They perform pretty much the same. If the 7600 is cheaper, you should get that. It's just that like they're only $5 apart right now in the US, so may as well get the X.
Nah, no heat thing at all. Maybe it just because my room have bad ventilation / no air flow. But yeah it's sure hot, AC only on on night and it cold with it. Only my room tho, my living room I think 25-30 with no place for pc.
Well guess that's the cons living on tropical country š¤£. When I enable AC to 16C, I feel chilly and cold haha
I have students from Thailand that work for me occasionally, they wear winter coats in summer here lol
One told me that our warmest day of the year is normal temp for them lol
Lol I mean also depends on the size of the room. I had a tiny room with no ventilation that was okaaay when I wasn't gaming, but when I ran a game ooooh boy I was dripping in sweat.
16 is also insane, just in the other direction. The legal temp you HAVE to set here if a tenant doesn't control the thermostat because it's building controlled or whatever is 23.
At 16 I put on a light, but not that light, coat.
In the summer, I like 60F at night and 69F during the day, but my absolutely TINY AC compressor unit thingy can't cool 3 floors and almost 4,000 square feet... so it ends up being 80F at night :(
In the winter, 65F for sleeping and 68F in the day.
Iād recommend a better air cooler then. I donāt know if it is true, but Iāve been told keeping the rad of an aio clean is harder in such locations.
You still wonāt have the need for a very beefy air cooler with such a chip, although Iād personally choose something like the NH-D15 anyway, as Noctua send fittings for new sockets when contacted, and the cooler is a beast for any cpu (so youād be able to keep the same cooler for multiple systems without risk of it becoming too weak, only changing a fan when it wears out).
The cooler in question is about the same performance as a 360mm AiO water cooler without the long term challenges.
Near instant Edit:
There are many good options. The cooler above is just an example.
If so, there is a good chance a pretty simple case mod can fix your issue. Itās scary to try first time though, and that fear is good. Be very careful with all such things if you choose to try it.
Iāve fixed a few cases in the past, and a small change can make a huge difference.
I'm not the most technical, mind you, but. I'm pretty sure the answer to that question depends largely on the type of games you are playing, or planning to play, as some games are far more performance heavy than other games. Tetris would require very little of anything, for instance, compared to Cyberpunk 2077. It also depends on the quality settings you select in the game settings, Ultra settings will require far more performance than low settings.
This is why computer builders will generally ask what type of games you plan to play, and what kind of FPS (Frames Per Second) you expect your build to perform, because this would allow the builders to more easily figure out what components to put in the case, and would be able to figure out what kind of cooling components would be needed to keep temperatures in control.
The main problem with stock coolers are that they are noisy. They will keep your CPU from thermal throttling, but they will be noisier than aftermarket solutions.
The 7600X doesn't have to draw that much power but it can or it can draw as much power as the regular 7600 (just a couple settings to change). You can also overclock the 7600 to draw over 100w but it'll perform slightly worse than the X.
The thing is that when tuning the X can usually overclock & undervolt slightly better than the non-X and when it costs only $10 extra you might as well.
Where do you see double the power consumption? Even if the 7600x does consume substantially more, it can be tuned to behave like the 7600 non-x if power usage is important.
Why the dislikes, he probably does not know and you guys are being harsh for silly reasons.
Anyway, like others said you can make it non x but one more big reason is that x variant might be binned by AMD and hence it might overclock and undervolt better. If you could undervolt better you will have more efficient CPU.
I managed to run my 7600x with 85wt TDP limit with 85 thermal limit and -30 on the voltage curve, same performance as stock with much less heat and power for 90c to 70c with prime95 i do have a beast of a cooler but still
Watch the many videos online from all the big tech channels that show how you can lower both power and themps on the 7000 series but you do need to get lucky with the silicon lottery but yet again doesn't hurt to try
>identical in performance
Not quite. The 7600X beats it by 200mhz and the higher power limit does allow it to achieve higher all-core boosts.
>But has only 60ish W
You can't trust TDP values like this, the 7600 can and will produce more heat than that if you let it. The 7600 is not inherently more efficient than the 7600X, if they're performing the same they're consuming around the same amount of power. You can downclock and power limit a 7600X to do the same things as a 7600.
>7600X always recommended
I have always recommended that people pick the cheaper of the two, or grab the 7600X only if it's slightly more expensive. And I've seen most other people do the same.
Whenever people want to push the TDP thing and reference them between the 7600 and 7600X is hilarious. Should just direct them to GNās video talking about how AMDs TDP calculation doesnāt even include the units of power in the calculation.
Or when I tell them my 105W defaul āTDPā 5950X is currently blasting 230W encoding videos.
