AMD Ryzen 5 5600X

[80-watt Hamster]

Performance wise, nothing to say, but it is a little disappointing that the 5600X has less performance per dollar than the previous generation 3600X.

There's less money in performance per dollar than in PERFORMANCE!!! Just ask Intel (historically) or Nvidia. Not disagreeing with you, though; I say this as a perf/$ junkie.

 

[sepheronx]

You want to say: “...how well SmartAccessMemory will work with the RX6000 series...”

Because InfinityCache has nothing to do with the alleged gains of the 5000/500/6000 combo. InfinityCache is part of the GPU/VRAM communication on RX6000 that enhance bandwidth between them. Nothing to do with SmartAccessMemory that is a CPU full access to the entire VRAM.

thank you for the correction.

 

[acethinjo]

Thanks TechPowerUP for deleting my post after pointing out the flaws in your testing methodology. Can't take a critic, can you?

 

[defaultluser]

I would have appreciate the 3300x being included in all the individual tests - this is a baseline for how much other performance improvement Zen 3 brings (besides single CCX).

When all you get is summary graphs, you can't really compare single-threaded performance tests; why include them at all, if your cutoff for testing is 6 cores?

 

[RandallFlagg]

I think the direct competition for the 5600X is the 10600 cause its a 6c/12t cpu. 10700 is 8c/16t cpu.

If 5600X were $250, AMD would have a clean sweep. It's not $250, it's not available yet, and I'd bet when it is available it'll be closer to $350 than $300 for several months.

That makes it compete with the $300 10700 and $350 10700K. Factor in a 10-20% IPC jump with Rocket Lake in March, along with a 10700K being able to get 5%+ via easy overclocking (the Zen 3 doesn't OC any better than a non-K Intel chip can via BCLK), and this being the last AM4 processor so there's no Zen 4 upgrade path. I think the 5600X only viable for someone who plans to upgrade to a 5900X / 5950X later.

 

[sepheronx]

this is a store a lot use now in Canada as they can be found from Western Canada to Eastern Canada - Memoryexpress.

5600X - $420 CAD

AMD Ryzen™ 5 5600X Processor, 3.7GHz w/ 6 Cores / 12 Threads - AMD AM4 CPUs - Memory Express Inc.

www.memoryexpress.com

vs

10600K - $380 CAD (on sale for $20 CAD off so its $400 Normal price)

Intel Core™ i5-10600K Processor, 4.1GHz w/ 6 Cores / 12 Threads - Intel 1200 CPUs - Memory Express Inc.

www.memoryexpress.com

Now when you move to 8 core / 16 T, the price difference is a bit:

10700 - $500 CAD

Intel Core™ i7-10700 Processor, 2.9 GHz w/ 8 Cores / 16 Threads - Intel 1200 CPUs - Memory Express Inc.

www.memoryexpress.com

vs

5800X - $630 CAD

AMD Ryzen™ 7 5800X Processor, 3.8GHz w/ 8 Cores / 16 Threads - AMD AM4 CPUs - Memory Express Inc.

www.memoryexpress.com

So if I was gonna go with a 6C/12T then the obvious choice would be the 5600X. But when you climb up to the 8C/16T options then it is a bit harder to choose. Mind you, the benefit of 5800X is that PCIE 4.0 on the NVME is working while you can get PCIE 4.0 on Z490, it doesn't work cause you need Rocket Lake which isn't out till next year anyway. And I am not 100% sure they will actually use it and if its available on all Z490 boards (rumor has it ASUS does not but the rest do).

 

[RandallFlagg]

this is a store a lot use now in Canada as they can be found from Western Canada to Eastern Canada - Memoryexpress.

5600X - $420 CAD

AMD Ryzen™ 5 5600X Processor, 3.7GHz w/ 6 Cores / 12 Threads - AMD AM4 CPUs - Memory Express Inc.

www.memoryexpress.com

vs

10600K - $380 CAD (on sale for $20 CAD off so its $400 Normal price)

Intel Core™ i5-10600K Processor, 4.1GHz w/ 6 Cores / 12 Threads - Intel 1200 CPUs - Memory Express Inc.

www.memoryexpress.com

Meh, Canada is always a problem when it comes to price comparisons, I see it in completely unrelated forums like motorcycling too.

