Skip to main content

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X Review: A Price Cut Disguised as a New Chip

Too little, too late

Ryzen 7 5700X
(Image: © Tom's Hardware)

Tom's Hardware Verdict

The Ryzen 7 5700X comes with a price cut compared to its previous-gen counterpart, the 5800X, but it is too little, too late. Intel's competing processors are faster, less expensive, and have a more modern platform.

Pros

  • +

    Less expensive than 5800X

  • +

    AM4 compatible, great for upgraders

  • +

    Overclockable

  • +

    Tame 65W TDP

Cons

  • -

    Alder Lake has lower pricing, better performance

  • -

    No bundled cooler

  • -

    Aging chipset, interfaces

The eight-core 16-thread $299 AMD Ryzen 7 5700X comes to market as a slightly modified yet lower-cost version of its predecessor, the $335 Ryzen 7 5800X, but it offers nearly the same gaming and application performance after a bit of no-hassle tuning. The 5700X debuts as part of AMD's newest line of seven Ryzen 5000 models that are designed to shore up the company's rankings in CPU benchmarks and retake its position on the Best CPUs for gaming list. That's a critical need after Intel's Alder Lake upset the Ryzen lineup with a better blend of both pricing and performance. 

The Ryzen 7 5700X leverages the same Zen 3 architecture and 7nm process as its counterparts and drops into the existing ecosystem of AM4 motherboards. Its predecessor, the 5800X, has always been an oddly-positioned chip, with its price point making it the lone Ryzen 5000 processor that didn't make much sense for just about anyone due to competing products from both Intel and AMD. In fact, the 5800X's positioning was so poor, and the Ryzen 7 5700X's absence so conspicuous, that we asked where the 5700X was right in the title box of our original review (seen below). 

Our Ryzen 7 5800X review lamented the missing Ryzen 7 5700X. (Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

It took AMD eighteen months, but it has now finally released the Ryzen 7 5700X. It's certainly late, though. As we explained in our 5800X review back in 2020, AMD really needed the 'missing' Ryzen 7 5700X to plug the big pricing gap in its product stack and make it easier for its customers to jump from Ryzen 5 to Ryzen 7 instead of buying an Intel processor. 

However, that was back when AMD competed with Intel's 10th-Gen processors. The game has changed entirely since then — Intel's disruptive 12th-Gen x86 hybrid Alder Lake chips are now well established as the overall performance and value leader at every price point, and the company's 13th-Gen Raptor Lake chips are purportedly on track for release this year. AMD also has its 5nm Ryzen 7000 ‘Raphael’ Zen 4 chips slated to arrive at the end of the year, but they'll arrive with the new AM5 platform. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 7 5700X drops into the long-lived Socket AM4 platforms that have shepherded the Ryzen chips from their infancy with the Ryzen 7 1800X in 2017 to the current day, but that cuts off any future upgrade path for adopters.

Naturally, AMD has a different pricing strategy today than we would have seen back in 2020: The 65W Ryzen 7 5700X is $150 less than the launch price of its full-fledged 105W sibling, the Ryzen 7 5800X. That isn't relevant to today's pricing situation, though — the 5700X is only $35 less than the 5800X's average pricing at retail. That isn't much of a discount. 

Given the similarities we'll see throughout our benchmark suite, the Ryzen 7 5700X is really just a price cut for the Ryzen 7 5800X, but it comes disguised as a new product.

The Ryzen 7 5700X is a solid upgrade choice if you already have a system built around a Ryzen 1000- or 2000-series processor and need more threaded horsepower. However, if you're a Ryzen upgrader that's only interested in gaming, you could save some cash with the Ryzen 5 5600, which offers comparable gaming performance at a much friendlier $199 price point. For new builds, you should look to Intel chips, like the Core i5-12400 or Core i5-12600K, and their more modern accommodations.

Let's take a quick look at the specs, then get right to our full gaming and application test results. 

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X Specifications and Pricing

Street / MSRPCores | ThreadsP-Core Base/BoostE-Core Base/BoostL3 CacheTDP / PBP / MTPDDR4-3200
Ryzen 9 5900X$400 ($549)12P | 24 Threads3.7 / 4.8 GHz-32MB105WDDR4-3200
Ryzen 7 5800X3D$4498P | 16 Threads3.4 / 4.5 GHz-96MB105WDDR4-3200
Ryzen 7 5800X$335 ($449)8P | 16 Threads3.8 / 4.7 GHz-32MB105WDDR4-3200
Core i7-12700K / KF$380 (K) - $377 (KF)8P + 4E | 12 Cores / 20 Threads3.6 / 5.0 GHz2.7 / 3.8 GHz25MB125W / 190WDDR4-3200 / DDR5-4800
Ryzen 7 5700X$2998P | 16 Threads3.4 / 4.6-32MB65WDDR4-3200
Core i5-12600K / KF$270 (K) - $264 (KF)6P+4E | 10 Cores / 16 Threads3.7 / 4.92.8 / 3.616MB125W / 150WDDR4-3200 / DDR5-4800
Ryzen 5 5600X$230 ($299)6P | 12 Threads3.7 / 4.6-32MB65WDDR4-3200
Ryzen 5 5600$1996P | 12 Threads3.5 / 4.4-32MB65WDDR4-3200
Core i5-12400 / F$175 - $170 (F)6P+0E | 6 Cores /12 Threads4.4 / 2.5-18MB65W / 117WDDR4-3200 / DDR5-4800

