Ryzen 7900x or Ryzen 7900 non-x ?

[ntic17]

The Ryzen 7900X and the non-X version are priced almost the same where I live.
I mainly do video editing with some gaming rarely but I prefer more power efficient CPUs and the 7900X isn't exactly efficient.

Would it be better to buy the 7900X and undervolt it to match the power limits of the non-X model?
Also, I need clarity on this — if I use the 65W Eco Mode, will the performance be the same as 7900 or WORSE? 

[191x7]

The 7900, it's the 9900X with a few % of performance less.

[porina]

I'd lean towards the X if they're the same price. It is better binned silicon. Without touching voltage directly, only adjusting power limits, I'd expect it to perform slightly better at like for like power usage. I'm not familiar with how ECO setting works. Normally the true power limit PPT is 35% higher than rated TDP. So for 65W TDP parts, the actual power limit is 88W. Setting the limit to 65W would actually be lower than a stock 65W TDP part.

[ntic17]

2 minutes ago, porina said:

I'd lean towards the X if they're the same price. It is better binned silicon. Without touching voltage directly, only adjusting power limits, I'd expect it to perform slightly better at like for like power usage. I'm not familiar with how ECO setting works. Normally the true power limit PPT is 35% higher than rated TDP. So for 65W TDP parts, the actual power limit is 88W. Setting the limit to 65W would actually be lower than a stock 65W TDP part.

Oh, i didn't even think of that and yeah the X costs about $15 more than non-x.
My goal is to run these chips in lower power. So, if I set the eco mode to 88W, it should perform the same or maybe better right?
Also, does underclocking reduces idle power as well? 
Thanks

[porina]

1 minute ago, ntic17 said:

So, if I set the eco mode to 88W, it should perform the same or maybe better right?

I'm not familiar with the ECO mode but however you do it, at the same power limit I'd expect the X to be slightly better performing.

 

1 minute ago, ntic17 said:

Also, does underclocking reduces idle power as well? 

Adjusting power limit wont. Adjusting the voltage curve to undervolt might, but I never tried it.

[SpecTre12345]

4 hours ago, 191x7 said:

The 7900, it's the 9900X with a few % of performance less.

 

Just no, stop spreading misinformation. The 9900X is better than the 7900 in every single aspect.

[ntic17]

30 minutes ago, SpecTre12345 said:

 

Just no, stop spreading misinformation. The 9900X is better than the 7900 in every single aspect.

9900x IS better but it costs about $100 more! 
Might as well just get 7950x at that point 

[GuiltySpark_]

Former 7900x owner with a close friend who has a 7900. The experience of both is essentially the same. Buy the cheaper one.

[ntic17]

44 minutes ago, GuiltySpark_ said:

Former 7900x owner with a close friend who has a 7900. The experience of both is essentially the same. Buy the cheaper one.

Did you ever try undervolting or Eco mods or anything like that to reduce power/temps. 
For me, the Non-X is $10 cheaper from X varient. I really do care about the power consumption but if the performance

difference in "productivity" is only 5-6% I'd choose the efficient chip...

[SpecTre12345]

1 hour ago, ntic17 said:

9900x IS better but it costs about $100 more! 
Might as well just get 7950x at that point 

 

And it's worth probably $500 more because it doesn't suffer from degradation. So again, no.....

[ntic17]

2 minutes ago, SpecTre12345 said:

 

And it's worth probably $500 more because it doesn't suffer from degradation. So again, no.....

Can you please elaborate on what you mean by degradation..
Is that something I've to worry about? Thanks

[GuiltySpark_]

6 minutes ago, ntic17 said:

Did you ever try undervolting or Eco mods or anything like that to reduce power/temps. 

Sure. Both chips can be confirmed in the same way so I'm never concerned with pure out of the box. Motherboards give you all the control.

[YoungBlade]

3 hours ago, SpecTre12345 said:

Just no, stop spreading misinformation. The 9900X is better than the 7900 in every single aspect.

Is it, though?

 

It's already been shown, even with the Windows fix, that 9000 and 7000 series trade blows across workloads. And if we're referring to out-of-the-box settings, the 7900 is definitely more power efficient in many situations, as it's only using up to 88W at full load.

 

1 hour ago, SpecTre12345 said:

And it's worth probably $500 more because it doesn't suffer from degradation. So again, no.....

What are you talking about? The recent degradation issues were with Intel 13th and 14th gen chips.

 

The motherboards giving too much voltage to AMD CPUs was addressed a long time ago - any system built today isn't going to have that problem, unless you get unlucky with buying new-very-old-stock and then never update your BIOS for some reason.

