Ryzen 9 9900X review: amazing value for money
AMD's second in command can hold it's own surprisingly well in Multi-core workloads.
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 9900X sits just shy of the top of the 9000 series, second only to the Ryzen 9 9950X. This 12-core, 24-thread CPU packs a serious punch for gaming and multi-threaded professional workloads, though it does one best. The launch of the 9000 series was a little rocky, to say the least; AMD focused largely on efficiency this time around rather than raw performance. Couple that with some technical issues stemming from Windows, and you have a recipe for a less-than-desirable launch.
However, AMD has come back from that stronger; with the Windows issues sorted and a TDP patch delivered to its lower-end Ryzen SKUs, AMD’s 9000 series is now a force to be reckoned with. The 9900X knows how to hold its own, and we will explore how and why this CPU is great for both performance and value for money.
Black Friday is back, and with it comes huge savings on some of the market’s most popular gaming and tech products. We’ll be covering all the best deals in more details over in our deals hub, but if you haven’t got time to read through those, why not see our top picks below.
-
ASUS TUF NVIDIA RTX 5080
Was $1599
Now $1199
-
ASUS TUF RTX 5070 Ti
Was $999
Now $849
-
Samsung Odyssey OLED G6
Was $899
Now $649
-
TCL 43S250R Roku TV 2023
Was $279
Now $199
-
iBUYPOWER Y40 Gaming PC
Was $2,299
Now $1,819
-
Samsung Odyssey G9 (G95C)
Was $1,299
Now $777
-
Alienware Area-51 gaming laptop
Was $3,499
Now $2,799
-
Samsung 77-inch OLED S95F
Was $4,297
Now $3,497
-
ASUS ROG Strix G16
Was $1,499
Now $1,199
*Prices and savings subject to change. Click through to get the current prices.
- Core configuration: 12
- Threads: 24
- Base core speed: 4.4 GHz
- Boost core speed: up to 5.6 GHz
- DDR5 support: Yes @ 5600 MT/s
- TDP / PPT: 120 W / 162 W
We think that the 9900X is in a good spot in the market if you can find it for a bit less than MSRP. AMD focused on efficiency this time around, so there’s an argument to be made that you should wait for the next batch of Ryzen processors, or opt for an X3D if you want a gaming rig. With that being said, the 9900X is pretty good in terms of single core performance, making it a good choice for gamers. And it also carries itself well if multi-core workloads, if they are what you frequent on you PC.
- Fantastic gaming performance, but superseded by 9800X3D
- Strong multi-core performance
- Works with older AM5 motherboards
- 7950X may offer better value for money
- Works best with 800 series motherboards so more expensive to upgrade.
Specifications comparison
Before diving into the specifications, we will compare the specifications of the 9900X with those of the 7900X to see how they compare generationally.
| 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) |
Looking at the specifications, we can see that these CPUs look relatively similar at first glance. But when you consider the new core generation and the smaller transistors, you realise there’s more going on here than meets the eye. The 7900X has a faster base speed with equal boost speeds, but the 9900X has the advantage of a greater IPC (instructions per clock).
IPC is the basic measurement of how many instructions a CPU can process per clock cycle. It is based on the number of transistors a CPU has. A CPU with smaller transistors can pack more into the same footprint, leading to a stronger IPC. Generally, even if a CPU with a higher IPC has slightly lower clock speeds, it’ll still be faster.
Design and Gallery
There’s not much physical difference between these two CPUs; the socket and IHS are the same. The only real difference lies in the core architecture we’ve covered. This CPU will fit into any AM5 motherboard. However, the BIOS may be slightly better on the newer X870 chipset.
Performance
Before we discuss the processor’s actual performance, we should examine the components that comprise the test bench, as they have a large bearing on our results. We like to keep things equal and consistent regardless of generation or brand to keep results comparable. To learn more about our testing and review process, visit our How We Test CPUs page.
| Component | WePC test rig |
|---|---|
| CPU | Ryzen 9 9900X |
| 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 9900X’s gaming performance with that out of the way. Remember that your results will vary if you have different hardware. We built our rig to represent the “middle ground” of gaming systems.
Graphs
We’ve set up some graphs to help make this information more digestible. The tables are great, but they’re much harder for some to consider – including myself.
Gaming performance
| Metric | CS2 | Days Gone | CP 2077 | Doom Eternal | Horizon FW | Frost punk 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score (FPS) | AVG: 325.09 99%: 135.53 | AVG: 354.77 99%: 156.69 | AVG: 325.09 99%: 135.5 | AVG: 501.54 99%: 357.19 | AVG: 192.4 99%: 129.12 | AVG: 208.3 99%: 141.83 |
| AVG temp (package) °C | 54 | 59 | 57 | 63 | 63 | 59 |
| Max temp (package) °C | 58 | 60 | 72 | 65 | 68 | 72 |
| Average PPT (W) | 104.69W | 105.65W | 99.41W | 147.45W | 140.68W | 120.58W |
We can see strong FPS averages across the titles we tested, with Doom Eternal leading at a blazing 501 FPS average. This isn’t surprising, given the game’s efficient engine and the hardware’s high performance. It’s followed closely by Days Gone, which maintains a solid 354 FPS average, while CS2 and Cyberpunk 2077 each land around 325 FPS. The heavier hitters, Horizon Forbidden West and Frostpunk 2, dip slightly, averaging 192 and 208 FPS, respectively, which reflects their more demanding engines and resource usage. It’s when we start comparing results that things get interesting.
| CPU | CS2 | Days Gone | Doom Eternal |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
The comparison between Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K and AMD’s Ryzen 9 9900X reveals some unexpected results, especially since the 285K is Intel’s flagship and should ideally be the leader. However, AMD’s 9900X not only keeps up but actually outperforms the 285K in key games, showing that Intel’s focus on efficiency with the 285K may have held it back in raw performance.