The Ryzen 7 5700X slots into the Ryzen stack with eight cores and 16 threads. At $299, the 5700X is the highest-priced 65W part from AMD, filling in the gap between the powerful 105W Ryzen 7 5800X that retails for $335 and the $225 Ryzen 5 5600X that also comes with a 65W TDP. 

The Ryzen 7 5700X comes with a 3.4 GHz base, a 4.6 GHz boost clock, and the same chiplet-equipped 'Vermeer' design as the existing Ryzen 5000 models. As such, the 65W Ryzen 7 5700X's eight-core 16-thread design is identical to the 105W Ryzen 7 5800X — they both even have 32MB of L3 cache.

To differentiate the two, AMD merely trimmed the Ryzen 7 5700X's clock rates to accommodate its 40W lower TDP. As a result, the TDP ratings and clock rates are the only difference between the two chips. This is likely purely the result of artificial segmentation; given the maturity of the TSMC 7nm process, it is unlikely that AMD has many dies that couldn't reach the extra 100 MHz boost that would make them suitable for the 5800X. If so, the company could have simply used them for the higher-priced and higher-margin Ryzen 7 5800X3D.  

Compared to the 5800X, the 5700X's 100 MHz lower boost clock rate will be nearly indistinguishable in most work, but the 400 MHz difference in base clocks will be more pronounced in heavily-threaded workloads at stock settings. However, as we'll demonstrate below, that's extremely simple to rectify with AMD's one-click Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO) auto-overclocking feature. If you engage PBO and have a suitable cooler, there is little to no difference between the 5700X and 5800X in threaded workloads.

AMD broke with tradition at the Ryzen 5000 launch and scuttled one of its biggest value-adds; except for its 65W TDP models, AMD stopped providing 'free' bundled coolers with its Ryzen processors. Unfortunately, now AMD has inexplicably ditched that policy, too, so the 65W Ryzen 7 5700X also comes without a cooler.

The $299 Ryzen 7 5700X faces intense pressure from Intel's Alder Lake from both above and below: The less-expensive $175 Core i5-12400 offers slightly faster gaming performance but trails in threaded applications. However, it comes with a cooler, magnifying the value prop for gamers. Meanwhile, Intel’s $270 Core i5-12600K beats the Ryzen 7 5700X in every facet and also doesn't have a cooler, but it retails for $30 less to offset Intel's higher motherboard costs. This is to say that the Ryzen 7 5700X would have certainly been more compelling if it came with a bundled cooler. 

The Ryzen 7 5700X fully supports overclocking the CPU, including core clocks, memory, and the Infinity Fabric, and will drop into existing 400- and 500-series motherboards (Socket AM4). AMD’s upcoming BIOS updates will also enable support on most older 300-series platforms. You'll need a BIOS with AGESA 1.2.0.6b (or newer) for the Ryzen 7 5700X. AMD says that Ryzen 5000 support will vary by vendor, as will the timeline for new BIOS revisions. However, we should see them all by the end of May 2022. These BIOS revisions also fix AMD’s fTPM stuttering issues.

The 5700X also doesn't support the leading-edge connectivity options, like DDR5 and PCIe 5.0, that you'll find with Alder Lake, but it does support up to DDR4-3200 and PCIe 4.0. AMD won't be able to match intel's connectivity tech until its 5nm Ryzen 7000 ‘Raphael’ Zen 4 CPUs arrive later this year.

Paul Alcorn
Paul Alcorn

Paul Alcorn is the Deputy Managing Editor for Tom's Hardware US. He writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage and enterprise hardware.

  • Liquidrider
    Ignoring the misleading article for one second. What is the point of this article? It's a serious question? Because there was a price cut?

    "Intel beats AMD in EVERY facet" 🤣 Really? Does power consumption no longer matter to your readers? A 50% difference seems significant
    Intel includes a cooler. Does it include a motherboard too? Because that is what is required when you buy ANY of Intel's 12000 series.

    What is more shocking is creating an article that complains about a price cut coming too late. 5700 was released two months ago. And who complains about a price cut regardless of what it comes. Maybe the point of this article was that Intel is becoming desperate to sell more CPUs before their next earnings.

    I am not trying to be mean, but it is a little bit frustrating for wasting a reader's time to push nonsense. You may even take this comment as an example
    Reply
  • mathextremist
    Admin said:
    We put AMD's Ryzen 7 5700X through the wringer in our expanse set of benchmarks.

