Skip to main content

AMD Zen 4 CPU Pricing Leaked: Ryzen 9 7950X May Cost Over $800

Ryzen 7000
Ryzen 7000 (Image credit: VideoCardz)

More and more information has started to surface as we approach the rumored September 15 launch date for AMD's Ryzen 7000 (Raphael) processors. News outlet VideoCardz (opens in new tab) has reportedly received a render of the packaging and pricing for the next-generation Zen 4 chips. Although the publication has solid sources, throwing a pinch of salt over the leaked pricing is healthy.

The premium packaging allegedly pertains to AMD's high-end Ryzen 9 SKUs, specifically the Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 9 7900X. It's safe to assume that the Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 5 chips will have different packaging. As opposed to the current packaging, the new Ryzen 9 box appears to feature a full-black theme with orange highlights and white text. AMD has inverted the colors for the Zen logo. The circle now comes in a black tone instead of an orange color. As expected, there's a small cut-out on the box that probably allows the consumer to see the model of the chip.

The alleged pricing is the juiciest part of VideoCardz's anonymously obtained information about Ryzen 7000. Unfortunately, the source didn't reveal the exact pricing for AMD's forthcoming Zen 4 lineup, so there is still some ambiguity. Instead, the person used the current Ryzen 5000's MSRP as a point of comparison. We assume the leak refers to the MSRP at launch and not the current pricing since AMD has issued significant price cuts for Ryzen 5000 since then.

AMD Ryzen 7000 Pricing*

ProcessorRCP (MSRP)Cores / ThreadsBoost Clock (GHz)L2 Cache (MB)L3 Cache (MB)
Ryzen 9 7950X> $79916 / 325.71664
Ryzen 9 5950X$79916 / 324.9864
Ryzen 9 7900X> $54912 / 245.61264
Ryzen 9 5900X$54912 / 244.8664
Ryzen 7 7800X> $4498 / 16?832
Ryzen 7 5800X$4498 / 164.7432
Ryzen 7 7700X$2998 / 165.4832
Ryzen 7 5700X$2998 / 164.6432
Ryzen 5 7600X?6 / 125.3632
Ryzen 5 5600X$2996 / 124.6332

*Specifications and pricing are unconfirmed.

The Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 9 7900X will cost more than the Ryzen 9 5950X ($799) and Ryzen 9 5900X ($549), respectively. The leak talks about a Ryzen 7 7800X, an SKU which hasn't emerged in the rumor mill. VideoCardz's source claims that the Ryzen 7 7800X is on AMD's plan. If we chipmaker decides to release the Ryzen 7 7800X, the octa-core Zen 4 chip will hit the shelves for over $449.

It would appear that the Ryzen 7 7700X would be the only Zen 4 processor to retain the same price tag as its predecessor, the Ryzen 7 5700X ($299). Meanwhile, the price tag for the Ryzen 7 7600X, the direct replacement for the Ryzen 5 5600X ($299), remains a mystery.

No one expects AMD's Ryzen 7000 processors to come cheap. While Zen 3 is on TSMC's 7nm node, Zen 4 jumps to the foundry's 5nm process node, which is more expensive to produce. According to rough estimates, a single 300mm wafer built on the 5nm node costs around $16,988, whereas the same 300mm wafer on the 7nm node is approximately around $9,346.

If the leaked pricing is somewhat genuine, the Ryzen 7 7700X would be a desirable octa-core option as it would offer more firepower than the Ryzen 5 5600X but costs the same as the hexa-core Zen 3 part when it first came out. However, if the Ryzen 7 7700X does end up debuting for under $300, the Ryzen 5 7600X could launch at $250 and be the winner for budget gamers.

Zhiye Liu
RAM Reviewer and News Editor

Zhiye Liu is a Freelance News Writer at Tom’s Hardware US. Although he loves everything that’s hardware, he has a soft spot for CPUs, GPUs, and RAM.

