AMD Ryzen 9 9950X: At the very top, with both 1 and 32 threads

Extra tests, Processors | | Ľubomír Samák

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X in detail

The most powerful AMD Zen 5 CPU is the fastest not only multi-threaded (when all cores are involved), but also single-threaded. It usually beats the competing Core i9-14900K processor quite clearly. Although, this may not always be the case and there are situations where the 16-core Ryzen 9 9950X is weaker. I mean, speed-wise. The efficiency (due to the lower power consumption) may already be on its side.

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X in detail

After the lower Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X models (these processors were released on August 8, 2024),the Ryzen 9s – 9900X and 9950X are also hitting stores on August 15. In the tests, we’ll focus on the more powerful model (R9 9950X) first and look at the R9 9900X later. The Ryzen 9 9950X is the successor to the Ryzen 9 7950X, with which it has a lot in common, but to which it also differs as well. What has changed is the new architecture (Zen 5), of which we also have a detailed analysis.

An increase in performance per clock, lower power consumption and the resulting higher efficiency compared to the previous generation (Ryzen 7000) was already revealed in the Ryzen 5 9600X test results recently. But now, in the case of the Ryzen 9 9950X, we’re at the other end of the offering, where there’s a push for maximum performance in which AMD wants to dominate the desktop processor market. “Maximum performance” here means how the processor performs in typically computational tasks, whether it’s a single-threaded or multi-threaded workload. Gaming-wise, the Ryzen 9 9950X doesn’t have the highest ambitions, those will only come with the 3D V-Cache processor models, which are still unsurpassed in their segment. Nothing about the dominant position of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in our gaming tests was changed, not even by the 32-threaded Ryzen 9 from the Granite Ridge family.

And now for the details of the R9 9950X which are the same as the R9 7950X. First of all, it’s still the AMD AM5 platform support, which so far only applies to models with “600 series” chipsets. The memory controller only supports DDR5 modules and is still dual-channel. The distribution of CPU cores is between two chiplets (CCD) in a balanced ratio of 8+8. The third silicon formation on the CPU substrate is the I/O chiplet, for which there have been no significant intergenerational changes. It is manufactured (except perhaps for some minor revisions that we do not know about) in the same way and also has the same properties.

The claimed TDP of the Ryzen 9 9950X is at 165 W (with a PPT of 230 W). So, the same as with Ryzen 9 7950X. But what’s notable is that in the specs, the new Ryzen 9 has a 200 MHz lower base clock speed for the all-core boost, “only” 4.3GHz.

Less clock speed throttling by temperatures

An important topic – cooling. It is expected to be better, or rather the minimum values of temperatures with which the board operates are lower at the same power consumption. This is mainly to set appropriate clock speeds, which also depend on the temperatures. Especially when it comes to the height of the single core boost. This was significantly hampered precisely by cooling performance with the Ryzen 9 7950X.

Even with the 360-millimeter Alphacool Eisbaer liquid cooler, across different motherboards, clock speeds in longer single-threaded loads average around 5500 MHz, about 200 MHz below the official maximum (or 300 MHz below the “unofficial” 5.85 GHz). The Ryzen 9 9950X also has this set at 5.7 GHz and it’s easier to get close to it now. You can get to higher SC boost clock speeds than the last generation Ryzen 9 even with a “weaker” or quieter cooler.

As with the other X models, a cooler is not supplied with the processor and you have to get one yourself.

Please note: The article continues in the following chapters.

* We have no certainty on this parameter. AMD does not specify the maximum resolution and maximum refresh rate in publicly available materials. However, it is possible that it will be the same as for Ryzen 7000, i.e. 3840 × 2160 px (60 Hz).


  •  
  •  
  •  
Continue:
Flattr this!

Related articles

Comments (12) Add comment

  1. Thanks for the test ! Suggestion : could you add some specific audio benchmark like DAWBench ? Those are kind of hard to find it could be useful for some people (not a lot obviously but the audio creator community would certainly be glad to have a reliable source).

    Reply

    1. Thanks for the tip for a test. Sure, we can add DAWBench to the test methodology, but I will collect data in it only for processors not yet tested, i.e. from R7 9700X > R9 9900X > Intel Arrow Lake > …

      Reply

  2. It looks like you have mistakenly transposed the values for the 7800X3D in Fire Strike’s Graphics score and Fire Strike’s Combined score on page six.