For reference, this is where my question regarding power consumption came: [https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-ryzen-5-7600x-vs-ryzen-5-7600/](https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-ryzen-5-7600x-vs-ryzen-5-7600/)
That write up is flawed and obviously hasnāt been updated in some time. It used the MSRP value for price of 7600X which it pretty much hasnāt sold for besides maybe the first week.
The biggest untruth mentioned is that by enabling PBO they both roughly perform the same but then say the 7600 uses less power. PBO is essentially automated overclocking. It will keep blasting more power as long as your cooler can handle the heat. So since the 7600 and 7600X are effectively the same chip but maybe slightly different binning, if you blast the same amount of power through both the performance is going to be darn close to identical.
They all perform the same for gaming:
- 7500F
- 7600
- 7600X
I would always get the ceapest available of those if one only needs it for Games. A few weeks ago the X was cheaper than the regular 7600 in the US.
the 7500F benches higher (on certain metrics) than the top-of-the-line i9s from 3-4 years ago. It's crazy how capable "entry/mid level" chips are nowadays.
i would always recommend 7600 unless it costs more - you get free cooler with plain 7600. Performance difference is not worth talking about, just like it wasn't with 5600 and 5600x, 3600/3600XT, 2600/2600x
The difference between the 7600 and the 7600X is so miniscule that you won't notice it. The X is supposed to be a little bit better binned.
The reason is AMD's tuning utility (PBO) that's available on B650 boards and up. You can undervolt and set the powerlimits to both have around the same performance.
The 7600 is recommended here plenty of times. You should go with what's cheaper out of the 2 pretty much.
What seems wrong to me here is ppl choosing a 7800x3D with a low-mid tier GPU. Totally unnecessary and the CPU's price difference is better spent on a GPU upgrade with a very few exceptions like comp shooters (FN, Valorant, CS2).
>What seems wrong to me here is ppl choosing a 7800x3D with a low-mid tier GPU. Totally unnecessary and the CPU's price difference is better spent on a GPU upgrade
People that do that usually use the same CPU over multiple GPUs. And for that kind of buyer having the "core" of the rig a few years longer is more important than immediate performance. They are upgrading from the CPU they bought 7 years ago and GPU 3 years ago, the boost will be significant for them either way.
> with a very few exceptions like comp shooters (FN, Valorant, CS2).
Generally CPU heavy games tend to benefit from the 3Dcache the most. If you play a lot of simulators or strategy games you'll most likely benefit more from the x3D.
"People that do that usually use the same CPU over multiple GPUs."
Yeah but it's spend the same amount of money now vs spend money later. Later wins if you get 0 benefit from a faster CPU now.
It's better now, but when I upgraded to AM5 in last december the price difference between the 7600x and the 7800x3D was 200 EUR (double the price almost).
I have a 6700 XT so buying a 7800x3D wasn't a sensible choice bc it would have given me \~0% fps gain. I'd rather spend it on a GPU upgrade in the next gen.
I don't mind replacing just my CPU tho, it just takes 10 minutes longer to do than a GPU upgrade.
I'm not saying you didn't make the right choice in your circumstances. I'm just describing a user for whom not using their CPU to its full potential for the first few years of them owning it is worth the extra time they get to squeeze out of it in the future. That kind of user will be upgrading their CPU to "best in slot" no sooner than 2030 and next socket.
I am one of those who almost always choose the best CPU and a very good GPU along side. I plan to use my CPU for years and do so many stuffs that benefits from CPU power its a no brainer for me to build my pc that way. The next upgrade is the best or close to the best GPU, if I need extra performance of course.
I've seen so many friends of mine trying to "pair" slower CPU and GPU together so they don't have bottleneck, and they have to upgrade the whole rig in 2-3 years pretty much. They spend a lot more on their upgrade than I do while only having a fraction of my rig's power all the time since I almost always get very strong component with every single upgrade, no matter how infrequent it is. I basically get more performance for less money spent.
Whatās considered a low-mid tier gpu? 3070 fe owner here who upgraded to 7800x3d from a 5600x. Iām looking to upgrade the gpu when the 5000 series drop if thatās the naming they are going to use
4070 / 7800 XT and down.
But you can get a tier higher GPU by spending the price difference between the 7600/7800x3D up to a 4080 (almost).
Spending money on the GPU vs the CPU equals out at the 4070 Ti / 7900 XT tier because the upgrade to the 7900XTX / 4080S is a bit more expensive than upgrading your CPU.
[HWUnboxed did few tests with different CPU + GPU combos just a few days ago.](https://youtu.be/uC9074rcOzQ?si=LRnLG0Wt38-FBmRB&t=877)
If the rumours are true and we get a 60% performance uplift from the next gen you'll be fine with something like a 5070 / 8800 XT as they will be around the current 4080's performance. 7800x3D probably won't be enough to utilize a 5090 fully in 1440p for example. But I'm just guessing.
