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
Add your own comment

80 Comments on AMD Ryzen 5 3600 Review Leaks, Shows Impressive Performance

#76
Xzibit
Passmark Software: Single Thread Performance - Updated 29th of June 2019 AMD Ryzen 5 3600 = 2,979

Here is a screenshot of the site
The system reportedly uses a B450 Aorus M board, not an X570 board. According to the reported clock speed, the CPU doesn't seem to be overclocked either; all three tests show the same turbo of 4.21 GHz, and one result shows a "measured speed" of 3.37 GHz, and the other two 3.61 GHz. It doesn't seem like there was some sort of trick making this 3600 so fast, at least not something we can glean from Passmark's reported information.

Interestingly, the third benchmark for the 3600 uses a 16GB kit of 3200 MHz CL14 G Skill RAM, unlike the first two benchmarks which used a single stick of Crucial RAM at 2666 MHz CL16. The third benchmark reports a score of 7% faster than the two previous scores, which implies that Zen 2 and/or Passmark benefits heavily from having high-speed low-latency dual-channel RAM, something which previous iterations of Zen also benefit from.
Posted on Reply
#77
ToxicTaZ
Intel will remain King of the world's fastest 6 cores CPU with the 8086K for now...

As the 3600X is going after the 18 months old 8700K blow for blow.

Same thing going to happen with the 3800X going after the 9900K blow for blow.

Thus Intel has the 9900KS to keep the world's fastest 8 cores CPU on Earth for 2019.

AMD wins power efficiency and price but slower than Intel top 8086K and 9900KS.
Posted on Reply
#78
EarthDog
Caqdeand the 9900K should be running at ~4.8ghz to 5ghz depending
only if a user enables some board's multicore enhancement would it run that fast. You're going to be in the 4.4 range I'd guess (since Intel stopped posting that Info...grrr.....). Still faster... but you'll likely barely be able to get all c/t on the amd much past that anyway.
Posted on Reply
#80
RichF
So many comments written as if the Intel security flaws haven't come with serious performance regressions.

You know, like having to completely disable hyperthreading? It's not just me saying that, either. It's the OpenBSD team, Apple, and various others.

I suppose if your gaming box has no sensitive information of any kind on it (and you're not worried about resources being drained away by the addition of surreptitious malware) then don't worry about patching all of the security flaws. It's not just hyperthreading that many are ignoring because of the performance regression problem. So, don't expect that the performance you have seen by not actively seeking out and patching for all of the flaws is the same thing as the true performance level of Intel's parts. Decisions have been made to sacrifice security for performance (e.g. what Windows 10 will patch and what it will ignore unless the user manually patches), from what I've read.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jan 31st, 2025 01:54 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts