Friday, September 20th 2019
AMD Ryzen 5 3500X CPU Listed
AMD will soon launch its budget CPU offerings from Ryzen 3000 series of CPUs to continue the tradition of covering all market segments. Today, Ryzen 5 3500X CPU has appeared in listing at Chinese retailer called JD which showed off CPU's pricing information and specifications. Coming in with a price tag of 1099 yuan (around $155), newly listed Ryzen 5 3500X is supposed to be a higher clocked variant of unannounced Ryzen 5 3500 CPU.
Featuring six cores and six threads, this CPU seems to have similar specs as Ryzen 5 3600 with the only difference being the disabled SMT support and slightly lower boost speeds. It has a 3.6 GHz base and 4.1 GHz boost frequency, all while having TDP of 65 Watts. Amount of L3 cache stays the same as its bigger, SMT enabled, variant which features 32 MB of GameCache. Additionally, JD also included some graphs where Ryzen 5 3500X was compared to Intel's i5-9400F CPU at various games, using NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 1660 graphics card. Bellow are the benchmarks comparing the two CPU offerings:
Source:
JD
Featuring six cores and six threads, this CPU seems to have similar specs as Ryzen 5 3600 with the only difference being the disabled SMT support and slightly lower boost speeds. It has a 3.6 GHz base and 4.1 GHz boost frequency, all while having TDP of 65 Watts. Amount of L3 cache stays the same as its bigger, SMT enabled, variant which features 32 MB of GameCache. Additionally, JD also included some graphs where Ryzen 5 3500X was compared to Intel's i5-9400F CPU at various games, using NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 1660 graphics card. Bellow are the benchmarks comparing the two CPU offerings:
57 Comments on AMD Ryzen 5 3500X CPU Listed
Especially in games, the 3500x torpedoes the 3600 and 3600x's value, and puts enormous pressure on intel's more expensive parts.
The 3500, sure, it will probably be noticeably slower, but the 3500x looks like a great performance chip for gaming.
Yes, better make it free instead :laugh:I'd say, as some others have pointed out ~ that chips with non functional SMT do have a place in the product stack, it's not like every SMT enabled chip coming out of TSMC will be faultless.
That's a separate market, as well as an entirely different chip.
SMT is very situational, most software doesnt benefit from it. The 2600x is a previous gen part, and the 3600 is consistently faster thanks to Zen2, and the 3500x will likely retain the same performance advantage outside of Ubisoft games and the handful of benchmarks that enjoy SMT. The selling point of the 1600 was that it was a HEX CORE, i5s at the time were quad cores. Now that i5s are hex core, the advantage for AMD is performance in productivity software, not SMT. Without SMT AMD still trumps Intel in said benchmarks.
Why would anyone buy a 3500X?
Top it off with nearly double L3 for 3500x, and you have a recipe for a perfect gaming CPU. I think for a gaming PC either one of those will do much better than 2600 ATM.
Also note, that on these slides it's marketed for mainstream and esports. Most of these titles are scaling well with CPU clock speed, but don't really care about all of those extra threads or even physical cores. Even the latest and heaviest Apex Legends don't scale past 6c/6t at all.
Better question, why would you spend $10 less on a previous generation that is consistenly slower then the low end for the current generation? If you really dont need that CPU power, why wouldn't you spend even less on a 1600 chip or a FX series chip for half the price instead of a $159 2000 series?
The problem is, price by price and cores by cores, most of the people end up choosing Intel. One of the advantages of Ryzen is precisely that they have more cores/threads for the same or lower cost!
Give me a cheap hexa-core all day.
And it would be a very capable machine for years to come.
If the 3500x was 150 with a decent cooler maybe id risk getting it, i havnt had issues with 3600/x470 asrock tachi ultimate but who knows as i dont use it very much, my workstation is a 9900k and never has issues except being a power hog.
I wonder what app gets benefit from game cache.
I think it's a good move, I'm sure that not all the silicone has gone without errors in the SMT areas of the chips. I'd rather see people rely on these than Celerons any day!
In other words you have better options for pure gaming and better options for multitasking than the 3500/X .What do you mean applications ? If by applications you mean productivity workloads then you are dreaming if you think 3500x is going to be close to the 2600X !You are contradicting yourself big time there !
If the advantage for AMD is perf in productivity then how can SMT not be the key factor considering it's precisely SMT that gives this advantage to AMD chips compared to non MT Intel chips ?
Related to a bang for the buck investment, I don't see these as being a bad - Would probrably be an excellent value in the end.
However it's still too early to really know, I'll reserve final judgement for when they are released and in the hands of folks like us.