AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Takes The Lead in Passmark Single Thread Scores

Kool64

2020-10-23 21:28

Ryu5uzaku:

I cant see your point. The 5600x is going to be good bit faster since it competes with intels that are 5ghz range instead of the 4.3 that this one is.

perhaps I would just feel weird paying $300 for six cores.

#5846006

SamuelL421

2020-10-23 21:28

This is awesome, I hope we start getting more options for AMD laptops soon. Sadly there's no workstation or high-end gaming laptops available with 4800h/4900h, maybe we'll finally get those with 5xxx / Zen 3 mobile chips.

#5846037

Webhiker

2020-10-23 23:40

tty8k:

Well thats great for 1 core (a bit suspicious that most leaks show single thread performance no?)

Not really since we all know AMD is superior in multi-threading and the 5000 series will only widen that gap to Intel. The reason single thread performance is being shown is due to the performance increase AMD have made in that area. With a 40 fps increase in Shadow of the Tomb Raider in 1080p compared to previous gen Ryzen is just mind boggling. When have Intel ever given you a performance uplift like that ?

#5846049

chainy

2020-10-24 00:41

All nice and dandy but let's wait and see real life gaming benchmarks and if they can beat 5.3 oc'd intels there on 1080p..

#5846075

fry178

2020-10-24 03:05

@tty8k and? the benchmark for hw sales are the +60-80% (depending on country/game etc) that are on 1080p (720p). outside the fact that virtually every bench/games shows almost no difference for 2k, and definitely almost nil at 4K, and completely ignoring that almost all (that dont have a 2080-ti/3090) are bottlenecking on the gpu, not the cpu, so upgrading the gpu would give far more gains than cpu.

#5846076

Reddoguk

2020-10-24 03:24

AMD hasn't really overtaken Intel in CPU performance it's more like Intel has stagnated with their 14nm ++++++++++++++++ and left the door wide open.. ^^

#5846078

theoneofgod

2020-10-24 03:29

Reddoguk:

AMD hasn't really overtaken Intel in CPU performance it's more like Intel has stagnated with their 14nm ++++++++++++++++ and left the door wide open.. ^^

It's the same thing.

#5846093

Aura89

2020-10-24 06:12

Kool64:

you'd have to be crazy to buy a 5600X though. With the 10400F being the new "budget" king. I guess you'd get one to have the fastest of the slowest???

By this same logic, the 10600k would be in the same boat. And everything inbetween. Just because they have the same amount of cores doesn't mean they'll have the same performance....

#5846114

ender79

2020-10-24 08:57

On paper Zen3 will be very good for gaming( a lot of cache ,no more CCXs , revised arch and infinity fabric bus) . Games love single thread performance because don't scale too much with high number of cores , but memory latency will hurt gaming. Zen3 will have a new memory controller , but it is still located outside the die (CCD) into that huge I/O controller die. Even with a lot of L3 cache that can hide memory latency , miss prediction occur in real life games . Cores are accessing memory controller via infinity fabric and that adds latency. I really hope for AMD to bring a really strong processor for gaming, I can't wait for reviews of Ryzen 5000 series .

#5846138

Webhiker

2020-10-24 11:36

tty8k:

Well that's easy since Intel didn't have such crap gaming processors to improve in the first place. The difference it's bigger when you come from a hole. Lets see what difference is in 2k and even 4k gaming so that they charge premium. Any chance of a 5% difference would be wonderful for the 50% more money. 1080p is a lost memory, at least 5 years old to me.

It doesn't really matter where they came from. Since Zen 1 was released they have done nothing but improve generation by generation. As a matter of fact it's a lot more impressive coming from nothing than releasing another 14+++++++++++++++++++ node with 2% performance increase. When Intel was ahead 1080p and even 720p was VERY important to show CPU performance, now it's not important at all. Suddenly 4k is all Intel cares about for the simple fact that the GPU matters more not the CPU. How pathetic is that.

#5846142

kapu

2020-10-24 12:05

Webhiker:

It doesn't really matter where they came from. Since Zen 1 was released they have done nothing but improve generation by generation. As a matter of fact it's a lot more impressive coming from nothing than releasing another 14+++++++++++++++++++ node with 2% performance increase. When Intel was ahead 1080p and even 720p was VERY important to show CPU performance, now it's not important at all. Suddenly 4k is all Intel cares about for the simple fact that the GPU matters more not the CPU. How pathetic is that.

That's intel marketing in the nut shell 😀 I'm waiting for cheap 5600 to appear , i hope AMD can put 200 euro price tag on it ....

#5846154

Rx4speed

2020-10-24 14:19

Kool64:

perhaps I would just feel weird paying $300 for six cores.

Well that arguement falls short when AMD releases the 5600 non-X for a rumored $220!?.

kapu:

That's intel marketing in the nut shell 😀 I'm waiting for cheap 5600 to appear , i hope AMD can put 200 euro price tag on it ....

Rumor has it around $220 USD. Not sure in Euros. With the 5600x at $300 and the 5800x @ $450, given the IPC gains alone, the $220 5600 looks like a stellar buy. I'd love a 5800x but I think the price point is too high.

#5846162

H83

2020-10-24 14:52

Richard Nutman:

The chip speeds really bother me. If the dual chiplet 16 core 5950X can hit 4.9Ghz turbo, why on earth can the single chiplet 8 core 5800X not reach 4.9Ghz also? Why is the 6 core 5600X limited to 4.5Ghz turbo? Makes no sense. Surely less cores is less heat?

AMD uses the best chips for the most expensive parts. If they have an 8 core chip that hits max speed they will use it on their higher models and leave the worst chips for the cheapest parts. Makes some sense although i agree that an X part should have the fastest chip available. Anyway, Zen 3 seems to be an hit and the 5800x is looking so good! Good thing it´s too expensive for me otherwise...

#5846171

Witcher29

2020-10-24 15:23

JamesSneed:

Whoa. AMD is killing it.

But not in gaming.

#5846174

kapu

2020-10-24 15:42

Witcher29:

But not in gaming.

This round appears to be quite different 😀

#5846187

fry178

2020-10-24 17:16

@Witcher29 lol. unless you have a 2080ti or equivalent, your gpu bound, and even the ppl i know that have tis, they rather have a more up to date platform, than 2fps more on intel

#5846207

Aura89

2020-10-24 19:50

Witcher29:

But not in gaming.

Do you work for intel?

#5846215

JamesSneed

2020-10-24 20:33

Witcher29:

But not in gaming.

We shall see once third party reviews are out. If AMD is to be believed they are killing Intel in gaming and every other metric.

#5846221

Steppzor

2020-10-24 21:16

My 8700K i still good, but craving a upgrade. Might go AMD this time for sure. This looks very promising.

#5846224

mackintosh

2020-10-24 21:18

I'd be happy if they at least match Intel this time around. If they do, I'll happily change to AMD, as I'm due for an upgrade. In fact, I'm kind of counting on it. Haven't owned an AMD system since I got a Core 2 Duo.