AMD Ryzen 5 7600 Review: Best Budget Gaming CPU of 2025?

AMD’s new non-X Ryzen CPUs balance unlocked performance with reduced power consumption and cost, empowering enthusiasts to optimize value

Hardware by Katmin on Jun 12, 2025

The recent launch of AMD’s non-X CPUs offers an alternative to the more expensive X-class 7000 series by providing comparable performance at a lower cost and with reduced power consumption. These new processors—the Ryzen 5 7600 non-X, Ryzen 7 7700 non-X, and Ryzen 9 7900 non-X—represent power-limited versions of their X-series counterparts, each featuring a 65 W Thermal Design Power (TDP) rating and bundled with AMD’s stock coolers.

Although they run with slightly reduced base and boost clock speeds, they remain fully unlocked for Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO) and manual overclocking. In the following sections, we delve into their core specifications, real-world gaming and productivity benchmarks, power efficiency, cooling considerations, motherboard and memory platform costs, and overall value proposition.

AMD, Ryzen 5 7600, Review, Budget , Gaming CPU, NoobFeed

AMD’s new non-X Ryzen CPUs strike a balance between unlocked performance and reduced power consumption and cost, empowering enthusiasts to optimize value.

Quick Specifications, Pricing, and Competition

12 threads and 6 cores, with a base frequency of 3.8 GHz and a maximum boost clock of 5.1 GHz, make up the Ryzen 5 7600 non-X, which is 100 MHz slower on boost and 900 MHz slower on the base clock than the 7600X. The Ryzen 9 7900 non-X has twelve cores and twenty-four threads, with a base frequency of 3.4 GHz and a boost clock of 4.9 GHz.

In contrast, the Ryzen 7 7700 non-X features 8 cores and 16 threads, operating at a 3.6 GHz base clock and boosting to 5.0 GHz. All three models carry a 65 W TDP rating, although their actual power draw can reach AMD’s PPT limit. At launch, street prices for the 7600 non-X sit around $230, compared to approximately $250 for the 7600X.

The 7700 non-X and 7700X retail for around $300 and $350, respectively, and the 7900 non-X is priced at around $400, compared to a $450 7900X. Intel’s Core i5 12600K and Core i5 13600K, priced at about $250 and $320, respectively, compete in similar segments but benefit from more affordable DDR4 platform options.

Gaming Performance

In gaming scenarios at 1080p with a high-end graphics card, the Ryzen 5 7600 non-X often matches the performance of the 7600X. For instance, in Far Cry 6, the non-X variant averaged 155 FPS, just three frames behind its X-series sibling, and remained indistinguishable when PBO was enabled.

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive benchmarks delivered roughly 387 FPS on both processors, demonstrating that the 65 W power limit seldom impacts peak gaming performance. Even in CPU-sensitive titles such as Shadow of the Tomb Raider, the non-X achieved frame rates within two frames of the 7600.

At the same time, GPU-bound tests, such as Total War: Warhammer III, showed no meaningful differences between any of the CPUs tested. These results confirm that, for most modern games, the non-X parts provide an equivalent user experience at a lower price point.

AMD, Ryzen 5 7600, Review, Budget , Gaming CPU, NoobFeed

Productivity and Content Creation

While gaming rarely pushes processors to their power limits, productivity workloads can expose the differences between non-X and X-series chips. In Blender rendering, the Ryzen 5 7600 non-X completed a complex custom logo in 16.7 minutes, compared to 15.9 minutes for the 7600X, a 5% delta. However, engaging PBO narrowed this gap to under 2%, indicating that modest tuning can recover a significant portion of the lost performance.

Chromium code compilation tests required 86.8 minutes on the 7600 non-X and 82.6 minutes on the 7600X, showcasing a similar 6% difference. Intel’s 12600K and 13600K finished the same tasks in 14.4 minutes and 12.0 minutes, respectively, for Blender and 74.8 minutes and 54.6 minutes for Chromium, highlighting Intel’s continued lead in heavily threaded throughput, albeit at a higher power and platform cost.