  • -Fran-
    I think most people would be ok with the 7900X and 7950X being the pricy siblings compared to the 7700X and 7600X, for sure. They can leave a huge gap in between that can be easily filled with a 7800X and/or a 7800X3D (I wish they just call it 7850X >_>) later on as needed and accoriding to market conditions. DDR5 is going to be a real pain for AMD, so they need to equalize or Raptor Lake, even if it is late, will sweep the biggest selling brackets at a time where each CPU sold counts for both camps; this is me saying as we're going into recession, each item sold will be important.

    Well, that's my take at least.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • cryoburner
    I question the likelihood that these would be the prices. So, we are to believe that AMD will release an 8-core, 16-thread 7700X for $300, but then they are also releasing a 7800X with the same amount of cores, threads and cache for more than $450? What exactly is the 7800X going to have to offer that would justify a more than $150 price premium over the 7700X? With the last generation, there was a difference in core count, with the $300 part only getting six cores, but not apparently this time, at least according to this data.

    The only ways I could see that happening would be if the 7800X were actually a 7800X3D with an additional cache chip. Or if it were a 12-core part, to better compete with Intel's additional E-cores. Or maybe if the chips were highly binned, and managed to get into the 6GHz range, with performance that can surpass RaptorLake. At the very least, competition from Raptor Lake is likely to be strong, with the i7 parts having the same number of performance cores and threads, but also 8 low-power E-cores for improved multithreaded performance, with overall performance that will likely be better than the current i9s. So I doubt AMD would regain the lead in at least multithreaded performance with an 8-core, 16-thread part at that price point.

    However, if the Ryzen 7 7700X does end up debuting for under $300, the Ryzen 5 7600X could launch at $250, so budget gamers should probably keep a close eye on the latter.
    I also suspect there will be a bigger price difference than that between the 7700X and the 7600X. If the 7700X ends up being $300, why would anyone go with the 7600X with fewer cores for just a $50 difference? There would have to be more like a $70+ difference for that part to make much sense,
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    cryoburner said:
    I question the likelihood that these would be the prices. So, we are to believe that AMD will release an 8-core, 16-thread 7700X for $300, but then they are also releasing a 7800X with the same amount of cores, threads and cache for more than $450? What exactly is the 7800X going to have to offer that would justify a more than $150 price premium over the 7700X? With the last generation, there was a difference in core count, with the $300 part only getting six cores, but not apparently this time, at least according to this data.

    The only ways I could see that happening would be if the 7800X were actually a 7800X3D with an additional cache chip. Or if it were a 12-core part, to better compete with Intel's additional E-cores. Or maybe if the chips were highly binned, and managed to get into the 6GHz range, with performance that can surpass RaptorLake. At the very least, competition from Raptor Lake is likely to be strong, with the i7 parts having the same number of performance cores and threads, but also 8 low-power E-cores for improved multithreaded performance, with overall performance that will likely be better than the current i9s. So I doubt AMD would regain the lead in at least multithreaded performance with an 8-core, 16-thread part at that price point.


    I also suspect there will be a bigger price difference than that between the 7700X and the 7600X. If the 7700X ends up being $300, why would anyone go with the 7600X with fewer cores for just a $50 difference? There would have to be more like a $70+ difference for that part to make much sense,
    Do not forget the DDR5-only restriction on AM5.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • TerryLaze
    cryoburner said:
    I question the likelihood that these would be the prices. So, we are to believe that AMD will release an 8-core, 16-thread 7700X for $300, but then they are also releasing a 7800X with the same amount of cores, threads and cache for more than $450? What exactly is the 7800X going to have to offer that would justify a more than $150 price premium over the 7700X?
    They did the same thing with the 5700x and 5800x so why does it look weird to you now?
    The 5800x is a 105W "TDP" CPU while the 5700x is 65W so no matter how close the base numbers look, actual performance will be different especially when using PBO.
    Intel calls it K and non-k so that you know there will be a difference, with AMD you have to look that stuff up because "all the CPUs are "unlocked" " .
    Reply
  • logainofhades
    Yea DDR5 is still stubbornly expensive. Close to twice the cost, for the same capacity of ddr4.