[SpecTre12345]

2 hours ago, ntic17 said:

Can you please elaborate on what you mean by degradation..
Is that something I've to worry about? Thanks

 

AMD stole blueprints from Intel. Ryzen is a rebrand of Sandy Bridge..... which was known to suffer from degrading of the silicon. This is why Intel is getting rid of Hyper-Threading because SMT is a bug.

 

That is definitely something you have to worry about, IMO.

 

1 hour ago, YoungBlade said:

What are you talking about? The recent degradation issues were with Intel 13th and 14th gen chips.

 

The motherboards giving too much voltage to AMD CPUs was addressed a long time ago - any system built today isn't going to have that problem, unless you get unlucky with buying new-very-old-stock and then never update your BIOS for some reason.

 

Read my reply to @ntic17

 

As you corrected yourself in your second statement, as I expected.....

[YoungBlade]

1 hour ago, SpecTre12345 said:

AMD stole blueprints from Intel. Ryzen is a rebrand of Sandy Bridge..... which was known to suffer from degrading of the silicon. This is why Intel is getting rid of Hyper-Threading because SMT is a bug.

 

That is definitely something you have to worry about, IMO.

 

Read my reply to @ntic17

 

As you corrected yourself in your second statement, as I expected.....

Ryzen is a re-brand of Sandy Bridge?

 

I don't even know where to start with how wrong that is. The architectures are completely different outside of both being x86-64 chips. Ryzen has more in common with Bulldozer than it does with Sandy Bridge in many respects, as both Bulldozer and Ryzen use core modules/complexes.

 

The performance characteristics of AMD's SMT implementation are different from the one Intel uses. It's arguably more effective, as it seems to give Ryzen a bigger efficiency boost than Intel chips see with HT. I have no idea where you're getting that it's a bug - it does show performance regressions in some games, but in many other workloads it boosts performance.

 

Sandy Bridge hasn't suffered more significant degradation than other chips from that era, unless you are actually going to point at the 6-series motherboard issues. If that's your point, then I don't even know what to tell you. The issue was with the motherboard, not the CPU architecture, and it was caught and addressed in a timely fashion, which is why most folks have never even heard of it.

 

And I didn't "correct" anything. I was pointing out that the CPUs burning up in the socket from excess voltage was addressed long ago. It was speculation at the time that the CPUs might have suffered degradation, but as far as I know, any issue there was not wide spread. And even if it us a problem, it wouldn't affect a brand new system today.

 

In that respect, Sandy Bridge and Zen 4 do have something in common - there was a motherboard issue in the 6-series that was found relatively early on and addressed by the companies involved.

[starsmine]

1 hour ago, SpecTre12345 said:

 

AMD stole blueprints from Intel. Ryzen is a rebrand of Sandy Bridge..... which was known to suffer from degrading of the silicon. This is why Intel is getting rid of Hyper-Threading because SMT is a bug.

 

That is definitely something you have to worry about, IMO.

 

 

Read my reply to @ntic17

 

As you corrected yourself in your second statement, as I expected.....

Where did you get any of this information? 

Rentable units is still a form of SMT, There is no bug in HT that is having intel get rid of it. The chip architect for royal cove thought rentable units was a better solution for royal cove do accomplish what he wanted it to. HT is a solution for a "weak" front end, (do not take weak as in bad here, its a relative term here). HT was them going, hey we cant fill our deeeeeeep as fuck(lol pentium 4) pipeline with our current front end, we either will need to triple the complexity of the front end, or add HT. There is no bug, there are just other solutions. 

Sandy bridge was not known to suffer from degrading hardware, an early chipset B0 stepping had sata degradation. that was fixed in C0. Let me stress that was Cougar Point, NOT sandy bridge. These are not the same chip in any way. The chip still worked, you just were out sata ports 2 and up. Ports 0 and 1 had no degradation.

[TheRandomness]

1 hour ago, SpecTre12345 said:

AMD stole blueprints from Intel. Ryzen is a rebrand of Sandy Bridge..... which was known to suffer from degrading of the silicon. This is why Intel is getting rid of Hyper-Threading because SMT is a bug.

Sorry, this statement was insane enough that I gotta comment on it. What on Earth are you on about. SMT is not a bug. Did you get your info from somewhere compromised recently? Like ZTT, UBM or the likes?

[anirudthelinuxwIzard]

On 9/12/2024 at 6:52 PM, SpecTre12345 said:

 

AMD stole blueprints from Intel. Ryzen is a rebrand of Sandy Bridge..... which was known to suffer from degrading of the silicon. This is why Intel is getting rid of Hyper-Threading because SMT is a bug.

 

That is definitely something you have to worry about, IMO.

Bro WTF? Not only is Ryzen not sandy bridge, I've been running a 2760QM at 95 degrees for 13 years and it has never failed.