The latest benchmarks of AMD's Ryzen 9 7950X 16-Core flagship CPU have been leaked within the Cinebench R23 benchmark.
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X Destroys The Ryzen 9 5950X In Single-Core & Multi-Core CPU Performance In Cinebench R23
Update: The same user has uploaded new results, now under a 360mm AIO liquid cooler. The CPU retains its stock 5.0 GHz all-core boost frequency but delivers a far better multi-threaded score of 36256 points.
The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X is the flagship Zen 4 CPU with a price of $699 US and targets Intel's 12th Gen Core i9-12900K & the soon-to-launch 13th Gen Core i9-13900K. The CPU benchmark leaked over at Baidu Forums (via Harukaze5719).
According to the leaker, the CPU is a close-to-retail chip that has a 4.5 GHz base clock, 5.7 GHz boost clock, and an all-core boost frequency of 5.0 GHz. The chip was running at default clocks and a default voltage of 1.48V on the Gigabyte AORUS X670E Xtreme motherboard with 16 GB of DDR5-5600 memory. The user reports that the board will cost around 4999 Yuan or around $700 US. But before the performance, let's talk about the specifications.
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X 16 Core "Zen 4" Desktop CPU
Starting with the flagship of them all, we have the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X which retains its healthy 16 core and 32 thread count from the previous two generations. The CPU will feature an impressive base frequency of 4.5 GHz and a boost clock of up to 5.7 GHz (5.85 GHz F-Max) which should make it 200 MHz faster than Intel's Alder Lake Core i9-12900KS which has a boost frequency of 5.5 GHz on a single-core.
It looks like AMD is extracting every ounce of Hertz that it could within that 170W TDP (230W PPT) for the Ryzen 9 chips. As for the cache, the CPU comes with 80 MB of that which includes 64 MB from L3 (32 MB per CCD) and 16 MB from L2 (1 MB per core). The flagship is going to cost $699 US which means that it will be priced slightly higher than the Core i9-12900K while offering a significant performance leap in multi-threading apps such as Chaos V-Ray of up to +57% and doing so with up to 47% higher energy efficiency.
In terms of gaming performance, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X will be offering up to 35% higher uplift in games such as Shadow of The Tomb Raider versus the Core i9-12900K.
AMD also showcased the performance of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X against the Intel Core i9-12900K in both gaming and content creation tasks. The CPU was anywhere from -1% to +23% faster in the gaming benchmarks and +36 to +62% faster in creation workloads.
So that's all the official specifications, performance, and prices that AMD disclosed itself. Now, we have to see how the chip performs in the leaked Cinebench R23 benchmark result. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X scored an impressive 2205 points in single-core and 29649 points in multi-core tests. Now comparing it to the Ryzen 9 5950X, it looks like the Zen 4 chip is going to crush the older Zen 3 chip entirely with a 34% single-core and 50% multi-core improvement. The CPU also ends up 7% faster in single-core and 32% faster in multi-core tests than the Core i9-12900K in single and multi-core tests.
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X CPU "New Water Cooled" CPU Benchmark (Image Credits: @henry41224):
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X CPU "Old Air Cooled" CPU Benchmark (Image Credits: Baidu Forums):
The results are provided below:
Greymon55 has also posted the multi-threaded performance benchmarks for the two CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X allegedly scores around 19800 points while the Ryzen 5 7600X scores around 15100 points. This puts the Ryzen 5 7600X 34% faster than its predecessor but slower than the i5-12600K. At the same time, the Ryzen 7 7700X is around 29% faster than its predecessor but slower than the Core i7-12700K.
The performance was evaluated using an air-cooler so we can't say for sure if the chip was being affected by thermal throttling as that seems to be the case with many samples. With that said, we can also compare the performance of the Ryzen 9 7950X with the Raptor Lake flagship, the Core i9-13900K, and see how it stacks up. It looks like the AMD Zen 4 CPU is around 4% slower in single and 10% slower in multi-core performance. That's quite the difference in multi-core performance but we also have to take into account the much higher 250-350W TDP that the Raptor Lake CPU will be running at.
it get the same score of mine es test.(37k, 240w 5.1Ghz 96℃ in360aio)
— Raichu (@OneRaichu) September 2, 2022
The leaker also reports that the chip can't seem to hit an all-core frequency of 5.0 GHz unless you are running water cooling. With water-cooling, the temperature doesn't exceed 100C but it also is not stable within Cinebench R23. AMD officially showcased a +48% / +41% Multi-threaded uplift in Cinebench R23 versus the 5950X and 12900K in their own presentation so there seems to be a big issue with this specific leak.
As for memory performance, the AIDA64 memory result is provided below and delivers around 89.6ns. We don't know if EXPO was enabled or not but with the new tech, AMD is said to achieve lower latency of around 63ns. More on EXPO here. What we do know is that the motherboard is using an older F1 BIOS whereas the latest one is F4 and Gigabyte doesn't even list any older BIOS prior to F3 for the X670E AORUS Master motherboard. So that should explain why the memory benchmark also shows poor result.
These are really strong figures against the Zen 3-based Ryzen 5000 family and we can't wait to see the AMD Ryzen 7000 chips hit retail on 27th September so users can enjoy some huge uplifts in the single and multi-core workloads. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X & the Ryzen 5 7600X also appeared in the leaked Geekbench 5 benchmarks yesterday.
AMD Ryzen 7000 'Raphael' Desktop CPU Specs (Official):
|CPU Name||Architecture||Process Node||Cores / Threads||Base Clock||Boost Clock (SC Max)||Cache||TDP||Prices (TBD)|
|AMD Ryzen 9 7950X||Zen 4||5nm||16/32||4.5 GHz||5.7 GHz||80 MB (64+16)||170W||$699 US|
|AMD Ryzen 9 7900X||Zen 4||5nm||12/24||4.7 GHz||5.6 GHz||76 MB (64+12)||170W||$549 US|
|AMD Ryzen 7 7700X||Zen 4||5nm||8/16||4.5 GHz||5.4 GHz||40 MB (32+8)||105W||$399 US|
|AMD Ryzen 5 7600X||Zen 4||5nm||6/12||4.7 GHz||5.3 GHz||38 MB (32+6)||105W||$299 US|