    AMD Ryzen 7 5700X Review: A Price Cut Disguised as a New Chip : Read more

    Are we sure this isn't just the public release of a re-named, OEM-only Ryzen 7 5800 (non-X) from the Alienware Aurora? I can't see any difference in the specs at all.
    Reply
  • agello24
    Liquidrider said:
    Ignoring the misleading article for one second. What is the point of this article? It's a serious question? Because there was a price cut?

    "Intel beats AMD in EVERY facet" 🤣 Really? Does power consumption no longer matter to your readers? A 50% difference seems significant
    Intel includes a cooler. Does it include a motherboard too? Because that is what is required when you buy ANY of Intel's 12000 series.

    What is more shocking is creating an article that complains about a price cut coming too late. 5700 was released two months ago. And who complains about a price cut regardless of what it comes. Maybe the point of this article was that Intel is becoming desperate to sell more CPUs before their next earnings.

    I am not trying to be mean, but it is a little bit frustrating for wasting a reader's time to push nonsense. You may even take this comment as an example
    i agree with you 100%. Toms ALLWAYS finds something negative to say about AMD, then turns around and praises a weak INTEL chip with a higher price.
    Reply
  • hotaru251
    mathextremist said:
    I can't see any difference in the specs at all.
    amd's spec page has oem cpu with a 5c higher max temp than 5700x.


    and on topic: if u go intel you HAVE to buy new MB alogn with the cpu (and possibly ram)

    if ur upgrading from any zen1-zen3 its still better to stay on am4.

    if u were going to go to intel and pay new chipset anwyays wait few months and go am5.
    AM5 is goign to thrash 12th gen from leaks (and 13th gen doesnt look too much better than 12th gen from them leaks) & AMD has said they will keep AM5 for a long time like AM4 (so betetr future upgrade paths too)
    Reply
  • TerryLaze
    Liquidrider said:
    "Intel beats AMD in EVERY facet" 🤣 Really? Does power consumption no longer matter to your readers? A 50% difference seems significant
    Which intel CPU are you comparing to to get that result?
    First of all a 65W TDP AM4 cpu draws at least 88W.
    https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3491-explaining-precision-boost-overdrive-benchmarks-auto-ocSecondly if you compare to the 12600k at stock settings that has 125w TDP the intel CPU is also more than 20% faster and is still cheaper.

    The i5-12400 draws 117W max, is only insignificantly slower than the 5700x in multithread and is almost half the price.
    Reply
  • scottscholzpdx
    Benchmarks are useless without including 2700x, 2700 (65w), 2600, 1500, 1600af, and 1800x. Those are the people who are interested in a chip such as this and the article even alludes to this. It's a drop in replacement in an aging platform.


    Why they wouldn't include these in benchmarks is mind boggling. No one cares how this compares to a 5900x.
    Reply
  • Juergenonly
    This article has been published weeks back when the 5700X was released. Why does it show up now on the home page? I don't see any new content that would justify it.

    Outside of that, I agree that it is a more power efficient version of the 5800X which I can see is why AMD does offer it. Power efficiency is an advantage they have over Intel at this point and until they come with their own next gen platform, what else outside lower pricing could they have offered?
    Reply
  • daeros
    Thanks Toms, for reminding us where your budget comes from.

    Intel beats AMD at every metric. You know, other than total platform cost, power consumption, gaming performance (thanks to the 5800X3D), and all-out performance for HEDT/workstation users (hello Threadripper Pro 5995WX).
    Reply
  • Why_Me
    Liquidrider said:
    Ignoring the misleading article for one second. What is the point of this article? It's a serious question? Because there was a price cut?

    "Intel beats AMD in EVERY facet" 🤣 Really? Does power consumption no longer matter to your readers? A 50% difference seems significant
    Intel includes a cooler. Does it include a motherboard too? Because that is what is required when you buy ANY of Intel's 12000 series.

    What is more shocking is creating an article that complains about a price cut coming too late. 5700 was released two months ago. And who complains about a price cut regardless of what it comes. Maybe the point of this article was that Intel is becoming desperate to sell more CPUs before their next earnings.

    I am not trying to be mean, but it is a little bit frustrating for wasting a reader's time to push nonsense. You may even take this comment as an example
    Power consumption is more of a thing with laptops ... not so much with desktops. With that said a i7 12700F can be had for $15 USD more.

    https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-12700F-2-1GHz-6xxChipset-BX8071512700F/dp/B09NPJDPVG/
    Intel Core i7-12700F $312.97

    Reply
  • Wisecracker
    Uhhhhh ...

    Has not the AMD Ryzen 7 "x700X " nomenclature always included a "Tame 65W TDP" ___ like the AMD 8/16 core/thread Ryzen 7 3700X ??

    Maybe Paul needs to reconsider his Verdict ...
    Reply