I went to that site and their 10700 and 10700K are way overpriced. I see that in Canada, the 10700 is about 20% higher than the 5600X, while the 10700K is a whopping $9 CN more than a 10700. Here the difference is about $30-$50 US between a 10700 and 10700K with the 10700 recently going on sale multiple times for $300. So your pricing logic probably works, for Canadians.

Edit: However, you have access to the somewhat rare 10700KF at $479 CN. There's your comparison point.

 

[ODOGG26]

I would have appreciate the 3300x being included in all the individual tests - this is a baseline for how much other performance improvement Zen 3 brings (besides single CCX).

When all you get is summary graphs, you can't really compare single-threaded performance tests; why include them at all, if your cutoff for testing is 6 cores?

Just take it as good data to look at. If you want a deep dive full out explanation/comparisons then Anandtech is usually the best for CPU reviews. Among most reviews out there, it seems the new ryzen cpus are the best. Overall good review and thanks for the hard work.

 

[EatingDirt]

Going to try to be real here.

If you look at Zen 3 purely from an architecture / engineer standpoint, it's a great product. AMD has a 6C/12T part (5600X) that matches up directly with an Intel 8C/12T (10700/10700K) part pretty well - though it still loses in heavily / easily threaded apps. It also matches or wins single thread performance despite a 10% clock disadvantage. It has finally overcome its memory cache latency issues on a part with more than 4 cores ( the 3300X also overcame those, by having half the cache, but only for 4 core/8 thread).

However in the real world where price matters, the 5600X only matches or slightly bests its direct competitor the 10700 / 10700K in some scenarios that are lightly threaded, and in fact loses (a lot) in more threaded benchmarks - including encoding, compression, encryption, and most scientific benchmarks. In games it's a tie.

I think the 5800X and 5900X are winners vs Intel even taking price into account, meaning Intel's top dogs are basically obsolete now. But the 5600X just doesn't do it at its current price point. If it were $250 it would be a significant part but at $300 it's not worth it, the 10700 / 10700K are better choices, and the Intel platform has a high probability to turn out to be a much better choice when RL comes out given that Zen 3 is barely able to 'tie' Intel in games now.

I'm not sure why you are comparing a $300 CPU to a $375 one.

Clearly the 5600X's competition is the $275 10600k. The 5600X is faster in the cumulative CPU(11%) & Gaming tests(3.8% @720p) than the 10600k. The 5600X is around 10% more expensive. The price is somewhat justified then, is it not? Extra bonus of the 5600x coming with a cooler & 10600k does not, which for some people will make up the price you would need to pay for the 10600k's cooler.

 

[RandallFlagg]

I'm not sure why you are comparing a $300 CPU to a $375 one.

Clearly the 5600X's competition is the $275 10600k. The 5600X is faster in the cumulative CPU(11%) & Gaming tests(3.8% @720p) than the 10600k. The 5600X is around 10% more expensive. The price is somewhat justified then, is it not? Extra bonus of the 5600x coming with a cooler & 10600k does not, which for some people will make up the price you would need to pay for the 10600k's cooler.

You can buy a 10700 right now at Best Buy for $325. You can also get it through some non-traditional channels (which I admittedly would not use) like Bonanza for $280, right now. I haven't said much about the 10600K but I can find it for $246 on Google.

Edit: My main point in the 10600K comment is that I'm not drawing that comparison, I don't think the 10600K is a good value at its current price points, I was only comparing to the 10700 / 10700K which outperform the 5600X.

How much and where can you buy a 5600X? I'll bet that it will be over $300 for the next 3-6 months.

 

[W1zzard]

Thanks TechPowerUP for deleting my post after pointing out the flaws in your testing methodology. Can't take a critic, can you?

You mean this post here? It's not deleted

AMD Ryzen 5 5600X

yeah keep posting that graph into every thread, maybe you will convince someone that the 5000 series lineup is indeed a geyming king Will a 11 game average convince you? However, given your very unbiased avatar, it won't. :)

www.techpowerup.com

if your cutoff for testing is 6 cores?

