AMD Ryzen 9 7900X review: a hot multithreaded option (literally)
The Ryzen 9 7900X boasts impressive multi-core performance on a reasonable budget

WePC is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Prices subject to change. Learn more
The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X is a powerhouse 12-core desktop processor designed for those who demand high performance, whether for gaming, content creation, or multitasking. Released in September 2022 at $549 (though it can be found for much cheaper now, given its age), this chip is built on AMD’s advanced Zen 4 architecture and uses the AM5 socket, which means it’s ready to take advantage of current-gen tech like DDR5 memory and PCIe 5.0 support.
With a base speed of 4.7 GHz that can boost up to 5.6 GHz and 24 processing threads, the 7900X packs great speed and multitasking power. Just remember that it’s also a power-hungry CPU, so a solid cooling solution is a must. Has the 7000 series improved over the 5000 series enough to warrant the extra spending? And does it hold value over the new 9000 series? Let’s find out.
Save up to $1,200 when you pre order the new Samsung Galaxy S25
This is your last chance to save big on the new Samsung Galaxy S25. Act quick though, as this limited time deal will be coming to an end soon!
- Samsung Galaxy S25 512GB – Save up to $1,200+
- Samsung Galaxy S25 1TB – Save up to $1,200+
- Samsung Galaxy S25 256GB – Save up to $1,200+
*Discounts calculated by value of trade-in credit and $300 Samsung credit.
- Cores: 12
- Threads: 24
- Base speed: 4.7GHz
- Boost speed: 5.6GHz
- Cache: L3 64MB
- Socket: AM5
The Ryzen 9 7900X is the second highest core-count CPU on the 7000 series. This means it packs a serious punch in multi-core workloads, and provides a solid gaming foundation thanks to it’s high boost frequencies. If you’re looking for a high-end CPU for mid-tier money, this CPU may be the one for you. The newer 9000 series is more efficient and faster granted, but will run you more money.
- Strong multi-core performance
- Great price-to-performance ratio
- High-end performance on a mid tier budget
- Superseded by 9000 series offerings
- Runs hotter than the 9000 series
- Less efficient than newer CPUs
Specifications and Comparison
Here, we will compare the specifications with those of the 9900X to see if there is an intergenerational improvement.
Component | Ryzen 9 9900X | Ryzen 9 7900X |
---|---|---|
Cores | 12 | 12 |
Threads | 24 | 24 |
Base frequency | 4.4 GHz | 4.7 GHz |
Boost frequency | up to 5.6 GHz | up to 5.6 GHz |
Memory speed | 5600 MT/s | 5200 MT/s |
PCI Express lanes | 24 (Gen 5) | 24 (Gen 5) |
L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |
TDP / PPT | 120W / 162W | 170W / 230W |
Process size | 4 nm | 5 nm |
Core architecture | Zen 5 | Zen 4 |
Socket | AM5 (compatible with X870, X670, B650, A620) | AM5 (compatible with X870, X670, B650, A620) |
While both processors offer 12 cores and 24 threads with identical boost frequencies of up to 5.6 GHz, the 9900X introduces AMD’s newer Zen 5 architecture. This architecture benefits from a more efficient 4 nm process, improving thermals and power efficiency over the 7900X’s 5 nm design. This change brings the 9900X’s TDP down to 120W, a noticeable decrease compared to the 7900X’s 170W, making it a cooler, more power-efficient choice for those who prioritize energy savings or want a quieter, cooler system.
Regarding memory performance, the 9900X has a slight advantage with support for DDR5 memory speeds of up to 5600 MT/s, compared to the 7900X’s 5200 MT/s. This increased memory bandwidth can provide a performance edge in applications that rely heavily on multitasking or memory access, such as data processing or content creation workloads.
Both chips are built on AMD’s AM5 socket and support the same PCIe Gen 5 lanes, offering ample connectivity for next-gen storage and graphics. However, the 9900X’s updated architecture and efficiency improvements make it a more future-proof choice for users seeking the latest enhancements in thermal performance and bandwidth.
