AMD Ryzen 5 5600X

[TechLurker]

Gamers Nexus posted his in-depth review of the 5600X, and is pretty overall impressive. Some highlights based on his video:

• Defeated the 10900K in most games at roughly half the price and with fewer cores
  • Lost to 10900K in Assassin's Creed and RDR2
• More power-efficient than the previous gen 3300X (at stock for both CPUs)
• Equals and sometimes even surpasses, the 5950X, beyond 1080P
• Acceptable workstation performance
• Straight up gives it the "Overall Best Gaming CPU"

For his results; he tested a 4.8 OC on the 5600X, and a 5.2 OC on the Intel 10900K in addition to stock/out-of-the-box performance.

It's looking to be a solid value based on those results; at least until Intel comes out with Rocket Lake, and AMD then maybe fires back with a refined XT version of their Ryzen 5000 series; as the node matures.

 

[Zach_01]

Yup, from all the reviews I've seen the power draw from CPU and Full System Draw seems to be similar, 75w~ for CPU, and 135-150~w for system. So don't know what Jiwidi was getting at.

He probably thought that the 136W is CPU package and not from whole system including PSU power losses.

 

[Mouth of Sauron]

Why is 'No IGP' amongst CONS?

I am personally very happy knowing I'm not paying for extra silicon that I won't be using (and also it's development and possibly flawed silicon).

For those who need integrated graphics (companies, budget system builders), AMD has a different product line, same for laptops - this is a desktop chip.

Each time I had (it's the correct expression - last time I *had* to buy it for laptop, because AMD was struggling at that point) to buy Intel, I cursed myself for being forced to buy 129th gen. piece-of-crap that has one feature 'can display picture on a screen'.

iGP being optional is actually nice - Intel does the opposite only to extort some more money for lacking its own discrete GPU... If Intel become a viable choice for discrete GPUs, I bet a non-IGP line op CPU will miraculously appear...

 

[seth1911]

(Prices today)

AMD want for the 6 core 300 Euro
10600KF 229 Euro

But i dont want OC, then i can get a 10400F for about 140 Euro, a 3600 cost 185 Euro.

Interessting that Intel is cheaper than AMD

 

[tussinman]

(Prices today)

AMD want for the 6 core 300 Euro
10600KF 229 Euro

But i dont want OC, then i can get a 10400F for about 140 Euro, a 3600 cost 185 Euro.

Interessting that Intel is cheaper than AMD

Good thing about AMD raising there game is cheaper intel prices. My local microcenter has the 10400 for only $150 and offers basically the same 1440p game performance as the 5600X for literally half the price.

 

[RandallFlagg]

1. Yes, two CPU's that cost more than the 5600X are sometimes faster than the 5600X. Again, the 5600X is slotted between the 10600k & 10700.
2. The 10700k is not a competitor to the 5600X. How many times do we have to go over this? The 10700k is $375 on B&H, Amazon, Newegg & Best Buy as the time of me writing this. Let's say we just go with your "sale" 10700k at $350. That makes the 10700k 18% more expensive than the 5600X. At its current regular price of $375, it's 25% more expensive. Additionally the 5600X doesn't need a cooler, so as a value proposition, you need to add at least another $20, making the full cost of a standard priced $375 10700k, $395 which is a full 31% more expensive than the 5600X. 31% more expensive for ±4% productivity & ±3% 1080p gaming.
3. On the 10700 non-K: 3% is not a win. It's within margin of error between the wide swath of PC games that exist. The TPU 10700 non-K review shows that the gains in games of a power unlocked 10700 is 0.2%. The 5600X is clearly faster when CPU limited @720p in some games than the 10700. See Sekiro, Civ6 & Wolfenstein 2.
3(a). Power unlocking is overclocking. 5600X doesn't need an OC. Overclocking the 10700 non-K will also add at least a $20 additional cost for the CPU cooler, reducing it's value. Related to power unlocking: power consumption stuff that the 5600X doesn't need to worry about.

You say at the price point the 5600X is, it failed, but you refuse to talk about the 10600k, its more relevant competitor. The 5600X is slotted between the 10600k & the 10700, and it splits the difference in performance. It also splits the difference in price. It's exactly where it should be. In fact, if you take the cooler cost for the 10600k that you'll need to buy, the price of the 10600k & 5600X are exactly the same(±$5).

Proof that most of what you say is wrong, even your B&H number is inflated :

And then there's this:

 

[Searing]

It's a good CPU, but some people want to see it as a be-all-end-all of CPUs. For games it's fine, but whatever. Any CPU from 8600k upwards will suffice, and if you play at 1440/2160 it really doesn't matter, 6700k will get you within 3% of the performance, so spend your money on a GPU. For me personally. the lack of any iGPU is a show stopper - in a gaming PC I rarely need it, but when I do, i REALLY do, and in a work PC I don't want a dedicated GPU, I much prefer a low power, slim and silent machine.

Where this generation really shines seems to be the productivity oriented high end with the 5900X/5950X.

That's just not true. We can see some huge massive increases all over the place. Horizon and Death Stranding, Counter Strike, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Hitman, Star Wars Squadrons, Serious Sam. Also the best power draw comparison ever. 67W beating Intel's 218W OC in gaming performance.

Check out the massive wins on Gamer's Nexus's reviews. Civ 6 for example. I'm not happy with the price of course, but AMD is in the lead, and the lead grows at 720p showing good future scaling.

 

[RainingTacco]

Why is 'No IGP' amongst CONS?

I am personally very happy knowing I'm not paying for extra silicon that I won't be using (and also it's development and possibly flawed silicon).

For those who need integrated graphics (companies, budget system builders), AMD has a different product line, same for laptops - this is a desktop chip.

Each time I had (it's the correct expression - last time I *had* to buy it for laptop, because AMD was struggling at that point) to buy Intel, I cursed myself for being forced to buy 129th gen. piece-of-crap that has one feature 'can display picture on a screen'.

iGP being optional is actually nice - Intel does the opposite only to extort some more money for lacking its own discrete GPU... If Intel become a viable choice for discrete GPUs, I bet a non-IGP line op CPU will miraculously appear...

IGPU is extremely useful when you want to sell your old GPU and wait that month for a new one.

 

[Space Lynx]

A bit too pricey to be the king of bang for buck gaming. Maybe 5600 non-X would be the new sweet spot.

the non-x will be king when it comes out. but can't blame AMD for making some money in the mean time.

on that note, i'd rather pay a little extra now to just have it. my 5600x arrived today!!!! now i just need a 6800 or 6800 xt... or a 3080... but i doubt im lucky enough to get any. bleh

 

[jayjr1105]

That's just not true. We can see some huge massive increases all over the place. Horizon and Death Stranding, Counter Strike, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Hitman, Star Wars Squadrons, Serious Sam. Also the best power draw comparison ever. 67W beating Intel's 218W OC in gaming performance.

Check out the massive wins on Gamer's Nexus's reviews. Civ 6 for example. I'm not happy with the price of course, but AMD is in the lead, and the lead grows at 720p showing good future scaling.

LOL, people actually considering an i5 @ 218W over a 67W 10900K killer. Just wait until some reviews come out with tweaked 3800 or higher RAM. That 5600X with tuned RAM and a bumped infinity fabric is going to roar.

 

[Space Lynx]

LOL, people actually considering an i5 @ 218W over a 67W 10900K killer. Just wait until some reviews come out with tweaked 3800 or higher RAM. That 5600X with tuned RAM and a bumped infinity fabric is going to roar.

yep exactly. its not just about speed, its about tightened timings, and we have to wait for @1usmus to update his calculator.

 

[seth1911]

AMD have no turn against me, i dont buy a 6 Core for about 300 Euros.
My first HEDT Machine was with an 3930K alias Socket 2011 for 349 Euros, it was 6 years before

 

[Space Lynx]

AMD have no turn against me, i dont buy a 6 Core for about 300 Euros.
My first HEDT Machine was with an 3930K alias Socket 2011 for 349 Euros, it was 6 years before

don't let the door hit ya on the way out

 

[Deleted member 24505]

AMD have no turn against me, i dont buy a 6 Core for about 300 Euros.
My first HEDT Machine was with an 3930K alias Socket 2011 for 349 Euros, it was 6 years before

People treat a 6/12 like its a 12 and it is not. Hyper cores are not real cores. Essentially the 5600x is a 6 core chip

 

[Space Lynx]

People treat a 6/12 like its a 12 and it is not. Hyper cores are not real cores. Essentially the 5600x is a 6 core chip

its going to beat a 10900k in every single game before im done with it. tightened timings 4000 1:1 bdie incoming and smart access memory enabled.

