The Launch and Performance of the AMD Zen 5 Mini HDT CPUs

We launched this Lexar kit does pretty well to match but it is not a precise match and has some reduced controls on some timings even with all of that caveat, the difference remains within reasonable expectations. Once again, a quick look at frequency shows the 9950 x with its maximum single core boost is pushing higher than the 97 x with the single CCD boost also running often right alongside the max single core at any given interval. The 9700x is average, and frequently significantly lower than that of the 950x, helping explain this larger 3.5% gap in this particular title.

We've been running at full steam ahead for like a week now on all the different benchmarks reviews that Zen 5 efficiency piece was a huge amount of work. Uh so if you've gotten here, we'll keep it short and you probably have a few questions. Your questions might be like which CPU is better, value is the 950x worth it? Should I buy the 950x or the 750x? Are you wearing the same shirt you filmed in two days ago and have you left the office seeing the sun in two days? To the last two questions, I'd say why don't you mind your own business.

AVX 512 is a strength for Zen 5, which becomes more relevant on these mini HDT CPUs. That's a big potential reason to buy a 950x instead of a 750x. We saw in Blender for example where there's a massive efficiency uplift but also a performance Improvement. So that's another type of scenario in gaming, the CPU is just not as efficient as almost any other modern AMD CPU. You shouldn't buy it for only gaming.

So we think it boils down to this for gaming, you buy a 7800 x3d for production workloads without particular focus on AVX 512 and you can research your applications if that matters for them. We think the 7950 X is far better value. These CPUs are more likely to be under a full all-core workload than the R5 R 7 CPUs, so you're more likely to benefit from the reduced power that we saw in certain all-core workloads. But not all that said, the 750x is $520 now, that makes the 9950 X's price 25% higher for what's off in similar performance or maybe 12% better.

Generally speaking, we'd advise against the 7950 x3d and instead favor the 7800 x3d. You can learn about why in our prior reviews but basically most workstation applications we test can't make use of the extra cash they underperform versus the 750x. I don't know if it was in the change or not for this one, but the 3D is below the 750x in almost every production workstation benchmark we do. But those applications do benefit from the higher frequency of the 750x.

Non-3D on the positive side, the 950x did better in gaming than we expected. You really shouldn't buy it for gaming primarily, but the fact that it's at least regularly matching or very slightly outperforming the 9700x is a good thing overall. The 7 950x is generally speaking a better value. The 950x is at least worth considering if you're doing a brand new from scratch build for a workstation-type environment.

But the thing for you to really research and pay attention to is the type of application you use. If it's really heavily threaded, it is running all cores at 100% all the time like in Blender, it's comparable to that. Or if it is an AVX 512 application, you are more likely to benefit from a 950x in a way that at least might start to matter versus a 750x. Whereas if those things aren't the case, then we think the better value is to buy the 750x instead. So it's going to be up to you, you got to look at those scenarios and uh you can research your applications to learn more about that.

Thanks for watching. We're going to knock out the 9900 X and go back to the 9600 X and then I am going to sleep for a day but uh thank you for watching subscribe for more. Go to store.gamasaccess.net to help us out directly. You can use code this is fine for 10% off while that code is active, which directly helps us on the store. And we have these super cool multicolor solder mats that we've added to the store in the past week or so. Uh so we now have green red and yellow in addition to the existing blue.

If you want some super heat-resistant work surfaces for your projects thanks for watching check out the Zen 5 efficiency video. We'll see you all next time.

"WEBVTTKind: captionsLanguage: enwe're back with the 950x after a hell of a long week working on zen5 efficiency testing if you haven't seen that video go check it out it's on the channel went up like I know 16 hours ago or something like that uh but the 950x is up for review now here's a quick price and update the 950x is a $650 CPU direct Alternatives might include the AMD R9 7950 X at about 520 bucks us right now the threader for 7960x as a we'll call it cheap HDT part at $1,400 or possibly the upcoming 9900x at $500 the existing 7900x is 360 bucks though making it possibly a better Contender depending on what you need and the value finally Intel's 14900 K is 546 bucks but again we have currently paused Intel recommendations until we can evaluate the new micro code fully AMD has some communication problems it always has had problems largely with marketing but this time the communication issues included not telling reviewers that the 950x and 9900x require the same special Windows setup and chipset driver installation steps as the 7950 x3d and the 7900 x3d this is really important because you can basically kill like half of the performance if you don't follow the steps now this is not something that's needed for the 7950 X non-3d nor the 7900x this is new for the 950x and 9900x and and AMD decided to tell reviewers 5 days after we got the CPUs so we threw away 5 days of data and we started over and I immediately messaged other reviewers including Steve from Hardware unboxed who replied with wellp I better get started and that was how we felt too uh this is you it's it's a complete mess this launch we're going to focus on the product today for most of this maybe I'll comment on it a little bit at the end but for this review we're going to focus on production applications a little bit on power because we think it's more likely you're buying one of these for production than for gaming we do have gaming benchmarks in here though because uh the main goal there is Mak sure it's functioning properly and not massively regressive so let's get started before that this video is brought to you by height and the y70 case the height y70 case has a lot of Polish and heavy attention to detail on the finer points the case can fit radiators that are massive in depth to the side mount has Cooling in the floor of the case for direct intake to the GPU and tries to find a balance between structural support of dust filters without obstructing too much intake the y70 is a follow-up to the popular y60 which got height to where it is today with its cut Corner tempered glass cases the 950x is a 16 core 32 thread part it is accompanied by the 9900x which is a 12 core part 24 threads and then for motherboards uh we are running on x670 these CPUs are am5 compatible so they socket into am5 motherboards and the chipsets right now include the 600 series AMD chipsets but in the future hope that within the next couple months it'll be ubiquitous uh there will be 800 series chips sets this is a list of CPUs that require the setup we're about to describe the only processors that require special care are these These are the 7950 x3d the 7900 x3d the 9900x and the 950x we're not talking about thread Ripper today let send those reviews if you want to learn about those the non-3d 750x and 7900x do not get the same treatment core parking is a behavior wherein half of the cpu's cores are parked or functionally doing nothing they are available but they're not assigned to the primary task that you are currently handling so they are basically avoided when scheduling work for something like a video game the affected AMD CPUs have two ccds or two chiplets in addition to the IOD chiplet CPUs like the 7800 x3d only have a single chiplet which also has its extra cash with the 7950 x3d and 7900 x3d the reason you would have parked cores is because the extra cash on one CCD bios can be set to favor