    PCPartPicker Part List
    Memory: TEAMGROUP T-Force Vulcan 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR5-5200 CL40 Memory ($169.99 @ Amazon)
    Memory: TEAMGROUP T-Force Vulcan Z 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory ($84.99 @ Newegg)
    Total: $254.98
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2022-08-09 18:56 EDT-0400
    Reply
  • cryoburner
    TerryLaze said:
    They did the same thing with the 5700x and 5800x so why does it look weird to you now?
    That's not the same at all. The 5700X didn't launch until just several months ago, a year and a half after the 5800X came out, and by then the 5800X had been priced under $400 for quite a while already. The 5700X was more or less released as a price-reduced version of the 5800X, to better compete with Intel after Alder Lake retook the performance lead. When the 5000-series first came out, it made some sense for AMD to charge a premium, as those processors were outperforming Intel at the high-end all around, so demand outpaced their supply. By the time the 5700X came out though, that was no longer the case.

    There's also the 5800X3D that launched alongside the 5700X, though that incorporated additional hardware in the form of a cache chip bonded to the processor that allowed it to match or in some cases outperform Intel's top-end processor in gaming. So again, it's going to be in high demand, at least in the short-term. In order for the 7800X to command an even larger premium over the 7700X, it's pretty much going to need to outperform Intel, at least in certain tasks like gaming, while the 7700X would need to perform enough behind to justify the price difference.

    TerryLaze said:
    The 5800x is a 105W "TDP" CPU while the 5700x is 65W so no matter how close the base numbers look, actual performance will be different especially when using PBO.
    Not really. If anything, PBO makes the two chips perform even closer to one another, within a few percent at most, and the two tend to offer virtually identical performance in games, either with or without it enabled. And as far as power consumption goes, PBO can push the 5700X up to 5800X levels.
    Reply
  • wifiburger
    too expensive, they will have to drop prices since you need new mobo + ddr5

    if not Intel 13th gen + keep ddr4 will come out cheaper if you want the latest cpu
    Reply
  • daworstplaya
    wifiburger said:
    too expensive, they will have to drop prices since you need new mobo + ddr5

    if not Intel 13th gen + keep ddr4 will come out cheaper if you want the latest cpu

    ^This! I think most people will just skip upgrading the CPU until the prices become a little more sane. As the CPU usually isn't the bottleneck in most gaming instances. Not to mention Intel will put the price pressure on AMD. Would be shocked if the 7600X costs more than $199 being a budget chip.
    Reply
  • TCA_ChinChin
    daworstplaya said:
    ^This! I think most people will just skip upgrading the CPU until the prices become a little more sane. As the CPU usually isn't the bottleneck in most gaming instances. Not to mention Intel will put the price pressure on AMD.
    Agreed. I'm imagining at least waiting until DDR5 prices are more reasonable.

    daworstplaya said:
    Would be shocked if the 7600X costs more than $199 being a budget chip.
    I'd be nice if it were, but I can see a world where AMD decides it can charge $250 for one reason or another. Was considering upgrading to AM5 from i7-4790k, but now I'm gonna wait till Raptor-Lake at least, probably until DDR5 becomes more mainstream with Zen 5? and whatever socket and Lake Intel puts out after this one that only supports DDR5.

    Hopefully by then, we'll have a better price for DDR5, more maturity with AM5 motherboards, and a better idea of how future AM5 CPUs and next-gen Lakes compare with each other.
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    The name of this website should be changed to TomsPinchOfSalt.com. Seriously, is there some requirement by the owners of this site to include that phrase in every news article that is posted here?
    Reply