc's manufacturing process improvements AMD has managed to

00:01:23.040 --> 00:01:32.200
pack an extra nearly 2 billion transistors into these little guys about

00:01:28.920 --> 00:01:35.640
26.2% too bad that wasn't enough

00:01:32.200 --> 00:01:37.960
transistors starting with f123 we see

00:01:35.640 --> 00:01:43.360
our previous generation x3d chips leading the pack now AMD never claimed

00:01:41.000 --> 00:01:49.640
that the 9700 X would be the new gaming champ but what they did say is that it's

00:01:46.159 --> 00:01:52.719
supposed to beat 5,000 series 3dv cash

00:01:49.640 --> 00:01:54.399
chips in gaming on average we found that

00:01:52.719 --> 00:01:58.200
the story was a bit more complicated than that but we'll get to that later

00:01:56.280 --> 00:02:02.840
for now I'm happy to tell you that our new 9000 Series chips beat everything

00:02:00.640 --> 00:02:08.520
else on the field except for Intel's 14900 K and let's be real I can't

00:02:06.520 --> 00:02:13.720
personally tell the difference between 381 frames per second and 378 and I

00:02:12.440 --> 00:02:19.680
certainly wouldn't want to deal with the extra heat power consumption or cost

00:02:16.959 --> 00:02:24.760
moving to a very CPU bound Esports title in rocket League wow do these things

00:02:21.720 --> 00:02:28.440
ever rip do I need over 800 frames per

00:02:24.760 --> 00:02:31.080
second no but is it cool that our 9700x

00:02:28.440 --> 00:02:36.400
is heads and tails about everything else absolutely and the 9600 X isn't very far

00:02:34.560 --> 00:02:42.400
behind now it's clear that any of the CPUs we tested will do this job just

00:02:38.680 --> 00:02:44.800
fine even our inexpensive 14100 F but if

00:02:42.400 --> 00:02:50.400
you were looking for a generational gain it's clear that they can be found like

00:02:46.840 --> 00:02:53.239
in returnal where our 9700x wins again

00:02:50.400 --> 00:02:58.519
not by much over AMD's goed X 3D chips but if we narrow in on the Apples to

00:02:55.440 --> 00:03:00.159
Apples comparisons against the non x3d

00:02:58.519 --> 00:03:04.840
predecessors we're looking looking at gains of over

00:03:01.920 --> 00:03:08.920
20% now considering these processors are barely different when we compare the

00:03:06.319 --> 00:03:13.519
spec tables and that they're using way less power that is pretty dang

00:03:11.080 --> 00:03:18.599
impressive and makes me very excited for the inevitable x3d refresh of course

00:03:16.440 --> 00:03:22.200
those aren't here yet and we haven't finished painting a full picture of

00:03:20.040 --> 00:03:26.599
these you might have noticed that most of what we've tested so far has been at

00:03:24.319 --> 00:03:31.319
low settings instead of ultra so let's change it up a bit and look at maxed out

00:03:28.560 --> 00:03:36.200
Total War Warhammer 3 this is still a fairly CPU dependent game which is why

00:03:34.040 --> 00:03:40.239
we chose it cuz we're testing CPUs but you can see that once you start to turn

00:03:37.879 --> 00:03:44.640
the details up things get pretty close at the top of the charts to show you why

00:03:42.400 --> 00:03:50.319
this matters we also ran this title at low where you can see that the AMD CPUs

00:03:47.360 --> 00:03:54.040
do pull further ahead but realistically if you're spending this kind of money on

00:03:51.760 --> 00:03:57.720
your CPU you're probably not going to be running everything at low so it's worth

00:03:56.000 --> 00:04:03.599
taking all of these results as what they are an illustration of how much faster

00:04:00.400 --> 00:04:05.879
these CPUs are in a completely non GPU

00:04:03.599 --> 00:04:10.760
bottleneck scenario probably the most interesting thing here though is our

00:04:07.519 --> 00:04:12.959
little 14100 F that could just chugging

00:04:10.760 --> 00:04:18.000
along down there but we'll come back to that later first I want to talk about

00:04:14.680 --> 00:04:20.840
our results from our x3d chips the 7800

00:04:18.000 --> 00:04:26.960
x3d does typically beat the prior generation 5800 x3d but not by as much

00:04:24.520 --> 00:04:32.639
as you might think both in averages and in all important 1% lows so if you're a