the CCD with higher frequency or with more cash but you should be using the chipset drivers for all of this if a game is bouncing load indiscriminately between cores across two very different chiplets it's possible that performance is worse it could land on a core where it doesn't have the frequency that would benefit it or that doesn't have the cash that would benefit it if you use core Park and you force it enabled on a CPU that should not have it it will harm the performance massive mely likewise if you don't have core parking on for a CPU that should have it the same thing will happen both can manifest in again double digit percentage impact so we'll talk about how to configure it first and we'll get into some of the downsides now that it's required on the 950x and 9900x if you're not buying this thing today just skip all this stuff and go to the benchmarks but for those of you who are buying it you want to know this first install amd's latest chipset driver with all the features then update Windows and enable Microsoft's game mode enable game bar open the Microsoft store Library library and click on Game Bar to check that it's fully updated then go to the control panel the real one not the settings app power options and select balanc balanced is required AMD says that afterwards you can go into the settings app not the control panel then system power and change power mode to best performance if you want then the system should handle itself but to be sure reboot and run the command that we have on the screen now then you leave the mouse and keyboard alone let the command finish processing this takes a few minutes and after that you can verify that all of this is working by running the next command that's on the screen now in an elevated command prompt this will either say there's no profile found which is the case for core parking off or it'll tell you about the core parking configuration and then save this video and this command for the future in case you ever do an in socket upgrade game bar is the app responsible for determining whether the cores get parked or Not by enabling game mode when it knows if an application is or isn't a game to test it you can open resource monitor open Windows game bar with Windows plus G and then you check the remember this game box you'd relaunch resource Monitor and then go to the CPU Tab and half of the cores should say parked it'll tell you and keep in mind that Microsoft's game bar I'm going to read Patrick wrote this section I'm going to read his quote exactly he says keep in mind Microsoft's game bar is still a huge piece of crap to quote uh we've seen the remember this game box randomly checked and unable to be deactivated so uh basically play with the option at your own risk if you boot with one of these four CPUs and then you later move to a CPU that doesn't require core parking let's say you buy a whatever a 10 800 x3d or something amd's official advice is to reinstall Windows they also say you can try uninstalling then reinstalling the AMD chipset driver as a work around in a situation like that you should use the power CFG command we gave you to make sure it actually did what you wanted it to do now uh our sort of blanket advice here is new windows install is the safest way to make sure it's all functioning prop L it is possible to get things working without going through a new windows install uh for us our concern is it's a test environment and we really want to be sure things are working right now one of the other tools we have is we can validate data with old data so we've got options uh but generally speaking for most people we'd recommend to clean install it is however possible if you follow these steps to get it working properly that's the basics there's some bios options on some boards with some CPU combinations also you can favor driver frequency so forth you should favor the driver D behavior and uh shorten this review we're going to provide a lot of other quick reference links in the description including zen5 architectural information Zen product level specifications and azen 5 efficiency benchmarking plus the 9700 Xtra viw which contains all of our testing methodology updates for this generation okay let's get into the benchmarking we'll look at frequency first to make sure things are performing as expected here's the all core frequency when the CPU is fully engaged on every thread and blender the 9700x was around 4500 MHz here plus orus 20 MHz the 7950 X plotted around 5100 MHz all core previously and as for the new 950x its higher power budget allows it to boost substantially higher than the 9700x the 950x ends up around the range of 5,000 mahz it's spiky but generally speaking it doesn't have any major dips it is a little bit lower than the 7950 X though we'd expect that our 950x should generally outperform the 9700x and gaming scenarios based on this as it's theoretically able to boost higher than the 9700 X the only reason this wouldn't be the case is if something is going wrong with say the core parking behavior in single core testing with caban 1T the 9700x maxed out at 5525 MHz in most scenarios the 7950 X ran at 5750 MHz in the same testing pushing relatively High the new 9950 a is also in this area with hours plotting around 5710 to 5725 MHz for a single threaded load as long as there's architectural uplift this should enable the 950x to also outperform the 750x in lightly threaded scenarios power consumption at the EPS 12 volt rails in just blender is up now this isn't an efficiency chart it's just the peak power consumption in a worst case scenario you can use this to help buffer your PSU requirements the 950x pulled 223 watts in this Benchmark which is down from the 750x is 251 Watts that we measured previously the 950x is about 70 Watts below the 13900 K here and against the R7 family the 950x is pulling about 136 Watts more than the 9700 X and it's 87.6 watt entry so far the 950x is down from what we measured on the 750x compared to older Generations power remains up overall the 3950x pulled 137 watts in this test with all cores loaded with the 550x at an impressive 120 watts it's why you'll see the 550x perform the same as the the 3950x and some benchmarks but with huge power reductions due to the quality of the voltage bin we're starting with our efficiency benchmarks now if you haven't seen our efficiency Deep dive from just yet today definitely go check that out it's in the link below open another Tab and save it really in-depth and good video with a lot of findings it's extremely interesting though and it reveals a lot of CPU behaviors but it also plotted the course for what we're doing in this review which is run a limited set of additional tests for efficiency all core workloads are where the 950x belongs so we'll start with production applications in blender the 9950 X ends up Neighbors with the 7700 and less efficient than the old 550x which was a remarkable chip for Tera the 7 950x ranks at 29.5 wat hours here so in the very least the 950x improves massively on that it's Improvement is a 26% reduction in the wat hour measurement for this specific test the 7 950x with the Eco Mode does phenomenally here as it always has with 105 watt Eco which we found to be the ideal configuration rather than dropping down to 65 the 19.1 result has it as a chart leader and just ahead of the 9700x and behind the PBT limited entries AMD continues to improve in efficiency in this specific test but as we saw in yesterday's content we need more than this szip is up now and then games in szip compression the 950x ranked at 1,3 mips per watt or millions of instructions per Jewel that has it as one of the least efficient on this chart we haven't run the 750x through for the efficiency the power logging here yet so we don't have comparative data for efficiency for that one this is a brand new data set will add to it four things that we can compare against the 950x ends up about the same place as the 9700x with PBO blast and behind the 7600 a part of this may be explainable by hitting other non-core bottlenecks and limiting its total performance now for games Final Fantasy is one of the ones that had more