You are currently viewing AMD’s Zen 5 flagship 16-core Ryzen 9 9950X processor leaked, performance benchmarks show strong multi-threaded chip

AMD’s Zen 5 flagship 16-core Ryzen 9 9950X processor leaked, performance benchmarks show strong multi-threaded chip

AMD’s flagship Ryzen 9 9950X 16-core “Zen 5” desktop processor has leaked, giving us a new look at the performance of this beast.

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X Is Latest Zen 5 Desktop CPU Leaked on Geekbench Benchmark, Near 14900K Performance

The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X “100-000001277” processor is the flagship offering with two Zen 5 CCDs and one IOD. The processor offers 16 cores, 32 threads, a base clock frequency of 4.3 GHz and a maximum boost frequency of up to 5.7 GHz. It comes with 80 MB cache (64 MB L3 + 16 MB L2) and has a TDP of 170 W. Now in terms of clock frequency, while the boost clock is identical to the Ryzen 9 7950X, the base clock is slightly reduced by -200 MHz, but we can expect a lot of performance coming from this flagship product, especially in terms of multi-threading performance.

The leak comes from the same user who tested the AMD Ryzen 9000 “Zen 5” desktop processors on the ASUS ROG Crosshair X670E HERO motherboard, but this benchmark is said to run with a single-channel memory configuration, which can result in a drastic -low performance. The test bench is specified with 32 GB of DDR5-6000 memory (2-channel). Regardless, the CPU peaked at 5.73 GHz, which is slightly over its clock speed and we could be looking at a non-PBO performance that could explain the performance here.

The following articles cover the rest of the leaked Ryzen 9000 desktop CPU results:

As for performance data, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core “Zen 5” desktop processor scored 3359 points in the single-core and 20550 points in the multi-core tests in Geekbench 6. Compared to the Ryzen 9 7950X, the Ryzen 9 9950X scored 14% a lead in the single-core test and a 7% lead in the multi-core test. Compared to the 12-core Ryzen 9 9900X, the 16-core chip was slightly slower in the single-core tests, but ended up being 4% faster in the multi-core tests. Once again, this shows that there is something wrong with the testing methodology here, as the 9950X has 33% more cores and should post a much higher multi-threaded score.

Compared to the Intel Core i9-14900KS and Core i9-14900K, the 16-core AMD Ryzen 9 9950X “Zen 5” desktop processor ended up being faster in single-core tests, but fell slightly behind the 14900KS while coming close to the 14900K . We still believe that proper results should at least put the 9950X ahead of the 14900K easily, so we advise our readers to wait for more results and check the reviews once they are available later this month.

0

5000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

AMD’s Ryzen 9 9950X will be a strong multi-threaded chip based on the Zen 5 architecture once it’s released. We’ve heard it will offer impressive gaming performance compared to the Ryzen 9 7950X and Intel Core i9 offerings, while delivering some insane efficiency. Once again, AMD Ryzen 9000 “Zen 5” desktop processors, including the Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core, hit retail later this month on the AM5 platform, so expect some action.

AMD Ryzen 9000 “Granite Ridge” Desktop Processor Specifications:

Processor name Architecture Cores / Threads Main / booster clock Cache memory Graphics (integrated) Memory support TDP Price (MSRP)
Ryzen 9 9950X3D? Zen 5 16/32 TBD 128 MB L3 + 16 MB L2 2 x RDNA 2 CUs DDR5-5600 TBD TBD
Ryzen 9 9950X Zen 5 16/32 4.3 / 5.7 GHz 64 MB L3 + 16 MB L2 2 x RDNA 2 CUs DDR5-5600 170W $649 USD?
Ryzen 9 9900X3D? Zen 5 12/24 TBD 128 MB L3 + 12 MB L2 2 x RDNA 2 CUs DDR5-5600 TBD TBD
Ryzen 9 9900X Zen 5 12/24 4.4 / 5.6 GHz 64 MB L3 + 12 MB L2 2 x RDNA 2 CUs DDR5-5600 120W $549 USD?
Ryzen 7 9800X3D? Zen 5 8/16 TBD 96 MB L3 + 8 MB L2 2 x RDNA 2 CUs DDR5-5600 TBD TBD
Ryzen 7 9700X Zen 5 8/16 3.8 / 5.5 GHz 32 MB L3 + 8 MB L2 2 x RDNA 2 CUs DDR5-5600 65W/120W? $399 USD?
Ryzen 5 9600X Zen 5 6/12 3.9 / 5.4 GHz 32 MB L3 + 6 MB L2 2 x RDNA 2 CUs DDR5-5600 65W $299 USD?

News source: Benchleaks

Leave a Reply