ASUS ROG STRIX Scope keyboard review
GALAX GeForce RTX 2070 Super WTF review
ADATA Spectrix S40G 512GB NVMe M.2 SSD review
Red Dead Redemption 2: PC graphics performance benchmark review
XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT THICC III Ultra review
Promo: URcdkey Halloween sale Windows 10 Pro for 11$
Guru3D Rig of the Month - October 2019
MSI GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER GAMING X review
Gigabyte GTX 1660 SUPER GAMING OC review
Palit GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER GamingPRO OC review
AMD Ryzen 5 3600X review
Posted by: on: 07/19/2019 12:34 PM [
132 comment(s) ]
We recently reviewed the Ryzen 7 3700X & Ryzen 9 3900X processors from AMD. How about the 3600 series six core parts eh? Well, let's check out the new Ryzen 5 3600X in this review.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
anticupidon
Senior Member
Posts: 4010
Senior Member
Posts: 4010
Posted on: 07/19/2019 12:56 PM
If this doesn't scream: - Value !! ...I don't know what does.
If this doesn't scream: - Value !! ...I don't know what does.
H1TMANza
Member
Posts: 42
Member
Posts: 42
Posted on: 07/19/2019 01:10 PM
I know, The 3600(non-X) or even a 2nd Hand 1600/2600/2700x chips.
@1440p gaming, good enough
If this doesn't scream Value, I don't know what does.
I know, The 3600(non-X) or even a 2nd Hand 1600/2600/2700x chips.
@1440p gaming, good enough
karma777police
Senior Member
Posts: 103
Senior Member
Posts: 103
Posted on: 07/19/2019 01:28 PM
This CPU is already out dated. By end of this year 8/16 will be a new mainstream standard CPU.
This CPU is already out dated. By end of this year 8/16 will be a new mainstream standard CPU.
Tsenng
Member
Posts: 24
Member
Posts: 24
Posted on: 07/19/2019 01:29 PM
I am SO glad i went for the 3600X (The regular 3600 was not in stock at the time). Paired it with a Gigabyte gaming 5 wi-fi X470 board wich i got dirt cheap on a sale. In total i paid 420$ for the cpu+mobo. And i sold my old x370mobo and R5 1600 cpu for 150$ so in reality only 270$ for a fantastic upgrade!
P.S With the latest bios the cpu easily turbo clocks itself on 1 core to 4.49Ghz so i didn't even bother to do any overclocking with this one.
I am SO glad i went for the 3600X (The regular 3600 was not in stock at the time). Paired it with a Gigabyte gaming 5 wi-fi X470 board wich i got dirt cheap on a sale. In total i paid 420$ for the cpu+mobo. And i sold my old x370mobo and R5 1600 cpu for 150$ so in reality only 270$ for a fantastic upgrade!
P.S With the latest bios the cpu easily turbo clocks itself on 1 core to 4.49Ghz so i didn't even bother to do any overclocking with this one.
tty8k
Member
Posts: 73
Member
Posts: 73
Posted on: 07/19/2019 02:01 PM
Expensive for what it is (same price as 9600k).
Gaming wise 9600k is still doing a better job overall and can reach higher frequency if overclocked.
Expensive for what it is (same price as 9600k).
Gaming wise 9600k is still doing a better job overall and can reach higher frequency if overclocked.
tty8k
Member
Posts: 73
Member
Posts: 73
Posted on: 07/19/2019 02:08 PM
I am SO glad i went for the 3600X (The regular 3600 was not in stock at the time). Paired it with a Gigabyte gaming 5 wi-fi X470 board wich i got dirt cheap on a sale. In total i paid 420$ for the cpu+mobo. And i sold my old x370mobo and R5 1600 cpu for 150$ so in reality only 270$ for a fantastic upgrade!
P.S With the latest bios the cpu easily turbo clocks itself on 1 core to 4.49Ghz so i didn't even bother to do any overclocking with this one.