Graphs
We’ve broken our results down into digestible graphs, here are our results:
Design and Gallery
There’s not much to say about the chip’s physical design; it’s identical to the recently released 9000 series processors. Compared to the 5000 series, though, it’s night and day. The IHS is shaped completely differently despite belonging to a new socket to retain cooler comparability with AM4 coolers. AMD also moved away from the PGA system and moved to LGA, joining Intel. The socket architecture is the same, but we cannot use a motherboard universally.
The Ryzen 9 7900X’s design reflects AMD’s focus on efficiency and performance. This chip is dense yet efficient and built on a 5 nm die with dual 71 mm² cores and a 6 nm I/O die. Given its high thermal output of 170W, effective cooling is essential, especially under heavy loads. The 7900X offers AMD’s Precision Boost 2 and Extended Frequency Range (XFR 2), which dynamically adjust frequencies based on thermal and power conditions to maximize performance without manual intervention.
Performance
Before discussing the Ryzen 9 7900X’s performance, it is important to review the components used in our test setup, as they significantly shape our results. We maintain consistent hardware across different generations and brands to ensure fair comparisons. Check out our How We Test CPUs page for more details on our testing and review methodology.
Component | WePC test rig |
---|---|
CPU | Ryzen 9 7900X |
Cooler | Corsair H150i Elite LCD |
Motherboard | ASUS Crosshair Hero X870 |
Memory | Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR5 @6800 MHz |
GPU | MSI RTX 4070 Ti |
PSU | ASUS Thor Platinum II 1000W |
Case | Cooler Master Masterframe |
Let’s discuss the 7900X’s performance with that out of the way. Remember, your results will vary depending on the rig you have at home. Let’s dive in!
Gaming performance
Metric | CS2 | Days Gone | CP 2077 | Doom Eternal | Horizon FW | Frost punk 2 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Score (FPS) | AVG: 315.43 99%: 137.16 | AVG: 226.4 99%: 142.36 | AVG: 235.28 99%: 152.26 | AVG: 445.31 99%: 314.27 | AVG: 186.66 99%: 129.72 | AVG: 205.62 99%: 140.33 |
AVG temp (package) °C | 66 | 56 | 76 | 73 | 77 | 69 |
Max temp (package) °C | 75 | 66 | 82 | 82 | 80 | 72 |
Average PPT (W) | 126.39 | 87.39 | 140.25 | 140.07 | 140.09 | 127.25W |
The Ryzen 9 7900X brings reliable gaming performance across various titles, with solid FPS numbers in popular games like CS2 and Doom Eternal. While it does handle demanding games well, staying fairly consistent in both average and 99th percentile FPS, the Ryzen 9 9900X does edge ahead slightly. However, the 7900X still proves highly capable, especially if you just want a balanced CPU for both gaming and productivity without paying top-tier prices.
Thermals remain manageable, too, with temperatures generally staying well below 80°C in most titles and the power draw averaging around 130W. So, even though it isn’t the absolute top performer, the 7900X gives a strong showing for its price point.
CPU | CS2 | Days Gone | Doom Eternal |
---|---|---|---|
Ryzen 9 7900X | AVG: 315.43 99%: 137.16 | AVG: 226.4 99%: 142.36 | AVG: 445.31 99%: 314.27 |
Core Ultra 9 285K | AVG: 313.8 99%: 133.7 | AVG: 236.952 99%: 153.415 | AVG: 499.82 99%: 393.848 |
Ryzen 9 9900X | AVG: 325.09 99%: 135.53 | AVG: 354.77 99%: 156.69 | AVG: 501.54 99%: 357.19 |
Each of these CPUs has its strengths in terms of gaming, though the Ryzen 9 9900X pulls ahead overall, especially in games like Days Gone and Doom Eternal, where it hits impressive average and 99th percentile FPS numbers. The Ryzen 9 7900X still performs very well, maintaining high FPS in games like CS2 and Doom Eternal—more than enough for smooth gameplay, even if it trails the 9900X by a few frames in most cases.