00:04:30.199 --> 00:04:37.680
gamer realistically our recommendation from 2 and 1/2 years ago hasn't really

00:04:35.280 --> 00:04:42.680
changed other than that you might be able to save yourself a buck with the

00:04:39.160 --> 00:04:44.280
newer cheaper 5700 x3d we didn't

00:04:42.680 --> 00:04:48.199
actually run the numbers on this chip but it's only marginally slower than its

00:04:46.400 --> 00:04:54.000
big brother and when paired with a budget board and some ddr4 memory it is

00:04:50.600 --> 00:04:56.280
an outstanding value x3d is weakness

00:04:54.000 --> 00:05:01.680
however is in productivity and this is where the fun begins Intel was already

00:04:59.080 --> 00:05:07.400
behind in huget bench Photoshop but now AMD has increased their lead with a 10

00:05:04.400 --> 00:05:10.240
plus% gain over their last gen 7000

00:05:07.400 --> 00:05:14.039
series in handbreak our h264 results were disappointing with the last

00:05:11.759 --> 00:05:19.840
Generation ryzen 7 beating the new hotness but av1 encoding is a whole

00:05:17.039 --> 00:05:25.680
other story thanks to am5 switch to a true 512-bit data path instead of double

00:05:22.880 --> 00:05:31.240
pumping 256 we see a similar Improvement on the 9600 X in blender but curiously

00:05:28.720 --> 00:05:35.720
the 97 100x isn't going to give you a reason to upgrade over last gen perhaps

00:05:33.720 --> 00:05:41.080
it's not as powerful as we thought it would be more

00:05:38.360 --> 00:05:45.520
on that later and unfortunately that trend of barely changing continues with

00:05:43.680 --> 00:05:49.440
go do compile where we have some marginal generational uplift on the

00:05:47.120 --> 00:05:54.160
ryzen 7 and then slightly better results on the ryzen 5 7zip is a tad better for

00:05:52.199 --> 00:05:58.520
both in compression but then worse in decompression and while cinebench does

00:05:56.280 --> 00:06:03.319
see an improvement it's minimal so what's going on here as it turns out a

00:06:01.000 --> 00:06:08.720
lot of it has to do with the lower power consumption that we mentioned earlier in

00:06:05.560 --> 00:06:13.039
cinebench our 7700x consumes an average

00:06:08.720 --> 00:06:17.319
of 144 Watts while the 9700x is steady

00:06:13.039 --> 00:06:19.960
at 88 Watts that is almost a 40%

00:06:17.319 --> 00:06:24.720
decrease in power consumption while netting slightly more performance and

00:06:22.960 --> 00:06:29.000
here in this part of Canada where power is cheap it's hard to get too excited

00:06:26.840 --> 00:06:32.319
about this kind of efficiency but for other parts of the world you could save

00:06:30.759 --> 00:06:38.319
so much on power you could treat yourself to a PTM 7950 thermal pad from

00:06:34.960 --> 00:06:41.520
LTT Store.com and check this out sure

00:06:38.319 --> 00:06:45.199
our 14700 K is streets ahead in terms of

00:06:41.520 --> 00:06:47.319
raw numbers but it's using almost 250

00:06:45.199 --> 00:06:51.880
Watts out of the box to get there that is almost triple the power for just

00:06:49.639 --> 00:06:58.720
under twice the score and if you toss out those ecor we can see that in single

00:06:54.400 --> 00:07:01.360
core testing on both the 97 and 9600 X

00:06:58.720 --> 00:07:05.080
Intel is losing by a wide margin now part of this could be because AMD seems

00:07:03.520 --> 00:07:11.160
to be leaving some performance on the table check this out in cinebench our

00:07:08.199 --> 00:07:16.720
ryzen 7 refuses to reach the advertised 5.5 GHz boost clock capping out instead

00:07:14.240 --> 00:07:22.199
at around 5.2 and I know what you're thinking well that 5.5 is just a single

00:07:19.680 --> 00:07:28.160
core boost it's just for gaming except that on our ryzen 5 it does manage to

00:07:25.400 --> 00:07:33.720
hit its maximum advertised boost across all cores in multi shaded workloads not

00:07:30.800 --> 00:07:39.280
all the time mind you but sometimes our ryzen 7 doesn't seem to be defective it

