AMD Ryzen 9 7900 and Ryzen 7 7700 review: High on performance, low on power

Note: This review was first published on 9 January 2023.

Last year, AMD released its highly-anticipated Zen 4 architecture in its Ryzen 7000 series CPUs, which marked the debut of the company's new AM5 platform. The Zen 4 architecture and AM5 platform offer several notable improvements, including support for PCIe 5.0, DDR5 memory, and access to the latest and greatest controller sets. While the Zen 4 architecture is impressive and efficient, it can be difficult for users on tighter budgets to find all of the components needed to build a system with AM5 that fits within their budget constraints, particularly due to the added cost of adopting a brand new platform, in additon to the first salvo of the Ryzen 7000 series that focussed on the overclocking oriented X-series models that have higher power requirements.

To address this issue, AMD has introduced three new processors that offer users on a budget a chance to experience the benefits of the Zen 4 architecture without the steep financial investment. These processors, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, Ryzen 7 7700, and Ryzen 5 7600, all feature the Zen 4 micro-architecture and have a low TDP of just 65W, making them suitable for a wide range of users, including gamers and enthusiasts looking for an affordable entry point onto the AM5 platform.

More power, better value

Building on the success of its 65W Ryzen 7000 series processors, AMD is now looking to offer better value across its entire lineup by reducing the prices of its X-series Zen 4 chips. Along with the new CPUs, AMD is also reintroducing its Wraith CPU coolers.

The Ryzen 9 and Ryzen 7 CPUs will come with a Wraith Prism cooler included, while the Ryzen 5 will come with a Wraith stealth cooler. While it is often recommended to use a third-party CPU cooler for optimal performance, AMD's bundled coolers are a solid choice for those on a budget.

The new Ryzen 7000 non-X series processors are available at a variety of price points and configurations, and some of them offer improved power efficiency compared to previous generations of AMD processors. Unlike the top X-series SKUs, which require powerful cooling solutions due to their higher power consumption, the new 65W models are designed with a focus on efficiency and performance per watt. This makes them more suitable for a wider range of system builders.

However, to compensate for the lower TDP compared to the X-series SKUs, AMD has lowered the clock speeds of these new chips. While the boost clocks are still relatively high, reflecting the chips' performance in lighter workloads, the base frequency clock speeds have been more significantly reduced in order to keep power usage in check during more heavily multi-threaded scenarios.

In the absence of a non-X 16-core Ryzen 9 7950X processor, AMD's most powerful 65W chip is the 12-core Ryzen 9 7900, which is priced at US$429. The Ryzen 9 7900 has a base clock of 3.7GHz, which is 1GHz lower than the comparable Ryzen 9 7900X, but it boosts to 5.3GHz. Despite the differences in clock speeds, the 7900's 65W power rating is much lower than the 7900X's 170W, making it a more power-efficient option. AMD positions the Ryzen 9 7900 to compete with Intel's non-K Core i9-13900, but at a significantly lower price point.

The Ryzen 7 7700 is an 8-core processor with a base clock of 3.8GHZ that is priced at US$329, and it sound enticing it is worth noting that AMD's recommended pricing often differs from what is available at retailers here. But its SRP price makes it the most attractive Zen 4 processor in the Ryzen 7000 series, in my opinion. It also comes with the RGB-equipped Wraith Prism cooler and is positioned to compete with the Intel Core i7-13700.

Last but not least, the 6-core Ryzen 7 7600 is the most affordable option in the lineup, with a price of just US$229. It also comes bundled with a Wraith Stealth cooler and if it is not obvious by now, is intended to compete with Intel's Core i5-13600.

All non-X models are also designed to be fully unlocked for core, memory, and fabric overclocking. To make it easier for users to take advantage of this feature, AMD has developed its own one-click EXPO DDR5 memory profiles for overclocking, which are comparable to Intel's XMP standard.

Testing platforms

For this performance review, we're focussing on the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 and Ryzen 7 7700 processors. To benchmark them, I am using the following test system, which was also used for all of our previous Zen 4-based models, such as the Ryzen 9 7950X.

