OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

AMD Ryzen 9 9900X review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£320PassMark multi-core score:54439N. of physical cores:12CPU boost clock speed:5.6 GHzCPU socket:AM5TDP (Thermal design power):120 W

AMD Ryzen 9 9900X Review: Compare 74 technical specifications, 39 expert and video reviews and 11 best-of lists to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen 9 9900X
8.5/10

Overall score

Score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 99% of models
Score components

40%

8.7

Technical score

25%

7.9

Reviews score

25%

8.5

List score

10%

9.1

Sentiment score

★Better than 99% of processors
8.6

Value for money

Value for money
8.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 98% of models
Score components

70%

8.5

Overall score

30%

8.8

Price

★Better than 98%
8.7

Technical score

Technical score
8.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 97% of models
Score components

60%

9.0

Performance

18%

8.2

Architecture

10%

9.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.8

Power & Thermal

4%

9.3

Platform

1%

7.2

Integrated graphics

★Better than 97%
7.9

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 66% of models

80%

7.4

Average grade

20%

9.7

Popularity

Grades by review (39)
27 reviews: 16 with a printed score, 11 estimated from the review. 12 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▲Better than 66%
8.5

List score

List score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (11)
List score: in 11 of 83 lists (13%)
★Better than 98%
  • amd-ryzen-9-9900x
  • amd-ryzen-9-9900x
  • amd-ryzen-9-9900x
  • amd-ryzen-9-9900x
amd-ryzen-9-9900x
amd-ryzen-9-9900x
amd-ryzen-9-9900x
amd-ryzen-9-9900x
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X

Based on 9 · 13

Reviewers praise strong productivity performance, but most are let down by its gaming results and value for money.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X

Based on 86 owners sharing their experience in online comments

77%positive10%mixed13%negative

Owners value its strong gaming and productivity performance, while heat and weaker-than-expected gaming results are the main complaints.

What owners dislike

  • Owners report it runs hot, reaching 70–84°C in games or stress tests, especially with weaker fans, a small radiator or cheap air coolers.9
  • Owners say it trails the 9800X3D in gaming, so some expected high frame rates in certain titles are not reached.6
  • Owners say overclocking and PBO are hard to set up, with limited Ryzen Master options, BIOS translation problems and some crashes when pushing settings.5
  • Owners say the platform costs more than rivals, since it needs an AM5 board and DDR5 memory, and some find Intel's i9 14900 cheaper for similar performance.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 9 9900X

Technical score
Technical score
8.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 97% of models
Score components:

60%

9.0

Performance

18%

8.2

Architecture

10%

9.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.8

Power & Thermal

4%

9.3

Platform

1%

7.2

Integrated graphics

8.7
Reviews score
7.9
List score
8.5
Value for money
Value for money
8.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 98% of models
Score components:

70%

8.5

Overall score

30%

8.8

Price

8.6
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
AM5
This processor uses the AM5 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 95% of processors and equal to that of 3.1% of processors.
Chipset
X870E, X870, B850, B840, X670E, X670, B650E, B650, A620
This processor supports X870E, X870, B850, B840, X670E, X670, B650E, B650, A620 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 92% of processors and equal to that of 3.3% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 69.3% of processors and equal to that of 7.1% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
N. of physical cores
12
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 12 CPU cores, which is more than 79.9% of processors and equal to 5.7% of processors.
CPU threads
24
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 24 CPU threads, which is more than 89.7% of processors and equal to 4.4% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
5.6 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.6 GHz which is higher than that of 97.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
12x 4.4 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 12x4.4 GHz which is higher than that of 95.2% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
54,439
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 54,439 in PassMark, which is higher than 96.4% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
4 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 4 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 86.8% of processors and equal to that of 7.7% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 4 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 4 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 86.4% of processors and equal to that of 7.8% of processors.
L3 cache
64 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 64 MB which is larger than that of 94.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.8% of processors.
L2 cache
12 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 83.1% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
L1 cache
960 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 960 KB which is larger than that of 84.6% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR5, which is newer than that of 64.2% of processors and equal to that of 12.8% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
5,600 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 5,600 MHz, which is higher than that of 77.9% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR5-5600 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR5-5600 MHz, which is higher than that of 77.4% of processors and equal to 6.2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
8,000 MHz
This processor supports XMP/EXPO memory speeds up to 8,000 MHz, which is higher than that of 99.6% of processors and equal to 0.4% of processors.
Maximum memory capacity
192 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 192 GB of memory, which is more than 82.2% of processors and equal to 6.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
AMD Radeon Graphics
This processor uses the AMD Radeon Graphics integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 87.4% of processors and equal to that in 1.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
2
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 2 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 95.5% of processors and equal to 4.5% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
400 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 400 MHz which is higher than that of 68.4% of processors and equal to that of 8.3% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 61.3% of processors and equal to 10.3% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
TDP (Thermal design power)
120 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 120 W which is higher than that of 91% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
120 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 120 W which is higher than that of 91.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

