AMD Launches AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Desktop Processors: The Fastest Gaming CPUs in the World

[Zubasa]

Yes, your point is perfectly valid, but don't you think it's annoying that the minute anyone passes any kind of judgement on AMD's pricing, they're either intel shills or "entitled"? It's almost as if only intel's prices can be subject to criticism. The 5600X is -in my opinion, and a lot of others', it would seem- a terrible value for money compared to 3600 and noone should be subject to fanboi ad homs for thinking so.

IMO, people complaints on just about everything in existence on the internet, I wouldn't stress myself over it.

 

[ratirt]

I'm ok with the prices. I think i will change my CPU and I don't worry about the cooler since I got my water already running.
I will still wait for the benchmarks and reviews. No need to rush the purchase. What AMD did with the new Ryzen is great and if Intel did something similar, we would have had a real competition.
Your move Intel, show us what you got and don't disappoint.

 

[Pumper]

I like compiling and doing video encoding which both should become quite faster with this generation as well. I couldn't care less about normal resolution gaming because I don't have and I don't intend to buy a high refresh rate monitor and my 1660 Ti drives my old 1080p 74Hz monitor just fine.

No they won't. Look at the slide showing 3950X vs. 5950X. Zen3 is only 5% faster at encoding and 9% at compiling:

 

[quadibloc]

Unless the wider floating-point unit of these new chips also means they have AVX-512 support added, I think I'll stick with my 3900X for the time being. I don't see a point in getting rid of a perfectly good CPU just because one slightly better is out. But a few years down the road, no doubt AMD will have something new and exciting. I am happy for AMD achieving the top tier in single-thread performance. Of course, last time, they were already so close to Intel that it hardly mattered, so even at 19% IPC, it's still not as big a jump in some ways then the 3000 series was.
Supposedly, Intel has 10nm available, and it's fixed some initial issues with it. I wonder why they aren't trying harder. Maybe they will now, since they're in the right position to do so. Or will AMD have to outstrip them in sales volume first?

 

[ratirt]

Unless the wider floating-point unit of these new chips also means they have AVX-512 support added, I think I'll stick with my 3900X for the time being. I don't see a point in getting rid of a perfectly good CPU just because one slightly better is out. But a few years down the road, no doubt AMD will have something new and exciting. I am happy for AMD achieving the top tier in single-thread performance. Of course, last time, they were already so close to Intel that it hardly mattered, so even at 19% IPC, it's still not as big a jump in some ways then the 3000 series was.
Supposedly, Intel has 10nm available, and it's fixed some initial issues with it. I wonder why they aren't trying harder. Maybe they will now, since they're in the right position to do so. Or will AMD have to outstrip them in sales volume first?

Yes, in your case the change may not be as significant. In my case with 2700X the bump in performance would be significant if I get 5900X. The coolest thing is, I just need to buy the CPU and nothing more.
That's just great and I hope my 470 Carbon Gaming will do fine with the new gen Ryzen and there will be no significant penalties in performance due to the older gen motherboard.
I'm still waiting to see how things will go with the new Ryzen CPUs. Either way it does look promising though.
With the 10nm Intel, it will probably end up in Mobile segment as the last time. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Will they finally supporting XMP from RAM's ? Because AMD was and is now still is a disaster on XMP memory modules.

You are aware XMP is an Intel specific standard, so why would it work well with AMD CPUs? The timings aren't going to be the same for two entirely different memory controller architectures. Yes, some board makers have made it sort of work, with some RAM, but that's it. XMP was never designed to work with AMD CPUs. It also takes all of two minutes to configure the RAM if you use the Ryzen DRAM calculator.

No, no they're not. Yes AMD support a lower overall RAM speed than Intel CPU's but buying a suitable kit when building a PC should be the same as any other expensive purchase you make, you research what you are buying and don't just throw money at it cause "dats the fastest and mostest xpensivvvv/cheapest so it must be de besssssttt" XMP is an intel technology and whilst it is good and all, if you don't do some basic homework on what parts you're buying and if they're compatible, how is that down to AMD? for AMD there are recommended kits of DDR4 RAM and tested kits for each and every motherboard that you can buy, but as we see with all the "My Ryzen motherboard doesn't run my RAM at their rated speed" threads people don't do that, they buy a CPU and motherboard and any old RAM they feel like throwing in there without doing so much of a smidgeon of googling about compatibility and complain when it doesn't work right. The fact that AMD motherboards support XMP is a plus point, but building a PC is not the same as building a lego set and if you have little experience in doing so but just wanted to try after watching 1 YouTube video on "how easy" it is then you really should stump up the extra $50/$100 bucks to get someone or a company who has the required knowledge and experience to do it for you and then just use your consumer rights to return it and get it sorted instead of wondering why your Corsair LPX 3200 won't run at it's rated speed on your Ryzen build.

That's not true though, AMD can support just as fast RAM as Intel in most instances, you just don't benefit of going over 3800MHz in 98% of cases. There are benchmarks showing that some games are happy with an AMD CPU running with 4400MHz at 1:2 to the IF, but most other software doesn't benefit from it.
Also, the DDR4 overclocking world record is with an AMD CPU...

Micron Memory Sets New DDR4 Overclocking World Record

Ballistix, Micron's global brand of high-performance gaming memory, has set a new overclocking world record for the fastest DDR4 memory frequency at 6024 MT/s. Leveraging performance-tuned Micron die and the innovation behind the new Ballistix Elite 4000 memory, the ASUS motherboard R&D team set...

www.techpowerup.com

Personally I bought some random RAM and it works really well, better than the spec it was sold at, without being on any QVL. However, XMP doesn't work, but who cares, as it performs better than it was meant to, not using XMP.

 

[ratirt]

You are aware XMP is an Intel specific standard, so why would it work well with AMD CPUs? The timings aren't going to be the same for two entirely different memory controller architectures. Yes, some board makers have made it sort of work, with some RAM, but that's it. XMP was never designed to work with AMD CPUs. It also takes all of two minutes to configure the RAM if you use the Ryzen DRAM calculator.

Yeah I read those comments and I'm really surprised that people still consider XMP as something AMD should have. The influence of the Intel's marketing is just outstanding how people perceive the technology now. Just a while back, someone said, AMD should support CUDA cores. It's a flying circus in their heads with some users though

 

[TheLostSwede]

No they won't. Look at the slide showing 3950X vs. 5950X. Zen3 is only 5% faster at encoding and 9% at compiling:

Cleaner slides below:

AMD announces Ryzen 5000 series (Zen3) - VideoCardz.com

Today AMD introduced its Zen3-based Ryzen 5000 series. The new desktop processors will feature higher clocks and more perforamnce. AMD announces its Ryzen 5000 series AMD focused on showcasing Ryzen 9 5900X processor (which will cost 549 USD) in comparison to Ryzen 9 3900XT. The CPU is expected...

videocardz.com

 

[ratirt]

Cleaner slides below:

AMD announces Ryzen 5000 series (Zen3) - VideoCardz.com

Today AMD introduced its Zen3-based Ryzen 5000 series. The new desktop processors will feature higher clocks and more perforamnce. AMD announces its Ryzen 5000 series AMD focused on showcasing Ryzen 9 5900X processor (which will cost 549 USD) in comparison to Ryzen 9 3900XT. The CPU is expected...

videocardz.com

The graphs and stuff looks great but I'm still waiting for the reviews. If this turns out to be exactly how the graphs show, it will be a hell of performance bump for me. If my Mobo can pull it off, I'm going 12 core this year

 

[laszlo]

Unlike Intel and NVIDIA, AMD is just above the break-even. AMD needs to improve its profitability.

is not all about profit in their case... they had loans/investments when they were on the ground and not forget the R&D which is a fraction of Intel or NV allocated amounts...

we can't expect cpu& gpu at cost prices ....when you are small compared to big dogs you must find a way to please investors and also buyers

 

[Mouth of Sauron]

All I've seen are AMD toxic fanboys attacking anyone and everyone that was not POSITIVELY ENTHUSED by the announcement. But what do I know. The fanboys know for a fact I'm just another intel shill for writing this. How dare anyone not be pissed with joy at the prospect of 300 dollars for the lowest end cpu, they're obviously shilling for intel or spoiled brats demanding free CPUs from amd.

5600X is not lowest-end CPU, and if we go along the Zen2 6core lineup, there are 3600 (also 6/12, like 50g cheaper and much more popular), 3500X and 3500 (both 6/6), all classified as 'mainstream' by AMD.

3300x and 3100 4/8 are the "entry level" by AMD on Ryzen brand, and they come pretty cheap - so calling 5600X "lowest end chip" is kinda not right.