I paid $390 for a 9600k and mobo almost 1 year ago and I have it running 4.8GHz on all cores.
You're 1 year late and paid more money for a slower combo.
I am SO glad i went for the 3600X (The regular 3600 was not in stock at the time). Paired it with a Gigabyte gaming 5 wi-fi X470 board wich i got dirt cheap on a sale. In total i paid 420$ for the cpu+mobo. And i sold my old x370mobo and R5 1600 cpu for 150$ so in reality only 270$ for a fantastic upgrade!
P.S With the latest bios the cpu easily turbo clocks itself on 1 core to 4.49Ghz so i didn't even bother to do any overclocking with this one.
I paid $390 for a 9600k and mobo almost 1 year ago and I have it running 4.8GHz on all cores.
You're 1 year late and paid more money for a slower combo.
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 11850
Senior Member
Posts: 11850
Posted on: 07/19/2019 02:34 PM
I paid $390 for a 9600k and mobo almost 1 year ago and I have it running 4.8GHz on all cores.
You're 1 year late and paid more money for a slower combo.
Trying to justify your purchase, eh? Same performance in games while slower in everything else. Only a madman would take 9600k before 3600x at this moment.
I paid $390 for a 9600k and mobo almost 1 year ago and I have it running 4.8GHz on all cores.
You're 1 year late and paid more money for a slower combo.
Trying to justify your purchase, eh? Same performance in games while slower in everything else. Only a madman would take 9600k before 3600x at this moment.
CrisanT
Member
Posts: 82
Member
Posts: 82
Posted on: 07/19/2019 02:37 PM
I paid $390 for a 9600k and mobo almost 1 year ago and I have it running 4.8GHz on all cores.
You're 1 year late and paid more money for a slower combo.
I do not get the point of a comment like this? get to the point please.
Or the point is to start the fanboy train?
I paid $390 for a 9600k and mobo almost 1 year ago and I have it running 4.8GHz on all cores.
You're 1 year late and paid more money for a slower combo.
I do not get the point of a comment like this? get to the point please.
Or the point is to start the fanboy train?
Erzengel84
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Posted on: 07/19/2019 02:39 PM
I paid $390 for a 9600k and mobo almost 1 year ago and I have it running 4.8GHz on all cores.
You're 1 year late and paid more money for a slower combo.
Aaaand in which universe an 9600k is an 6C/12T CPU.
You paid 30 bucks less for at least 30 bucks less performance and an CPU with so many security issues you can barely count.
I paid $390 for a 9600k and mobo almost 1 year ago and I have it running 4.8GHz on all cores.
You're 1 year late and paid more money for a slower combo.
Aaaand in which universe an 9600k is an 6C/12T CPU.
You paid 30 bucks less for at least 30 bucks less performance and an CPU with so many security issues you can barely count.
vbetts
Posts: 14714
Posts: 14714
Posted on: 07/19/2019 02:54 PM
Bad start if you're gonna argue like kids. Cut it out.
Bad start if you're gonna argue like kids. Cut it out.
Borys
Member
Posts: 71
Member
Posts: 71
Posted on: 07/19/2019 03:10 PM
GREAT job AMD! Fantastic performance x value, 7nm, lower power and very good security cpu. Its more than 50% better than a I5 9600k... dude 50% more multitasking performance?!?!?! This even was a battle... was a W.O! No answer to this CPU at this time!
GREAT job AMD! Fantastic performance x value, 7nm, lower power and very good security cpu. Its more than 50% better than a I5 9600k... dude 50% more multitasking performance?!?!?! This even was a battle... was a W.O! No answer to this CPU at this time!
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 606
Senior Member
Posts: 606
Posted on: 07/19/2019 03:25 PM
Thanks for the review. With this series it is almost pointless to overclock. AMD has done a really nice job with PBO. Everytime I read these reviews it makes me wonder how EPYC is going to do in the server space since most of the workload is multitasking. I have a feeling Intel is in for some hurt in the server space this time around.