interesting Behavior especially on some of the 7,000 series CPUs explained in yesterday's video for the 950x the CPU ended up pulling about 85 Watts or 10 watts more than the 9700x but obviously far less than what we'd see in allore work that extra TDP gives it extra power budget even though half the CPU is parked but half the CPU is parked this is not useful the end result is overall good performance in an absolute sense but less efficient operation the 950x outd does the 14700 K and 14900 K but underperforms against everything else in Phantom Liberty the 950x pulled about 119 Watts while producing a frame rate similar to the 9700x as a result its efficiency is through the floor this CPU is just off the far end of the bathtub curb for these kinds of games the Baseline power consumption to keep the CPU operational is higher and it has a ton of cores sitting there doing next to nothing this CPU needs to be fully leveraged to have a better result like we saw in blender not parked and games just don't really do what you would need when you're core parking which is what you should be doing for gaming in Stellaris the 950x completes 1.4 simulations per wat hour which has it below almost everything except for the 14700 K and 14900 K CPUs the 9700x leads by a significant margin up about 1.8 simulations per wat hour with the 7800x 3D roughly doubling the performance The only positive is that it's ahead of Intel here we're starting with production benchmarks for the 9950 X since its intended use case would be for workstation type tasks followed by Gaming benchmarks just to make sure it's working as expected blender starts us off the 950x is the new chart topper for tile based rendering posting a total render time reduction of 12% from the 7950 X that's going to be one of the top gains we see in this review as this is a fully engaged allcore workload the 4900 K from Intel required 7.9 minutes to complete the same work depending on launch Day pricing if the 750x moves around or not it's possible that it Remains the best option for a machine that combines workstation gaming tasks when looking at it from a value standpoint but it really depends on price positioning we don't know right now if the 750x will drop in price at the time we're filming this cuz it's pre-launch generationally the 950x reduces the total render time required by 43% from the 5950 X and 3950x which both require about 10.4 minutes to complete it's not a mistake they are just the same here talked about that from our original review years ago if you want to learn more if you prefer to look at this from the direction of increase in time required obviously the percent flips and nearly results in a doubling but we do these comparisons as percent reduction and total required time because that's the direction of improvement AMD is at least moving the needle with this one we'll see if it sustains but in the very least if they happen to be very similar in price the 950x makes more sense than the 7 950x Adobe Photoshop is next tested with the Puget test suite for Adobe scoring is done as a formula calculating filtering scaling other types of tasks blend modes things like that within the software and this benchmark the 950x scored 11,694 points for Photoshop which has it below the 9700x by technicality they're basically the same Photoshop can utilize extra cores but it isn't making enough use of those extra eight cores over the 9700 X to matter here at least not with the way this test is run generationally we saw similar Behavior with the 7950 X and 7700x they were within margin of error of each other the 950x improves on the 750x by 7% which still isn't bad at least it's not regressive uh certainly not a huge excitement though this is performance we'd expect out of something more like a mid generation refresh it doesn't really feel like enough for how much this was marketed as such a brand new platform to work off of versus the 550x the 950x improves 33% the 3950x gives the 950x an uplift of 60% so if you've been on the 3950x for years now it's at least starting to look like you'll get meaningful uplift in some of these tasks the newest version of this Benchmark combined with the newest version of Photoshop shows AMD favorable positioning whereas older versions showed Intel favor Intel's first showing on this is below the 7600 X in Adobe Premiere the 9950 X scored almost 11,000 points for the extended Benchmark the 14900 K flanks it with the standardized and the fased memory But ultimately these are equivalent against the prior generation the 950x improves 31% over the 5950 X which is down near the 7600 X and 42% over over the 3950x for a comparison the 550x which itself wasn't always an exciting uplift over the 3950x posts a 9% improvement over its predecessor anyone expecting a 7950 X era gain here would be pretty disappointed that one saw a 26% to uplift over the 550x but of course that also came with it an entire platform change from am4 to am5 Intel does much better in this test than some of the prior ones with our current data set the 14700 K and 14600 K are still in the top portion of this chart and we actually generally like the 13600 K when it's been discounted as it has recently and sometimes the 14600 k for a cheaper option for this task plus gaming especially when they're discounted but we're waiting for some of the smoke to clear for Intel before we resume any recommendations of them the micro code is still rolling out to boards and we're still kind of watching and seeing how they react to the rest of this situation code compile testing with chromium is next this requires a reminder that not all compile workloads behave the same just like anything else so all we can really talk about here is how this one performs with our CPU testing and at least our test the 950x leads everything the new CPU required 66 minutes to complete the compile leading the 7950 X's 73 minute entry and benefiting from a total compile time reduction of almost 10% obviously thread Ripper would be ahead of this we've tested that in the past but we don't have it rerun for the new tests the 750x was able to reduce the compile time required from the 5950 X's 101 minute result by 27% whereas the 5950 X only reduced it from the 3950 X's 106 minute result by 5.3% the new 950x compared to the 750x is similar to that era the 5950 to 3950 then it would be the 7950 to the 5950 again because the total platform change helped that one out it's not too surprising Intel's closest entries are the 14900 K which roughly ties the 750x AMD is gaining some distance here against Intel where before it was closer to equivalence file compression with seven zip is next in this one the 9 50x completed 205,000 mips or millions of instructions per second when stock which is an improvement of 5.9% over the 7950 X's result for that same generational perspective here's how it lines up the 795x gained 39% on the 595x which itself had gained 7.5% on the 3950x the gains are up and down but the 950x is the lowest of these metrics so far Intel's 14900 K encroaches on the top of the chart and was nearly tied with the 750x previously again AMD benefits from creating some slight distance between itself and the 14900 K regardless of Intel's current problems if aerol Lake can do better than this Intel may be able to maneuver itself into a strong strong spot it'll depend on if intel can regain confidence before then against the 9700x the 950x completes 71% more myips this aligns with the massive core count difference decompression move some of these CPUs around but the 950x remains at the top of the chart its lead over the 750x is only 1. 