The cutoff is around 75% average perf, except for some important SKUs. 3300X is at 71%, which is close enough, I'll remake the charts for you

@defaultluser: new charts are up. does that help?

 

[InVasMani]

You mean this post here? It's not deleted

Sorcery...

 

[docnorth]

Nice and enlightening review as usual. Maybe you could also use Cinebench as stress test, because some AMD CPUs continue to draw more power during Cinebench compared to stress tests. [Cinebench optimized? Other explanation?].
Anyway big performance increase, this time for all users, including everyday - office use and gaming. About multicore performance there wasn't much competition already.

 

[tussinman]

Good performance but iffy on price. Microcenter by my house usually slashes the previous gen 6 core variants to 150 dollars or less so that's a much better buy, especially if your mostly doing 1440 or 4k gaming

 

[EatingDirt]

You can buy a 10700 right now at Best Buy for $325. You can also get it through some non-traditional channels (which I admittedly would not use) like Bonanza for $280, right now. I haven't said much about the 10600K but I can find it for $246 on Google.

Edit: My main point in the 10600K comment is that I'm not drawing that comparison, I don't think the 10600K is a good value at its current price points, I was only comparing to the 10700 / 10700K which outperform the 5600X.

How much and where can you buy a 5600X? I'll bet that it will be over $300 for the next 3-6 months.

10700 non-K, because of it's low base clock, is slower in the majority of CPU(-7%) and ±3% in gaming tests on the review itself, and it's more expensive than the 5600X. Great?

The 5600X slots in-between the 10600k & 10700 non-k really quite well. It's faster in almost every case than the 10700 non-k, but quite a bit faster in CPU tests than the 10600k, and gaming is again, ±3%. I'm not sure, and I don't think you are either, on where you're going with any of your comparisons. In overall CPU Performance per $, the 5600X beats both the 10600k, 10700(non-k) & 10700k on TPU's own chart. https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-ryzen-5-5600x/images/performance-per-dollar.png

 

[InVasMani]

Nice and enlightening review as usual. Maybe you could also use Cinebench as stress test, because some AMD CPUs continue to draw more power during Cinebench compared to stress tests. [Cinebench optimized? Other explanation?].
Anyway big performance increase, this time for all users, including everyday - office use and gaming. About multi-core performance there wasn't much competition already.

Quake 2 RTX and Minecraft RTX at 480p/720p/1080p would be really good to see. I really want to see how a Ryzen 5800X and 3900X/3900XT compares in those titles the Zen 2 chips with 4 more cores seem to do better in multi-core rendering workloads involving path tracing so if that follows through with them that bodes well for multi-core performance in relation to path tracing as a whole for real time games that will only continue to become more available and playable. It also complicates which CPU to purchase because it's another aspect of consideration for a very minor $10 to $20 cost difference.

 

[Zach_01]

Here in local market:

10600k - 245€
10700 - 310€
10700k - 347€

Im expecting the 5600X to start around ~330+€. No listings yet... except 1 retailer that has it at 399€...

 

[medi01]

So:

Civilization TPU shows that Intel beats everyone || Anandtech, Hexus, Linus, GamerNexus shows Intel being beaten
Tom Raider TPU shows that Intel beats everyone || Linus, GamerNexus shows Intel being being beaten, Hexus has them tied
AC TP shows that Intel beats everyone || Nobody uses that game as a benchmark (makes me wonder why TPU is using it)
Battlefield TP shows that Intel beats everyone || Linus shows a good lead for AMD, the rest of the reviews don't use it
Far Cry TP shows that Intel beats everyone || Only Anandtech has that game (there's a new one...), again AMD leading Intel

A pattern? No conspiracy theories, but this needs to be analyzed and addressed.

 

[Hattu]

At least one shop still has the 5600X on shelf, 325€. Too lazy to check others....

I'm sure prizes go down later, but i don't think they're overprized. New is almost always more expensive than older models.