Thanks for the review. With this series it is almost pointless to overclock. AMD has done a really nice job with PBO. Everytime I read these reviews it makes me wonder how EPYC is going to do in the server space since most of the workload is multitasking. I have a feeling Intel is in for some hurt in the server space this time around.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4492
Senior Member
Posts: 4492
Posted on: 07/19/2019 04:03 PM
If the 3600X screams value, the 3600 uses a megaphone. Hardly any slower but is $50 cheaper. If you plan to overclock, they should both reach roughly the same speeds. The 3600X has a better box cooler, and because of that (and because of the higher default speeds), I think it's actually the better choice for anyone who doesn't intend to OC.
No, it won't. 4/8 is the new mainstream and will continue to be that way for a while. 6/12 will probably be the most popular choice among non-streaming gamers for a long while. 8/16 will be for entry-level enthusiasts.
If this doesn't scream Value, I don't know what does.
If the 3600X screams value, the 3600 uses a megaphone. Hardly any slower but is $50 cheaper. If you plan to overclock, they should both reach roughly the same speeds. The 3600X has a better box cooler, and because of that (and because of the higher default speeds), I think it's actually the better choice for anyone who doesn't intend to OC.
This CPU is already out dated. By end of this year 8/16 will be a new mainstream standard CPU.
No, it won't. 4/8 is the new mainstream and will continue to be that way for a while. 6/12 will probably be the most popular choice among non-streaming gamers for a long while. 8/16 will be for entry-level enthusiasts.
gerardfraser
Senior Member
Posts: 2852
Senior Member
Posts: 2852
Posted on: 07/19/2019 04:27 PM
Great review.
I got 3600X,well just for the 200Mhz over 3600 .I only game and @4k and this is a cheap perfect gaming CPU for me.Can match any CPU out there gaming 4k.
Paired 3600X with MSI X470 Gaming Plus all is very good and I am pleased with the CPU.
Great review.
I got 3600X,well just for the 200Mhz over 3600 .I only game and @4k and this is a cheap perfect gaming CPU for me.Can match any CPU out there gaming 4k.
Paired 3600X with MSI X470 Gaming Plus all is very good and I am pleased with the CPU.
rm082e
Senior Member
Posts: 519
Senior Member
Posts: 519
Posted on: 07/19/2019 04:28 PM
If I were buying today, it would be very difficult to justify any Intel chip over the 3600x/3700x. I would probably go with the 3700x in the hopes that 4 years from now it would perform better than the 3600x in the new games at that time.
If I were buying today, it would be very difficult to justify any Intel chip over the 3600x/3700x. I would probably go with the 3700x in the hopes that 4 years from now it would perform better than the 3600x in the new games at that time.
Toadstool
Member
Posts: 87
Member
Posts: 87
Posted on: 07/19/2019 04:32 PM
I hear a lot of criticism for the lack of overclocking headroom on Zen2. While I somewhat understand it, I'm also at the point where I don't have a ton of free time to play with overclocking and have come to value stability way more than I used to. I'm actually somewhat glad to see these chips are giving it their all out of the box so I can get to work and not have to worry about leaving too much performance on the table.
My 1700x is still chugging along but this new lineup is crazy tempting and that would let me shift the 1700x over to a designated drum tracking rig as opposed to using my aging laptop.
As a side note, I'm still ecstatic that more cores is becoming commonplace. More than anything, that's the gain from AMD being back in the game, for me at least. Hopefully software will be quick to catch up and leverage all these threads. I was out of the PC hardware loop for a long while, focusing instead on music and more analog recording techniques. I don't know what made me jump back in but it feels like it was perfect timing (just prior to Ryzen's initial launch).
I hear a lot of criticism for the lack of overclocking headroom on Zen2. While I somewhat understand it, I'm also at the point where I don't have a ton of free time to play with overclocking and have come to value stability way more than I used to. I'm actually somewhat glad to see these chips are giving it their all out of the box so I can get to work and not have to worry about leaving too much performance on the table.