6% here we may be running into something like memory bandwidth limitations that'd be a separate test but the next CPUs are pretty far away amd's 950x leads the 4900 K and its 229,000 mips result by 22% it's a big Advantage the 5950 X also did well in this one shoving itself right between the 14900 K and the 13900 K this test clearly favors having a bunch of homogeneous cores against the 9700x the 950x doubles performance but it also doubles core count making this one of the more linear gains that we'll see spec works station is up next this testing is completed using the spec pre-built benchmarks for various professional software the first one is for lamps which is part of Spec's biomedical Suite as tested by the spec Benchmark lamps has the 950x as the chart leader it's up at 6.93 leading the 7950 X's 6.61 result by 5% that also puts AMD now ahead of the 14900 K the next one is for the spec workstation FSI test or a financial test which it says analyzes black schs pricing models runs py Carlo simulations and probability simulations and runs a binomial options pricing model we're not familiar with what any of that means or what the use cases are in the real world just being real with you uh but our hope is that these tests are useful to the audience in the past some of you in the financial industry have told us that they are here the 950x ends up leading the 750x non 3D by 7.7% at 9.47 to 8.79 points the lead over the 14900 K is 20% against prior Generations the 5950 X gives the 950x a 61% lead gaming is up now this is less important for the 950x you shouldn't buy these CPUs for a gaming build only our main goal here is to just make sure it works properly and doesn't chop the frame rate in any major unplayable ways that used to happen on Old AMD platforms we won't spend much time on each of these charts we think that time is better spent in the production and other sections of this review Dragons Dogma 2 is up first the CPU heavy game that came out this year the 950x is about the same as the 7950 X here it's technically slightly ahead and as a positive we're seeing benefit from the 16 core Parts in this specific test it's actually really cool from a testing perspective because historically some of the 16 core CPS have had problems in gaming but this was especially true in older games and as you all likely know we just refreshed our whole game suite where most of them are 2023 2024 launches now we're starting to see in some of these where they are CPU heavy and more cores can help the 950x is definitely not worth buying just for gaming but neither was the 750x and this one it's holding an average frame rate similar to a 13600 K or 5600 x both of which are much better value for just gaming the lows on the 9950 X are good though which means it clears the bar of working in a gaming scenario the 7800 x2d remains remarkably good value in this particular game Intel's i7 CPUs at the top also do overall well you can see that the older 16 core CPUs also outdo their generational family by small margins the 3950x leads the 3700x slightly and the 5950 X leads the 5900 X and 5800 X non-3d Parts slightly this is pretty cool to see as again it was rare in Prior years of benchmarking Dragon Dogma 2 looks like it's a pretty good game for our test Suite in balers Gate 3 the 9950 X landed at 111 FPS average that has about tied with a 13700 K and slightly ahead of the 5700x 3D against the 9700x we're seeing about a 2.9% uplift with the 9950 X lows are similar but with the 0.1% lows technically worse the gain over the 750x is about 5.2% the 3950x allows the 950x to run 55% faster with the 595x allowing it a 28% lead as for the 7800 x2d with our default memory it outperforms the 950x by 19.4% the 14900 K is also up here at 121 FPS average when paired with faster memory or down at 116 FPS average without where it and the 13900 K become limited the 950x is working better than we expected for balers Gate 3 Stellaris post results that have the 9700x outperforming the 950x slightly the reduction in average simulation time is 1 full second or about 3.5% time reduced the 950x is also tied with the 7800 x3d with this being one of the only tests where we saw the 9700x leverage its changes to pull ahead of the x3d part the 950x has the same architectural benefits so it's up here as well despite not improving over the 9700x the 9950 X at least improves on the 7950 X the jump from 33.3 seconds to 28 .4 seconds starts to become noticeable for longer play sessions back in the 550x era we can see that there was no real differentiation between it and the 5600x or the 5900 X the 3950x is actually a little bit worse than the 3700x this makes sense for those CPUs as they sacrificed more frequency along with their core count increases Intel's presence begins at the 30.5 second Mark with the 14700 K and 14900 K which are about the same Final Fantasy 14 dawn tril has the 950x at 336 FPS average which is a somewhat noteworthy lead over the 9700x of 2% it'd be insane to spend this kind of money on it for just gaming obviously but at least it's tracking better and we seem to be past that old era of High Core count Parts floundering like what we saw at the original threader 1950x the 7800 x3d Remains the clear gaming chart leader to better understand what's going on in Dawn tril we plotted the frequency of the 950x and 9700x during this workload we found that the 9950 X's all quore average was about 4975 5 to 5,000 MHz which is lower than the 9700 X's all core average of 5500 MHz but that's because it's averaging an inactive CCD we'll look at that in a second you can see that the 9700x is all core is just below its maximum single core frequency at the same time the 950x is able to boost its maximum core higher up to 5670 to 5700 MHz at times that's surr a 150 MHz advantage over the 9700x which explains the performance that we're seeing in Final Fantasy if we plot the the average frequency for just eight cores that are active we see that it aligns with the max so that helps explain things even further the 950x is just boosting higher everywhere here now for F1 2024 F1 had the 950x at 393.7 FPS average with the 9700x at 380 it's about a 3 and a half% difference between them one note here we have observed more variable behavior in this test on the 9,000 Series CPUs as compared to the 7,000 series which we think has to do with the memory kit change uh where as discussed last time we can't use our standard Corsair DDR 56000 kit for the 9000 Series as the platform has some issues running it at the manual timings we set despite 7,000 workings since launch this Lexar kit does pretty well to match but it is not a precise match and has some reduced controls on some timings even with all of that caveat the difference remains within reasonable expectations once again a quick look at frequency shows the 9950 x with its maximum single core boost is pushing higher than the 97 x with the single CCD boost also running often right alongside the max single core at any given interval the 9700x is average is frequently significantly lower than that of the 950x helping explain this larger 3 and 1 half% Gap in this particular title we're going to keep the conclusion really short been running at full steam ahead for like a week now on all the different benchmarks reviews that zen5 efficiency piece was a huge amount of work uh so if you've gotten here we'll keep it short and you probably have a few questions your questions might be like which CPU is better value is the 950x worth it should I buy the 950x or the 750x are you wearing the same shirt you filmed in two days ago and have you left the office or seing the sun in two days and to the last two questions I'd say why don't you mind your own business okay AVX 512 is a strength for zen5 which becomes more relevant on these mini HDT CPUs that'd be a big potential reason to buy a 950x instead of a 750x uh we saw in blender for example where there's a massive efficiency uplift but also a performance Improvement so that's another type of scenario in gaming the CPU is just not as efficient as almost any other modern AMD CPU you shouldn't buy it for only gaming so we think it boils down to this for gaming you buy a 7800 x3d for production workloads without particular focus on AVX 512 and you can research your applications if that matters for them we think the 7950 X is far better value these CPUs are more likely to be under a full allcore workload than the R5 R 7 CPUs so you're more likely to benefit from the reduced power that we saw in certain allcore workloads but not all that said the 750x is $520 now that makes the 9950 X's price 25% higher for what's off in similar performance or maybe 12% better uh results at the highend generally