Wednesday, June 26th 2019
AMD Ryzen 5 3600 Review Leaks, Shows Impressive Performance
El Chapuzas Informático has posted an early review of the AMD Ryzen 5 3600 which was tested on a Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7 WiFi motherboard, G.Skill FlareX DDR4 @ 3200 MHz and an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE graphics card. Looking at the data presented, it becomes clear the performance on offer if real looks to be quite impressive. The site compared AMD's latest offering to the Intel Core i9-9900K and the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X with the Ryzen 5 3600 typically slotting in between the two and in some cases beating both. This is interesting to note as the Ryzen 7 2700X offers similar clock speeds to the Ryzen 5 3600 but the former has a 2C/4T advantage. Even so, the newer AMD CPU tends to outpace the Zen+ based Ryzen 7 2700X in multiple tests. In Cinebench R15, for example, the Ryzen 5 3600 had the lead in single-core performance while multi-core was held by the Ryzen 7 2700X. Cinebench R20 roughly mimics these results as well.
While memory latency was quite high 80.5 ns, it didn't seem to impact performance to any serious degree. In fact, in wPrime 2.10 32M running on a single core showed the Ryzen 5 3600 coming in just behind the Intel Core i9-9900K while being faster than the previous generation Intel Core i7-8700K, i7-8600K, and AMD Ryzen 7 2700X and 1700X. That said, the previous generation Ryzen processors were far slower here were as the Intel chips were still competitive. In the multi-core test, the Ryzen 7 2700X took a slight lead while the Ryzen 7 1700X was a bit slower than the Ryzen 5 3600. One interesting quirk of note was the lack of write speed on the memory with the Ryzen 5 3600 only hitting 25.6 GB/s which is quite a drop from the 47 GB/s seen on the Ryzen 7 1700X and Ryzen 7 2700X. However this could be due to the X470 motherboard being used or maybe an issue with sub timings on the memory, something that will need to be verified in future reviews.
Other than that, the Ryzen 5 3600 proves to be a capable processor. While not quite on par with the Intel Core i9-9900K in gaming tests, it does get quite close and typically beats the Ryzen 7 2700X. While the margins of victory are not staggering, it's still good to see as it does show an improvement since the Ryzen 5 3600 does have a lower clock speed and fewer cores and threads compared to the previous generation. If these chips are decent overclockers, they may prove quite interesting for mid-range gaming builds since they Ryzen 5 3600 has an MSRP of $199. Considering other AMD processors in the lineup can boost up to 4.6 GHz, these mid-range Ryzen chips could be quite the gaming CPUs as a potential 400 MHz overclock would likely let them close the gap with Intel's far more expensive unlocked processors.
You can check the full review at the source below, and while the results appear plausible, we suggest taking them with a grain of salt.
Update Jun 26th: El Chapuzas Informático has posted a follow up review, using a motherboard with X570 chipset. Looks like the differences are only minor.
Source:
El Chapuzas Informático
While memory latency was quite high 80.5 ns, it didn't seem to impact performance to any serious degree. In fact, in wPrime 2.10 32M running on a single core showed the Ryzen 5 3600 coming in just behind the Intel Core i9-9900K while being faster than the previous generation Intel Core i7-8700K, i7-8600K, and AMD Ryzen 7 2700X and 1700X. That said, the previous generation Ryzen processors were far slower here were as the Intel chips were still competitive. In the multi-core test, the Ryzen 7 2700X took a slight lead while the Ryzen 7 1700X was a bit slower than the Ryzen 5 3600. One interesting quirk of note was the lack of write speed on the memory with the Ryzen 5 3600 only hitting 25.6 GB/s which is quite a drop from the 47 GB/s seen on the Ryzen 7 1700X and Ryzen 7 2700X. However this could be due to the X470 motherboard being used or maybe an issue with sub timings on the memory, something that will need to be verified in future reviews.
Update Jun 26th: El Chapuzas Informático has posted a follow up review, using a motherboard with X570 chipset. Looks like the differences are only minor.
