Do you really need more than an 8-core CPU for gaming? But the new 12-core AMD Ryzen 9 7900 is very attractive.

The main difference from the existing Ryzen 9 7900X 12-core model is the price. While the full-size "X" chip is a $549 monster, the new 12-core light Ryzen 7 7900 nonX is only $456 (open in new tab). And as we'll see below, it's not so "light" after all.

But the price is worth a little more discussion: the Ryzen 7 7700X is priced at $399, and the other new non-X model, the Ryzen 7 7700 (open in new tab), is $329. Compared to the 7700X, you pay very little for the extra core, and the Ryzen 7 7700X is only $399 (open in new tab).

Compared to the non-X 7700, you get 50% more cores for 30% more money. Usually, the higher up the CPU or GPU range you go, the lower the value. But here it is different. These new non-X Ryzen 7000 series chips are true value champions.

Price aside, there are a few other things to note. In terms of features, the Ryzen 7 7900 largely follows the existing 7900X model. That is, two 5nm CCDs with six CPU cores each and a 6nm I/O die with a fun-sized mini-GPU that will hold up in a pinch but not for slightly more serious 3D rendering work. [Both models have 12MB of L2 cache and 64MB of L3 cache. In other words, both have the same silicon. Just the clock speeds and power consumption have been adjusted for the newer non-X chip. [In terms of frequency, it goes from 4.7 GHz base and 5.6 GHz boost for the 7900X to 3.7 GHz base and 5.4 GHz boost for the new non-X 7900.

Similar to the comparison between the Ryzen 7 7700 and 7700X, there appears to be a significant drop in clock speed. However, these base clock figures are only a guide and are the absolute lowest that can be expected. Without giving too much away right away, rest assured that the new Non-X 7900 will perform well above 3.7GHz.

What it can't do is consume as much power as the 7900X; the X model has a TDP of 170W, while the new 7900 is only 65W. This is the same figure as the 7900X's rating in "eco" mode.

There is also a slightly more worrisome limitation with this 12-core CPU than with the 8-core Ryzen 7 7700: the 7900 adds four more cores, but no additional power budget is given. Please keep this in mind.

In games, it would be difficult to tell the difference between the 170W 7900X and this 65W eco-warrior. 6.1 vs. 6.2 seconds per turn in "Civilization VI"; 206 fps vs. 204 fps in "Total War: Three Kingdoms"; 134 fps vs. 131 fps in "Metro Exodus"" Thus, you will not feel any difference in the subjective gameplay experience .

Of course, there are a few titles where the difference is a bit larger. But equally, there are some where the fact that you are using a slightly newer graphics driver on a non-X chip actually means that you will be faster. In other words, in gaming terms, this low-power option offers basically nothing.

When it comes to extensive computing and productivity, it is a slightly different story. For example, in Cinebech multithreaded rendering, the 7900 has 25,366 points compared to the 7900X's 27,450; in Blender, it has 132 samples per minute compared to 120 samples per minute; in Cinebech, the 7900 has 25,366 compared to the 7900X's 27,450; in Blender, it has 132 samples per minute compared to the 7900X's 132 samples per minute.

Gaming Performance

Compute and System Performance

These are not large gaps, but they reflect the fact that the non-X 7900's wattage is quite limited by factory settings. Of course, these limitations lead to excellent low power consumption. The bare-bones 7900 is a bit slower than the X model, but its peak power consumption is 90W, less than half the 182W of the 7900X. This is remarkable.

Moreover, thanks to AMD not locking any chip out of overclocking, you can decide how efficient you want this chip to be; the 7900 can be overclocked up to 5. With the standard AMD Wraith cooler, 3 GHz is easy. At this speed, it exceeds 30,000 points on Cinebench. This is considerably higher than the normally clocked 7900X.

In other words, like its 8-core sibling, the Ryzen 7 7700, the new Ryzen 9 7900 is not at all comparable to the 7900X. Why pay an extra $120, when you get so little in return?

That said, the fiercest resistance to this slim and mean 12-core Ryzen is, predictably, from Intel; the Core i7 13700K is generally a bit cheaper, so there's nothing wrong with it price-wise.

However, the 13700K tends to have the edge in both multithreaded productivity tasks and gaming. The difference is not huge, but it is fairly consistent; as noted with the Ryzen 7 7700, the AMD platform has some advantages, including excellent PCIe 5.0 support and a socket that seems to have a longer upgrade path on the AM5.

In other words, Intel's options are not a slam dunk. If power consumption is a particular concern, AMD can be recommended. In stock configuration, the Ryzen 9 7900 is much more efficient than the Intel option.

In other words, you pay for the choice. For most gamers, the Intel option would make more sense in most cases. However, this new low-power offering from AMD is certainly the most attractive Zen 4-based CPU out there.