speaking we'd advise against the 7950 x3d and instead favor the 7800 x3d you can learn about why in our prior reviews but B basically most workstation applications we test can't make use of the extra cash they underperform versus the 750x I don't know if it was in the chge or not for this one but the 3D is below the 750x in almost every production workstation uh Benchmark we do but those applications do benefit from the higher frequency of the 750x non 3D on the positive side the 950x did better in gaming than we expected you really shouldn't buy it for gaming primarily but the fact that it's at least regularly matching or very slightly outperforming the 9700x is is a good thing overall the 7 950x is generally speaking a better value the 950x is at least worth considering if you're doing a brand new from scratch build for a workstation type of environment but the thing for you to really research and pay attention to is the type of application you use if it is really heavily threaded it is running all cores at 100% all the time like in blender it's comparable to that uh and or if it is an AVX 512 application you are more like liky to benefit from a 950x in a way that at least might start to matter versus a 750x whereas if those things aren't the case then we think the better value is to buy the 750x instead so it's going to be up to you you got to look at those scenarios and uh you can research your applications to learn more about that but that's it for this one thanks for watching we're going to well we're going to knock out the 9900 X and go back to the 9600 X and then I am going to sleep for a day but uh thank you for watching subscribe for more go to store. gamas access.net to help us out directly you can use code this is fine for 10% off while that code is active which directly helps us on the store and we have these super cool multicolor solder mats that we've added to the store in the past week or so uh so we now have green red and yellow in addition to the existing blue if you want some super heat resistant work surfaces for your projects thanks for watching check out the zen5 efficiency video we'll see you all next next timewe're back with the 950x after a hell of a long week working on zen5 efficiency testing if you haven't seen that video go check it out it's on the channel went up like I know 16 hours ago or something like that uh but the 950x is up for review now here's a quick price and update the 950x is a $650 CPU direct Alternatives might include the AMD R9 7950 X at about 520 bucks us right now the threader for 7960x as a we'll call it cheap HDT part at $1,400 or possibly the upcoming 9900x at $500 the existing 7900x is 360 bucks though making it possibly a better Contender depending on what you need and the value finally Intel's 14900 K is 546 bucks but again we have currently paused Intel recommendations until we can evaluate the new micro code fully AMD has some communication problems it always has had problems largely with marketing but this time the communication issues included not telling reviewers that the 950x and 9900x require the same special Windows setup and chipset driver installation steps as the 7950 x3d and the 7900 x3d this is really important because you can basically kill like half of the performance if you don't follow the steps now this is not something that's needed for the 7950 X non-3d nor the 7900x this is new for the 950x and 9900x and and AMD decided to tell reviewers 5 days after we got the CPUs so we threw away 5 days of data and we started over and I immediately messaged other reviewers including Steve from Hardware unboxed who replied with wellp I better get started and that was how we felt too uh this is you it's it's a complete mess this launch we're going to focus on the product today for most of this maybe I'll comment on it a little bit at the end but for this review we're going to focus on production applications a little bit on power because we think it's more likely you're buying one of these for production than for gaming we do have gaming benchmarks in here though because uh the main goal there is Mak sure it's functioning properly and not massively regressive so let's get started before that this video is brought to you by height and the y70 case the height y70 case has a lot of Polish and heavy attention to detail on the finer points the case can fit radiators that are massive in depth to the side mount has Cooling in the floor of the case for direct intake to the GPU and tries to find a balance between structural support of dust filters without obstructing too much intake the y70 is a follow-up to the popular y60 which got height to where it is today with its cut Corner tempered glass cases the 950x is a 16 core 32 thread part it is accompanied by the 9900x which is a 12 core part 24 threads and then for motherboards uh we are running on x670 these CPUs are am5 compatible so they socket into am5 motherboards and the chipsets right now include the 600 series AMD chipsets but in the future hope that within the next couple months it'll be ubiquitous uh there will be 800 series chips sets this is a list of CPUs that require the setup we're about to describe the only processors that require special care are these These are the 7950 x3d the 7900 x3d the 9900x and the 950x we're not talking about thread Ripper today let send those reviews if you want to learn about those the non-3d 750x and 7900x do not get the same treatment core parking is a behavior wherein half of the cpu's cores are parked or functionally doing nothing they are available but they're not assigned to the primary task that you are currently handling so they are basically avoided when scheduling work for something like a video game the affected AMD CPUs have two ccds or two chiplets in addition to the IOD chiplet CPUs like the 7800 x3d only have a single chiplet which also has its extra cash with the 7950 x3d and 7900 x3d the reason you would have parked cores is because the extra cash on one CCD bios can be set to favor the CCD with higher frequency or with more cash but you should be using the chipset drivers for all of this if a game is bouncing load indiscriminately between cores across two very different chiplets it's possible that performance is worse it could land on a core where it doesn't have the frequency that would benefit it or that doesn't have the cash that would benefit it if you use core Park and you force it enabled on a CPU that should not have it it will harm the performance massive mely likewise if you don't have core parking on for a CPU that should have it the same thing will happen both can manifest in again double digit percentage impact so we'll talk about how to configure it first and we'll get into some of the downsides now that it's required on the 950x and 9900x if you're not buying this thing today just skip all this stuff and go to the benchmarks but for those of you who are buying it you want to know this first install amd's latest chipset driver with all the features then update Windows and enable Microsoft's game mode enable game bar open the Microsoft store Library library and click on Game Bar to check that it's fully updated then go to the control panel the real one not the settings app power options and select balanc balanced is required AMD says that afterwards you can go into the settings app not the control panel then system power and change power mode to best performance if you want then the system should handle itself but to be sure reboot and run the command that we have on the screen now then you leave the mouse and keyboard alone let the command finish processing this takes a few minutes and after that you can verify that all of this is working by running the next command that's on the screen now in an elevated command prompt this will either say there's no profile found which is the case for core parking off or it'll tell you about the core parking configuration and then save this video and this command for the future in case you ever do an in socket upgrade game bar is the app responsible for determining whether the cores get parked or Not by enabling game mode when it knows if an application is or