00:07:36.039 --> 00:07:42.400
hits 5.5 in games and even in other

00:07:39.280 --> 00:07:44.800
stress tests like occt linpack and

00:07:42.400 --> 00:07:48.759
outside of games it's using the same or a similar power envelope to do so so

00:07:47.080 --> 00:07:54.560
what gives here and I know what you're thinking it's got to be cooling right

00:07:51.759 --> 00:07:59.759
well here's the thing this might be clear to some of you already but less

00:07:57.000 --> 00:08:05.039
Watts means less heat so where AMD was already crushing Intel now we're seeing

00:08:02.280 --> 00:08:11.120
even better performance these chips run so cool I'm talking a 22° drop on

00:08:07.840 --> 00:08:13.960
average on the ryzen 7 and 16° on the

00:08:11.120 --> 00:08:20.039
ryzen 5 so for anyone who hates seeing High CPU temps AMD just dummied Intel

00:08:17.919 --> 00:08:24.720
and did it efficiently so it's not thermals what is it we'll get to it

00:08:23.080 --> 00:08:28.960
first I want to talk about where this efficiency uplift comes from it's

00:08:26.759 --> 00:08:33.839
partially thanks to AMD's new two aead branch prediction this is going to be

00:08:31.039 --> 00:08:36.919
really simplified down but here we go let's say you're running a program and

00:08:35.399 --> 00:08:41.919
that program is trying to get from point A to point B without Branch prediction

00:08:39.800 --> 00:08:46.080
at every fork in the road it has to stop and figure out which way to go then go

00:08:44.159 --> 00:08:50.399
down the right path with Branch prediction your CPU can predict the path

00:08:48.480 --> 00:08:55.560
ahead of time removing the need to stop and think at each fork with two ahead

00:08:53.160 --> 00:08:59.839
prediction the CPU is guessing the next two steps and by dual porting the

00:08:57.959 --> 00:09:04.200
instruction fetching AMD is is able to basically check the guess work about

00:09:02.160 --> 00:09:09.079
twice as quickly which speeds up the entire process now there is still a

00:09:06.680 --> 00:09:12.880
penalty if they get a prediction wrong but it's not any worse than how they

00:09:10.600 --> 00:09:18.399
were doing things before so it's all gains baby so what's not to love here

00:09:15.720 --> 00:09:23.000
well there are a few things we are not getting the xdna 2 AI component that is

00:09:21.200 --> 00:09:27.880
present in the strix point mobile counterpart to these chips instead AMD

00:09:25.560 --> 00:09:32.480
is claiming that the CPU can act as an aii accelerator which

00:09:29.880 --> 00:09:36.800
is a pretty honest takedown of the whole AI frenzy that AMD themselves is

00:09:34.440 --> 00:09:40.440
participating in but it could make a slight difference down the line

00:09:38.360 --> 00:09:45.640
especially for power consumption a bigger issue for me though is that more

00:09:42.800 --> 00:09:49.440
ryzen 9000 chips are coming but everything AMD has announced is going to

00:09:47.640 --> 00:09:54.480
be more expensive than what we're looking at today which continues AMD's

00:09:52.079 --> 00:09:58.920
troubling trend of ignoring their ryzen 3 customers we also think that while

00:09:57.240 --> 00:10:04.560
efficiency is exciting to the data center folks who are eagerly awaiting

00:10:01.240 --> 00:10:07.399
epic Turin with its Unthinkable 192 core

00:10:04.560 --> 00:10:12.000
counts most desktop users might have preferred to see AMD give these chips a

00:10:09.480 --> 00:10:17.600
little more juice by default and it's finally time to talk about the weirdness

00:10:14.519 --> 00:10:20.040
that we observed we tested the 9700x

00:10:17.600 --> 00:10:25.720
with PBO enabled and with its power set to unlimited and what we found was that

00:10:22.320 --> 00:10:27.399
it easily Drew over 140 Watts putting it

00:10:25.720 --> 00:10:33.440
in the same neighborhood as its predecessor in terms of power consumption and resulting in some

00:10:30.959 --> 00:10:37.720
measurable performance gains of course though this is technically overclocking

00:10:35.800 --> 00:10:41.760
and with the recent reliability issues that have plagued Intel users I can

00:10:40.200 --> 00:10:46.760
understand why some of you might shy away from this so I guess what I'm

00:10:43.680 --> 00:10:49.000
saying is I wish AMD had just officially

00:10:46.760 --> 00:10:52.720
under warranty given these things more juice so that we could reach those