My game list includes a mixture of old and recent games to test processor performance. The focus will be on CPU performance, where possible, like Ashes of Singularity: Escalation and Horizon Zero Dawn. The list isn’t exhaustive by any measure, but there are enough different game engines and API variety to give us an idea of broader performance trends.

• Horizon Zero Dawn
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider
• Total War: Three Kingdoms
• Ashes of the Singularity
• Metro Exodus
• Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy
• Cyberpunk 2022
• F1 22

Gaming

1080p benchmarking is a great measure of a CPU’s prowess, no thanks in part to high-performance gaming cards such as the GeForce RTX 4090 used in the benchmarks here. You see, at lower resolutions, the GPU can process and transfer data much more quickly than at higher resolutions. A CPU bottleneck happens here because the processor cannot keep up with the processing speed of the graphics card. The CPU, after all, is responsible for processing real-time game actions, physics, UI, audio and other complex CPU-bound processes.

When I tested the performance of the Ryzen 9 7900 and Ryzen 7 7700 at 1080p resolution, I was generally impressed by their results. In most of the games tested, these processors demonstrated strong performance despite being limited by a 65W TDP (90W while under load), indicating that they have sufficient processing power for the majority of titles available. It even displayed solid average frame rates with Cyberpunk 2022, a notoriously resource-hogging game.

I avoided 1440p and 4K benchmarks this time around, as both resolutions are more GPU-dependent and will not reveal any impactful numbers unlike 1080p. Overall, these chips performed well, considering their TDP limitations.

Office, Content Creating and Rendering

The non-X processors are great value for gamers. But what about the non-gaming works, such as content creation and office productivity? To size up the processors’ core performance, I’ve used CineBench R23 alongside a mix of synthetic and real-time benchmarks. PugetBench for Adobe Premiere Pro and Photoshop, for example, is a great benchmark as it mimics real-world workloads.

For office productivity, either of the non-X Ryzen will really do the job just fine. The Ryzen 7900X and Ryzen 9 7950X processors, in this instance, are probably a tad overkill if that's the primary use of your computer. On the other hand, serious content creators and artists will do well to go with the 7950X, where its superior core, cache and unmatched power will offer the most noticeable uplift in performance.

Power and Temperature

AMD's X-series Ryzen 7000 models have been criticized for their high power limits, which caused the Zen 4 processors to run hotter and use more power than previous-generation Ryzen chips. However, the new non-X models have lower power limits, making them more efficient and run cooler in my benchmarks. While they are designed to handle temperatures up to 95-degree Celsius like the X-series chips, I did not see temperatures reach that level in all of my tests, including with PC Mark's Extended Test

The 12-core Ryzen 9 7900, in particular, has excellent efficiency, almost double that of the similar 7900X, thanks to its lower power envelope, lower operating temperature and offering very similar performance capability.

Overall, what I really like about the new AMD's processors are their better power consumption, efficiency, and thermal output. So choosing a non-X Ryzen 7000 CPU will result in a cooler and quieter system, which allows you to consider small form factor system options.

Conclusion

AMD's new 65W processors, including the Ryzen 9 7900 and Ryzen 7 7700, are energy-efficient options that are worth considering in today's market where energy costs are rising. These processors offer similar performance to their X-series counterparts, but with lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 9 7900, in particular, only loses 10% of the full performance compared to the 7900X, but it has a lower price and includes a Wraith Prism cooler in the box. Although real-time pricing may not reflect the full financial savings, the overall value of the Ryzen 9 7900 is hard to argue with. It offers impressive performance and is versatile enough to be used in small-form-factor systems and overclocked in powerhouse PCs.

Competition from Intel, which also debuted its own line of less power-hungry, non-K line of 13th Gen Core processors at last week's CES, keeps AMD on its toes and provides more choices for enthusiasts. You cannot go wrong with the Ryzen 9 7900 or the Ryzen 7 7700, but if your budget allows it, my recommendation is to go with the former as it is the best performance-to-value option for content creators, who are also gamers at heart.

Of course, if you're only focused on gaming, the cheaper Ryzen 7 7700 has more than proven its worth, matching the Ryzen 9 7900 in gaming performance very closely.

Our articles may contain affiliate links. If you buy through these links, we may earn a small commission.