isn't a game to test it you can open resource monitor open Windows game bar with Windows plus G and then you check the remember this game box you'd relaunch resource Monitor and then go to the CPU Tab and half of the cores should say parked it'll tell you and keep in mind that Microsoft's game bar I'm going to read Patrick wrote this section I'm going to read his quote exactly he says keep in mind Microsoft's game bar is still a huge piece of crap to quote uh we've seen the remember this game box randomly checked and unable to be deactivated so uh basically play with the option at your own risk if you boot with one of these four CPUs and then you later move to a CPU that doesn't require core parking let's say you buy a whatever a 10 800 x3d or something amd's official advice is to reinstall Windows they also say you can try uninstalling then reinstalling the AMD chipset driver as a work around in a situation like that you should use the power CFG command we gave you to make sure it actually did what you wanted it to do now uh our sort of blanket advice here is new windows install is the safest way to make sure it's all functioning prop L it is possible to get things working without going through a new windows install uh for us our concern is it's a test environment and we really want to be sure things are working right now one of the other tools we have is we can validate data with old data so we've got options uh but generally speaking for most people we'd recommend to clean install it is however possible if you follow these steps to get it working properly that's the basics there's some bios options on some boards with some CPU combinations also you can favor driver frequency so forth you should favor the driver D behavior and uh shorten this review we're going to provide a lot of other quick reference links in the description including zen5 architectural information Zen product level specifications and azen 5 efficiency benchmarking plus the 9700 Xtra viw which contains all of our testing methodology updates for this generation okay let's get into the benchmarking we'll look at frequency first to make sure things are performing as expected here's the all core frequency when the CPU is fully engaged on every thread and blender the 9700x was around 4500 MHz here plus orus 20 MHz the 7950 X plotted around 5100 MHz all core previously and as for the new 950x its higher power budget allows it to boost substantially higher than the 9700x the 950x ends up around the range of 5,000 mahz it's spiky but generally speaking it doesn't have any major dips it is a little bit lower than the 7950 X though we'd expect that our 950x should generally outperform the 9700x and gaming scenarios based on this as it's theoretically able to boost higher than the 9700 X the only reason this wouldn't be the case is if something is going wrong with say the core parking behavior in single core testing with caban 1T the 9700x maxed out at 5525 MHz in most scenarios the 7950 X ran at 5750 MHz in the same testing pushing relatively High the new 9950 a is also in this area with hours plotting around 5710 to 5725 MHz for a single threaded load as long as there's architectural uplift this should enable the 950x to also outperform the 750x in lightly threaded scenarios power consumption at the EPS 12 volt rails in just blender is up now this isn't an efficiency chart it's just the peak power consumption in a worst case scenario you can use this to help buffer your PSU requirements the 950x pulled 223 watts in this Benchmark which is down from the 750x is 251 Watts that we measured previously the 950x is about 70 Watts below the 13900 K here and against the R7 family the 950x is pulling about 136 Watts more than the 9700 X and it's 87.6 watt entry so far the 950x is down from what we measured on the 750x compared to older Generations power remains up overall the 3950x pulled 137 watts in this test with all cores loaded with the 550x at an impressive 120 watts it's why you'll see the 550x perform the same as the the 3950x and some benchmarks but with huge power reductions due to the quality of the voltage bin we're starting with our efficiency benchmarks now if you haven't seen our efficiency Deep dive from just yet today definitely go check that out it's in the link below open another Tab and save it really in-depth and good video with a lot of findings it's extremely interesting though and it reveals a lot of CPU behaviors but it also plotted the course for what we're doing in this review which is run a limited set of additional tests for efficiency all core workloads are where the 950x belongs so we'll start with production applications in blender the 9950 X ends up Neighbors with the 7700 and less efficient than the old 550x which was a remarkable chip for Tera the 7 950x ranks at 29.5 wat hours here so in the very least the 950x improves massively on that it's Improvement is a 26% reduction in the wat hour measurement for this specific test the 7 950x with the Eco Mode does phenomenally here as it always has with 105 watt Eco which we found to be the ideal configuration rather than dropping down to 65 the 19.1 result has it as a chart leader and just ahead of the 9700x and behind the PBT limited entries AMD continues to improve in efficiency in this specific test but as we saw in yesterday's content we need more than this szip is up now and then games in szip compression the 950x ranked at 1,3 mips per watt or millions of instructions per Jewel that has it as one of the least efficient on this chart we haven't run the 750x through for the efficiency the power logging here yet so we don't have comparative data for efficiency for that one this is a brand new data set will add to it four things that we can compare against the 950x ends up about the same place as the 9700x with PBO blast and behind the 7600 a part of this may be explainable by hitting other non-core bottlenecks and limiting its total performance now for games Final Fantasy is one of the ones that had more interesting Behavior especially on some of the 7,000 series CPUs explained in yesterday's video for the 950x the CPU ended up pulling about 85 Watts or 10 watts more than the 9700x but obviously far less than what we'd see in allore work that extra TDP gives it extra power budget even though half the CPU is parked but half the CPU is parked this is not useful the end result is overall good performance in an absolute sense but less efficient operation the 950x outd does the 14700 K and 14900 K but underperforms against everything else in Phantom Liberty the 950x pulled about 119 Watts while producing a frame rate similar to the 9700x as a result its efficiency is through the floor this CPU is just off the far end of the bathtub curb for these kinds of games the Baseline power consumption to keep the CPU operational is higher and it has a ton of cores sitting there doing next to nothing this CPU needs to be fully leveraged to have a better result like we saw in blender not parked and games just don't really do what you would need when you're core parking which is what you should be doing for gaming in Stellaris the 950x completes 1.4 simulations per wat hour which has it below almost everything except for the 14700 K and 14900 K CPUs the 9700x leads by a significant margin up about 1.8 simulations per wat hour with the 7800x 3D roughly doubling the performance The only positive is that it's ahead of Intel here we're starting with production benchmarks for the 9950 X since its intended use case would be for workstation type tasks followed by Gaming benchmarks just to make sure it's working as expected blender starts us off the 950x is the new chart topper for tile based rendering posting a total render time reduction of 12% from the 7950 X that's going to be one of the top gains we see in this review as this is a fully engaged allcore workload the 4900 K from Intel required 7.9 minutes to complete the same work depending on launch Day pricing if the 750x moves around or not it's possible that it Remains the best option for a machine that combines workstation gaming tasks when looking at it from a value standpoint but it really depends on