However, the Core Ultra 9 285K falls short of expectations on the gaming front. While it performs decently in multi-core heavy applications, its gaming results reveal a slight gap behind the two Ryzen contenders, especially in the 99th percentile FPS, where stability counts. It manages high averages in some titles, like an impressive 499 FPS in Doom Eternal. Still, Intel’s Ultra series is geared more toward multi-core tasks than consistent gaming dominance.
So, if gaming is your focus, the 9900X holds a slim lead (but we expected that); both Ryzen chips provide robust performance across the board, making them solid choices depending on your budget and needs. If you can stretch to a 9900X, you probably should go for it, for future-proofing purposes
Metric | CPU Z | Cinebench R23 | Geekbench | Blender render |
---|---|---|---|---|
Score (points) | Single 767 Multi 11,818 | Single 2,070 Multi 28,659 | Single 3,018 Multi 18.899 | Monster: 181.52 SPM Junkshop: 130.11 SPM Classroom: 91.39 SPM |
AVG temp (package) °C | 67 | Single: 67 Multi: 86 | 62 | 86 |
Max temp (package) °C | 87 | Single: 73 Multi: 93 | 86 | 92 |
Average PPT (W) | 139.17 | Single: 80.05W Multi: 180.25W | 76.64 | 147.69W |
In synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 9 7900X shows solid performance across the board, easily handling intense tasks like Blender rendering and multi-core benchmarks. However, it runs notably hotter under load compared to the 9900X, which benefits from a more efficient 4 nm process. This efficiency gives the 9900X a slight edge in multi-core workloads, as it manages high performance while maintaining lower temperatures.
CPU | Score | AVG temp (package) °C | Max temp (package) °C | Average PPT (W) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Ryzen 9 7900X | Single 2,070 Multi 28,659 | Single: 67 Multi: 86 | Single: 73 Multi: 93 | Single: 80.05W Multi: 180.25W |
Ryzen 9 9900X | Single 2,153 Multi 30,990 | Single: 59 Multi: 66 | Single: 62 Multi: 69 | Single: 71.32W Multi: 144.43W |
Core Ultra 285K | Single: 2,134 Multi: 42,399 | Single: 45 Multi: 62 | Single: 51 Multi: 73 | Single: 29.98W Multi: 160.06W |
In terms of synthetic performance, the Ryzen 9 7900X, Ryzen 9 9900X, and Core Ultra 285K each demonstrate varying levels of power efficiency and thermal performance.
The Core Ultra 285K stands out for its excellent efficiency. Despite its strong multi-core performance (42,399 points), it keeps power consumption low, drawing just 160W in multi-core workloads, and temperatures remain manageable (62°C max). This efficiency makes it attractive for users looking to balance power and performance.
While the Ryzen 9 9900X is slightly behind the 7900X in multi-core performance (30,990 vs. 28,659), it is notably more efficient. It pulls just 144W in multi-core tasks and stays cooler, with a maximum temperature of 69°C. The 9900X’s smaller 4 nm process helps it maintain lower temperatures, making it a solid performer without the heavy power demands.
In contrast, the Ryzen 9 7900X, with its 5 nm architecture, shows impressive performance but at the cost of much higher power consumption and temperatures. It draws 180W in multi-core workloads and peaks at 93°C, significantly higher than the 9900X and 285K. This means that while the 7900X delivers solid performance, it requires better cooling and is less efficient than its competitors in terms of power and thermals.
Price
The Ryzen 9 7900X is currently priced around $365 on Amazon, making it a solid choice for those looking for powerful multi-core performance without jumping to flagship price points. The 7900X delivers strong value for gaming and productivity tasks at this price, especially considering its Zen 4 architecture and 12-core setup.
For comparison, the Ryzen 9 9900X costs around $430 on Newegg and $383 on Amazon. It offers more memory speed, 5600 MT/s, but reasonable performance gains over the 7900X. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 9 9800X3D, with its $480 MSRP, provides an edge for gaming thanks to its 3D V-Cache, but it comes at a premium. However, I must do my duty to inform you that the 9800X3D blows everything else out of the water for gaming.
The 7900X strikes a great middle-ground if you want to balance budget with performance, delivering a robust experience across various applications.