00:10:50.959 --> 00:11:00.760
advertised boost clocks across all course like we did once we enabled PBO

00:10:56.600 --> 00:11:02.560
also last thing the lowest tier am5 b840

00:11:00.760 --> 00:11:07.360
motherboards that are supposedly supposed to help make this platform more

00:11:04.200 --> 00:11:10.240
affordable don't officially support PCI

00:11:07.360 --> 00:11:13.920
E Gen 4 so if you do try to save a buck on your motherboard you could end up

00:11:12.000 --> 00:11:18.120
seriously limiting your graphics and your storage bandwidth which just just

00:11:16.200 --> 00:11:22.000
it's one more knife in the side of AMD's budget conscious

00:11:19.480 --> 00:11:26.040
customers with that in mind we thought it would be interesting to see how AMD's

00:11:23.959 --> 00:11:30.920
new offerings stack up against what you can't buy from AMD right now a CPU that

00:11:28.720 --> 00:11:35.480
costs less L than half as much money fits in a cheaper board that does

00:11:32.720 --> 00:11:39.720
support PCI Gen 4 and comes with a stock cooler the results aren't amazing but

00:11:38.440 --> 00:11:44.600
when you don't even have a competitor in the weight class you kind of forfeit the

00:11:41.760 --> 00:11:48.399
fight and Intel's 1400f puts up pretty respectable results at less than half

00:11:46.760 --> 00:11:52.519
the price now it struggles in productivity and struggles even more in

00:11:50.519 --> 00:11:57.160
CPU bound games but if you're on a budget it's a pretty compelling value of

00:11:55.320 --> 00:12:03.279
course though it's based on a platform that has no future upgrade path and you

00:12:00.160 --> 00:12:05.959
aren't saving that much compared to am4

00:12:03.279 --> 00:12:11.000
which by the way AMD just released another refresh 4 with the XT lineup and

00:12:08.839 --> 00:12:16.480
they also confirmed that am5 is going to be supported until at least 2027 in

00:12:13.560 --> 00:12:22.360
conclusion then solid chips even better if you're adventurous and turn on PBO

00:12:18.680 --> 00:12:24.000
but not really for gamers so I'm kind of

00:12:22.360 --> 00:12:29.680
more excited to see the matchup that's coming then between the 9800x 3D and

00:12:27.160 --> 00:12:34.560
Intel's AOL link which supposed is dropping hyperthreading all together

00:12:32.240 --> 00:12:37.440
huge move and I don't think anybody knows what that's going to mean for

00:12:35.720 --> 00:12:41.519
gaming performance as they go to a purely big little architecture just like

00:12:40.040 --> 00:12:45.760
nobody knows what on Earth would happen if I didn't segue to today's sponsor

00:12:43.760 --> 00:12:50.160
Squarespace tired of your online presence looking like a geoc city's

00:12:47.720 --> 00:12:54.160
nightmare we feel you instead of dragging your feet on coding a site you

00:12:52.000 --> 00:12:58.440
can literally just drag and drop designs with Squarespace blueprint it's designed

00:12:56.279 --> 00:13:02.199
to give you great layout and styling options so you're website is optimized

00:13:00.320 --> 00:13:06.720
for every device they also have integrated optimized SEO tools that help

00:13:04.800 --> 00:13:10.600
your site rank higher in search results which means more people will find your

00:13:08.279 --> 00:13:14.240
site easily Squarespace makes shopping easy too they accept credit cards PayPal

00:13:12.800 --> 00:13:17.880
and even Apple pay to give your customers flexibility if you want to

00:13:15.839 --> 00:13:21.959
give me money you do it any way you want and of course we use Squarespace to

00:13:19.720 --> 00:13:27.360
build our website too no more late nights spend Googling why my website

00:13:24.000 --> 00:13:29.079
broken Squarespace has 24/7 support to

00:13:27.360 --> 00:13:34.360
help you build your dream website start start building your website today and receive 10% off your first purchase by

00:13:32.440 --> 00:13:39.839
visiting squarespace.com LTT if you guys enjoyed this video maybe

00:13:36.720 --> 00:13:41.760
go check out our review of the 7800 x3d

00:13:39.839 --> 00:13:48.920
somehow that chip and even its predecessor are just killing it like

00:13:44.120 --> 00:13:48.920
years later outstanding gaming CPUs