AMD ZEN 4 RYZEN 7000 INTEGRATED GRAPHICS IGPU
All Ryzen 7000 chips will support some form of graphics, so it doesn't appear there will be graphics-less options, like Intel's F-series, for now. The RDNA 2 engine resides on the IOD (I/O Die) and supports up to four display outputs, including DisplayPort 2 and HDMI 2.1 ports, and Ryzen 7000 has the same video (VCN) and display (DCN) engine as the Ryzen 6000 'Rembrandt" processors. Even though all Ryzen 7000 chips will have baked-in iGPUs, the company will still release Zen 4 APUs with beefier iGPUs. The company will also bring its Smart Shift ECO tech, which allows shifting the graphical work between the iGPU and a discrete GPU to save power, to the Ryzen 7000 models for the desktop PC.
AMD has tried to temper expectations for the integrated graphics engine, pointing out that the RDNA 2 graphics are only designed to 'light up' displays, cautioning that we shouldn't expect any meaningful gaming performance. AMD has said that all SKUs will have the same undisclosed number of CUs — the IOD configuration will be the same for all models. As such, it's safe to assume we're looking at probably 2 to 4 CUs per Ryzen 7000 chip.
If it's any consolation, the iGPU's close proximity to the DDR5 controllers also resident on the die should provide plenty of bandwidth from the main memory. However, we'll have to wait to learn exactly how many cores the graphics engine has, but we have seen this iGPU running between 1,000 and 2,000 MHz in a recent benchmark submission. Despite the expected low performance, the integrated RDNA 2 engine will help address one of AMD's key weaknesses in the OEM market where discrete GPUs are a rarity in most machines. It will also be helpful for troubleshooting if you need a basic display out.
AMD ZEN 4 RYZEN 7000 BENCHMARKS AND ZEN 4 IPC
We tend to see benchmark results posted to third-party benchmark databases as processors work their way to market. Still, we've only seen two instances of a Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 processor listing that doesn't come from AMD.
The latest Zen 4 benchmark comes from the Basemark database and comprises a six-core Ryzen 7000 chip, part number 100-000000593-20_Y, paired with a Gigabyte X670 Aorus Master motherboard and an Nvidia RTX A4000 graphics card. The Ryzen 7000 chip ran at 4.4 GHz, but we aren't sure if this is a final configuration or just an engineering sample. In the tweet embedded below, you can see a comparison of this benchmark result to a comparable six-core Zen 3 model.
Here we see roughly 10% gains across the board with the six-core Ryzen 7000 against the 16-core Ryzen 9 5950X, but this synthetic benchmark isn't very common, so it doesn't tell us too much about real-world gaming performance.
Earlier, two Ryzen 7000 submissions to the MilkyWay@Home project on the BOINC platform. The submissions don't tell us much about performance, but it does expose the 100-000000666-21_N codename that likely represents the Ryzen 7 7800X that will replace the Ryzen 7 5800X. The other codename, 100-000000665-21_N, lines up with a 16-core model that is likely the Ryzen 9 7950X that will replace the Ryzen 9 5950X.
For now, most of the Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 benchmarks come from AMD, and as with all vendor-provided benchmarks, you should approach these results with caution. These chips are pre-production models, so performance is subject to change, and the test conditions could be favorable to AMD's chips.
During its Computex 2022 keynote, AMD CEO Lisa Su demoed a 16-core pre-production Ryzen 7000 chip running the Ghostwire: Tokyo game. As you can see from the third image, the chip topped out at an incredible 5.52 GHz, and AMD has since clarified that this boost occurred on multiple cores during the test. The 5.5 GHz peak matches the current desktop PC frequency leader, the 5.5 GHz Intel Core i9-12900KS. Naturally, that comes with caveats: AMD only guarantees that its chips can reach the peak frequency on a single core. However, this is a significant increase over the existing Ryzen family.
AMD also demoed it's 16-core 32-thread Ryzen 7000 chip against the 16-core 24-thread Core i9-12900K in a Blender render (we included the test notes in the above album). The Ryzen 7000 processor completed the render of a Ryzen 7000 chip in 204 seconds, which is 31% less than the 12900K's time of 297 seconds. Notably, the Ryzen 7000 chip has 33% more threads than the 12900K, but Intel's Raptor Lake is expected to have 32 threads, making for a close battle.
Blender supports AVX-512, which could contribute to AMD's lead over Intel in this benchmark, which would be odd: Intel pioneered AVX-512 but disabled the instructions with the Alder Lake chips because of the complexities of scheduling work to the correct cores in the x86 hybrid architecture. Now AMD has it in its arsenal.
Additionally, although we know that the 5nm process should be more power-efficient than the 7nm process, it is possible that the higher 230W provided by the AM5 socket could help improve all-core performance, specifically during an AVX-powered workload. (The 142W PPT limit hampered performance with the 12- and 16-core Ryzen 9 5900X and 5950X during all-core workloads.) It will be interesting to see comparisons of multi-threaded performance in a broader spate of benchmarks. Also, the impact of higher multi-core boosts on gaming shouldn't be overlooked — even lightly-threaded games are subject to multi-core frequencies due to the operating system and other background tasks, and game engines are becoming more multi-threaded over time. In fact, we saw big gaming performance gains moving from Zen 2 to Zen 3, fed in part by multi-core boost clocks, so any improvement here floats all boats, including gaming. We do have to remember that Raptor Lake will come with four more e-cores and higher clock rates than the 12900K, so we expect close competition between the chips in heavily-threaded work.
AMD also measured Ryzen 7000's +15% single-threaded performance improvement by putting an unnamed pre-production 16-core Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 processor with DDR5-6000 memory up against the 16-core Ryzen 9 5950X with DDR4-3600 in a Cinebench R23 single-threaded test. Unfortunately, AMD didn't share any specific benchmark scores, but this does give us a basic idea of how the chips will fare against Intel's Alder Lake in this specific benchmark.
