Looks like AMD still has a few tricks up its sleeve with Zen 5. According to a leak dropped today, by well-known hardware tipster chi11eddog, the same source who nailed the Ryzen 7 9850X3D specs before it was officially announced, two new Ryzen 9000 series processors are in the pipeline: the Ryzen 7 9750X and the Ryzen 5 9650X.
Both chips share a 120W TDP, which is nearly double the 65W thermal envelope of their direct predecessors, and that number alone has gotten the community talking.
The Ryzen 7 9750X packs 8 cores and 16 threads, a 4.2 GHz base clock, and a boost clock that climbs up to 5.6 GHz, along with 32 MB of L3 cache. The Ryzen 5 9650X brings 6 cores and 12 threads, a 4.3 GHz base, a 5.5 GHz boost clock, and the same 32 MB of L3 cache. Both land at 120W TDP.
So how do those numbers stack up against what AMD already sells? The 9750X adds 400 MHz to the base clock and 100 MHz to the boost over the Ryzen 7 9700X. The 9650X does the same over the Ryzen 5 9600X, same formula, different tier. It may not sound like earth-shattering change on paper, but there’s more to the story than just the headlines.
New!
Ryzen 7 9750X, 120W, 8C16T, 32MB L3 cache, 5.6/4.2GHz
Ryzen 5 9650X, 120W, 6C12T, 32MB L3 cache, 5.5/4.3GHz— chi11eddog (@g01d3nm4ng0) March 18, 2026
More watts, more sustained power
The TDP jump from 65W to 120W is the real talking point here. A higher power budget means these chips can maintain those elevated clocks for longer under actual workloads, not just in brief bursts. That’s the difference between a number on a spec sheet and a number you actually feel in day-to-day use. It’s worth noting that AMD already addressed the underperformance of the original 9700X and 9600X by rolling out a 105W TDP mode through a BIOS update.
Using that as the baseline, the jump to 120W is only about 15W more, roughly a 14% increase. The “nearly double the TDP” framing is technically accurate compared to the launch specs, but a bit more dramatic than the real-world picture suggests.
What matters more is what that headroom actually enables. These aren’t X3D parts, so there’s no stacked cache involved. Instead, the formula here is straightforward: higher clock speeds, a more aggressive power envelope, and better-sustained performance out of the box, no BIOS adjustments, no Precision Boost Overdrive tweaking required. Picking one of these over their predecessors would guarantee a higher operating frequency right from the start.
There’s one thing builders should keep in mind, though. The increased TDP could affect system design, fans, PSUs, and motherboards spec’d for 65W chips might not be the ideal fit anymore. On the flip side, running these chips in 65W mode via BIOS remains an option for those who want the efficiency of the older design with a bit of extra headroom in reserve.
AMD is playing chess with Intel’s Arrow Lake refresh
Here’s where things get interesting from a competitive angle. Intel announced its Core Ultra 200S Plus refresh just six days ago, with retail availability locked in for March 26, 2026. That lineup brings the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, both targeting mainstream desktop gaming and general-purpose builds, the exact same market segment the 9750X and 9650X would land in. This is not a coincidence.
AMD’s mid-range desktop processors are some of its strongest sellers, and keeping that segment competitive is essential. The original Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 5 9600X launched in 2024 at $359 and $279, respectively, and have since dropped to around $307 and $184 on the street.
Intel, for its part, is positioning its new Core Ultra 7 270K Plus at $299 and the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at $199, meaning the pressure on AMD to respond is very real. If AMD slots these refreshes into similar price positions as the outgoing chips, it could set up a genuinely compelling head-to-head matchup right in that sweet $200–$300 range that most builders actually shop.
The naming convention is worth a quick mention too. AMD used to slap an “XT” suffix on mid-cycle refreshes in older Ryzen generations, but with Zen 5 it looks like they’re done with that approach, moving to incremented model numbers instead, just like they did going from the 9800X3D to the 9850X3D.
Honestly, it’s a smarter move. Higher number, better chip. No guessing games. It’s a cleaner way to communicate generational steps and helps buyers understand the stack without needing a decoder ring.
One last thing to keep in mind before getting too excited: AMD has not officially announced either chip. Chi11eddog has a strong track record, the 9850X3D leak proved accurate, but the same leaker also mentioned a 9950X3D2 that never actually launched. Nothing is set in stone until AMD makes it official. Still, between the timing, the competitive pressure, and the source’s history, this one has a lot going for it.
The next few weeks in the desktop CPU space are shaping up to be really interesting. Intel is pushing hard with Arrow Lake Refresh, AMD appears ready to answer back, and the people who stand to benefit most from all of this are the builders sitting right in that mainstream sweet spot, the ones who don’t want to spend flagship money but still want a serious chip in their rig.
Do you think the Ryzen 7 9750X and Ryzen 5 9650X are enough to keep AMD competitive against Intel’s latest refresh, or is AMD going to need to bring more to the fight? Tell us in the comments!