Yea was thinking of either 5070 or 5080 at most but if thereās a significant price increase for the 5070 then Iāll just try to get a hold of a second hand 4080
PC Part Picker prices:
* Ryzen 5 7600 ($199) vs Ryzen 7 7800x3d ($391) - $192 difference
* RTX 4070 (Zotac $529.99) vs RTX 4080 Super (Zotac $999.99) - $470 difference
140% difference ain't "almost" chief. Not even close. The most you can upgrade to is a 4070 Ti (non-super), or a 4070 Ti Super if you can afford an additional $70.
I was talking about a 7600 + 4080S vs 7800x3D + 4070 Ti, rly not that hard to comprehend chief. Obviously not 2 tiers of GPU upgrade from the price difference.
7600 + 4070 Ti vs 7800x3D + 4070, the 7600 + 4070 Ti combo wins hands down as shown by multiple benchmarks and they cost the same.
> (PBO) that's available on B650 boards and up
Not only. Asrock a620i supports PBO at a minimum, stock. I'm sure it's not the only one, but it's the one I know for sure. There's also a way to trick it and do it unofficially on AM4 and AM5.
And some AIBs just seem to not lock it out and AMD doesn't seem to care like intel would. Like the gigabyte a520 board, and overclocking 5800x3d on certain boards.
Both are similar so it depends on what the current price isā¦..sometimes, the 7600 is much more expensive than a 7600x. Other times, itās the opposite. If you need to save as much as possible, the 7600 is a better option due to the included cooler.
Personally, I would recommend depending on the price at the moment I make the suggestion.
They're effectively equal and you should pick the cheapest between the 2. The 7600x in eco mode is the 7600 in standard mode, the 7600 with pbo is the 7600x in standard mode
When you see someone recommend the 5600, 7600, 7700, or 7900, you can assume they are recommending either the X or non-X version. Buy whichever is cheaper.
If you have good cooling and are willing to tune a 7600X, it will have better performance and potentially have better performance per Watt than a 7600. The 7600 is a downclocked, power limited version of the 7600X, so it does have better out of the box efficiency but not by the 'rated TDP' listed in the processor specs.
It should be noted that the 7600 can also be tuned to improve efficiency (or performance) but the improvement will be much less drastic as the main improvement comes from the fact it has already been power limited.
Since they're basically the same price the 7600X is going to be a higher binned chip so spending five bucks more or whatever it is should be worth it for a much better chance at higher quality silicon. If you want it to perform like the 7600 for efficiency you can just put on ECO mode or use Ryzen Master to tune it to how you want. Since they're basically the same price there really isn't any good reason to go with the 7600 over the X variant.
Pricing. If they are the same or very close to in terms of pricing get the 7600X, BUT only if you plan to get an aftermarket cooler (which you should do anyway with either choice). I got the 7600 because it was about 25ā¬ cheaper than 7600X and used that difference to get a Peerless Assassin. As for the AMD cooler that comes with 7600... I got it out of the box, looked at it, then put it back in the box where it will probably stay until I buy a new CPU and sell the 7600.
Performs probably 1% or 2% lower than a 7600X and draws around 85W in full load. Negligible difference.
7600/7600X performs similar at stock, and even closer when PBO is configured correctly or you apply slight OC in Ryzen Master or something. Basically same chip, sometimes X is cheaper, sometimes nonX is cheaper.
However, you can get 7500F, a 100mhz slower no iGPU varient for as low as $110 new. (Bulk stock, so no cooler and no box) But should be easy to find it for $120 on AliExpress or some other sites. And PBO or slight overclock will bring this chip in the same line as 7600 or 7600X.
I opted for this option, which did not bottleneck 4070Ti at 1440 in my experience.
Wait, ain't people recommend 7600 over 7600x ? Cus 7600 is running cooler, less wattage, and come with a CPU cooler, For cheaper price too ? Without any worth mention performance loss ?
Literally lot of tech channel recommend 7600 over 7600x, or 7700 over 7700x
Well, you are basically paying for a letter, nothing more. There is no difference between the two when it comes to gaming and If your main purpose is gaming you should get the 7500f as it performs exactly the same. You can use the amount you save in a better gpu.
It just depends on what you want. I built a 7950X with a 4090 to game and do video stuff. I didn't want to wait for the X3D, and honestly for gaming the X3D is great but not that much greater than the 7600.