Compression and Decompression

Compression benchmarks using 7-Zip positioned the Ryzen 5 7600 non-X alongside the previous-generation 5800X3D and Intel’s 12600K, with the 7600X pulling ahead by a modest 3%. Decompression testing further underscored the non-X’s capability, as it outperformed the 12600K by 6% and exceeded the 5600X by 16%.

Despite Intel’s 13600K leading this segment by 29%, it comes at a premium price point. These results demonstrate that the non-X CPUs are well suited for mixed workloads involving frequent file archiving and extraction.

AMD, Ryzen 5 7600, Review, Budget , Gaming CPU, NoobFeed

Creative Application Benchmarks

In Adobe Premiere Pro, which combines live playback, scrubbing, and export performance, the 7600 non-X lagged the 7600X by 7%, while Intel’s 12600K and 13600K outpaced it by 9% and 20%, respectively. This suggests that serious video editors may benefit more from Intel’s higher thread count offerings.

Conversely, in Adobe Photoshop—a workload that leverages both single-thread speed and moderate multi-thread performance—the 7600 non-X beats the 12600K by 7% and trails the 7600X by only 2%, positioning it as an attractive option for photo editing and less intensive creative tasks.

Power Consumption and Efficiency

AMD’s TDP ratings can be misleading, as they denote thermal limits rather than actual power draw. In our power testing, the Ryzen 5 7600 non-X consumed 88 W under sustained load, matching its PPT limit, while the 7600X drew 116 W, representing a 32% increase in power.

Activating PBO on the non-X did not push consumption beyond the PPT, affirming its conservatively tuned power profile. By contrast, Intel’s 12600K and 13600K drew 123 W and 16, respectively. For builders prioritizing energy efficiency, these savings translate into lower electricity bills, quieter cooling solutions, and easier thermal management.

Cooling Considerations

Each non-X processor includes an AMD stock cooler: the Wraith Stealth for the Ryzen 5 7600 non-X and the Wraith Prism RGB for the Ryzen 7 7700 non-X and Ryzen 9 7900 non-X. These coolers handle the 65 W PPT under stock settings comfortably, but prolonged PBO or manual overclocking will cause temperatures to rise.

Enthusiasts seeking greater tuning headroom and lower noise levels should consider aftermarket air or liquid cooling solutions rated for 95 W or more, ensuring consistent performance under sustained loads.

AMD, Ryzen 5 7600, Review, Budget , Gaming CPU, NoobFeed

Motherboard and Memory Platform Costs

Adopting AMD’s AM5 platform incurs additional expenses for compatible motherboards and DDR5 memory. Entry-level B650 motherboards range from $150 to $200, while premium X670 boards can cost up to $350. DDR5 memory kits start at roughly $80 for 16 GB at JEDEC speeds, with higher-frequency kits commanding a premium.

In contrast, Intel’s LGA1700 platform supports both DDR4 and DDR5, allowing budget builders to choose lower-cost DDR4 kits priced as low as $40 for 16 GB. When tallying overall system costs, Intel-based builds can undercut AM5 by $100–$150, which may sway value-conscious buyers even if AMD’s CPUs offer compelling silicon efficiency and performance.

Value Proposition and Important Summary

AMD’s non-X Ryzen CPUs deliver compelling performance per dollar by narrowing the gap to X-series parts while reducing power consumption. The Ryzen 5 7600 non-X, for example, sacrifices only a few percent of performance yet saves around $20–$30 compared to the 7600X.

Enthusiasts willing to employ PBO or light overclocking can further close this performance gap, unlocking nearly identical behavior for most applications and games. For those who prioritize energy efficiency, quieter systems, and lower upfront CPU costs, the non-X models represent a beautiful choice.

However, total platform cost—including motherboard and memory—must be considered, as Intel’s DDR4-friendly ecosystems may offer lower entry barriers. Ultimately, AMD’s power-tuned, fully unlocked non-X CPUs underscore the company’s commitment to providing builders with flexible options for balancing performance, power, and cost.

Also, check our other hardware articles: