Lol right?! I found a 7th Gen Intel tower with 128gb pcie drive at the local dump few years ago and I'm like.. this is perfect for my mom to check emails and do spread sheets for work. Replaced her 11 year old AMD athlon with astronomically more performance. She knows nothing about computer and said "son.. if you're recommending it I know it's an amazing upgrade.. IDC what is inside it" lol
Still rocking a r5 5600 with rx 6600 xt which i built myself on September of 2022. Has been a charm, no issues whatsoever. My friends suggested me to buy rtx 3050/60 instead of an AMD card saying that amd cards have driver issues. I researched and bought 6600 xt and had no issues. Its good that i didn't listen to them Lmao
Nvidia has had driver issues too, it's just that people ignore and forget them. In my experience, Nvidia often don't fix them before putting GPU into legacy category or notoriously saying their GPU was "only for Windows 8" refusing to fix installing updates on W10.
Yeah, when gaming at 1080p the 6600 XT with a 5600 is more than enough for another generation. Honestly, you aren't really going to get any real performance benefit switching to Nvidia at that tier. You'd need to get a 3070 or better to really take advantage of the architecture with raytracing or DLSS upscaling for 4K and at that point you'd need a better CPU to push it.
I had lots of driver issues with amd until I figured the problem was with the ram voltage by being too low, I dont know why asus uses a measly 1.136 in their b650 bios. I got it to 1.265 and all the timeouts were gone.
I just love how the 5600 was a mid range CPU to 'almost budget' price and you get 90-130 fps even in highly demanding tripple A games on ultra. Its so nice when you get actually good value for your money, and dont have to count pennies and make multi year plans. Now if GPU pricing could stop being cancer...
I think that's happening. Used graphics card prices are falling again in anticipation of upcoming next generation graphics card releases from both AMD and Nvidia. Also, sales of current gen graphics cards have slumped a lot, and prices for new graphics cards have already started trending downward, though there hasn't been any major price movement yet on the cards which were already offering the best value, such as any RX 6000 series cards from the 6600 and up (but some are mostly sold out now), the RX 7800 XT, and the RTX 4070, and 4070 Super. The RX 7700 XT and the 16GB RTX 4060 ti have both come down in price somewhat, making either of them potentially good, though I still don't think either of them is all that good. The 16GB 4060 ti is probably only worth considering if you really really care about power efficiency for some reason, and the RX 7700 XT still isn't really that much cheaper than the 6800 XT and 7800 XT, despite having 25% less vram in addition to significantly less GPU compute performance.
I honestly think the whole negativity surrounding GPU prices is BS. Point in case: The "90 class" were previously called "Titan class" and was just as bitterly expensive. Gamers just ignored their existence because they were marketed towards semi-pro users. But well-off gamers bought them anyway. Back in 2013 I payed $1000 (MSRP) for my Radeon HD 7990. I bought it because I wanted a fun toy, full well knowing that the dual GPU layout would probably become an issue down the road. In 2016 I bought an RX 580 for $220 to replace it, precisely because too many games were starting to have issues. The RX 580 is nominally 5-10% faster than the HD 7990 and has 2GB VRAM more. I know this is a bit of an extreme case, but that was "20% for the same performance 3 years later". I'm currently running an XTX at 1440p (not stupid enough to get on the 4k train!), but nobody on a budget should even go 1440p. 1080p 144/165Hz monitors are cheap, and GPUs that can give you 90-120FPS@1080p at high or ultra settings, in today's most demanding games, are $300-400. A 4090 is only nominally 2.6x faster than a 6750XT. But 4k requires roughly 4x as much compute power as 1080p. So a 6750XT at 1080p is faster than a 4090 at 4k. Resolution is expensive as fuck. Not GPUs.
I bought a used 6700XT for $250, free shipping, last summer. I did the 6750XT factory OC myself and enjoy better raw performance than the then $500 4060Ti 16GB. You can get a used 6700XT for less now, the 4060Ti 16GB is still $450.
Gpu pricing is fine. Just buy an AMD gpu below $500, and a 4070ti super or 7900xt at most. You can still get the fantastic 6600xt for near $200, which is more than good enough for entry level gaming, the 4070 super and 7800xt are still good for their price, and the 4070ti vram bump and price cuts of the 7900xt made both of those cards as viable options. If you ignore the whale garbage that is the $1000+ gpus, or the obviously terrible choices like the 7700xt, 4060ti, etc, you can find acceptable prices for good gpus.
Selling for way too much money even today, when an FX8350 will drop in on most boards that support it and give far better performance... but neither are worth the money they still sell for for some reason.
I got a 5800X for free. People paid me to build them an editing machine and specified a 5800X. They then said it was too slow and asked me to drop a 5950X in the machine. When I asked what they wanted done with the 5800X they said to just keep it. No problem. I swapped out my 3700X. Pure bliss.
a fire stick is 25 whats the price of team fortress 2 original xbox 360 these does still just free or sumn on the internet i total to i wish i hade a original xbox 360 copy with used whats a block buster price tag on her and the price one prerelease triple a Title whatever i just search duh other subect plus engineer your so so trans parents crazy train news politics the sky is falling your parents music sucked you probably going to grow up to be your parents i have a horrid sense of humor like i would have to be payed for or i have no idea any way about it it is really bad have to be career only for certain markets
Yep. One of my reasons to jump on the 5800x3d is that the best gaming CPU of a popular socket is likely to appear in benchmarks for years to come. There's no shame in encouraging my favorite hardware channel to continue to cover it.
The 5700X3D is goated too. I was on the fence of upgrading to a 5800X3D for a long time, but I finally got a discounted 5700X3D for 290 CAD. It's the cheapest 3D VCache chip most of the world can buy
@@hey01e5Yeah it's almost the same as 5800X3D but a lot cheaper. Over here in europe it's currently discounted to just $250 compared to the 5800X3D which is almost as expensive as the 7800X3D at $315.
Ryzen 5 5600 is still a beast. Probably the best choice for a budget gaming machine. Toss in something like RX 6800 second hand with it and you have one hell of a machine to enjoy literally anything on the market at 1440p.
I concur, this is literraly my current build of the last 2 years (5600x + RX 6800 non XT) and I really don't have any incentive to replace it today (I mean, the money I would have to spend is not worth it atm for me). Costed me around 1200€ for the total system (and 32Gb, 2.5To SSDs total, great case etc...) and will surely last at least a couple more years.
66 titles accounted for 80 percent of all playtime in 2023. And 60 percent of that playtime was spent in games that are six years old or older. Only a minority of gamers are actually playing recent AAA titles.
@@jocerv43 I went for the 12400F, because AMD delayed the 5600 a long time. Also a really nice GPU, and the price was forced quite low by AMDs competition. In retrospect a 5800x3D would been goated tho, if I were able to make it run on my older AM4+ Motherboard.
am4 was a great one, personally started out with a b350. Used it from first gen all the way to the 5800x3d, eventually got a nice b550 for some updated io/features. I would have never thought that socket would last that long.
If that's the realistic price range you shop GPUs in, then there will be at least another GPU upgrade and possibly two before you have to consider a system upgrade. A 5600(X) can max out a 6800XT at 1080p, if you crank up the settings, in nearly all games (that don't already run at stupid good framerates), so something like an RX 8600(TX) will certainly still be a good pairing once their price becomes reasonable.
Yeah, I had a 5900x and 6900xt which was pretty much the best when I bought it. Worked really well and you don't really use the extra cores so 5600x is similar enough. I would only upgrade the cpu if you have at least a 6700xt and are cpu bottlenecked hard (which can be the case for specific games like Satisfactory or X4).
@@josh2238350 aged better than some newer Intel CPUs that (at the time) offered better performance. i3 that left FX in the dust eventually became insuficcient with 2 cores and 4 threads, while FX chugged along with consistently underwhelming performance. It's an unstoppable tortoise, probably will die when it's 100 years old. i7 2600 is all around better except price and niche use cases like x264 encoding (it's ALU heavy and FX 8000 has 8 ALUs vs. 4 in Intel).
@@josh223 By what metric? It's 12 years old. I'd trust my own experience over what people who were infants when it released would say. It's been pretty well documented it has better frametimes than quad core intel CPU's from its era.
I had 5600, 5700x and 5800x3d all with rtx 3060ti later rx6800, know rx7800xt. It was all great with 5600 until i bought 240hz screen. Then i started to chase that 240 fps and ended with 5800x3d. I got gift card for some web shop at work and bought 5800x3d for the money i got from selling that 5700x while it was still worth a lot..
It is a stunningly powerful and efficient CPU for productivity work, one of the best ever, and highly relevant today. I will be picking one up in a month or so for a lower cost/high performance work PC.
Got my 5950X durring pandemic/newegg shuffle, wasn't really wanting that particular cpu but you couldn't buy anything, won shuffle by surprise so went with it. Since I also have a bunch of DVD and blurays to rip and put on the NAS it's come in very useful. With it and the 3080 also newegg shuffle I haven't had any issues in gaming especially at 1440p. Honestly were I to upgrade to a 9000 series I'd save up for the 9950X.
*'60 Percent Of Playtime In 2023 Went To 6-Year-Old Or Older Games'* League of Legends, Roblox, Minecraft, CG:GO, Sims 4, Rocket League, Rainbow 6 Siege, Fortnite, Apex. 5600/5600X is more than excellent for the vast majority of games people actually play.
Plus the 5800X3D and 5950X are a thing for an upgrade later on. So when the 5600 stops giving playable framerates, the higher end chips will be available used for a good price. Or just an upgrade to a newer platform.
the best thing is excelent upgrade path to 3d chips if u are gamer like 5600x3d or 5700x3d even 5800x3d or if u looking for productivity 5950x and so on you have so many options after so many years which is truly excelent for people so much options to upgrade no need to replace whole platform and spend so much cash $$
You don't know how I wanted this video. I really do. I am putting together a pc mini itx 5L, with which I want to last about 4 or 5 years. But I don't want to spend more than I need. I have found the 5600 for 95$ and the 5700x for 150$. I have watched thousands of videos including yours. But I've always been left with that pimple as the videos are a few years old and I would like more recent information. And here you come to the rescue. It's as if you have listened to my wishes. Thank you.
Built my son a gaming PC for Christmas. 5600, B550 mATX board, an Asrock 6600, and reused a spare kit of DDR4 I had. CPU was 190, Mobo was 130 and GPU was 220. All in CAD. All he plays is Fall Guys, Roblox and Minecraft, so its more than enough for now, and should be enough for him to grow in to. Probably isn't a better budget combo for what you get out there right now.
Had to wait longer then hoped to upgrade pc, wanted ryzen 5900x but was last of AM4 and price was long time high, so meh. Now spiked on a 699€ 7950x3d cause only 250€ more then 7800x3d for double cores, glad i did, i sometimes alt tab between game and picture software, and this works amazing, soon video editing as well.
5800x3D pricing spiked here more than a year ago (checked after a commenter claimed upgrade to AM5 wasn't much more), the 5700x3D is the viable option. It's almost like AMD have a new range coming soon!
@@RobBCactive I wouldn't consider going from 269 to 279 over a month a spike when the 5700X3D when from 205 to 225 within the last week alone. In fact, the 5800X3D has been stable in that 270-280 range since the price drop at the beginning of the year. But the 5700X3D has also been on a slow decrease down from 260 in january (when the 5800X3D was at 300 from the christmas peak)
@@HappyBeezerStudios my local price is €380 against €230, I paid €300 for an 5800x3D. I checked because others in other countries were saying they saw bad prices too. Even with your numbers the 5700x3D looks better gaming value.
I did a 5600x3d with 4070Super for my kids. It is by far the best value out there. My much more expensive system is a bit of a disappointment to that value king.
@@tilapiadave3234 Ever thought about that maybe he upgraded when AM5 was super expensive or when the 5800x3D was the only x3D chip and no one knew if there would be anything after it for AM4?^^
@@tilapiadave3234 But your time has value too :) +New sockets always have problems and are quite expensive. . Waiting is rarely worth it in pc building.
@@Hardwareunboxed That is not the "norm". Most use 16CL as 14CL is more expensive, and don´t give much more performance to justify the price difference.
Hi Steve, thanks for looking into this. I've been recommending a good solid 6 core processor to budget minded ,gaming focused customers for years. Thankfully I'm not too far off the mark. One for other people to look into is the whole gaming experience is more than just fps. I've found that loading times, game update, and asset streaming for computers with beefier processors tend to load much more quickly. Overall the gaming experience when quick travelling or loading in new areas feel much more immersive. If I were to aim for a budget focused computer, the lion's share of the budget should be for the gpu. For more balanced builds, I would definitely pick a solid 8core cpu. The next question that I would like a revisit the intel big and little core designs. Did they improve the scheduler at all? Some games just run weird with little cores active.