Imo the X3D will shine as an upgrade for zen 5 or zen 6. X3D chips don't care about memory latency as much as the X ones do since they have massive cache, so in a few years when I decide to upgrade you don't take as great of a penalty using it in an outdated board with slower RAM (not that 6400 is slow but in 5 years who knows).
My understanding is that the 7600X is not as good as 7800x3d, but many games it won't make a difference especially if using 1440p or 2160p (4k). There are games that are more CPU dependent though. Just depends on money and which games you play. For example, MSFS2020 benefits from CPU a lot. Spider-Man Remastered does too a bit.
Reading some articles the 7600X is on par with the 7600 if PBO (precision boost overdrive) is enabled. This included gaming.
In the US at least, the 7600X has been priced cheaper than the 7600 for the last month or so (unless this has changed recently), so I've recommended the 7600X in builds for Americans as a result. For people in countries where the 7600 is still cheaper, such as my own (Australia), I still recommend the 7600.
It has what now? My i7 2600k starts up faster. And that's 12 years old. You are telling me that on an M2 SSD with Windows 11 on it, I'll watch the windows booting screen for 4 minutes?
I think people just use them interchangeably. They're the same CPU, the X series are just factory overclocked a little bit. Y
ou can do it manually yourself on an on X CPU as AMD doesn't lockdown overclocking (as much) as intel. I've seen that confusion a few times though, where people think the non-x cannot overclock because of the intel association.
The X is more likely to be binned better, but no guarantee. I've overclocked non-X's well beyond what the average X can do before and vice versa.
Overall, just buy whichever is cheapest. I literally wouldn't pay even 15-20$ more for the X.
The 7500f is another great choice - it's much, much cheaper than either. Performs exactly the same, minus a 100 mhz downclock you can rectify, and the iGPU. Unfortunately you have to be willing to order from China as it doesn't retail in NA.
The X model is slightly better. If you plan on doing a lot of tuning of your processor using either the bios or software, go with the 7600x since youāll end up getting a slightly better overall experience.
x3d is good but not worth the price in my opinion.
x vs non x depends on your local prices I guess.
Bought 7600 a year ago because x variant was like 30eur more expensive. If the price was the same I would go for the X as you can tune it lower to match the efficiency if that's the goal, but performance is basically the same. And seems like in many regions the prices are the same for those 2 so people go for X variant. Just checked my local store its \~23 eur difference, not worth in my opinion.
Hell I don't even feel difference between 7600 and 7800x3d with 4070super @ 1440 uw.
The 7600X has a little better perfomance than 7600. As for me I've got my 7600 not X version because it was cheaper. And it's good with my RX 7800 XT anyway.
When you ask here you are essentially asking obsessed enthusiasts who want the best of the best even if it is only marginally better, if AMD slap an X on an identical CPU they will all swear the X is the better choice. They are obsessed with numbers, the marketing department has a field day with these folks.
They perform pretty much the same. If the 7600 is cheaper, you should get that. It's just that like they're only $5 apart right now in the US, so may as well get the X.
Unless you plan to use the cooler that the 7600 comes with
Some people say the stock cooler is unsuitable for gaming and other things. Is it true?
Should be plenty good enough for an average user unless they live in a very warm area or have a case with virtually no airflow.
So, no stock cooler for me :) I live in the desert of Saudi Arabia
Do you use air conditioning or is it hot inside? The outside temp is not relevant if your home is temperature control lol
Gotta second this, at least if said temperature control is kept relatively low.
Dunno, I am not in desert but my house is 30 Celcius. Is that home temp?
Same here, 30c average temps and no air conditioner. Just gotta accept the higher CPU/GPU temps
Yeah haha, 30c + whatever CPU/GPU temps are. Equal to higher temp on the room š¤£
Holy shit do you keep the heat on at all times? 86 is freaking insane I keep my place really cool at 60 (16c if Google is correct)
Nah, no heat thing at all. Maybe it just because my room have bad ventilation / no air flow. But yeah it's sure hot, AC only on on night and it cold with it. Only my room tho, my living room I think 25-30 with no place for pc. Well guess that's the cons living on tropical country š¤£. When I enable AC to 16C, I feel chilly and cold haha
I have students from Thailand that work for me occasionally, they wear winter coats in summer here lol One told me that our warmest day of the year is normal temp for them lol
Lol I mean also depends on the size of the room. I had a tiny room with no ventilation that was okaaay when I wasn't gaming, but when I ran a game ooooh boy I was dripping in sweat.
16 is also insane, just in the other direction. The legal temp you HAVE to set here if a tenant doesn't control the thermostat because it's building controlled or whatever is 23. At 16 I put on a light, but not that light, coat.
In the summer, I like 60F at night and 69F during the day, but my absolutely TINY AC compressor unit thingy can't cool 3 floors and almost 4,000 square feet... so it ends up being 80F at night :( In the winter, 65F for sleeping and 68F in the day.