80 Comments on AMD Ryzen 5 3600 Review Leaks, Shows Impressive Performance
Time to move on? These are the first products rated for DDR-3200, and it's plenty for most uses.What is wrong with testing the product under the maximum rated speed?
Running beyond 3200 MHz is overclocking and is no longer a benchmark of the product at stock.
Now we don't know which version of Wraith, but as the R5 2600 and this is a 65W part it probably the Wraith Spire. So as a Core i9-9900K doesn't include a stock cooler we have no idea what Intel would have to actually limit that chip to if they had to box it with some prohibitive lub of aluminium. See if they said this is all the cooler/cost we can stomach to give would they still be able to infer the same performance/clocks/TDP at only about $500? That's what I'm getting at, the Core i9-9900K is great because they can un-hinder it from any base required cooling system. If AMD said this part not held to 65W, say more like the Core i9-9900K and you find you own cooling, what would AMD be able to bin parts at and what would that be able to offer? Sure the way AMD provides the clocks/TDP it's copacetic with the Wraith Spire we believe they will provide. CPU spec's in many respects are tethered to what the cost (and total price point) that a cooling solution can support.Are both running with a completely different Wraith Prism? As that a better and more costly cooler, even demanding tests it will do decently in permitting a 2700X provide it's rated stock configuration.
For a supposed $200 CPU +Cooler to present what is said here is just crazy competitive.
This is your pathetic logic.If you knew how CCX works and how certain engines starve for low latencies instead of raw instructions per clock, you would understand. Keep getting salty bud, try again on 7nm+, maybe then intel is done. For now, nop, not yet.
Intel's superior memory controllers usually allow higher memory clocks and If that is the case on those charts I'd like to know.
What is wrong with asking for all the specs?
Those latency numbers aren't too great, though, and the memory performance doesn't seem to bode well for those of us who regularly shift fairly large files. Add in the expected high cost of the new '570 motherboards and the requirement for fast-read expensive-memory and AMD may find this a more difficult sell than previous Ryzen releases, particularly to those on older Intel hardware that are looking for an upgrade.
Looks like my 2700X is still safe :D but, as has already been said by many: Add your own salt and wait until more comprehensive reviews are in.
And for the record so that you can learn something new today, IPC is a function of latency among other things. That means that tuning for performance is a multi variable optimization problem where some things can become the bottleneck as you progress through this process of finding the optimum. If AMD increased performance that means latency isn't the bottleneck, plain and simple fact.
Games, as with any other software needs instruction throughput , you can't get better latency without also increasing the instructions throughput and that's what matters.
No one is saying it's a bad design, but the oddities of the design let us know it's limits, and I'm going to guess that 5.2Ghz is going to be the high end of this design, it will double the power consumption to achieve it on good chips and it's going to be temperature sensitive and we see some death from the variable thermal expansion and two dies soldered in a couple years.
So surely 3rd gen Ryzen will happily run ram higher then 3200MHz.
Good times ahead!
8086K will remain the world's fastest 6 cores dual channel cpu for 2019.
But the 3600X will have a great price and good power efficiency.
Same thing with AMD 3800X 8 cores will be slower than Intel 9900KS 8 cores dual channel CPU for 2019. But better on price and power efficiency.
So take your pick....price and power efficiency or the fastest 6 or 8 cores CPU.
Even if it was at "MSRP" of $425 for the 8086K you can get a 3600X with a 16gb 3600 C16 Kit and have money left over to go see a movie and buy the BIG JUMBO popcorn with drink.
This should be quite a lot better than Haswell.
Amd matches skylake and delivers more cores.
meh, its skylake 2.,0 lol.
Whether it's worth buying or not depends on what you already have. If you have a Skylake family CPU and your usage don't really benefit from more cores, then wait for the next performance level from either company (or your needs to change). E.g. if you own an i7-8700K and only really do gaming, there is no point in "sidegrading".