price positioning we don't know right now if the 750x will drop in price at the time we're filming this cuz it's pre-launch generationally the 950x reduces the total render time required by 43% from the 5950 X and 3950x which both require about 10.4 minutes to complete it's not a mistake they are just the same here talked about that from our original review years ago if you want to learn more if you prefer to look at this from the direction of increase in time required obviously the percent flips and nearly results in a doubling but we do these comparisons as percent reduction and total required time because that's the direction of improvement AMD is at least moving the needle with this one we'll see if it sustains but in the very least if they happen to be very similar in price the 950x makes more sense than the 7 950x Adobe Photoshop is next tested with the Puget test suite for Adobe scoring is done as a formula calculating filtering scaling other types of tasks blend modes things like that within the software and this benchmark the 950x scored 11,694 points for Photoshop which has it below the 9700x by technicality they're basically the same Photoshop can utilize extra cores but it isn't making enough use of those extra eight cores over the 9700 X to matter here at least not with the way this test is run generationally we saw similar Behavior with the 7950 X and 7700x they were within margin of error of each other the 950x improves on the 750x by 7% which still isn't bad at least it's not regressive uh certainly not a huge excitement though this is performance we'd expect out of something more like a mid generation refresh it doesn't really feel like enough for how much this was marketed as such a brand new platform to work off of versus the 550x the 950x improves 33% the 3950x gives the 950x an uplift of 60% so if you've been on the 3950x for years now it's at least starting to look like you'll get meaningful uplift in some of these tasks the newest version of this Benchmark combined with the newest version of Photoshop shows AMD favorable positioning whereas older versions showed Intel favor Intel's first showing on this is below the 7600 X in Adobe Premiere the 9950 X scored almost 11,000 points for the extended Benchmark the 14900 K flanks it with the standardized and the fased memory But ultimately these are equivalent against the prior generation the 950x improves 31% over the 5950 X which is down near the 7600 X and 42% over over the 3950x for a comparison the 550x which itself wasn't always an exciting uplift over the 3950x posts a 9% improvement over its predecessor anyone expecting a 7950 X era gain here would be pretty disappointed that one saw a 26% to uplift over the 550x but of course that also came with it an entire platform change from am4 to am5 Intel does much better in this test than some of the prior ones with our current data set the 14700 K and 14600 K are still in the top portion of this chart and we actually generally like the 13600 K when it's been discounted as it has recently and sometimes the 14600 k for a cheaper option for this task plus gaming especially when they're discounted but we're waiting for some of the smoke to clear for Intel before we resume any recommendations of them the micro code is still rolling out to boards and we're still kind of watching and seeing how they react to the rest of this situation code compile testing with chromium is next this requires a reminder that not all compile workloads behave the same just like anything else so all we can really talk about here is how this one performs with our CPU testing and at least our test the 950x leads everything the new CPU required 66 minutes to complete the compile leading the 7950 X's 73 minute entry and benefiting from a total compile time reduction of almost 10% obviously thread Ripper would be ahead of this we've tested that in the past but we don't have it rerun for the new tests the 750x was able to reduce the compile time required from the 5950 X's 101 minute result by 27% whereas the 5950 X only reduced it from the 3950 X's 106 minute result by 5.3% the new 950x compared to the 750x is similar to that era the 5950 to 3950 then it would be the 7950 to the 5950 again because the total platform change helped that one out it's not too surprising Intel's closest entries are the 14900 K which roughly ties the 750x AMD is gaining some distance here against Intel where before it was closer to equivalence file compression with seven zip is next in this one the 9 50x completed 205,000 mips or millions of instructions per second when stock which is an improvement of 5.9% over the 7950 X's result for that same generational perspective here's how it lines up the 795x gained 39% on the 595x which itself had gained 7.5% on the 3950x the gains are up and down but the 950x is the lowest of these metrics so far Intel's 14900 K encroaches on the top of the chart and was nearly tied with the 750x previously again AMD benefits from creating some slight distance between itself and the 14900 K regardless of Intel's current problems if aerol Lake can do better than this Intel may be able to maneuver itself into a strong strong spot it'll depend on if intel can regain confidence before then against the 9700x the 950x completes 71% more myips this aligns with the massive core count difference decompression move some of these CPUs around but the 950x remains at the top of the chart its lead over the 750x is only 1. 6% here we may be running into something like memory bandwidth limitations that'd be a separate test but the next CPUs are pretty far away amd's 950x leads the 4900 K and its 229,000 mips result by 22% it's a big Advantage the 5950 X also did well in this one shoving itself right between the 14900 K and the 13900 K this test clearly favors having a bunch of homogeneous cores against the 9700x the 950x doubles performance but it also doubles core count making this one of the more linear gains that we'll see spec works station is up next this testing is completed using the spec pre-built benchmarks for various professional software the first one is for lamps which is part of Spec's biomedical Suite as tested by the spec Benchmark lamps has the 950x as the chart leader it's up at 6.93 leading the 7950 X's 6.61 result by 5% that also puts AMD now ahead of the 14900 K the next one is for the spec workstation FSI test or a financial test which it says analyzes black schs pricing models runs py Carlo simulations and probability simulations and runs a binomial options pricing model we're not familiar with what any of that means or what the use cases are in the real world just being real with you uh but our hope is that these tests are useful to the audience in the past some of you in the financial industry have told us that they are here the 950x ends up leading the 750x non 3D by 7.7% at 9.47 to 8.79 points the lead over the 14900 K is 20% against prior Generations the 5950 X gives the 950x a 61% lead gaming is up now this is less important for the 950x you shouldn't buy these CPUs for a gaming build only our main goal here is to just make sure it works properly and doesn't chop the frame rate in any major unplayable ways that used to happen on Old AMD platforms we won't spend much time on each of these charts we think that time is better spent in the production and other sections of this review Dragons Dogma 2 is up first the CPU heavy game that came out this year the 950x is about the same as the 7950 X here it's technically slightly ahead and as a positive we're seeing benefit from the 16 core Parts in this specific test it's actually really cool from a testing perspective because historically some of the 16 core CPS have had problems in gaming but this was especially true in older games and as you all likely know we just refreshed our whole game suite where most of them are 2023 2024 launches now we're starting to see in some of these where they are CPU heavy and more cores can help the 950x is definitely not worth buying just for gaming but neither was the 750x and this one it's holding an average frame rate similar to a 13600 K or 5600 x both of which are much better value for just