 

[Searing]

AMD have no turn against me, i dont buy a 6 Core for about 300 Euros.
My first HEDT Machine was with an 3930K alias Socket 2011 for 349 Euros, it was 6 years before

You love passive computers based on your profile ("I5 4590s @ 2,2 GHz Passive")? Well excellent, you can replace your quad core i5 passive with a new twice/thrice as fast 5600x passive. The 5600X is the most efficient CPU ever.

 

[dragontamer5788]

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

A lack of replication is a good thing.

If everyone replicated each other too much, then that almost proves a conspiracy. The fact that there are differences is almost proof that the testing is real. There really can't be a "conspiracy" when your results are different from everyone else's !!

With that being said: Yeah, I'll await the explanation. Maybe its RAM speeds, maybe its boost clocks and temperature. Who knows, but its good to see differences. That's how you learn new things.

 

[Mussels]

Why is 'No IGP' amongst CONS?

I am personally very happy knowing I'm not paying for extra silicon that I won't be using (and also it's development and possibly flawed silicon).

For those who need integrated graphics (companies, budget system builders), AMD has a different product line, same for laptops - this is a desktop chip.

Each time I had (it's the correct expression - last time I *had* to buy it for laptop, because AMD was struggling at that point) to buy Intel, I cursed myself for being forced to buy 129th gen. piece-of-crap that has one feature 'can display picture on a screen'.

iGP being optional is actually nice - Intel does the opposite only to extort some more money for lacking its own discrete GPU... If Intel become a viable choice for discrete GPUs, I bet a non-IGP line op CPU will miraculously appear...

the one big oddity about AM4, is that the mobos waste money and space on all these video out connectors that a large portion of users simply cant use. It causes confusion for the uneducated as to why the ports dont work, and then for the high end users we could at least use an APU's hardware encoding for streaming purposes. That said, i see it as more of a neutral fact, than a negative for the CPU review.

 

[max007]

I think you guys need to re visit your testing. Its nothing like Gamer Nexus or other benchmarks. Or mine for that matter. Something is wrong with your test set up.

Gamers Nexus posted his in-depth review of the 5600X, and is pretty overall impressive. Some highlights based on his video:

• Defeated the 10900K in most games at roughly half the price and with fewer cores
  • Lost to 10900K in Assassin's Creed and RDR2
• More power-efficient than the previous gen 3300X (at stock for both CPUs)
• Equals and sometimes even surpasses, the 5950X, beyond 1080P
• Acceptable workstation performance
• Straight up gives it the "Overall Best Gaming CPU"

For his results; he tested a 4.8 OC on the 5600X, and a 5.2 OC on the Intel 10900K in addition to stock/out-of-the-box performance.

It's looking to be a solid value based on those results; at least until Intel comes out with Rocket Lake, and AMD then maybe fires back with a refined XT version of their Ryzen 5000 series; as the node matures.

I dont know what happened in these tests but its wrong

 

[80-watt Hamster]

