Sunday, June 2nd 2024
AMD Outs Ryzen 5000XT Processors for Socket AM4, an 8-year Old Socket
AMD Socket AM4 is now an 8-year-old platform, since its debut back in 2016. AMD objectively went above and beyond for this platform, launching processors powered by the original "Zen," the refreshed "Zen+," the "Zen 2," and the Intel-beating "Zen 3" microarchitecture, including 3D V-cache versions of the "Zen 3" that were competitive even with Intel's 12th Gen Core "Alder Lake" processors in gaming. Those on older processors on AM4 are spoiled for choice with upgrades within the platform, without having to change it, with AMD releasing new processor models every year for the past 8 years. The 2024 launches include the Ryzen 5000XT series.
It's hard to call the Ryzen 5000XT a "series," since there are only two SKUs—the Ryzen 9 5900XT, and the Ryzen 7 5800XT. Neither of the two feature 3D V-cache, but push clock speeds up. The Ryzen 9 5900XT is a 16-core/32-thread part, and is not meant to be confused with the 5900X, which is a 12-core/24-thread part. The 16-core 5900XT comes with a maximum boost frequency of 4.80 GHz, which is 100 MHz less than that of the 5950X. It has the same 105 W TDP, and a significantly lower $360 price. The Ryzen 7 5800XT, on the other hand, is an 8-core/16-thread chip with 4.80 GHz maximum boost frequency, compared to the 4.70 GHz of the 5800X, and the same 105 W TDP. It's priced around $260. Both chips include an AMD Wraith Prism RGB cooler that's capable of handling 140 W TDP processors. The Ryzen 9 5900XT is claimed by AMD to offer similar gaming performance to the Intel Core i7-13700K; while the 5800XT is claimed to play games competitively to the Intel Core i5-13600KF. Both chips should be available sometime in July, 2024.
It's hard to call the Ryzen 5000XT a "series," since there are only two SKUs—the Ryzen 9 5900XT, and the Ryzen 7 5800XT. Neither of the two feature 3D V-cache, but push clock speeds up. The Ryzen 9 5900XT is a 16-core/32-thread part, and is not meant to be confused with the 5900X, which is a 12-core/24-thread part. The 16-core 5900XT comes with a maximum boost frequency of 4.80 GHz, which is 100 MHz less than that of the 5950X. It has the same 105 W TDP, and a significantly lower $360 price. The Ryzen 7 5800XT, on the other hand, is an 8-core/16-thread chip with 4.80 GHz maximum boost frequency, compared to the 4.70 GHz of the 5800X, and the same 105 W TDP. It's priced around $260. Both chips include an AMD Wraith Prism RGB cooler that's capable of handling 140 W TDP processors. The Ryzen 9 5900XT is claimed by AMD to offer similar gaming performance to the Intel Core i7-13700K; while the 5800XT is claimed to play games competitively to the Intel Core i5-13600KF. Both chips should be available sometime in July, 2024.
213 Comments on AMD Outs Ryzen 5000XT Processors for Socket AM4, an 8-year Old Socket
Of course, a "4k gamer" might reasonably decide to de-emphasize CPU horsepower for the sake of increasing his GPU budget, but ideally that decision should rest on accurate information about the CPUs on offer. You don't get that accurate information unless reviewers remove GPU bottlenecks from their benchmarks. That is why 1080p benches will continue to enjoy relevance for quite some time to come. Personally, I like that Techpowerup goes even a step further, with 720p benches, though I'd understand if W1zzard got tired of hearing endless complaints that "lmao 720p on a 4090 is unrealistic." Realism isn't the point.
The 5950X is about $360 here. That gives me just a little more speed at the top end compared with the 5900XT, whereas the rest of the specs are pretty much the same. So, I have to decide if that extra 8-10% ($30) is worth the 100Mhz top speed difference.
Can anyone point out the difference in performance I am looking at? If it's not much, I would consider the $30. If it's more, then I would go with the 5950X.
Oh wait, what? lmao :roll:
When they drop like a rock in price they'll be interesting but as launched they're worthless, you can buy something better for cheaper.
I objectively know that AMD is just a corporation like any other bit I've never seen Intel or nVidia do anything even remotely this awesome, like EVER. This is the definition of above and beyond.
While AM4 technically came out in 2016, Ryzen CPUs didn't come out until very early 2017. Still, SEVEN years on one platform is incredible and let's not forget that AMD was on the precipice of insolvency when they did this. That makes it even more amazing.
There's no question that AM4 is the greatest consumer x86 platform ever made and it's not even close. Regardless, AMD still won't let AM4 die, even though we're already more than a year into the AM5 era. If AMD tastes AM5 as they did AM4, Intel's in some REAL trouble!
Intel socket 775 went from 90 to 45 nm, from one to four cores, Prescott/Presler through Wolfdale/Yorkfield across three DDR generations? I'd say that's still the longest lived, just about equivalent in number of years ~2004-2011
@Avro Arrow - Don't get confused. A new model name doesn't always mean a new product. ;)
And as much as I love mobo upgradability, I don't particularly love amd's way of doing it. Having to wait for 2 years for bios updates? Officially saying they will support it, then they remove support, then they take it back due to public pressure. I'd rather not have to deal with this.
In my opinion, the word "new" also carries "different" within it. It can be of higher or lower performance by any means, but it shouldn't be the same as something already available.Upgrading with every generation is pointless anyway. By the time your system is actually due for an upgrade, you'll have to swap platforms anyway, whether you're on AMD or Intel.
Imagine Intel in 2040 releasing a 12100k. Who cares? Nobody would claim lga1700 has support for 20 years. It's just silly.
I know some people might disagree, but when I hear about stock TDPs, power limits etc. I kinda imagine people using the same arguments for other devices. "I bought X air conditioner cause it has better out of the box settings", "I bought X TV because the stock brightness is higher than the Y TV" etc. It just doesn't make any sense to me, I just don't get it.
Personally, I don't mind some mild tweaking, but generally speaking, if a product doesn't work as intended out of the box, then it's not a product that's intended for my use case.
The 5900X and 5800X3D are still completely valid upgrade options for my daily hobbies and actual compute labor.
5600GT is probably too much compromise and the 5700X3D would be a fair third option should the rest disappear due to flash crash.
I don't have to upgrade anything but for future CPU+GPU jobs that chug, I'm better off addressing the bottlenecks now since I'm not jumping ship for AM5.
Conclusion: Super excite!