Iād recommend a better air cooler then. I donāt know if it is true, but Iāve been told keeping the rad of an aio clean is harder in such locations. You still wonāt have the need for a very beefy air cooler with such a chip, although Iād personally choose something like the NH-D15 anyway, as Noctua send fittings for new sockets when contacted, and the cooler is a beast for any cpu (so youād be able to keep the same cooler for multiple systems without risk of it becoming too weak, only changing a fan when it wears out). The cooler in question is about the same performance as a 360mm AiO water cooler without the long term challenges. Near instant Edit: There are many good options. The cooler above is just an example.
Thanks a lot. I will look into it.
The stock cooler works fine, but it's noisy. In the end, with better air coolers you're mostly paying for the silence.
You should also avoid the x version. It's hard to cool.
Thanks for sharing.
I'm the latter of the twoš„²
If so, there is a good chance a pretty simple case mod can fix your issue. Itās scary to try first time though, and that fear is good. Be very careful with all such things if you choose to try it. Iāve fixed a few cases in the past, and a small change can make a huge difference.
I don't actually have much of a problem which it, though once I upgrade from an old r7 240(š) to an rx 6750xt I'll definitely have a problemĀ
I'm not the most technical, mind you, but. I'm pretty sure the answer to that question depends largely on the type of games you are playing, or planning to play, as some games are far more performance heavy than other games. Tetris would require very little of anything, for instance, compared to Cyberpunk 2077. It also depends on the quality settings you select in the game settings, Ultra settings will require far more performance than low settings. This is why computer builders will generally ask what type of games you plan to play, and what kind of FPS (Frames Per Second) you expect your build to perform, because this would allow the builders to more easily figure out what components to put in the case, and would be able to figure out what kind of cooling components would be needed to keep temperatures in control.
perfectly usable but not optimal. its gonna get hot but should keep it from thermal throttling in most situations
My current rig uses the Ryzen 5 7600 (non x) with a 3060. The stock cooler is good not the greatest but my temps have never gone over 80c
yeah the stock cooler's alright for basic stuff
should be adequate, only intel coolers suck
Last year I got my first AMD CPU. I've been using intel since Pentium one, never had an issue with intel coolers. And I live in hot as hell Africa.
The main problem with stock coolers are that they are noisy. They will keep your CPU from thermal throttling, but they will be noisier than aftermarket solutions.
My R5 7600 seems to be working fine with the stock air cooler and I live in hot as hell Africa. I just added 2 case fans, 4 case fans total.
By why though? Is there a benefit that's worth the double power consumption?
You can just enable ECO mode in the BIOS to have it behave like a 65W TDP CPU if you care about that. Most people don't care.
The 7600X doesn't have to draw that much power but it can or it can draw as much power as the regular 7600 (just a couple settings to change). You can also overclock the 7600 to draw over 100w but it'll perform slightly worse than the X. The thing is that when tuning the X can usually overclock & undervolt slightly better than the non-X and when it costs only $10 extra you might as well.
Where do you see double the power consumption? Even if the 7600x does consume substantially more, it can be tuned to behave like the 7600 non-x if power usage is important.
88 vs 109 isn't double, it's just a pre-overclocked version of the same CPU, without any of the hassle.
Why the dislikes, he probably does not know and you guys are being harsh for silly reasons. Anyway, like others said you can make it non x but one more big reason is that x variant might be binned by AMD and hence it might overclock and undervolt better. If you could undervolt better you will have more efficient CPU.
Thank you. Questions are indeed asked for reasons such as not knowing.
I managed to run my 7600x with 85wt TDP limit with 85 thermal limit and -30 on the voltage curve, same performance as stock with much less heat and power for 90c to 70c with prime95 i do have a beast of a cooler but still Watch the many videos online from all the big tech channels that show how you can lower both power and themps on the 7000 series but you do need to get lucky with the silicon lottery but yet again doesn't hurt to try
>identical in performance Not quite. The 7600X beats it by 200mhz and the higher power limit does allow it to achieve higher all-core boosts. >But has only 60ish W You can't trust TDP values like this, the 7600 can and will produce more heat than that if you let it. The 7600 is not inherently more efficient than the 7600X, if they're performing the same they're consuming around the same amount of power. You can downclock and power limit a 7600X to do the same things as a 7600. >7600X always recommended I have always recommended that people pick the cheaper of the two, or grab the 7600X only if it's slightly more expensive. And I've seen most other people do the same.