1. Yes, two CPU's that cost more than the 5600X are sometimes faster than the 5600X. Again, the 5600X is slotted between the 10600k & 10700.
2. The 10700k is not a competitor to the 5600X. How many times do we have to go over this? The 10700k is $375 on B&H, Amazon, Newegg & Best Buy as the time of me writing this. Let's say we just go with your "sale" 10700k at $350. That makes the 10700k 18% more expensive than the 5600X. At its current regular price of $375, it's 25% more expensive. Additionally the 5600X doesn't need a cooler, so as a value proposition, you need to add at least another $20, making the full cost of a standard priced $375 10700k, $395 which is a full 31% more expensive than the 5600X. 31% more expensive for ±4% productivity & ±3% 1080p gaming.
3. On the 10700 non-K: 3% is not a win. It's within margin of error between the wide swath of PC games that exist. The TPU 10700 non-K review shows that the gains in games of a power unlocked 10700 is 0.2%. The 5600X is clearly faster when CPU limited @720p in some games than the 10700. See Sekiro, Civ6 & Wolfenstein 2.
3(a). Power unlocking is overclocking. 5600X doesn't need an OC. Overclocking the 10700 non-K will also add at least a $20 additional cost for the CPU cooler, reducing it's value. Related to power unlocking: power consumption stuff that the 5600X doesn't need to worry about.

You say at the price point the 5600X is, it failed, but you refuse to talk about the 10600k, its more relevant competitor. The 5600X is slotted between the 10600k & the 10700, and it splits the difference in performance. It also splits the difference in price. It's exactly where it should be. In fact, if you take the cooler cost for the 10600k that you'll need to buy, the price of the 10600k & 5600X are exactly the same(±$5).

Proof that most of what you say is wrong, even your B&H number is inflated :


View attachment 174690

View attachment 174693

And then there's this:

View attachment 174695

Where is EatingDirt wrong? I've read the quoted post three times and can't find any untrue statements. But good on you for finding a 10700KA at a slight discount.

 

[Deleted member 24505]

the one big oddity about AM4, is that the mobos waste money and space on all these video out connectors that a large portion of users simply cant use. It causes confusion for the uneducated as to why the ports dont work, and then for the high end users we could at least use an APU's hardware encoding for streaming purposes. That said, i see it as more of a neutral fact, than a negative for the CPU review.

I think a IGP is a bonus, when i destroyed my gtx 1080 i am glad my CPU had a IGP or i would not have been able to use my PC till i got the RX5700xt RD. I think i will probably end up getting a 5600x but i will wait till early next year till the rush to buy has subsided a bit, and maybe the price will have dropped a tad.

 

[Metroid]

People treat a 6/12 like its a 12 and it is not. Hyper cores are not real cores. Essentially the 5600x is a 6 core chip

Yeah is not but ht helps a lot to offload lots of tasks. Yeah ht is not good for single threads tasks, it was proven time and time again that many games work better with ht off in the past but with time devs worked to optimize games with ht on and right now only few games still works best with ht off, most work pretty good with ht on.

I'm trying to see the benefit on replacing a 3600x with a 5600x and so far the only benefit is emulators because direct windows steam games, I always play on 4k and on 4k you really need a powerful gpu, not a cpu and for that a 3600 is just enough. I might hold on the 3600 for a year or 2 till dddr5 comes and then purchase a new system. I have a b450 motherboard and was looking for a x570 if i had decided to buy a 5600, not sure if is worth anymore. A GPU will be lot more useful than a cpu, 3600 is good enough for the time being. I'm a minimalist person ehhe, I hate buying things that I end up not using them as much to be worthy the purchase.

 

[kmetek]

299$ USA

around 400€ here.

 

[Space Lynx]

Yeah is not but ht helps a lot to offload lots of tasks. Yeah ht is not good for single threads tasks, it was proven time and time again that many games work better with ht off in the past but with time devs worked to optimize games with ht on and right now only few games still works best with ht off, most work pretty good with ht on.

I'm trying to see the benefit on replacing a 3600x with a 5600x and so far the only benefit is emulators because direct windows steam games, I always play on 4k and on 4k you really need a powerful gpu, not a cpu and for that a 3600 is just enough. I might hold on the 3600 for a year or 2 till dddr5 comes and then purchase a new system. I have a b450 motherboard and was looking for a x570 if i had decided to buy a 5600, not sure if is worth anymore. A GPU will be lot more useful than a cpu, 3600 is good enough for the time being. I'm a minimalist person ehhe, I hate buying things that I end up not using them as much to be worthy the purchase.

at 4k i don't think a cpu upgrade would benefit you much at all right now. i agree wait for AM5 and ddr5 platform next year!

 

[KarymidoN]

@W1zzard can u bench again but now with 4 sticks of the same RAM?