My 1700x is still chugging along but this new lineup is crazy tempting and that would let me shift the 1700x over to a designated drum tracking rig as opposed to using my aging laptop.
As a side note, I'm still ecstatic that more cores is becoming commonplace. More than anything, that's the gain from AMD being back in the game, for me at least. Hopefully software will be quick to catch up and leverage all these threads. I was out of the PC hardware loop for a long while, focusing instead on music and more analog recording techniques. I don't know what made me jump back in but it feels like it was perfect timing (just prior to Ryzen's initial launch).
waltc3
Senior Member
Posts: 1001
Senior Member
Posts: 1001
Posted on: 07/19/2019 04:52 PM
Speaking of overclocking the 3600X, I returned my up-volted 4.4GHz all-core overclock on this cpu @ 1.356v to auto yesterday--for the simple reason that I can detect no advantage to running at anything else other than auto! It seems the chip runs just as fast @ 3.8GHz + 4.4Ghz boost, if not faster, than bumping the voltage manually and manually overclocking all cores. But at auto it definitely runs a lot cooler--and therefore better, I think. AMD has released something brand-new in cpu architectures, imo, and it's working really well. R 3k series is significantly different than any cpu I have ever owned in that regard. Difference is I'm still getting my 600Mhz overclock ROOB--but only when I need it, instead of continuously! Much better than expected--and much different. The old paradigms are fast becoming relics!
Edit: wanted to add that I liked the review and who wouldn't choose a 3600 over a 9900k at half the price for 5% less frame-rate performance (and that much likely temporary, looking ahead)? I picked the 3600X because it's a 95W TDP versus the 65W TDP of the 3600, which means it should clock higher--which it does. Although I had no trouble doing an all-core OC to 4.4GHz @ 1.356v, I really don't recommend it because the way this boost works now it isn't worth it, imo.
Speaking of overclocking the 3600X, I returned my up-volted 4.4GHz all-core overclock on this cpu @ 1.356v to auto yesterday--for the simple reason that I can detect no advantage to running at anything else other than auto! It seems the chip runs just as fast @ 3.8GHz + 4.4Ghz boost, if not faster, than bumping the voltage manually and manually overclocking all cores. But at auto it definitely runs a lot cooler--and therefore better, I think. AMD has released something brand-new in cpu architectures, imo, and it's working really well. R 3k series is significantly different than any cpu I have ever owned in that regard. Difference is I'm still getting my 600Mhz overclock ROOB--but only when I need it, instead of continuously! Much better than expected--and much different. The old paradigms are fast becoming relics!
Edit: wanted to add that I liked the review and who wouldn't choose a 3600 over a 9900k at half the price for 5% less frame-rate performance (and that much likely temporary, looking ahead)? I picked the 3600X because it's a 95W TDP versus the 65W TDP of the 3600, which means it should clock higher--which it does. Although I had no trouble doing an all-core OC to 4.4GHz @ 1.356v, I really don't recommend it because the way this boost works now it isn't worth it, imo.
korn87
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Posted on: 07/19/2019 05:06 PM
I am confused by the test in browsers
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-5-3600x-review,13.html
If I understood correctly, the tests were conducted on the latest version of the browser chrome.
8700k 5GHz + 16Gb RAM 4266MHz (16-17-17-30 2t)
https://krakenbenchmark.mozilla.org/kraken-1.1/results.html?{"v": "kraken-1.1", "ai-astar":,"audio-beat-detection":,"audio-dft":,"audio-fft":,"audio-oscillator":,"imaging-gaussian-blur":,"imaging-darkroom":,"imaging-desaturate":,"json-parse-financial":,"json-stringify-tinderbox":,"stanford-crypto-aes":,"stanford-crypto-ccm":,"stanford-crypto-pbkdf2":,"stanford-crypto-sha256-iterative":}
I have 686ms, and in article 964ms for not overclocked 8700k
in another test, everything is different: I have 181, and in article 185
https://funkyimg.com/i/2VB3Z.jpg
I am confused by the test in browsers
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-5-3600x-review,13.html
If I understood correctly, the tests were conducted on the latest version of the browser chrome.