Line-up was simply represented by 4 chips, out of 10 or more - even 5800X was skipped...

Besides, the bunch of 1xxx, 2xxx etc are still live and well and cheap. Guess the same will be true for Zen2 family...

 

[TheLostSwede]

The graphs and stuff looks great but I'm still waiting for the reviews. If this turns out to be exactly how the graphs show, it will be a hell of performance bump for me. If my Mobo can pull it off, I'm going 12 core this year

I'm sure no-one takes AMD on their word here, I simply wanted to share the easier to read slides, as it was kind of hard to see some of the info from the phone l live stream. There were obviously some additional data provided by AMD that wasn't shown in the live stream.

 

[SIGSEGV]

Do I have to wait for AM5 socket?
I think I am gonna upgrade my current CPU with 5950X. Besides, I also want to commemorate AM4 socket.

 

[ratirt]

Do I have to wait for AM5 socket?
I think I am gonna upgrade my current CPU with 5950X. Besides, I also want to commemorate AM4 socket.

Wait for the reviews of the new Ryzens CPUs and then decide. You can wait like a month I guess. You will get review, comparisons and how it works in a different configurations and then you will have a bigger picture what to buy to match your expectations.
I'm waiting with purchases.

 

[HD64G]

AMD has cornered down Intel as hard as ever. Has the best CPUs in both vfm (Zen2) and absolute performance (Zen3). Absolute market dominance for desktop. The same for mobile and server is a matter of time now.

 

[ratirt]

AMD has cornered down Intel as hard as ever. Has the best CPUs in both vfm (Zen2) and absolute performance (Zen3). Absolute market dominance for desktop. The same for mobile and server is a matter of time now.

Well, I wouldn't give up on Intel yet. I'm sure they have some more tricks up their sleeves to diminish the 5000 series new Ryzen.

 

[wahdangun]

Hm, seems like the shoe might be on the other foot with AMD vs Intel.

Let me see if I can switch my arguments.

So, is it really worth it to spend an extra $100 on AMD for 1-2 fps? Intel is good enough and is a better price/performance ratio, nobody will notice those 2 fps.

How am I doing?

good, except this time amd also win in productivity

 

[londiste]

I'm ok with the prices. I think i will change my CPU and I don't worry about the cooler since I got my water already running.
I will still wait for the benchmarks and reviews. No need to rush the purchase. What AMD did with the new Ryzen is great and if Intel did something similar, we would have had a real competition.
Your move Intel, show us what you got and don't disappoint.

Rocket Lake, Q1 2021.
If the rumors are true (expecially the Willow Cove backport part), it actually might be a worthy upgrade for people who do not need 12 or 16 cores.

I guess you're not aware that all of that was fixed after about six months worth of UEFI and AGESA updates? Ignorance is bliss...

I guess my personal experience clouds my judgement here. My 3600X never managed to run at over 4.2GHz for anything but a split second and I did not see 4.4GHz even then. UEFI/AGESA updates made negligible difference in that regard. So, YMMV. And while CPUs produced later may have an easier time hitting the intended speeds, that doesn't exactly fix the problem I had.

AMD has cornered down Intel as hard as ever. Has the best CPUs in both vfm (Zen2) and absolute performance (Zen3). Absolute market dominance for desktop. The same for mobile and server is a matter of time now.

Have they? 10600K sells for about 250 these days (KF a bit lower), 10700K sells for about 350 (again, KF a bit lower). 5600X in between them is not exactly in a nice spot all things considered. 5900X was 6-7% faster in games on average compared to 10900K, so while it leads that lead is small and depending on eventual prices Intel might be the one with more cores for the same money this time around.

It seems Intel may not have anything to compete directly with a 5900X, assuming those benchmarks are representative of overall performance.

Intel did not and does not have anything that would directly compete with 3900X either, much less 3950X.

 

[RandallFlagg]

good, except this time amd also win in productivity

How sure are you of that? On a cost comparison AMD has only displaced the 10900k.

Zen 3 vs 10th Gen By cost :

$299 6c/12t 5600X vs $310 8c/16t 10700

$450 8c/16t 5800X vs $450 10c/20t 10850K

I don't know - and seriously doubt - that same cost Zen 3 will win in those price / performance comparisons. At those prices, you actually get more cores / threads with Intel than with AMD except at the very top.

 

[ratirt]

Rocket Lake, Q1 2021.
If the rumors are true (expecially the Willow Cove backport part), it actually might be a worthy upgrade for people who do not need 12 or 16 cores.

