Ryzen 5000 - Zen 3 lineup Cinebench R20 scores pop up in database

Atombender

2020-10-12 09:21

Weird that the single core performance of a 5950x higher is than the 5900x. While the clockspeed is 300Mhz slower. Or did they only use the boost speed?

#5841679

#Andreas#

2020-10-12 09:36

SINGLE core score is higher because of the higher SINGLE core boost.

#5841683

mohiuddin

2020-10-12 09:42

Looks really promising. I badly fear that AMD is gonna be the new Intel

#5841684

NightWind

2020-10-12 09:45

Looking good, one 5800X for me please to crack 6k in CB20. 🙂

#5841689

clopezi

2020-10-12 10:03

mohiuddin:

Looks really promising. I badly fear that AMD is gonna be the new Intel

You can be confident that it's not gonna happen in many years. Intel have the performance crown for many years without competition, I doubt that Intel it's gonna sink without doing anything, and they have the money and the resources. My fear it's that this is a one day flower. I hope that AMD can fight the crown for many years.

#5841693

Netherwind

2020-10-12 10:17

These scores are really good. With an all-core OC I got my 3800X up to 511/5257 and now I see that the 5800X completely thrashes those results. Getting a 5800X or 5900X for sure.

#5841695

Kaarme

2020-10-12 10:36

Those Tiger Lakes are quite decent laptop CPUs. I wonder how merciful they are on the battery, though, with clocks that high. Maybe Intel has perfected high clocks well enough.

#5841696

fantaskarsef

2020-10-12 10:38

Those single thread scores make me want to have one of those for my next build. But honestly, there's not much "cheap" about that anymore... not that I would complain about the price itself (I used to buy Intel's "enthusiast" platforms for my last two rigs anyway), but a 500€ CPU paired with a ~200€ mainboard isn't exactly what gives AMD an advantage over Intel. But definitely, great CPUs, curiously awaiting comprehensive (gaming) benchmarks, but yeah... going for red next build.

#5841698

Valken

2020-10-12 10:45

I am curious of the headroom in single or "some" not all core mode. For Gurus with Ryzen 3xxx, can you try to OC one of your cores to get the max and post if it is stable? If we can OC the 5800 to 1 or 2 cores close to 5 GHZ, that may be enough for most users.

#5841700

BReal85

2020-10-12 11:05

So if we assume the data is real, the $450 5800X is within 12% in multithread against officially $488, but in reality $650+ 10900K - which is 2/4 cores/thread less. And nearly 15% faster in single thread.

fantaskarsef:

Those single thread scores make me want to have one of those for my next build. But honestly, there's not much "cheap" about that anymore... not that I would complain about the price itself (I used to buy Intel's "enthusiast" platforms for my last two rigs anyway), but a 500€ CPU paired with a ~200€ mainboard isn't exactly what gives AMD an advantage over Intel. But definitely, great CPUs, curiously awaiting comprehensive (gaming) benchmarks, but yeah... going for red next build.

What do you mean by this? There is an $450 8-core 5800X that beats the 10-core 10900K, which is officially $488, but I couldn't find one under $650 (Microcenter, Amazon, Newegg). You can 100% use B550 motherboards with the 5800X. Their price start at around $80-90.

#5841703

mohiuddin

2020-10-12 11:12

clopezi:

You can be confident that it's not gonna happen in many years. Intel have the performance crown for many years without competition, I doubt that Intel it's gonna sink without doing anything, and they have the money and the resources. My fear it's that this is a one day flower. I hope that AMD can fight the crown for many years.

Well , even though i feel that AMD is gonna play differently on the market while relishing on its dominance, Intel's almost decade long nibbling on 4c/8t crap makes me apprehensive.

#5841704

nevcairiel

2020-10-12 11:16

BReal85:

What do you mean by this? There is an $450 8-core 5800X that beats the 10-core 10900K, which is officially $488, but I couldn't find one under $650 (Microcenter, Amazon, Newegg). You can 100% use B550 motherboards with the 5800X. Their price start at around $80-90.

It only beats it half-way though, in multi-core the Intel 10-core is still ahead, so the comparison isn't exactly that clear-cut. And AMD did already increase prices this generation - deservedly so with their performance of Zen2 and Zen3, but its a departure from the "value" brand for CPUs for sure. And comparing street prices for the Intel CPU and MSRP of the AMD isn't accurate. There is a good chance that there will be shortages of those new AMD CPUs and thus price hikes. PS: For the record, I can get a 10900K for 525€, which converted to USD and deducted taxes, that comes around to roughly 500 USD, not too far from MSRP. No clue if there is official MSRP for europe to compare to.

#5841706

Nictron

2020-10-12 11:23

This is Intel's new 10nm laptop chip correct, Intel Core i7-1185G7? Running at 4.8 so if desktop variant can reach 5.3 like the past 10900K then it could reach R20 score of 668. If AMD releases an XT variant of the 5950 that reaches 5 Ghz then a score of 647 can be reached. Competition is great! Battle on!

#5841709

Richard Nutman

2020-10-12 11:36

Valken:

If we can OC the 5800 to 1 or 2 cores close to 5 GHZ, that may be enough for most users.

I don't think there's any need to overclock it. It's fast enough. It's already faster than Intel's 5.3Ghz in single core performance.