AMD Ryzen 9 9900X vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4.75x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (54,439 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    54,439 vs 11,469
  • 3.79x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (19,756 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    19,756 vs 5,209
  • 82.9% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,678 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,678 vs 2,558
  • 2.17x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,338 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,338 vs 1,535
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Granite Ridge vs Kaby Lake).
    Granite Ridge vs Kaby Lake
  • 8 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (12 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    12 vs 4
  • 27.3% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 17.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.9/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 66% of models

    80%

    7.4

    Average grade

    20%

    9.7

    Popularity

    Grades by review (39)
    27 reviews: 16 with a printed score, 11 estimated from the review. 12 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.9 vs 6.7
  • 26.4% higher sentiment score
    9.1 vs 7.2
  • 9.0% higher list score
    List score
    8.5/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (11)
    List score: in 11 of 83 lists (13%)
    8.5 vs 7.8
  • 17.7% better value for money
    AMD Ryzen 9 9900X has better value for money than the average processor (8.58 vs 7.3).
    8.58 vs 7.29
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (AM5 vs FP5).
    AM5 vs FP5
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, VAES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA).
    AES, VAES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
  • 4 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2024 vs 2020).
    August 2024
    2024 vs 2020
  • 4.75x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (54,439 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    54,439 vs 11,469
  • 3.79x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (19,756 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    19,756 vs 5,209
  • 82.9% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,678 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,678 vs 2,558
  • 2.17x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,338 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,338 vs 1,535
  • 27.3% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 8 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (12 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    12 vs 4
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 80.2% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (883 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    883 vs 490
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (12x4.4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    12x4.4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 4 wider front-end design
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    8 vs 4
  • 16 higher clock multiplier
    This processor has a higher clock multiplier than the average processor (44 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    44 vs 28
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Granite Ridge vs Kaby Lake).
    Granite Ridge vs Kaby Lake
  • 7.11x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (64 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    64 MB vs 9 MB
  • 4x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (12 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    12 MB vs 3 MB
  • 2.88x more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (5.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    5.33 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 66.7% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (4 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    4 nm vs 12 nm
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 4 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 4 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 2.5x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (960 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    960 KB vs 384 KB
  • 2x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 3.36x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (16.6 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    16.63 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    24 usable lanes
    28 vs 16
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3).
    5 vs 3
  • 3x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (192 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    192 GB vs 64 GB
  • 91% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 75% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    5,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR5 vs DDR4
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-5600 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR5-5,600 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (AMD Radeon Graphics vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    AMD Radeon Graphics vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 5 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 75.6% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (97 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    97 vs 398.015
  • 2.67x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (120 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    120 W vs 45 W
  • 87.3% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (43.1 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    43.08 vs 340.075
  • 48.6% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (263 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    263 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 2.67x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (120 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    120 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 91.7% fewer GPU execution units
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (2 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    2 vs 24
  • 28% more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is more expensive than the average processor (£320 vs £250).
    £320 vs £250
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, Shadow Stack, GMET vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, Shadow Stack, GMET vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 75.6% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (97 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    97 vs 398.015
  • 87.3% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (43.1 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    43.08 vs 340.075
  • 48.6% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (263 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    263 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 91.7% fewer GPU execution units
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (2 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    2 vs 24
  • 2.67x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (120 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    120 W vs 45 W
  • 2.67x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (120 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    120 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

