Review: AMD Ryzen 5 5600 processor (the non-X)
Click here to post a comment for Review: AMD Ryzen 5 5600 processor (the non-X) on our message forum
Undying
If you all core overclock the thing you'll end up with high voltage and lower clocks than pbo boost. Not worth it.
Krizby
Now it's called curve optimizer where you modify the freq/voltage curve to get higher clocks at the same stock voltage, works better than PBO since all PBO does is allowing higher power consumption (leading to higher temp that cause clocks to drop anyways)
user1
this chip is an exception because it only has a boost of 4.4ghz, as >4.6ghz should be doable all core.
NiColaoS
Forgot to mention that I reduced the voltage from 1,350V to 1,225V even when all enhancing capabilities are on and never faced any kind of problem. I really love my CPU. I can't even imagine the 4xxx but for sure I won't be buying it since I don't yet need it. I'll see when next month I'm getting my 1440p 144Hz curved ( 1000R not 1800R ). I love and play all my games with VSync and FPS limiter ( -2FPS than my monitor's refresh rate ), though. Depending on your needs, previous generations the budget PC have had huge impact. Small extraordinary piece of engineering. Mewnehile, I was Intel and only fan since my first PC 480 DXII@80Mhz.
Supertribble
I bought the 5600 but found it frustrating to work with on the MSI Gaming Edge wifi tbh. Out of the box on the latest firmware for the mainboard the 5600 dropped to 4.15Ghz during Cinebench and had too much voltage going through it during gaming sessions. Even when lightly utilized in gaming it was still getting to almost 1.3v which seems too much. The temps were also not good using my old 1st gen D14, which doesn't have PWM fans, so I'm using the low noise adapter. Turning on PBO saw the frequency rise to 4.45Ghz in CB but the temps were crazy at over 80C, too high for a 65w part IMO. My 3600 in a different build using similar cooling runs much cooler.
Ryzen Master tried to tune it to all cores -23 but it wasn't stable with games crashing after a few minutes and I didn't really get anywhere manually setting an offset voltage the old way, nothing really brought the temps down that much.
In the end I dropped the boost by 200Mhz and its running much cooler now, like way cooler. I'm not sure if my CPU is a lemon or the BIOS isn't ready for prime time but, yeah, frustrating chip to work with, at least on this board.
Undying
34" 1440p and 1000r curve looks warped and distorted and monitor looks smaller than it actually is so i would not recommend it. 1800 and 1500r looks much more natural.
Venix
Considering my 5800x does 4.6 all core on 1.185 so 1.150 v after the vdrop and never had a single bsod well over a month now I think you where really really unlucky .
user1
imo the ryzen master optimzer is kinda trash, its way too aggresssive, i found running small fft prime 95 and manually tunning values per core to be far more useful, since you got -23 from ryzen master i would start with that, and then run p95 and see which cores crash, then drop the offset on those cores until it stops crashing.
recommend doing this via bios, because ryzen master can be kinda annoying by reseting pbo settings. i have a 5600g and it does -26 on the best core and -22 on the worst core, the ryzen master optimzer set all cores with -26, which led to crashes.
Supertribble
I'm making some progress with it, got it to 4.35Ghz stable now. I will try for the spec boost of 4.4 but I'm not sure a few hundred mhz really makes a difference. 4.25 is comfy for this chip and it's already so much faster for gaming than the 2700X it is replacing.
I never bothered with the 5800X because generally it has a reputation for running hot, although yours seems very nice, plus the VRMs on this MSI board I have are made of chocolate and get hot with higher watt parts supposedly.
edit
user1: I will try some manual tuning with different cores although TBH some teething difficulties aside I'm very pleased with the perf of the 5600, plus at 4.25 it sips power, which I like very much.
Venix
@Supertribble you will be fine well to be fair ctr tells me i got a golden sample ! and i was actually waiting for the 5700x but the price difference was 12 euros ... so i did not even bother .