According to our benchmarks, Intel's Alder Lake chips currently hold the lead in the Cinebench R23 single-threaded benchmark. They also hold the overall lead in single-threaded performance against AMD's Ryzen 5000 chips. Below we've boiled this down into a head-to-head with the flagship Alder Lake Core i9-12900K against the Ryzen 9 5950X.
According to our tests, the Core i9-12900K is roughly 16% faster than the Ryzen 9 5950X in the Cinbench R23 benchmark, and AMD claims its 16-core Ryzen 7000 model is 15% faster than the 5950X. That means the Zen 4 chips will likely pull to parity with Intel's Alder Lake in this benchmark.
Additionally, you can see that the Cinebench R23 result tracks well with our more expansive overall measurement of single-threaded performance that we use for our rankings in our CPU Benchmark hierarchy. This measurement encompasses performance in three single-threaded tests, and its similarity to the Cenbench scores suggests that Zen 4 could basically match Alder Lake in overall single-threaded performance.
Intel's Raptor Lake will come with the same Golden Cove architecture for its performance cores (P-cores) as we saw with Alder Lake, but we expect Intel to dial up the clock rates to boost performance. As such, we can expect quite a battle for single-threaded superiority between Ryzen 7000 and Raptor Lake.
- 2017: Zen 1 — 14nm — +52% IPC
- 2019: Zen 2 — 7nm — +16% IPC
- 2020: Zen 3 — 7nm — +19% IPC
- 2022: Zen 4 — 5nm — +8 to 10% IPC
The TSMC 5nm process hit 5.52 GHz during AMD's gaming demo, which was incredibly impressive, but AMD has clarified that we'll only see an 8 to 10% improvement in IPC over Zen 3. That's less than we're accustomed to seeing with new AMD architectures, but improved power delivery can help deliver much larger gains in threaded workloads. It also isn't unheard of for AMD to tout higher performance numbers as it reaches final silicon (like with Zen 1's IPC measurements).
Notably, AMD says the demo processor was "a 16-core pre-production sample not yet fused to specific power values, but was operating below our final 170W TDP spec." Naturally, that doesn't tell us if the demo processor consumed 50W below the 170W spec, or just one single watt below the spec.
AMD is eager to show that those relatively tame IPC improvements aren't all Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 brings to the table. At its Financial Analyst Day, AMD also shared a slide showing a greater than 25% performance-per-watt and greater than 35% gain in overall performance in a multi-threaded Cinebench benchmark.
This benchmark used a 16-core 32-thread Ryzen 7000 desktop PC processor against the 16-core Zen 3 Ryzen 9 5950X. The slide is a bit misleading as it uses a non-zero axis that visually amplifies the gain, so keep that in mind. However, these are impressive generational performance gains — regardless of whether they originate from IPC, frequency, or improved power delivery and multi-core boosts.
The Zen 4 processors will also support up to 25% more memory bandwidth per core, a marked increase that comes from both the step up to DDR5 and likely from widened pathways in the chip to deliver additional bandwidth to the cores. That will provide quite the uplift for the bandwidth-hungry AVX-512 extensions that AMD added for Zen 4.
We'll have to wait a bit longer to get a clearer view of performance from third-party benchmarking. As always, we won't know what you'll see in real life until we snap the chips into the socket on our testbed.
AMD ZEN 4 RYZEN 7000 POWER CONSUMPTION
AMD originally stated that Socket AM5 would have a 170W Package Power Tracking (PPT) limit, meaning that would be the peak amount of power the socket could provide to any given processor. However, AMD later clarified that the original number it shared is in error. Instead, we'll see a 170W TDP for some processors designed for the AM5 socket, like Ryzen 7000, which is a significant increase over the current 105W TDP limit with the Ryzen 5000 processors.
Additionally, the peak power consumption (PPT) for the AM5 socket is actually 230W. That's a significant increase over the previous-gen Ryzen 5000's 142W limit.
Overall, the increase represents a 65W TDP and an 88W PPT increase over AMD's current flagships.
We've also learned that all Ryzen 9 models will come with a 170W TDP, so they'll have a PPT of 230W. Additionally, information revealed in the infamous 'Gigabyte leak' indicates that AMD will have 45, 65, 95, 105, 120, and 170W power ranges spanning the entire Zen 4 lineup.
This increased power delivery will help the Ryzen processors in heavily-threaded workloads, like the Blender benchmark the company demoed during Computex that showed Ryzen 7000 thrashing Intel's Alder Lake Core i9-12900K. The increased 170W TDP also means it's entirely possible that we could see souped-up 12- and 16-core Ryzen 7000 chips with a 170W TDP for extreme users, while 105W 12- and 16-core models slot in for more mainstream uses.
Increasing the TDP and PPT will help AMD deliver more performance, particularly for its higher core-count models, during heavy multi-threaded workloads. In many cases, AMD's previous limit of 142W with the previous-gen AM4 socket held back performance, so the additional 88W of power will be particularly helpful with the newer 12- and 16-core models. That could help offset the demise of AMD's consumer-oriented Threadripper HEDT platforms — the company recently announced that it was retiring all non-Pro Threadripper chips, thus putting pricing of the remaining models out of reach of enthusiasts. The higher-end high-core-count Ryzen 7000 models paired with the high-end X670E motherboards with PCIe 5.0 support (more below) will presumably fill that niche.
In addition, AMD has specified that it will use the standard TDP and PPT calculations for chips that drop into the AM5 socket — you can simply multiply the TDP by 1.35 to calculate the maximum power consumption of the chip (PPT).