5 ms·
Power consumption summary > The Ryzen 5 7600 / Ryzen 7 7700 maintained around a 70~71 Watt average with a peak of 91 Watts while the Ryzen 9 7900 maintained a
by neogodless 4y ago
Power consumption summary
> The Ryzen 5 7600 / Ryzen 7 7700 maintained around a 70~71 Watt average with a peak of 91 Watts while the Ryzen 9 7900 maintained a 73 Watt average and similar peak of 92 Watts. This is much lower than the Ryzen 7000 X-series parts and much lower than the Intel competition -- the Core i5 13600K meanwhile had a 95 Watt average with a peak of 167 Watts.
Performance / efficiency
> If taking the geometric mean of all 300+ Linux benchmarks conducted, here is the positioning of this assortment of Intel and AMD CPUs. The Ryzen 9 7900 was at 95% the speed of the Ryzen 9 7900X (while on average at 66% the power consumption) and was still fast enough to come just ahead of the Core i9 12900K Alder Lake processor. The Ryzen 7 7700 was at 96% the speed of the Ryzen 7 7700X and nearly matching the Core i5 13600K performance. The Ryzen 5 7600 lastly was at 96% the performance of the Ryzen 5 7600X while tieing with the prior generation Core i5 12600K and the prior Zen 3 Ryzen 9 5900X. When factoring in the CPU power consumption of these "65 Watt" parts, the performance is all the more impressive especially compared to Intel's real power figures.
- xioxox 4y agoAre there any idle power measurements in that article? For 95%+ of the time my home computer isn't doing a lot (text editing, simple browsing, playing radio or music).
- neogodless 4y agohttps://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/10309/amd-65w-zen-4-ryzen-7600-7700-and-7900-cpus-tested/index.html https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/10309/amd-65w-zen-4-ryzen-... > Looking at our CPU power draw alone, the 7900, 7700, and 7600 all pull around 20 watts at idle. For comparison, the Intel Core i9-13900K seems to draw just 10 watts, and the Intel Core i5-13600K only draws 6! https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/10222/intel-core-i9-13900k-raptor-lake-cpu/index.html#Gaming-and-Power-Consumption https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/10222/intel-core-i9-13900k...
- vladvasiliu 4y agoThat's interesting. According to TFA, the i5-13600K has the best "performance / cost" ratio. So, all other things equal, for a "regular PC", the intel part looks the most interesting, since it won't be any slower when you need it to actually do something for a few minutes (like compile something).
- neogodless 4y agoThough - now I see on the first of the links I posted, they show much higher idle power draw for the Intel parts, around 22-24W. I wonder why they have different numbers for the same parts on different articles.
- vladvasiliu 4y agoGood catch. Loaded figures for both and idle for AMD seem the same between the two articles...
- undersuit 4y agoIt could be the different motherboards. Phoronix used an ASUS for their Intel tests while TweakTown had a Gigabyte. Lots of tweaks on motherboards, i.e. give the CPU a bit more voltage than standard and it will boost more and your motherboard gives users more perfomance. Also just differences in measuring, was it from the wall or via voltage pads on the motherboard.
- formerly_proven 4y agoBoth X (AMD) and K (Intel) lean heavily towards "gib last 5 % perf" in order to win benchmarks in reviews across their line-ups. The non-K 13th gen SKUs aren't out yet, but in the largely similar 12th gen they also enjoyed substantially lower power consumption.
- mbfg 4y agoUnless you are using a laptop (as these processors aren't mean for) or are running a datacenter (which these processors aren't meant for) does anyone really care about 65 vs 150w differences?
- dr_zoidberg 4y agoYes, to avoid getting a space heater when you turn on your computer during the summer. In winter it's not really that bad, as you get both compute and heating from the same device. Lower power bills help too. And let's not forget the ridiculous power numbers that new GPUs are consuming.
- mbfg 4y agoif only 100W would produce any meaningful amount of heat, that would be wonderful. A simple space heater runs at 1500W and can only barely help heat a medium sized room as supplemental heat. Unfortunately (for heat purposes), computers waste a bunch of that electricity on actually doing computations.
- BenjiWiebe 4y agoThe electricity spent doing computations is still turned into heat.
- formerly_proven 4y agoHigh-end GPUs have been around 250-300 W for a very long time (with the odd xx95 X2 Ultra Titan model consuming more). "Ridiculous power numbers of new GPUs" is a pure-bred meme.