With a freezer 34 esports 1 fan iwas getting 91 c on cinebench with pbo full blasting .... on 1.375 v .. (( what ever was default )) and was boosting all core 4.55 with a drop to 4.5 in the end .... with 1.150 ((after vdrop )) i am not going over 70 c ...all core stuck on 4.6ghz !
[SPOILER]
https://i.gyazo.com/e72c4a4d33b4ad8260474420081c8993.png [/SPOILER]
sykozis
Ya'll are making me want to start tuning voltages.... My poor 5600X runs upwards of 1.375V under load and heats my room up rather quickly. I'd love to get it down to around 1.2-1.25V....
sykozis
5600 + 6650XT.... You'll get similar performance for less money....unless you're one of those "ray-tracing" snobs.
I'll be throwing a 6650XT into my son's computer with a 5600X tomorrow night. Will make for a nice upgrade over his 5500XT that's been struggling lately.
Venix
1.25v should be easy if you have an average silicon piece while maintaining stock clocks. If you have a lucky one 1.150 and keep stock settings is possible ! I will find it really strange if you can not undervolt even a little bit. Try it worse case scenario you get a bit frustrated with bsods and just leave stock 😛
Undying
3060ti is a much faster than 6650xt raytracing or not. In 1440p difference is quite substantial.
sykozis
We must have been looking at different reviews. In Hitman 3, the difference at 1440 is about 6% in favor of the 3060Ti but at 1080P, it's about 5% in favor of the RX6650XT. In Assassin's Creed: Valhalla, the RX6650XT is little over 11% faster at 1080P and matches the performance of the 3060Ti at 1440..... For the most part, the cards trade blows. There are only a few exceptions where 1 card is notably faster than the other. In fact, in Formula 1 2021, the RX6650XT is just under 20% faster at 1080P and around 10% faster at 1440..... In most instances, the 6650XT is keeping up with the 3070Ti..... The only time the 3060Ti has a definitive advantage, is in raytracing, which most budget gamers aren't as concerned about since the framerates suck at that point anyway. If you're gaming on a budget, the 3060Ti simply isn't worth the extra almost $200....
Undying
It is severly bottlenecked by memory bandwidth at 1440p but at 1080 performs very well. All in all 6650xt is only 4% faster than 6600xt which is just meh.
sykozis
Seriously? The 6650XT competes with the 3060Ti at 1080P and 1440..... You're seriously grasping at straws here.... For someone on a budget, 4% at the same price (even though that's not an accurate number), isn't an issue. The card is even marketed as being targeted at 1080P gaming. It's even right on the box. If you're trying to build a system for around $900, it's unlikely that you're playing at 1440 or prioritize RT. You're also not going to be looking at an almost $600 graphics card.
Undying
No it does not compete with 3060ti and even looses sometimes to regular 3060. Sniper Elite 5 just came out and it runs better on amd hardware. 6600xt is even slower than 5700xt at 1440p. Stop talking nonsense.
https://i.imgur.com/8RCn9pf.jpg
cucaulay malkin
what really happened here is you smoked too much of the stuff amd sends you
sykozis
Let's be honest here... If you can't cite your source and have to cherry pick benchmark results, your argument is invalid.
Quite funny how you had to cherry pick a single result that doesn't even include the RX6650XT....and from another site for that matter, while I quoted differences directly from the review of the RX6650XT done by Hilbert himself and from multiple benchmarks and resolutions.... I wonder who's really talking non-sense..... You even failed to link to your source, while mine is, directly from Hilbert's review and easily verifiable.
And just as Undying's post above, you had to go to another website.....and cherry pick a graph that demonstrates your claim..... And you had to resort to an "avg-fps" graph, which just makes your choice even worse and even less valid, as it's not a chart budget gamers would waste their time with. Let's add to the fact that AMD openly advertises the card as targeting budget gamers on 1080P, while you both felt the need to pick 2560x1440 charts. And again, no link to source.... Are neither of you capable of intelligent discussion? Neither of you seem to comprehend the idea of budget gaming.... And you both want to argue invalid points.