5.0
CrazyTechLab
≈ estimated
14/08/2024
Hands-on review · gaming and content creation tests
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is only slightly better than the launch CPUs, not enough to justify upgrading from Ryzen 7000.
8.0
KitGuruTech
✓ explicit
14/08/2024
Hands-on review · benchmarks, power, temperatures and gaming tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is still worth buying for its good value and efficiency, though gaming results are uneven.
7.0
Robeytech
≈ estimated
14/08/2024
Early review · benchmarks, power draw and gaming tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 9900X offers solid multicore gains and efficiency, but weak gaming and a high price make it a narrow buy.
5.0
Machines & More
≈ estimated
14/08/2024
Launch review · benchmarks, gaming and overclocking tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a decent CPU, but its gaming is no better than the 7900X, and the 7950X is the better buy.
8.0
ShortCircuit
≈ estimated
14/08/2024
Launch review · gaming, productivity and power tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a solid all-round CPU with strong productivity, though a 3D-cache chip is better for gaming.
Overview video
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Shop video
Overview video
Overview video
Shop video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
14/08/2024
Benchmark review · 12-core CPU
Verdict
The Ryzen 9 9900X performs close to Intel's Core i7-14700K while drawing 31% less power in Cinebench, but its idle draw is disappointing.
9.0
xda-developers.com
✓ explicit
14/08/2024
Hands-on review · Zen 5 CPU
Verdict
The Ryzen 9 9900X is a cool, efficient 12-core chip for all-round work, but gaming barely improves on the 7000 series.
9.0
windowscentral.com
✓ explicit
14/08/2024
Benchmark review · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a fast single-core chip for creators, but it trails Intel's Core i7-14700K in some multi-core tests and is no upgrade from Ryzen 7000.
9.1
tweaktown.com
✓ explicit
05/09/2024
Lab test · Zen 5 desktop chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core chip that uses less power than the 7900X and gains modestly in CPU-heavy work, but it trails in gaming.
5.0
gamersnexus.net
≈ estimated
09/09/2024
Benchmark review · Productivity focus
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core chip that beats the 7900X by up to 10%, but for many buyers the 7950X or 7800X3D fit better.
7.0
hwcooling.net
≈ estimated
12/09/2024
Megatest · Efficiency comparison
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is the most efficient 12-core Ryzen tested here, with lower reported temperatures than the 7900X and over twice the 5900X's speed in some tasks.
8.0
cgmagonline.com
✓ explicit
14/08/2024
Benchmark review · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a solid, efficient 12-core chip that handles video editing and rendering with ease, but trails Intel's Core i9-14900K in multi-core and gaming is mixed.
7.0
pcguide.com
✓ explicit
03/02/2025
Lab test · Synthetic benchmarks
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X has the best single-core speed of AMD chips tested, but its 120W limit leaves it behind rivals in multi-core work.
7.2
pcgamer.com
✓ explicit
14/08/2024
Hands-on review · Content creation
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X suits content creators and heavy multi-threaded work, but gamers should skip it, since it is barely faster than the Ryzen 9 7900X in games.
5.0
digitalfoundry.net
≈ estimated
14/08/2024
Benchmark review · Gaming and rendering
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a solid step up for rendering, but its gaming is inconsistent, with some games slower than on the Ryzen 9 7900X.
8.0
kitguru.net
✓ explicit
14/08/2024
Launch review · Work and gaming CPU
Verdict
The Ryzen 9 9900X is a strong all-rounder for work and games, though possible 3D cache models and new motherboards could change the picture.
8.5
hothardware.com
✓ explicit
14/08/2024
Launch review · Work-focused CPU
Verdict
The Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core chip with faster single-core speed and lower power use, but gaming is essentially unchanged from the Ryzen 7000 series.
8.0
clubic.com
✓ explicit
20/08/2024
Lab test · Zen 5 desktop chips
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X uses less power and runs cooler than the 7900X, but it does not clearly beat the Core i7-14700K.
10
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
01/11/2024
Lab test · Apps, games, power
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a strong all-rounder for multi-threaded work, but it draws 308W for the whole system and gains little in games over the 7900X.
7.0
hardwarecooking.fr
≈ estimated
14/08/2024
Full test · Power and heat
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is an efficient 12-core chip for application workloads, drawing about half the power of an Intel i9-13900K, but gaming is weaker than AMD's X3D chips.
7.0
comptoir-hardware.com
≈ estimated
14/08/2024
Test roundup · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a good application chip that challenges the Core i9-13900K, but gains are too small to justify an upgrade from Ryzen 7000.
9.2
profesionalreview.com
✓ explicit
14/08/2024
Lab test · Zen 5 CPU
Verdict
The Ryzen 9 9900X is an efficient 12-core chip for content creation, but it matches the 7900X in gaming and trails the 9600X.
9.4
geeknetic.es
✓ explicit
19/09/2024
Review · Feature overview
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core chip with a 120W power budget that handles games and heavy work well, though it needs a separate cooler.
9.0
hardzone.es
✓ explicit
14/08/2024
Full analysis · Desktop processor
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a fast 12-core chip for creative work, with strong single-core speed and fine-grained overclocking control, though it ships without a cooler.
9.5
fanaticosdelhardware.com
≈ estimated
02/08/2025
Review · Creators and gaming
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X suits multi-threaded work and overclocking, but it isn't always faster in games despite its 12 cores.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 9 9900X

  • Excellent energy efficiency with a reduced 120W TDP compared to its predecessor
  • Strong single-threaded performance improvements due to Zen 5 architecture
  • Lower operating temperatures that are manageable even with high-end air coolers
  • Impressive performance in creative and multithreaded workloads like 3D rendering and video editing
  • Compatibility with the existing AM5 socket and motherboards
  • Support for higher native memory speeds (DDR5-5600) and overclocking

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 9 9900X

  • High launch price relative to the performance gains over the Ryzen 9 7900X
  • Marginal gaming performance improvements, trailing behind specialized gaming CPUs like the 7800X3D
  • Lacks a bundled cooler, adding to the total system cost
  • High idle power consumption compared to competing Intel processors
  • No integrated NPU for dedicated AI hardware acceleration
  • Requires specific software configurations (Xbox Game Bar/Game Mode) for optimal thread scheduling

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a high-performance desktop processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, featuring 12 cores, 24 threads, a 4.4 GHz base clock, and a boost clock of up to 5.6 GHz. Built on a 4nm process for the AM5 socket, it includes 76 MB of total cache (L2+L3) and supports DDR5-5600 memory and PCIe 5.0. Main pros include significantly improved energy efficiency with a lower 120W TDP, excellent single-core and multi-threaded performance for creative tasks like rendering, and lower operating temperatures compared to its predecessor. However, main cons include a high initial price-to-performance ratio versus older models, gaming gains that are often marginal or inconsistent compared to specialized X3D chips, and the lack of an included thermal solution.

Compare AMD Ryzen 9 9900X with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and other processors

No results found