Finally 6-core content not focused on the 3600; 5600 with unified cache is the gaming baseline really, 3600 was just ok. Sold my 3600 for $200 and got the 5600 for $280 at launch from microcenter... Been great so far. Appreciate the 4k benchmarks as thats what res i play at, as there's virtually no difference between them at the res, im sticking with the 5600x till next gen at least. Unfortunately the x3d upgrade costs too much to be worth it really.
To be fair I wouldn't ask someone if the product they bought is good enough for me. It's a common trope by now that netizens will justify their purchases regardless of how bad it was. I replaced my I5-9600K with a 7600 last year even though it was good enough and going strong with the RTX3080. Turns out the 7600 was better and much more convenient regardless of how much i wanted to justify the 9600K. Something about being able to better render videos in the background during Apex Legends sessions and having less frame drops in smoke and explosions.
Just ordered a 5600x 2 days ago (before watching this video) to replace my aging Ryzen 3 3100, for around 120$ (new). It's an incredibly cheap upgrade. Was thinking about waiting for the 5500x3d but they keep delaying it and i doubt' it'll be much less than double the 5600x's price.
More cores doesn't mean more performance necessarily, true. But 10 years ago people were saying that 4 core/8 threads was all we would ever need. More cores' performance will scale with time that's for sure, but will that scale quickly enough to take advantage of Zen 3 or Zen 4 while they're still relevant? Probably not, hard to say. I guess the point is to buy a processor that fits your needs and bugdet in the current window in time, like always. TLDR: I like commas.
My 5600x has served me well over the last 3 years and I have no regrets! Paired with my 7800XT, it's been a great little combo and I don't feel a need to upgrade yet.
60fps+ on all games = great. Does it ever stutter? What happens if you activate DLSS in 4k in cpu bound games? Does the 1% low and average improve? If so, how much?
Considering DLSS is rendering at a lower res and then upscaled, I'd say performance would either stay the same, or even go down if the upscaling runs on something that doesn't have the resources available.
The 5600X3D would beat all the non-3D chips in this test. They limited it to Microcenter to upsell the 8-core variant. In the same way a 7600X3D would be almost as fast as the 7800X3D, but obviously they want you to buy a more expensive CPU.
@@Hardwareunboxed Well 4K sure is, but 1440p still has some cpu limitations in games. 1080p is true cpu power test i agree, but comparison tests with 4K in there doesnt add anything valuable :) Still cool test about 6core cpu's.
ever since the R5 1600 came out. ryzen's R5 X600 a godsend for budget minded people who want a powerful CPU without burying wallet-kun with your sold organ.
@Clearsight-oo2ez nobody said budget. Sure, I could spend more money for marginally better performance. But I'm happy with the performance at those resolutions. Why are you mad?
@Clearsight-oo2ez only in games that take advantage of the 3d cache, most of which I don't play. It's not worth spending another $410 CAD at this time. If the 5800x3d existed at the time of build, sure.
I've commented this before, but I'd be curious to see how ray tracing in these games scales with the cores, it it's single core intensive or can it scale to multiple cores. The games here that scaled better than 3 to 4% on 5600 were the ones that needed more processing power to generate the frames. Hence, RT might also scale similarly, maybe not, will be curious to see that.
I had a nice chuckle when you showed the 4K data. Y'all have been talking about why it doesn't matter for a solid year and enough viewers are still confused
Could have been nice to retest with the same hardware as was done in the original review, to get a how well did it age with new bios, windows updates, and drivers
Not really, at least in Europe, where you can get 7500f for much lower price than 5700X3D, let alone insanely overpriced 5800X3D. While in terms of performance 7500f with tuned RAM is right on par with 5800X3D, if not a bit faster. So you can just sell your old AM4 kit, add what 5800X3D costs here and get a new platform with great future upgradeability.
@@stangamer1151 The 7500F is only on par with the 5800X3D in titles that don't benefit much from the extra cache. For stuff that likes the cache (and/or more cores) it's nowhere near. AM5 motherboards and DDR5 are also MUCH more expensive than a setup you can slap a 5800X3D into, so it's a false equivalence. Not that I'd necessarily recommend someone doing an entirely new build go for AM4 at this point (though nor would I recommend buying into AM5 right now with Zen 5 arriving shortly), but the 5800X3D remains a great upgrade option for people who want something easy to drop in. Incidentally, I don't know where you are in Europe, but it's certainly not "insanely overpriced" in my country.