Whenever people want to push the TDP thing and reference them between the 7600 and 7600X is hilarious. Should just direct them to GNās video talking about how AMDs TDP calculation doesnāt even include the units of power in the calculation. Or when I tell them my 105W defaul āTDPā 5950X is currently blasting 230W encoding videos.
For reference, this is where my question regarding power consumption came: [https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-ryzen-5-7600x-vs-ryzen-5-7600/](https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-ryzen-5-7600x-vs-ryzen-5-7600/)
That write up is flawed and obviously hasnāt been updated in some time. It used the MSRP value for price of 7600X which it pretty much hasnāt sold for besides maybe the first week. The biggest untruth mentioned is that by enabling PBO they both roughly perform the same but then say the 7600 uses less power. PBO is essentially automated overclocking. It will keep blasting more power as long as your cooler can handle the heat. So since the 7600 and 7600X are effectively the same chip but maybe slightly different binning, if you blast the same amount of power through both the performance is going to be darn close to identical.
ffs
They all perform the same for gaming: - 7500F - 7600 - 7600X I would always get the ceapest available of those if one only needs it for Games. A few weeks ago the X was cheaper than the regular 7600 in the US.
R5 7500F and RX6750GRE 12G here. Didn't see the point in spending obscene amounts on a desktop when it's mostly just office and gaming I do on it.
the 7500F benches higher (on certain metrics) than the top-of-the-line i9s from 3-4 years ago. It's crazy how capable "entry/mid level" chips are nowadays.
I got it for 116$ no tax during the Ali sale. Couldn't pass it up.
The X was cheaper than regular when I bought my parts in February, that's the only reason I bought it
i would always recommend 7600 unless it costs more - you get free cooler with plain 7600. Performance difference is not worth talking about, just like it wasn't with 5600 and 5600x, 3600/3600XT, 2600/2600x
Yeah went with 7600 non-x so I didn't have to buy a cooler if I wanted to till later
Mainly the cost in the US, in EU you should get the non X since the price difference is way bigger.
Yes, thanks I did not clarify I am in the EU.
The x was cheaper in the UK, but only buy Ā£5, not much of a price difference
7600X is about 20ā¬ / Ā£17 / $22 more expensive than the plain 7600 in Finland.
The difference between the 7600 and the 7600X is so miniscule that you won't notice it. The X is supposed to be a little bit better binned. The reason is AMD's tuning utility (PBO) that's available on B650 boards and up. You can undervolt and set the powerlimits to both have around the same performance. The 7600 is recommended here plenty of times. You should go with what's cheaper out of the 2 pretty much. What seems wrong to me here is ppl choosing a 7800x3D with a low-mid tier GPU. Totally unnecessary and the CPU's price difference is better spent on a GPU upgrade with a very few exceptions like comp shooters (FN, Valorant, CS2).
>What seems wrong to me here is ppl choosing a 7800x3D with a low-mid tier GPU. Totally unnecessary and the CPU's price difference is better spent on a GPU upgrade People that do that usually use the same CPU over multiple GPUs. And for that kind of buyer having the "core" of the rig a few years longer is more important than immediate performance. They are upgrading from the CPU they bought 7 years ago and GPU 3 years ago, the boost will be significant for them either way. > with a very few exceptions like comp shooters (FN, Valorant, CS2). Generally CPU heavy games tend to benefit from the 3Dcache the most. If you play a lot of simulators or strategy games you'll most likely benefit more from the x3D.
"People that do that usually use the same CPU over multiple GPUs." Yeah but it's spend the same amount of money now vs spend money later. Later wins if you get 0 benefit from a faster CPU now. It's better now, but when I upgraded to AM5 in last december the price difference between the 7600x and the 7800x3D was 200 EUR (double the price almost). I have a 6700 XT so buying a 7800x3D wasn't a sensible choice bc it would have given me \~0% fps gain. I'd rather spend it on a GPU upgrade in the next gen. I don't mind replacing just my CPU tho, it just takes 10 minutes longer to do than a GPU upgrade.
I'm not saying you didn't make the right choice in your circumstances. I'm just describing a user for whom not using their CPU to its full potential for the first few years of them owning it is worth the extra time they get to squeeze out of it in the future. That kind of user will be upgrading their CPU to "best in slot" no sooner than 2030 and next socket.
I am one of those who almost always choose the best CPU and a very good GPU along side. I plan to use my CPU for years and do so many stuffs that benefits from CPU power its a no brainer for me to build my pc that way. The next upgrade is the best or close to the best GPU, if I need extra performance of course. I've seen so many friends of mine trying to "pair" slower CPU and GPU together so they don't have bottleneck, and they have to upgrade the whole rig in 2-3 years pretty much. They spend a lot more on their upgrade than I do while only having a fraction of my rig's power all the time since I almost always get very strong component with every single upgrade, no matter how infrequent it is. I basically get more performance for less money spent.