I could actually use more cores. Considering my two TR 3960's, I could use some more power in my regular desktop. Intel is not an upgrade for me actually. I already have Ryzen and what I will need to upgrade is a CPU only. The 5000 series seems pretty good in any case and switching to Intel now (whatever performance benefit willow cove will bring) is not an upgrade but new system build which I will need to spend a lot for. Considering Intel's new gen new chipset idea, I'm OK with, going Ryzen and now I see it payed off since I don't need anything aside CPU change. Besides, looking at Intel's CPU iterations in the past 3-4 years I'm not convinced the 11th gen CPU will bring anything new in general just some minor changes and still 14++ node with kinda big power consumption.
I will upgrade later this year or at the beginning of the 2021 (my board will need an Bios update for the new Ryzen) so if Intel releases something till then I might reconsider but I seriously doubt anything is going to be released from Intel now or in few months in the desktop department so I'd rather stick to Ryzen.

 

[Jayp]

To add to my previous post: I hate when people choose companies - you should choose products and root for healthy competition and AMD now has perfectly shown that when competition falters, customers get punished hard. I've been eagerly waiting for the Ryzen 5000 series but now I'm hesitating whether to upgrade from my 3700X. A performance uplift is great but the cost of the upgrade is not palatable at all. There's no way I will be able to sell my 3700X for $330 I bought it for. At most I'll get $200 for it on the secondary market. Paying $250 to get 20% more performance? I don't know.

Not sure why everyone feels the need to be on a yearly upgrade cycle. Your 3700X either makes you happy or it doesn't. Why even think about the upgrade unless you need or could benefit from more. You could easily wait a year on the 3700X and grab the following Zen 4 CPU that seems to be likely on DDR5 as well. Zen 3 is a an upgrade over Zen 2 no doubt but it is notably an upgrade for Zen and Zen+ users. Someone on early zen would be seeing significant upgrade.

 

[R0H1T]

Rocket Lake, Q1 2021.
If the rumors are true (expecially the Willow Cove backport part), it actually might be a worthy upgrade for people who do not need 12 or 16 cores.

It's not going to be the same IPC increase, that you saw on 10nm, if the same rumors are true of course. Intel will still be relying on their 14nm clock speed advantage to get outright wins.

Efficiency does take a tumble so in the end zen3 will likely be doing better overall perf & certainly much better perf/W even at stock.

 

[Shatun_Bear]

It’s a shame they couldn’t hit the 5.0ghz barrier. You know the engineers probably wanted to get there in the worst way. I’m guessing these will behave like 3000 series, where they will reach max clocks better on their own boosting algorithm and there won’t be any overclocking. It’s not a bad showing by any means—the design changes and IPC uplift are something to be proud of, and the power consumption sounds like it’s going to be so much better. And all this on the same 7nm node. I know these aren’t reviews, but I’d be surprised if the benchmarks they posted couldn’t be reproduced. Just makes me wonder what GPU they were using.

Threadripper 5000 will obviously come with a 5Ghz boost clock if the 5950X is 4.9Ghz already.

That, or a 5950XT in 6 months if you dont fancy TR.

All of a sudden, gaming matters again for AMD fans. LOL

I think the point is, Ryzen CPUs now beat Intel's equivalents in every single metric you can imagine, aside from AVX workloads

In some metrics - efficiency - AMD is so far ahead you could say with a straight face: they're two generations ahead of Intel.

AMD has cornered down Intel as hard as ever. Has the best CPUs in both vfm (Zen2) and absolute performance (Zen3). Absolute market dominance for desktop. The same for mobile and server is a matter of time now.

Yes, Ryzen 4000U on mobile also completely dominates Intel's best in performance per watt and price.

 

[sergionography]

If benchmarking is not done on equal configuration/settings what is their purpose?
Ray Tracing will be normal when there are more new games with it than without. Currently, it's like PhysX, not many games have it and it wouldn't be fair comparison if you can't run it on AMD also.

This is why I said rtx3000 vs rtx2000. Cards that have the same features should be compared accordingly. Also it's for scientific purposes. I'm curious as to how much ray tracing improved and how it effects frame rates. How much ray tracing harware is required before it works parallel to rasterization without effecting performance

 

[JrRacinFan]

All I know is im grabbing my popcorn and sitting it out and waiting to see if any XT versions of Zen 3 show their face.