    Reply

    1. A few other test anomalies(?):

      On page 31, the AIDA64 AES / SHA3 test shows both the 9950X and 9600X as severely underperforming. It would be interesting to know why, whether a software issue or otherwise.

      On page 32, for the Convolution (SPECworkstation 3.1) test, the Core i5-12400 (C0) seems to have been given a strong energy drink, and it outscores all of the other CPUs by a factor of nearly 4x. Seems like an error. 🙂

      On page 33, the 9950X (and 9600X) are missing from the RodiniaCFG test charts, but I did not see a note explaining why this was the case (as was present on the AIDA L3 blank result issue).

      Power and temperatures were also both higher than most other reviews, but it may be explained by variance in the power measuring device and use of an air cooler rather than a suggested AIO.

      Good review, it’s perhaps not an exciting processor, but is an interesting one. Really excels in certain areas but fails to move the bar in others. I suspect that there are a small minority who are very excited about it for their specific workloads (AI/ML/encryption). Cheers!

      Reply

      1. The poor AES/SHA3 Aida64 results are probably due to unfinished SW optimizations (on the Aida64 side). This is not a mistake / incorrect description of the results.

        Yes, the Convolution value for Core i5-12400 (C0) is indeed wrong. It was an accidental mistake to describe “score” instead of “Spec ratio”. Corrected. Thanks for the heads up!

        RodiniaCFG test results for some processors are missing because they end up with an error. We’ve added a traditional explanatory note at the end of the chapter to make everything clear.

        Power consumption: Many testers are satisfied with the motherboard’s SW reporting and rely on the “CPU power package”. In my experience, these values are often inaccurate and the power consumption ratios between processors often do not correspond to reality. This is despite the fact that these values are based on the processor’s own management and maybe that’s why they are sometimes understated. Our measurements are based on hardware, we measure the electrical current on EPS cables. A certain disadvantage of these measurements is that they also reflect the (in)efficiency of the motherboard VRM, so that is why the measured values are higher than the real consumption of the processors. But always more or less equivalent. We strive for a comparatively high VRM efficiency across the test motherboards. Nevertheless, of course, there are differences between the motherboards. That’s why we also cover the motherboard tests in detail, in which you can see that for example, with a comparable performance of the R9 7950X you measure 215.7 W (ASRock B650E Taichi), but also 258.9 W (MSI B650 Gaming Plus WiFi). Yet the power limits are set the same.

        Higher temperatures than in other tests are probably due to the relatively lower cooling performance of the Noctua NH-U14S compared to for example the more powerful 360 mm AIOs that are commonly used in tests?

        Reply

        1. —“…due to the relatively lower cooling performance of the Noctua NH-U14S…”
          Since you mention the NH-U14S, are you going to compare the standard mount vs offset vs offset + NF-A15 Gen2 anytime soon? 😛

          Reply

          1. We don’t have it in the roadmap of tests yet. And although it would certainly be interesting (to test an “old” heatsink with a new fan), the list of things to test is extremely long… and, unfortunately, not everything can be done. But what we will definitely be testing is the new Noctua single-tower cooler with a 140 mm fan. No, I don’t know that Noctua is planning one, but I believe that its addition to the cooler lineup will only be a matter of time. 🙂

            Reply

            1. —“… what we will definitely be testing is the new Noctua single-tower cooler with a 140 mm fan…”
              Well, I’m guessing a time horizon of at least 2 years (I’m an optimist 🙂 )…
              And in that case, will you also test the old (gen1) A15 fans on the new cooler?
              … although at that time it already… 😛

              Reply

              1. We’ll see, I don’t want to make any promises in this direction. What we are going to focus on are tests of the NH-D15 G2 on different platforms. Soon we will start on LGA 1700 and then, as part of the new, long-term methodology, we will also test on AM5 (9950X) and LGA 1851. But I understand that the tests of the NH-U14S with the NF-A14x25r G2 would be more precious, since few (if any :)) will be dedicated to them and maybe we will eventually do them if the wait for the successor is too long. 🙂

                Reply

    2. Thanks Brian, good point! Indeed the results of the graphical score were switched with the combined score. Fixed (also in older tests)! 🙂

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *