CPUs are in a strange place right now, and it’s hard to ignore the uncertainty. AMD made a surprising move by delaying the launch of its new Zen 5 chips, while Intel continues to struggle with widely reported stability issues. Despite this, AMD’s new Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X are among the best processors available, but their arrival coincides with a time where making fair comparisons is challenging. The Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X are not easily evaluated. They aren’t designed for gamers, as AMD’s 3D V-Cache CPUs dominate the best gaming processors. Performance improvements range from remarkable to mediocre. AMD’s latest chips are undeniably fast and deserve a recommendation. However, considering the current strange landscape between AMD and Intel, it might be wise to wait a few weeks before committing to a new chip and see how everything settles.
The Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X prioritize architecture, a fact evident in their specifications. Compared to last-generation Ryzen 7000 chips, there are minimal changes, including the same core counts, similar clock speeds, and identical cache. The improvements lie in the new Zen 5 architecture. Zen 5 offers numerous architectural enhancements compared to Zen 4, including an 8-wide dispatch unit (up from 6-wide in Zen 4) and six Arithmetic Logic Units (ALUs) (up from four). However, the high-level objectives of the architecture make the real difference. AMD focused on single-threaded performance and built a true 512-bit data path for AVX-512 instructions, establishing a new foundation for future CPUs according to AMD. My performance results clearly demonstrate that AMD achieved its design goals. However, this is a new foundation, not the final form, and further advancements are expected in future generations. Overall, performance feels uneven, with some workloads showcasing moderate improvement while others demonstrate groundbreaking gains.
Beyond architecture, the Ryzen 7 9700X boasts a significant spec change. The previous-generation Ryzen 7 7700X had a power draw of 105 watts, but AMD reduced it to 65W. While the power rating is somewhat optimistic, with the chip often exceeding 65W, it’s still commendable that AMD is pushing towards efficiency with Zen 5. This was crucial for the Ryzen 5 7600 (non-X) in the previous generation.
As with all CPU reviews, I used two test configurations as close as possible for both AMD and Intel. Both systems included a high-end motherboard, a 360mm all-in-one (AIO) liquid cooler, 32GB of DDR5-6000 memory, a 1200W PSU, and an RTX 4080 Founder’s Edition graphics card. All BIOS settings were returned to default, ensuring XMP/EXPO and Resizable BAR were enabled for both platforms. There’s much discussion about BIOS settings currently, with Intel CPUs facing significant instability due to improper BIOS adjustments. These issues are still being resolved, and performance may change once Intel’s CPUs reach a more stable state. The goal of these performance benchmarks is to showcase what to expect out of the box with each CPU.
The ideal starting point for any CPU review is Cinebench R23, which immediately highlights AMD’s improvements. Except for the Core i9-13900K and Core i9-14900K, AMD’s new chips top the single-core charts, and by a significant margin. This is a massive leap, especially considering these are the two weakest in AMD’s current Zen 5 lineup. Keep in mind that the Core i9-14900K is rated to boost to 6GHz, while the Ryzen 7 9700X reaches 5.5GHz. Unsurprisingly, multi-core performance isn’t as impressive. Intel’s core mix allows for higher core counts, which are more noticeable in benchmarks like Cinebench. However, improvements are clearly visible. For example, the Ryzen 5 9600X with six cores matches the Core i5-12600K despite having four fewer cores, showcasing the impact of the architecture within the cores.
To put multi-core performance into context, consider Handbrake. The six-core Ryzen 5 9600X now matches the 16-core Ryzen 9 5950X from two generations ago, and the Ryzen 7 9700X trails closely behind the Core i5-14600K despite its massive core deficit. Performance in Photoshop is even more impressive. AMD already performed well in Photoshop, but it’s outperforming itself here. The Ryzen 7 9700X matches the Ryzen 9 7950X from the previous generation, and the Ryzen 5 9600X isn’t far behind. While Photoshop isn’t the most demanding workload, it clearly demonstrates the performance improvements.
These CPUs are doing what they should, but there are also unbalanced results, for both better and worse. The downsides are apparent in Blender and 7-Zip. The Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X barely make a difference in these tests, and in the case of 7-Zip, the Ryzen 5 9600X was slightly slower than the previous-generation Ryzen 5 7600X (although not enough to be significant). The upside, however, is far more substantial, so much so that I initially questioned the results. In the browser benchmark JetStream 2, the Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X yielded the highest scores I’ve ever recorded. Similarly, in Y-Cruncher, calculating 500 million digits of pi, the single-core performance of these two chips obliterates everything else on the market, including the latest flagships. These are specific tests, but they highlight the best of AMD’s Zen 5 improvements. For tasks like photo editing in Photoshop or transcoding in Handbrake, these CPUs are exceptional. However, depending on your usage, you might not see the full performance gains. It’s clear that Zen 5 is a new foundation for AMD, and I anticipate it will balance performance in more specific workloads over time.
Discussing gaming performance with the Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X is tricky. Performance is decent to disappointing, but ultimately, it doesn’t matter much. AMD has repeatedly proven that its 3D V-Cache technology is the key to the highest frame rates, and these chips lack the extra cache. If gaming performance is a concern, you should avoid the Ryzen 5 9600X or Ryzen 7 9700X and wait for the 3D V-Cache versions.
From a broader perspective, AMD is delivering better gaming performance overall. This is evident in the CPU score of 3DMark Time Spy. The Ryzen 7 9700X outperforms the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, while the Ryzen 5 9600X provides a disappointing but understandable 5% improvement over the previous generation. As usual, real-world games offer a slightly different narrative. Take Hitman 3 as an example. AMD managed to surpass the Ryzen 7 5800X3D with the Ryzen 7 9700X, but both fall short compared to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. It’s not even a close comparison. Similarly, in Far Cry 6, AMD not only delivers a solid generational uplift, but the Ryzen 5 9600X even beats the previous generation’s 16-core Ryzen 9 7950X. This is impressive, but then you realize how much faster the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is once again.
Ignoring the 3D V-Cache parts, AMD’s new Zen 5 chips are great. The issue is that PC gamers cannot afford to ignore 3D V-Cache. I wouldn’t want to be stuck with a Ryzen 7 9700X knowing that a Ryzen 7 9700X3D could launch within months. AMD has confirmed their arrival, and even the Ryzen 7 7800X3D continues to dominate gaming charts. Some of the uneven performance seen in productivity benchmarks also appeared in gaming. Red Dead Redemption 2 is a prime example. This game is in my CPU test suite to ground discussions about gaming CPUs. It’s a graphically intensive game that takes some focus away from the processor. Surprisingly, AMD managed to break through a performance barrier that every other CPU I’ve tested has hit, including the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. In my opinion, this says more about the potential of 3D V-Cache versions of these CPUs than these two specific chips.
Finally, there’s LeelaChessZero, and the chart speaks for itself. If there was any doubt that a dedicated 512-bit data path for AVX-512 instructions didn’t matter, this chart settles it. It’s a massive improvement, and I can’t wait to see how the more powerful Ryzen 9 9900X and Ryzen 9 9950X perform in this benchmark.
At $280 for the Ryzen 5 9600X and $360 for the Ryzen 7 9700X, these are two compelling CPUs. AMD is offering a generational uplift at a lower price. However, this price cut isn’t out of goodwill. There are still oddities with these chips and their strange results, leading to incredible performance increases in some workloads and minimal improvement in others. If you already have a Zen 4 CPU, the upgrade isn’t substantial enough to justify the switch. This might change once we see the flagships in action, but lower down the stack, the changes aren’t as drastic. The only exception is workloads like AVX-512, where the new Zen 5 architecture completely outclasses everything else.
Gamers don’t need to worry either. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D continues to deliver impressive results years after its release, and the Ryzen 7 7800X3D remains the undisputed champion of gaming performance. Zen 5 brings gaming improvements, there’s no doubt about that, but the 3D V-Cache versions of these chips will truly unleash those improvements.
However, the Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X are excellent choices if you haven’t upgraded to the AM5 platform yet. They’re faster and cheaper than Ryzen 7000 options, especially considering the drop in DDR5 memory prices. But if you’ve already made the leap to AM5, you can probably skip this generation. After all, AMD has stated that there will be more generations on this socket.
