Mindfactory Only Sold a Few Dozen AMD Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 5 9600X (2024)

rv8000No one is crawling over bodies to be first in line for low-mid range skus. People are waiting for the X3D variants… kind of painfully obvious.

Or for those who need CPUs for productivity they are waiting for 12C and 16C versions which should release tomorrow.

ChaitanyaOr for those who need CPUs for productivity they are waiting for 12C and 16C versions which should release tomorrow.

the pricing of 9900x and 9950x not encouraging
i found a great deal for 7950x3d for only 450$ which is definitely better in gaming and multitasks than 9900x and cheaper

I'm waiting to see what the 9800X3D brings but I don't expect much of an uptick in performance over the 7800X3D.

I haven't been paying much attention to CPUs until recently but I hear from those that do that AMD commonly drops the price pretty quickly after release. This might have some bearing on the lackluster sales right now as well.

64KI'm waiting to see what the 9800X3D brings but I don't expect much of an uptick in performance over the 7800X3D.

I haven't been paying much attention to CPUs until recently but I hear from those that do that AMD commonly drops the price pretty quickly after release. This might have some bearing on the lackluster sales right now as well.

Overall productivity tasks should be much better with the same clocks vs the 7800X3D due to not having drastically reduced PPT targets (if it remains the same as the 7800X3D). That wasn’t the case for the 9700X, as while the efficiency had a nice bump vs. the 7700X, the power limit reduced all core clocks significantly which diminished the value of the IPC gains in comparison.

What’s more interesting about the 9000X3D chips will be allowed “overclocking”. If consumers are allowed to push frequencies up, or the manf. process simply allows higher clocks along with new temperature sensor adjustments, performance all around should theoretically look a lot nicer.

The 9900X/9950X will be pretty strong productivity skus, and largely more interesting than the R5/R7 parts.

rv8000Overall productivity tasks should be much better with the same clocks vs the 7800X3D due to not having drastically reduced PPT targets (if it remains the same as the 7800X3D). That wasn’t the case for the 9700X, as while the efficiency had a nice bump vs. the 7700X, the power limit reduced all core clocks significantly which diminished the value of the IPC gains in comparison.

What’s more interesting about the 9000X3D chips will be allowed “overclocking”. If consumers are allowed to push frequencies up, or the manf. process simply allows higher clocks along with new temperature sensor adjustments, performance all around should theoretically look a lot nicer.

The 9900X/9950X will be pretty strong productivity skus, and largely more interesting than the R5/R7 parts.

My only interest is to build a high end gaming rig so I'm only curious about the 9800X3D to see if it's worth a little more money over the 7800X3D.

They really should just have released the X3D variants to desktop. There's no reason to not get X3D -- especially since the 7700 and 7600 have the low end completely saturated.

They also did this with the Zen 4 series and it actually pushed me to buy intel -- had the X3D been out at that time I would have bought that - but it was a choice of a $450 7700x + $200 DDR5 + $250 AM5 board, and at that time AM5 had a bunch of stuttering and Bios issues -- or the $50 less for a 13700KF setup. The gaming performance and productivity is still way better on the 13700 so that's what I got.

Initial sales of Zen 4 were hot garbage as a result. They had to start bundling and giving away ram kits to move dies. AMD decided to repeat that self own again, because the first time wasn't enough.

If they released 9800X3D that was 10% faster than 7800X3D right now they would be MOPPING up market share as people flee intel's degrador lake.

nguyenI bet 7800X3D sale just sky rocketed LOL, people were expecting 9700X to beat 7800X3D both in games and productivities

I don't know why anyone would think that. When AMD themselves said it won't beat the 7800x 3D in gaming?
do people just not care to pay attention anymore?

DemonicRyzen666I don't know why anyone would think that. When AMD themselves said it won't beat the 7800x 3D in gaming?
do people just not care to pay attention anymore?

They literally said it was within 2%.

It's 25% slower.

Mindfactory Only Sold a Few Dozen AMD Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 5 9600X

Good. The marketplace working as it should.

Launching the vanilla chips before the x3d never made sense to me... why not get your flagship out first full guns blazing and then launch vanilla chips as updates to last gen?

Who heads AMD marketing? Please go seek new career challenges elsewhere!

phanbueyThey literally said it was within 2%.

It's 25% slower.

That is not what it shows on Techpowerup here, so you are lying & full of it.

nguyenI bet 7800X3D sale just sky rocketed LOL, people were expecting 9700X to beat 7800X3D both in games and productivities

About 80% of all Zen4 series 8core CPU sales of Mindfactory have been 7800X3D CPUs since launch.

Fun fact(s):
MF sells the 7500F (tray) at less than 50% of the 9600X price, the 7700 (tray) is also 25% cheaper than a 9600X, and according to the TPU review beats it both in application performance and energy efficiency. If you prefer boxed versions for the proper warranty, you typically still pay less for the 7700 (boxed) or the 7700X (boxed) than the 9600X (boxed).

MF also sells the 7900 (boxed), 7900X (boxed) and the 7800X3D (boxed) for roughly 10% less than the 9700X right now.

It would have been even worse, if the larger German retailers hadn't decided to hike prices by 5% to 10% after the announcement of the Zen5 delays. The 7800X3Ds (boxed) had been below €330 at that point.

We guess what's happening here is a combination of consumers waiting to see how the 9900X and 9700X perform, what the 9000X3D series and Intel's next-generation bring to the table, and favoring previous-gen incumbents such as the 7800X3D, i9-14900K, etc., which have had price cuts over the past several months.

I'm guessing this should actually be the 9950X? @btarunr

phanbueyIt's 25% slower.