 

[tancabean]

As a Haswell user it would be really helpful to see how those chips are holding up today. It's ancient hardware at this point but I have the sneaky feeling that it's still not much slower than the latest and greatest CPUs at normal settings (1080p, 1440p).

Maybe toss a 4790k in there next time? It's probably a hassle but figured I would ask anyway!

 

[Megas]

So on Amazon Prime Day us Canadians were finally thrown a price bone (For example a 3600 will cost you $250ish for reference). I was able to pick up a 3800X for less than a 3700x. It cost me $391 and I haven't opened it since I've been waiting on benchmarks to come out for the 5000 series (turns out I am definitely not the only one).

I thought it would be an easy decision and it was starting to be until the techpowerup reviews came out. Ironically my fav place for reviews but I've never looked at the forums before. If you look at other review sites it seems like there is a much larger spread especially in games but here it's a 1-23fps difference. So question is 3800X @ $391 vs. 5600X @ 399-420 (what I'm seeing for pricing). I'm really not sure what to do. It seems like the 5600X would be the smarter decision but then I wonder about those extra cores... Pointless ultimate? I use this rig for 80% gaming and I also don't plan on buying an aftermarket cooler either so I'm not going to chase some ultra OC or anything.

Do I keep the 3800X or return and get the 5600X? For reference my 3800X is unopened I'm not one of those dicks who returns something perfectly good. Urghghhh

Hey W1zzard any chance you are going to see how far you can push a 5600X on the stock cooler?

 

[TechLurker]

So:

Civilization TPU shows that Intel beats everyone || Anandtech, Hexus, Linus, GamerNexus shows Intel being beaten
Tom Raider TPU shows that Intel beats everyone || Linus, GamerNexus shows Intel being being beaten, Hexus has them tied
AC TP shows that Intel beats everyone || Nobody uses that game as a benchmark (makes me wonder why TPU is using it)
Battlefield TP shows that Intel beats everyone || Linus shows a good lead for AMD, the rest of the reviews don't use it
Far Cry TP shows that Intel beats everyone || Only Anandtech has that game (there's a new one...), again AMD leading Intel

A pattern? No conspiracy theories, but this needs to be analyzed and addressed.

There's some minor differences between the other reviews as well. Seems to be mostly memory speed related. Some ran at 3200, others at 3600, and one or two at 4000. Also not all of them ran them at 720 or 4K, and all of them had different settings turned on/off. It'll be interesting to see more in-depth reviews in the near-future, as various groups tighten up timings and upping memory speeds to see how much "free" performance was left on the table before OC'ing.

 

[W1zzard]

but this needs to be analyzed and addressed.

Yup, already working on trying to figure out what's going on

 

[RandallFlagg]

10700 non-K, because of it's low base clock, is slower in the majority of CPU(-7%) and ±3% in gaming tests on the review itself, and it's more expensive than the 5600X. Great?

The 5600X slots in-between the 10600k & 10700 non-k really quite well. It's faster in almost every case than the 10700 non-k, but quite a bit faster in CPU tests than the 10600k, and gaming is again, ±3%. I'm not sure, and I don't think you are either, on where you're going with any of your comparisons. In overall CPU Performance per $, the 5600X beats both the 10600k, 10700(non-k) & 10700k on TPU's own chart. https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-ryzen-5-5600x/images/performance-per-dollar.png

The 10700 and 10700K both beat the 5600X in games at 1080p by about 3%. If you OC the K, which is trivial, you can win by 5 to 8 %.

On productivity the 10700K beats the 5600X by 3.9%. The 10700K can be had for about $50 more than the 5600X @ $299, assuming you can actually find one for $299. The next up slot in AMDs lineup is the $450 5800X, which would compete with the 10850K and 10900 in price.

The 10700 non K wins at games by ~3%, and loses in productivity by ~7%. However, you can power unlock the 10700 nonK - again trivial to do - and win on both games and productivity. There's nothing you can do to the 5600X to counter that.

So yeah at this particular price point AMD failed. I never said anything about the 10600K, and I won't argue a point I didn't make.

 

[Deleted member 24505]

Yup, already working on trying to figure out what's going on

Will you do a retest when you figure it out W1z?