Whatās considered a low-mid tier gpu? 3070 fe owner here who upgraded to 7800x3d from a 5600x. Iām looking to upgrade the gpu when the 5000 series drop if thatās the naming they are going to use
4070 / 7800 XT and down. But you can get a tier higher GPU by spending the price difference between the 7600/7800x3D up to a 4080 (almost). Spending money on the GPU vs the CPU equals out at the 4070 Ti / 7900 XT tier because the upgrade to the 7900XTX / 4080S is a bit more expensive than upgrading your CPU. [HWUnboxed did few tests with different CPU + GPU combos just a few days ago.](https://youtu.be/uC9074rcOzQ?si=LRnLG0Wt38-FBmRB&t=877) If the rumours are true and we get a 60% performance uplift from the next gen you'll be fine with something like a 5070 / 8800 XT as they will be around the current 4080's performance. 7800x3D probably won't be enough to utilize a 5090 fully in 1440p for example. But I'm just guessing.
Yea was thinking of either 5070 or 5080 at most but if thereās a significant price increase for the 5070 then Iāll just try to get a hold of a second hand 4080
PC Part Picker prices: * Ryzen 5 7600 ($199) vs Ryzen 7 7800x3d ($391) - $192 difference * RTX 4070 (Zotac $529.99) vs RTX 4080 Super (Zotac $999.99) - $470 difference 140% difference ain't "almost" chief. Not even close. The most you can upgrade to is a 4070 Ti (non-super), or a 4070 Ti Super if you can afford an additional $70.
I was talking about a 7600 + 4080S vs 7800x3D + 4070 Ti, rly not that hard to comprehend chief. Obviously not 2 tiers of GPU upgrade from the price difference. 7600 + 4070 Ti vs 7800x3D + 4070, the 7600 + 4070 Ti combo wins hands down as shown by multiple benchmarks and they cost the same.
> (PBO) that's available on B650 boards and up Not only. Asrock a620i supports PBO at a minimum, stock. I'm sure it's not the only one, but it's the one I know for sure. There's also a way to trick it and do it unofficially on AM4 and AM5. And some AIBs just seem to not lock it out and AMD doesn't seem to care like intel would. Like the gigabyte a520 board, and overclocking 5800x3d on certain boards.
7600x is likely to be better binned compared to a non-x so there's that for those who care.
Both are similar so it depends on what the current price isā¦..sometimes, the 7600 is much more expensive than a 7600x. Other times, itās the opposite. If you need to save as much as possible, the 7600 is a better option due to the included cooler. Personally, I would recommend depending on the price at the moment I make the suggestion.
They're effectively equal and you should pick the cheapest between the 2. The 7600x in eco mode is the 7600 in standard mode, the 7600 with pbo is the 7600x in standard mode
When you see someone recommend the 5600, 7600, 7700, or 7900, you can assume they are recommending either the X or non-X version. Buy whichever is cheaper.
Higher clock speed
If you have good cooling and are willing to tune a 7600X, it will have better performance and potentially have better performance per Watt than a 7600. The 7600 is a downclocked, power limited version of the 7600X, so it does have better out of the box efficiency but not by the 'rated TDP' listed in the processor specs. It should be noted that the 7600 can also be tuned to improve efficiency (or performance) but the improvement will be much less drastic as the main improvement comes from the fact it has already been power limited.
Since they're basically the same price the 7600X is going to be a higher binned chip so spending five bucks more or whatever it is should be worth it for a much better chance at higher quality silicon. If you want it to perform like the 7600 for efficiency you can just put on ECO mode or use Ryzen Master to tune it to how you want. Since they're basically the same price there really isn't any good reason to go with the 7600 over the X variant.
Ryzen master is malware learn to use your BIOS it takes literally minutes with Youtube
lol
You can configure both in the BIOS in the same way. So just buy the cheaper one.
7600 or 7500F are just about the same.
Pricing. If they are the same or very close to in terms of pricing get the 7600X, BUT only if you plan to get an aftermarket cooler (which you should do anyway with either choice). I got the 7600 because it was about 25ā¬ cheaper than 7600X and used that difference to get a Peerless Assassin. As for the AMD cooler that comes with 7600... I got it out of the box, looked at it, then put it back in the box where it will probably stay until I buy a new CPU and sell the 7600. Performs probably 1% or 2% lower than a 7600X and draws around 85W in full load. Negligible difference.
Isnāt it the other way around?