#5841710

fantaskarsef

2020-10-12 11:46

BReal85:

So if we assume the data is real, the $450 5800X is within 12% in multithread against officially $488, but in reality $650+ 10900K - which is 2/4 cores/thread less. And nearly 15% faster in single thread. What do you mean by this? There is an $450 8-core 5800X that beats the 10-core 10900K, which is officially $488, but I couldn't find one under $650 (Microcenter, Amazon, Newegg). You can 100% use B550 motherboards with the 5800X. Their price start at around $80-90.

nevcairiel:

It only beats it half-way though, in multi-core the Intel 10-core is still ahead, so the comparison isn't exactly that clear-cut. And AMD did already increase prices this generation - deservedly so with their performance of Zen2 and Zen3, but its a departure from the "value" brand for CPUs for sure. And comparing street prices for the Intel CPU and MSRP of the AMD isn't accurate. There is a good chance that there will be shortages of those new AMD CPUs and thus price hikes. PS: For the record, I can get a 10900K for 525€, which converted to USD and deducted taxes, that comes around to roughly 500 USD, not too far from MSRP. No clue if there is official MSRP for europe to compare to.

Pretty much what @nevcairiel said in regards to the cost. It's not like the price wasn't justified, but the "AMD is cheaper than Intel" argument is no longer there, which it was just a few years ago. And that didn't happen because Intel dropped their prices that much in the last years. But, I want to stress, I find the price is justified. Just not a "exceptionally cheap and good" line of products, just a good products. And of course you are right with B550 mainboard. But buying a 500+€ CPU, I wouldn't want to cheap out on the mainboard. Especially not if you need more than one PCIe slot, etc.

#5841713

Netherwind

2020-10-12 11:52

fantaskarsef:

Those single thread scores make me want to have one of those for my next build. But honestly, there's not much "cheap" about that anymore... not that I would complain about the price itself (I used to buy Intel's "enthusiast" platforms for my last two rigs anyway), but a 500€ CPU paired with a ~200€ mainboard isn't exactly what gives AMD an advantage over Intel. But definitely, great CPUs, curiously awaiting comprehensive (gaming) benchmarks, but yeah... going for red next build.

Said in a slide somewhere that "Prices are subject to change" meaning if Intel starts to threaten or if they feel there is too much negative opinions regarding the price, they could always do a a 50$ cut. https://i.redd.it/iqk0oz3hi0s51.jpg

#5841717

Undying

2020-10-12 12:11

Netherwind:

Said in a slide somewhere that "Prices are subject to change" meaning if Intel starts to threaten or if they feel there is too much negative opinions regarding the price, they could always do a a 50$ cut. https://i.redd.it/iqk0oz3hi0s51.jpg

Which basically means its more expensive only becouse there is no competition.

#5841719

Fox2232

2020-10-12 12:13

clopezi:

You can be confident that it's not gonna happen in many years. Intel have the performance crown for many years without competition, I doubt that Intel it's gonna sink without doing anything, and they have the money and the resources. My fear it's that this is a one day flower. I hope that AMD can fight the crown for many years.

Well, intel ended innovation with Sandy bridge. All they did since then was tiny base/boost clock each generation and IMC capable to have faster memories. (And added AVX2 w/ Haswell.) Would Sandy been equipped wit equal IMC and memories as current chips clocking around 4.5GHz, it would be about equal everywhere except AVX2. Way intel got money came from clocking down environment. Want OC? Pay for OC CPU and OC chipset. Otherwise enjoy that 100~300MHz bump from next generation and 133~267MHz higher memory clock. I doubt AMD is going that way. They may ask more for their chips each generation. But it will come with higher performance and power efficiency. When AM5 comes, early adopters will be paying extra for DDR5, but will get benefits of 8C/16T CPUs capable to match current 12C/24T. (And run circles around them in games.)

#5841730

fantaskarsef

2020-10-12 12:31

Netherwind:

Said in a slide somewhere that "Prices are subject to change" meaning if Intel starts to threaten or if they feel there is too much negative opinions regarding the price, they could always do a a 50$ cut. https://i.redd.it/iqk0oz3hi0s51.jpg

Undying:

Which basically means its more expensive only becouse there is no competition.

... which sounds like something that Intel would have done just a few years ago 😀 Still, they have ways, and CPU + mainboard combo deals are not unknown etc.

#5841732

Undying

2020-10-12 12:36

Fox2232:

Well, intel ended innovation with Sandy bridge. All they did since then was tiny base/boost clock each generation and IMC capable to have faster memories. (And added AVX2 w/ Haswell.) Would Sandy been equipped wit equal IMC and memories as current chips clocking around 4.5GHz, it would be about equal everywhere except AVX2. Way intel got money came from clocking down environment. Want OC? Pay for OC CPU and OC chipset. Otherwise enjoy that 100~300MHz bump from next generation and 133~267MHz higher memory clock. I doubt AMD is going that way. They may ask more for their chips each generation. But it will come with higher performance and power efficiency. When AM5 comes, early adopters will be paying extra for DDR5, but will get benefits of 8C/16T CPUs capable to match current 12C/24T. (And run circles around them in games.)

If you are right and performance would be that much better maybe it would be smart waiting for ddr5 and zen4 if its rumored 2021 release than spending so much for zen3.