gaming the lows on the 9950 X are good though which means it clears the bar of working in a gaming scenario the 7800 x2d remains remarkably good value in this particular game Intel's i7 CPUs at the top also do overall well you can see that the older 16 core CPUs also outdo their generational family by small margins the 3950x leads the 3700x slightly and the 5950 X leads the 5900 X and 5800 X non-3d Parts slightly this is pretty cool to see as again it was rare in Prior years of benchmarking Dragon Dogma 2 looks like it's a pretty good game for our test Suite in balers Gate 3 the 9950 X landed at 111 FPS average that has about tied with a 13700 K and slightly ahead of the 5700x 3D against the 9700x we're seeing about a 2.9% uplift with the 9950 X lows are similar but with the 0.1% lows technically worse the gain over the 750x is about 5.2% the 3950x allows the 950x to run 55% faster with the 595x allowing it a 28% lead as for the 7800 x2d with our default memory it outperforms the 950x by 19.4% the 14900 K is also up here at 121 FPS average when paired with faster memory or down at 116 FPS average without where it and the 13900 K become limited the 950x is working better than we expected for balers Gate 3 Stellaris post results that have the 9700x outperforming the 950x slightly the reduction in average simulation time is 1 full second or about 3.5% time reduced the 950x is also tied with the 7800 x3d with this being one of the only tests where we saw the 9700x leverage its changes to pull ahead of the x3d part the 950x has the same architectural benefits so it's up here as well despite not improving over the 9700x the 9950 X at least improves on the 7950 X the jump from 33.3 seconds to 28 .4 seconds starts to become noticeable for longer play sessions back in the 550x era we can see that there was no real differentiation between it and the 5600x or the 5900 X the 3950x is actually a little bit worse than the 3700x this makes sense for those CPUs as they sacrificed more frequency along with their core count increases Intel's presence begins at the 30.5 second Mark with the 14700 K and 14900 K which are about the same Final Fantasy 14 dawn tril has the 950x at 336 FPS average which is a somewhat noteworthy lead over the 9700x of 2% it'd be insane to spend this kind of money on it for just gaming obviously but at least it's tracking better and we seem to be past that old era of High Core count Parts floundering like what we saw at the original threader 1950x the 7800 x3d Remains the clear gaming chart leader to better understand what's going on in Dawn tril we plotted the frequency of the 950x and 9700x during this workload we found that the 9950 X's all quore average was about 4975 5 to 5,000 MHz which is lower than the 9700 X's all core average of 5500 MHz but that's because it's averaging an inactive CCD we'll look at that in a second you can see that the 9700x is all core is just below its maximum single core frequency at the same time the 950x is able to boost its maximum core higher up to 5670 to 5700 MHz at times that's surr a 150 MHz advantage over the 9700x which explains the performance that we're seeing in Final Fantasy if we plot the the average frequency for just eight cores that are active we see that it aligns with the max so that helps explain things even further the 950x is just boosting higher everywhere here now for F1 2024 F1 had the 950x at 393.7 FPS average with the 9700x at 380 it's about a 3 and a half% difference between them one note here we have observed more variable behavior in this test on the 9,000 Series CPUs as compared to the 7,000 series which we think has to do with the memory kit change uh where as discussed last time we can't use our standard Corsair DDR 56000 kit for the 9000 Series as the platform has some issues running it at the manual timings we set despite 7,000 workings since launch this Lexar kit does pretty well to match but it is not a precise match and has some reduced controls on some timings even with all of that caveat the difference remains within reasonable expectations once again a quick look at frequency shows the 9950 x with its maximum single core boost is pushing higher than the 97 x with the single CCD boost also running often right alongside the max single core at any given interval the 9700x is average is frequently significantly lower than that of the 950x helping explain this larger 3 and 1 half% Gap in this particular title we're going to keep the conclusion really short been running at full steam ahead for like a week now on all the different benchmarks reviews that zen5 efficiency piece was a huge amount of work uh so if you've gotten here we'll keep it short and you probably have a few questions your questions might be like which CPU is better value is the 950x worth it should I buy the 950x or the 750x are you wearing the same shirt you filmed in two days ago and have you left the office or seing the sun in two days and to the last two questions I'd say why don't you mind your own business okay AVX 512 is a strength for zen5 which becomes more relevant on these mini HDT CPUs that'd be a big potential reason to buy a 950x instead of a 750x uh we saw in blender for example where there's a massive efficiency uplift but also a performance Improvement so that's another type of scenario in gaming the CPU is just not as efficient as almost any other modern AMD CPU you shouldn't buy it for only gaming so we think it boils down to this for gaming you buy a 7800 x3d for production workloads without particular focus on AVX 512 and you can research your applications if that matters for them we think the 7950 X is far better value these CPUs are more likely to be under a full allcore workload than the R5 R 7 CPUs so you're more likely to benefit from the reduced power that we saw in certain allcore workloads but not all that said the 750x is $520 now that makes the 9950 X's price 25% higher for what's off in similar performance or maybe 12% better uh results at the highend generally speaking we'd advise against the 7950 x3d and instead favor the 7800 x3d you can learn about why in our prior reviews but B basically most workstation applications we test can't make use of the extra cash they underperform versus the 750x I don't know if it was in the chge or not for this one but the 3D is below the 750x in almost every production workstation uh Benchmark we do but those applications do benefit from the higher frequency of the 750x non 3D on the positive side the 950x did better in gaming than we expected you really shouldn't buy it for gaming primarily but the fact that it's at least regularly matching or very slightly outperforming the 9700x is is a good thing overall the 7 950x is generally speaking a better value the 950x is at least worth considering if you're doing a brand new from scratch build for a workstation type of environment but the thing for you to really research and pay attention to is the type of application you use if it is really heavily threaded it is running all cores at 100% all the time like in blender it's comparable to that uh and or if it is an AVX 512 application you are more like liky to benefit from a 950x in a way that at least might start to matter versus a 750x whereas if those things aren't the case then we think the better value is to buy the 750x instead so it's going to be up to you you got to look at those scenarios and uh you can research your applications to learn more about that but that's it for this one thanks for watching we're going to well we're going to knock out the 9900 X and go back to the 9600 X and then I am going to sleep for a day but uh thank you for watching subscribe for more go to store. gamas access.net to help us out directly you can use code this is fine for 10% off while that code is active which directly helps us on the store and we have these super cool multicolor solder mats that we've added to the store in the past week or so uh so we now have green red and yellow in addition to the existing blue if you want some super heat resistant work surfaces for your projects thanks for watching check out the zen5 efficiency video we'll see you all next next time\n"