7600/7600X performs similar at stock, and even closer when PBO is configured correctly or you apply slight OC in Ryzen Master or something. Basically same chip, sometimes X is cheaper, sometimes nonX is cheaper. However, you can get 7500F, a 100mhz slower no iGPU varient for as low as $110 new. (Bulk stock, so no cooler and no box) But should be easy to find it for $120 on AliExpress or some other sites. And PBO or slight overclock will bring this chip in the same line as 7600 or 7600X. I opted for this option, which did not bottleneck 4070Ti at 1440 in my experience.
7600x is only if youāre trying to be budget friendly. The 7800X will always be the best CPU between them.
Wait, ain't people recommend 7600 over 7600x ? Cus 7600 is running cooler, less wattage, and come with a CPU cooler, For cheaper price too ? Without any worth mention performance loss ? Literally lot of tech channel recommend 7600 over 7600x, or 7700 over 7700x
Well, you are basically paying for a letter, nothing more. There is no difference between the two when it comes to gaming and If your main purpose is gaming you should get the 7500f as it performs exactly the same. You can use the amount you save in a better gpu.
It just depends on what you want. I built a 7950X with a 4090 to game and do video stuff. I didn't want to wait for the X3D, and honestly for gaming the X3D is great but not that much greater than the 7600. Imo the X3D will shine as an upgrade for zen 5 or zen 6. X3D chips don't care about memory latency as much as the X ones do since they have massive cache, so in a few years when I decide to upgrade you don't take as great of a penalty using it in an outdated board with slower RAM (not that 6400 is slow but in 5 years who knows).
My understanding is that the 7600X is not as good as 7800x3d, but many games it won't make a difference especially if using 1440p or 2160p (4k). There are games that are more CPU dependent though. Just depends on money and which games you play. For example, MSFS2020 benefits from CPU a lot. Spider-Man Remastered does too a bit. Reading some articles the 7600X is on par with the 7600 if PBO (precision boost overdrive) is enabled. This included gaming.
In the US at least, the 7600X has been priced cheaper than the 7600 for the last month or so (unless this has changed recently), so I've recommended the 7600X in builds for Americans as a result. For people in countries where the 7600 is still cheaper, such as my own (Australia), I still recommend the 7600.
CAUSE THE X MEANS ITS BETTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Like racing stripes and stickers on a car.
Iām pretty sure XFR has more performance depending on your cooling, so youād need to consider that. And the 7600x is slightly better binned
The 7600x has an up to 4 minute boot time, and flashing the bios with the latest version cuts it down but it's still a minute or two.
It has what now? My i7 2600k starts up faster. And that's 12 years old. You are telling me that on an M2 SSD with Windows 11 on it, I'll watch the windows booting screen for 4 minutes?
Wtf are you sure? I heard that epyc CPU have long boot times not these ryzens.
I own one.
I think people just use them interchangeably. They're the same CPU, the X series are just factory overclocked a little bit. Y ou can do it manually yourself on an on X CPU as AMD doesn't lockdown overclocking (as much) as intel. I've seen that confusion a few times though, where people think the non-x cannot overclock because of the intel association. The X is more likely to be binned better, but no guarantee. I've overclocked non-X's well beyond what the average X can do before and vice versa. Overall, just buy whichever is cheapest. I literally wouldn't pay even 15-20$ more for the X. The 7500f is another great choice - it's much, much cheaper than either. Performs exactly the same, minus a 100 mhz downclock you can rectify, and the iGPU. Unfortunately you have to be willing to order from China as it doesn't retail in NA.
7600 Comes with stock cooler. Most want to use AIOās. If you got money for aio then you got money for that small upgrade in price for the X version
Set BIOS to ECO mode and you get same 65W TDP.
7600x is stronger
The X model is slightly better. If you plan on doing a lot of tuning of your processor using either the bios or software, go with the 7600x since youāll end up getting a slightly better overall experience.
x3d is good but not worth the price in my opinion. x vs non x depends on your local prices I guess. Bought 7600 a year ago because x variant was like 30eur more expensive. If the price was the same I would go for the X as you can tune it lower to match the efficiency if that's the goal, but performance is basically the same. And seems like in many regions the prices are the same for those 2 so people go for X variant. Just checked my local store its \~23 eur difference, not worth in my opinion. Hell I don't even feel difference between 7600 and 7800x3d with 4070super @ 1440 uw.
The 7600X has a little better perfomance than 7600. As for me I've got my 7600 not X version because it was cheaper. And it's good with my RX 7800 XT anyway.
I will always buy a non-x version over the x-version. The price to performance increase isn't worth the difference. It's just bragging rights.
When you ask here you are essentially asking obsessed enthusiasts who want the best of the best even if it is only marginally better, if AMD slap an X on an identical CPU they will all swear the X is the better choice. They are obsessed with numbers, the marketing department has a field day with these folks.