In Counter-Strike 2, the Ryzen 9 9900X takes a slight lead with an average FPS of 325 compared to the 285K’s 313. It also edges out in the 99th percentile FPS. This small difference could mean smoother gameplay for competitive players.
The gap widens in Days Gone, where the 9900X hits 354 FPS on average, while the 285K lags behind at 237 FPS. Even in Doom Eternal, where Intel’s 285K does well with high 99th percentile frames (394 FPS), the 9900X still holds a small edge in average FPS, reaching 501.
These results show that the Ryzen 9 9900X delivers stronger frame rates across these games. Intel’s focus on efficiency with the 285K might have come at the cost of the raw power needed to lead as a flagship. If Intel had prioritized performance over efficiency, the 285K could have been a tougher competitor for the 9900X.
Synthetic performance
| Metric | CPU Z | Cinebench R23 | Geekbench | Blender render |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score (points) | Single 829 Multi 12,673 | Single 2,153 Multi 30,990 | Single 3,335 Multi 19,863 | Monster: 194.6 SPM Junkshop: 140.87 SPM Classroom: 97.68 SPM |
| AVG temp (package) °C | 60 | Single: 59 Multi: 66 | 54 | 61 |
| Max temp (package) °C | 65 | Single: 62 Multi: 69 | 68 | 64 |
| Average PPT (W) | 110.22W | Single: 71.32W Multi: 144.43W | 67.58W | 147.69W |
As we can see, the 9900X scores pretty well in multi-core synthetic workloads. This is because it possesses 12 cores and 24 logical processors, so it is on the higher end of what AMD offers. IPC again plays in here and helps exponentially as multiple cores are involved. So, you would expect a relatively large uplift over CPUs from the previous generation. The 9900X also stays relatively cool compared to Zen 4, with maximum temperatures staying within 70°C, a full 25°C from the rated Tjmax.
| CPU | Score | AVG temp (package) °C | Max temp (package) °C | Average PPT (W) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
The comparison here isn’t exactly apples to apples, but it does give you an idea of how good the 9900X’s single-core performance is. Regarding multi-core performance, it isn’t even close to the 285K. We don’t recommend the 285K as an alternative to the 9900X; we’re just showcasing the power of more cores (24 cores vs 12 cores). Interesting to see that the multi-core performance is not doubled, despite the 285K having 2x the cores. This again comes from the fact that AMD’s Zen 5 cores are much better than Intel’s new Core Ultra cores.
The 285K manages a very respectable Cinmebench R23 score of 42,399, compared to the 9900X’s 30,990. However, it is important to note that AMD’s 9950X scored 43,000 points with PBO enabled. This, however, significantly increases the processor’s power and thermal demand.
Price
The Ryzen 9 9900X is listed at $430 on Newegg and $383 on Amazon, making it a strong value for those who want high-end gaming and workstation performance without reaching the premium price of flagship CPUs. The Ryzen 9 9800X3D has an MSRP of $480. This CPU’s 3D V-Cache make it appealing for gaming performance, though the elevated prices could be a consideration. The 9900X is still a great option for a middle-ground “do it all” CPU.
The Ryzen 9 9700X is priced at around $327 on Newegg and $325 on Amazon. It offers an affordable option with solid multi-threaded performance, making it a strong choice if you’re focused on productivity without needing the cache advantage of the 9800X3D.
On the Intel side, the Core Ultra 285K is priced at $630 on Newegg (currently out of stock), which positions it as one of Intel’s high-end options, though we all know how that turned out. Check out the review if you don’t. The Core Ultra 265K sits at $400 on Amazon, though you should never buy these CPUs; the cost of the new platform, the MSRP, and terrible gaming performance aren’t viable.
Is the Ryzen 9 9900X worth it?
The Ryzen 9 9900X represents a balanced “do-it-all” option for a high-performing, versatile CPU. It’s particularly appealing for those who want strong gaming and workstation capabilities at a fair price. While it doesn’t quite reach flagship status, its efficiency, solid gaming performance, and excellent multi-threading potential make it a worthy choice in AMD’s 9000 series lineup. The 9800X3D far exceeds the gaming performance of this chip, so if you want a pure gaming PC, that would be the way to go. Conversely, the 9950X is far better at multi-core workloads thanks to its 4 extra cores. Another thing to consider is whether you want more power in your workstation applications.
Overall, the 9900X is a fantastic CPU for the price, and we’ve already seen it at sales events for a few fewer dollars than MSRP. AMD’s rocky launch of the 9000 series has made it eager to sell this chip by any means necessary, which works well for us and our wallets.
AMD Ryzen 9 9900X