25% slower than what?

Mindfactory sold just between 20-30 Ryzen 5 9600X processors, with just under 600 page views for the product. The Ryzen 7 9700X is very slightly better, but not by much—just 30-40 pieces sold, and under 1,200 page views.

@btarunr You might actually want to correct that part: "observers" of a product at the Mindfactory store are not page views. That's the number of people who put that specific product onto their wishlist or saved it into a shopping basket for later checkout.

DemonicRyzen666I don't know why anyone would think that. When AMD themselves said it won't beat the 7800x 3D in gaming?
do people just not care to pay attention anymore?

People obviously pay more attention than you :D because, yes, AMD did in fact say that the 9700X would beat the 7800X3D in gaming.

phanbueyThey literally said it was within 2%.

It's 25% slower.

AMD made TWO statements prior to the release of Zen 5 with regard to gaming performance when compared to the 7000X3D series.

1) The earlier statement is from an interviewat Tom's Hardware. This is when AMD said it would be a really close call...

"Is it the fastest in gaming? It's faster than the competition in our tests. X3D is still the king of the hill, but by a much smaller margin than typically between X3D and non-X3D," Woligroski responded. "So a 7800X3D would, yes, be faster than 9700X, but maybe not by as much as you would expect."

2) Statement no. 2 is newer and I already linkedit above. This is when AMD told Overclock3D at a tech event just a couple of weeks before the launch of Zen 5 that 9700X would in fact beat 7800X3D by 2%.

And, yes, it turned out that 9700X is much slower by a considerable margin so people are RIGHTFULLY disappointed by the poor gaming performance compared to AMD's false advertising. If you look outside of TPU, where the 9700X is uncharacteristically strong compared to the rest of the web, then 25% as stated by @phanbuey might be the worst case for 9700X but we are typically definitely in a range of 15% to 20% average below the 7800X3D.

Check that site again ~

According to Mark Campbell of Overclock3d, it looks like AMD's Ryzen 7 9700X "Zen 5" Desktop CPU might just be able to outperform the Ryzen 7 7800X3D in gaming benchmarks. During the AMD Tech Day, the company onlycompared the Ryzen 7 9700X against the much older Ryzen 7 5800X3D, which has had a phenomenal run on the AM4 platform. Versus the 5800X3D, the new Ryzen 7 9700X scores up to 30% faster performance in games and 12% on average.

wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-9700x-zen-5-faster-than-ryzen-7-7800x3d-3d-v-cache-cpu-in-games/
What is might? It's either faster or slower!

AMD’s new Ryzen 7 9700X can best older X3D CPUs with less power and without 3D V-Cache

AMD has used their 3D chip stacking technology to great effect with their X3D series of gaming-focused processors. Now, as AMD prepares to launch their Ryzen 9000 series of CPUs, AMD has confirmed that their new Ryzen 7 9700X can best their older X3D CPUs. Even without V-Cache, AMD’s Ryzen 7 9700X is a great gaming CPU.

Below, AMD has compared their Ryzen 7 9700X to their Ryzen 7 5800X3D, AMD’s best AM4 gaming processor. On average, AMD claims that their Ryzen 7 9700X runs games 12% faster. That said, some games still run faster on AMD’s fastest Zen 3 X3D processor. Even so, it is worth noting that many games are more than 25% faster on AMD’s Ryzen 7 9700X.

What about the Ryzen 7 7800X3D?

Let’s start off by saying that AMD does not see the Ryzen 7 9700X as an upgrade option for Ryzen 7 7800X3D CPU users. On average, AMD claims that their Ryzen 7 9700X is 2% faster than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. Simply put, Ryzen 7 7800X3D users should wait for Zen 5 based X3D CPUs if they want to upgrade.

With Zen 5, AMD is promising greater performance and greater power efficiency. Regardless, the lack of AMD’s X3D tech on their early Zen 5 CPUs leaves them in a strange position. AMD’s Ryzen 9000 series are great gaming processors as-is. However, we know that they will be much better when AMD’s X3D tech is added.

On average, AMD’s Ryzen 7 9700X is better than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. That said, the performance leader will change on a game-by-game basis.

overclock3d.net/news/cases_cooling/amd-ryzen-7-9700x-beats-prior-x3d-cpus-even-without-3d-v-cache/
On OC3d as well it's pretty vague!

RogueSixPeople obviously pay more attention than you :D because, yes, AMD did in fact say that the 9700X would beat the 7800X3D in gaming.

AMD made TWO statements prior to the release of Zen 5 with regard to gaming performance when compared to the 7000X3D series.

1) The earlier statement is from an interviewat Tom's Hardware. This is when AMD said it would be a really close call...

2) Statement no. 2 is newer and I already linkedit above. This is when AMD told Overclock3D at a tech event just a couple of weeks before the launch of Zen 5 that 9700X would in fact beat 7800X3D by 2%.

Did you read the article you linked or you just trying for a gotcha moment?

AMD also commented on the performance of the Ryzen 7 9700X versus the Ryzen 7 7800X3D and revealed that the new Zen 5 Desktop CPU should be able to perform 2% faster on average in the same tests that were used to compare the 9700X against the 5800X3D. AMD did cherry-pic

Put the important part in bold. Out of all the games they used to compare against the 5800X3D, I don’t think a single reviewer tested any of the games in AMDs suite that showed a much larger performance gap.

People need to actually read what’s being presented to them. If there’s and outright lie or questionable performance result with the 9000 series, it’s handbrake; afaik AMD has yet to disclosed how they tested Zen5 in their benchmark suite.