8700k 5GHz + 16Gb RAM 4266MHz (16-17-17-30 2t)
https://krakenbenchmark.mozilla.org/kraken-1.1/results.html?{"v": "kraken-1.1", "ai-astar":,"audio-beat-detection":,"audio-dft":,"audio-fft":,"audio-oscillator":,"imaging-gaussian-blur":,"imaging-darkroom":,"imaging-desaturate":,"json-parse-financial":,"json-stringify-tinderbox":,"stanford-crypto-aes":,"stanford-crypto-ccm":,"stanford-crypto-pbkdf2":,"stanford-crypto-sha256-iterative":}
I have 686ms, and in article 964ms for not overclocked 8700k
in another test, everything is different: I have 181, and in article 185
https://funkyimg.com/i/2VB3Z.jpg
Amaze
Senior Member
Posts: 3091
Senior Member
Posts: 3091
Posted on: 07/19/2019 05:17 PM
I hear a lot of criticism for the lack of overclocking headroom on Zen2. While I somewhat understand it, I'm also at the point where I don't have a ton of free time to play with overclocking and have come to value stability way more than I used to. I'm actually somewhat glad to see these chips are giving it their all out of the box so I can get to work and not have to worry about leaving too much performance on the table.
Yeah I much prefer it this way. And isn't the reason Intel chips have so much headroom is that their chips can fry bacon when running at max clock? So Intel purposely downclocks their chips to stay within TDP. I heard someone say that a little while ago, and it makes sense.
I hear a lot of criticism for the lack of overclocking headroom on Zen2. While I somewhat understand it, I'm also at the point where I don't have a ton of free time to play with overclocking and have come to value stability way more than I used to. I'm actually somewhat glad to see these chips are giving it their all out of the box so I can get to work and not have to worry about leaving too much performance on the table.
Yeah I much prefer it this way. And isn't the reason Intel chips have so much headroom is that their chips can fry bacon when running at max clock? So Intel purposely downclocks their chips to stay within TDP. I heard someone say that a little while ago, and it makes sense.
Kool64
Senior Member
Posts: 374
Senior Member
Posts: 374
Posted on: 07/19/2019 05:25 PM
mmmm baaacconnn.
mmmm baaacconnn.
Jagman
Senior Member
Posts: 2219
Senior Member
Posts: 2219
Posted on: 07/19/2019 05:31 PM
Now I fancy a bacon sandwich..... That's your fault Amaze and Kool64 you didn't help either.....
Now I fancy a bacon sandwich..... That's your fault Amaze and Kool64 you didn't help either.....
Amaze
Senior Member
Posts: 3091
Senior Member
Posts: 3091
Posted on: 07/19/2019 05:32 PM
Jagman
Senior Member
Posts: 2219
Senior Member
Posts: 2219
Posted on: 07/19/2019 05:36 PM
^ That really helps, thanks! Got no bacon in the house
P.S. Great review HH.
^ That really helps, thanks! Got no bacon in the house
P.S. Great review HH.
Toadstool
Member
Posts: 87
Member
Posts: 87
Posted on: 07/19/2019 06:18 PM
I'll take bacon discussion over Intel/AMD fanboys at each other's throats any day.
I recently got a big 'ol slab of salt pork. Cut it thick and fry it up like bacon, so good. I think they use more sugar in the brine than with bacon.
I'll take bacon discussion over Intel/AMD fanboys at each other's throats any day.
I recently got a big 'ol slab of salt pork. Cut it thick and fry it up like bacon, so good. I think they use more sugar in the brine than with bacon.
pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 11850
Great review. Very nice cpu and like HH said pairing it with a b450 should be a great combo.
This is all you need for gaming.