AMD Ryzen 9000 CPU family compared in Cinebench — purported scores for the 9900X, 9700X, and 9600X shared

News
By
published

We also tabulate the improvements over previous-gen Ryzens.

AMD
(Image credit: AMD)

Although AMD has delayed the launch of its Zen 5-based Ryzen 9000-series processors, these CPUs are in the wild. Thus, it is inevitable that their benchmark results have leaked. This time around blogger HXL (@9950pro) has published Cinebench R23 scores purportedly run on AMD's Ryzen 9900X, 9700X, and 9600X CPUs.   

AMD's Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core processor operating at 4.40 GHz, the Ryzen 7 9700X is an eight-core processor functioning at 3.80 GHz, and the Ryzen 5 9600X is a six-core CPU at 3.90 GHz, these are about to enter our CPU our hierarchy shortly. Given the basic specifications of these processors, their performance difference is obvious in Cinebench R23, a benchmark that takes advantage of all the CPU resources it can get. On a side note, we do not know the specifications of the PC systems used, and Cinebench scores are easy to fake, so take this information with a grain of salt.

Swipe to scroll horizontally
ModelConfigurationFrequencySingle-ThreadMulti-ThreadST Performance Difference*MT Performance Difference*
Ryzen 9 9900X12C/24T4.40 GHz2232322168.98.9
Ryzen 9 7900X12C/24T4.70 GHz203429349--
Ryzen 7 9700X8C/16T3.80 GHz22802153311.56.8
Ryzen 7 7700X8C/16T4.50 GHz201820059--
Ryzen 5 9600X6C/12T3.90 GHz22441703712.610.7
Ryzen 5 7600X6C/12T4.70 GHz196115215--

*compared to direct predecessor.

Comparing Cinebench R23 benchmark scores of AMD's 12-core Ryzen 9 9900X to its direct predecessor Ryzen 9 7900X, it offers 8.9% higher single-thread performance and 8.9% higher multi-thread performance, which is in line with what AMD said. The eight-core Ryzen 7 9700X is 11.5% faster than its direct predecessor in single-thread benchmark and 6.8% faster in multi-thread workload. As for the Ryzen 5 9600X, it is 12.6% faster than the Ryzen 5 7600X in ST and 10.7% faster in MT. 

As it turns out, the lower core count Ryzen 5 9600X gets more performance advantages in Cinebench R23 compared to its higher core count siblings, namely the Ryzen 9 9900X, which is 'only' 8.9% faster than its direct predecessor. Then again, since we are technology enthusiasts, we are certainly waiting for performance benchmarks of AMD's Ryzen 9000-series range-topping processor, the Ryzen 9 9950X. With 16 Zen 5 cores, this one will of course set performance records among its peers aimed at high-end desktop computers for gaming and professional applications. 

AMD's delay of its Ryzen 9000-series Zen 5 microarchitecture-based processors has momentarily impacted the plans of people planning to upgrade their desktops to the latest and greatest. While we are still awaiting a full-fat CPU performance review by our own Paul Alcorn, it is safe to say that performance enhancements the new CPUs bring (at least based on Cinebench R23 results) will make these processors some of the best CPU choices for gaming and professional applications. 

See more CPUs News
Anton Shilov
Anton Shilov
Contributing Writer

Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

71 Comments Comment from the forums
  • TheHerald
    I wish I had bet money on this! 9600x around 12600k performance....
    Reply
  • bit_user
    IMO, the single-threaded improvement is most interesting, especially given the lack of clockspeed increases.

    As for the multi-threaded cases, I wonder if it's being held back by the speed of the DDR5 memory being used. The MT case should benefit from the compound effect of Zen 5's IPC improvements and the efficiency improvements touted by AMD. Therefore, I'd expect it to improve by more than the single-threaded case.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    TheHerald said:
    I wish I had bet money on this! 9600x around 12600k performance....
    BTW, the R5 9600X is rated at 65 W, while the i5-12600K is rated at 125W.

    Also, what's your source for an authoritative score for the i5-12600K? In this WCCFTech article, they list a score of 15982, which 17037 beats by 6.6%.
    https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-9700x-ryzen-5-9600x-zen-5-cpus-tested-default-pbo-2-percent-uplift-cyberpunk/
    On single-threaded CineBench R23 performance, the above WCCFTech article shows the R5 9600X being 4.0% faster than even the i5-14600K (they don't list a ST score for the i5-12600K). If we take the ST score from the Toms article, the gap jumps to 8.0%!
    Reply
  • TheHerald
    bit_user said:
    BTW, the R5 9600X is rated at 65 W, while the i5-12600K is rated at 125W.
    And that is relevant to the performance, how?

    bit_user said:
    BTW, the R5 9600X is rated at 65 W, while the i5-12600K is rated at 125W.

    Also, what's your source for an authoritative score for the i5-12600K? In this WCCFTech article, they list a score of 15982, which 17037 beats by 6.6%

    Both TPU and tomshardware.com have the 12600k at 17 to 18k. The 16k is definitely false, but let's say it's correct. Still a 6.6% difference is what I call minor, no?

    The 17k you are using btw is with PBO.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    TheHerald said:
    And that is relevant to the performance, how?
    It's a multi-threaded benchmark, which is going to be power-limited on the i5-12600K.

    TheHerald said:
    The 17k you are using btw is with PBO.
    Oh, good catch. Yes, Toms just took the PBO score. That explains the discrepancy between the two articles.

    So, I guess we'd have to know how much power it's using in PBO mode, or just stick with the WCCFTech "(default)" scores.
    Reply
  • TheHerald
    bit_user said:
    It's a multi-threaded benchmark, which is going to be power-limited on the i5-12600K.


    Oh, good catch. Yes, Toms just took the PBO score. That explains the discrepancy between the two articles.

    So, I guess we'd have to know how much power it's using in PBO mode, or just stick with the WCCFTech "(default)" scores.
    According to TPU the 600k scores 17500 while limited to 125w.
    Reply
  • Reality_checker
    Not final, but also unlikely to get a lot better.

    The 9950X is the only interesting SKU anyway.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    I wish they reported the clocks and power draw while testing CB. Well, in the leak at least...

    Not too much longer for getting official numbers, so all points to this being a decent enough uplift with a lot of bragging rights on the efficiency department (I think).

    Regards.
    Reply
  • vinay2070
    That is less than what I expected TBH. Thats around 10% on average. So the MT on 9950x will be around 7% then?
    Reply
  • bit_user
    vinay2070 said:
    That is less than what I expected TBH. Thats around 10% on average. So the MT on 9950x will be around 7% then?
    As a matter of fact, if you look at this chart, it has a bar specifically for Cinebench R23 which claims 17% IPC improvement.
    Therefore, such a small real world improvement suggests these CPUs are running at substantially lower clocks than their predecessors, which seems weird, given the supposed efficiency improvements.
    Reply