@@CaptainKenway €315 VS €170. That is €145 difference. You can get 32GB of DDR5 6400 MHz / CL32 for €145. If you overclock it to 6400MHz and also use CU to make 7500f function at +200MHz, you can actually get similar performance to 5800X3D even in those games, which benefit from bigger L3 cache, thanks to much higher single core performance of Zen 4 and much faster RAM. In CPU heavy games, like Spider Man, 7500f is even a bit faster than 5800X3D. As a result, I do not see any reason to spend €315 for an old gen CPU, which not that much faster than my tuned 5600. I'd rather sell my existing AM4 kit and get new AM5 kit with 7500f by simply adding the same €315, since new AM5 kit costs just around €450.
Thanks for testing in 4k, also. While some people are convinced CPUs don't matter that much when gaming at 4k and will say so on every forum there is, it's good to see how much they don't matter... For example, I have a 5600x and was looking to upgrade once I eventually bought a 4k monitor (in like 2 weeks time), but the 5800x3d is hella expensive at the moment (if I can even find one). Then there's the 5950x, which costs the equivalent of 340 USD. But now I know for sure I don't have to upgrade until I have enough of a budget to switch to a newer socket. Seeing is believing, mate!
I did a side-grade from a 9900k to a 5600X and dropped the heat in my room massively and gained PCIe 4.0 with gen 4 SSDs. I still have both of those systems as well as a 7700X and 7800X3D+4090 system. The 5600X was a bargain in a $230 Microcenter combo with a MSI motherboard.
I have a 9900k (AIO), 5600x3d (Air), and a 14700k (AIO) in the same room. The 9900k on a 360 AIO in a Fractal North Case with Noctua fans is definitely the coolest of the bunch. The 5600x3d is in a Fractal Torrent Nano (180mm fan in the front) cooled with a Noctua NH-12UA. What case, fans, and cooler where you using?
@@forcedcobra yes I'm talking about the BTUs per hour of heat generated and put into the room. There's 3.41 BTU/h per watt. That's the heat you feel coming from your PC. The 5600X can be cooled by a potato. I have a Hyper 212 Evo on it and that's all it needs 😂. My 9900k had a 280mm Corsair H115i Elite Capellix RGB and it struggled. Intels basically all need a 360mm at this point 🤦
MicroCenter is ridiculous with their bundles. Picked up a 7800X3D, MB, and 32gigs for $460. Had to suffer through some issues with the gigabyte MB initially, but after figuring out the issue it has been rock solid. Just incredible value.
Just a suggestion and i know it would be probably alot of work but would you guys ever create a spreadsheet with these graphs for each game you test for each cpu and gpu that you use and log 1080, 2k and 4k results? It might be handy for users to look at a game for a particular cpu that they have and want to compare it to a certain GPU that they want to buy etc
So, you can actually do that yourself by drawing a venn diagramm with (fps cpu can drive at lowest res) & (fps gpu can drive at target res), of already exsisting cpu and gpu benchmarks! Hope this helps!
The idea that memory cache is important was already back in the socket 370 pentium 3 era. They were similar clocked Celerons with a lot less memory cache, while most other things were practically equal. Those Celerons were a lot slower. Basically scaling in a similar fashion actually. This is also one of the reasons these older Intel Xeon's still cope pretty decently. They also have a lot of cache.
_"memory cache is important was already back in the socket 370 pentium 3 era"_ That's actually categorically incorrect. The Mendocino Celeron 300A, with 1/4 the L2 cache of the P2, was an absolute beast with a simple bump to 100MHz FSB, besting the Pentium II 450 in almost everything. Even with Coppermine, the differences were not that significant. What you _might_ be referring to is the original _Slot 1_ Covington Celerons that had *zero* L2 cache and were horribly crippled.
@@awebuser5914 I used to have a Celeron 667Mhz, the P3 equivalent was way faster. These were overclocking monsters btw. Mine was able to reach 1050Mhz easily. Probably more, but I ran into the limits of my motherboard. Good old times!
Please do include the frame per dollar charts more often. Its useful almost in every video but especially in those kind of videos where you specifically compare how good each part was/is between generations.
@@HappyBeezerStudios yeah, and? If that logic draws pricer per dollar chart meaningless then it also draws other charts meaningless. As for the price changes yeah that makes sense to some degree, but cpu prices don't really jump all that much - GPUs do. Even comparing MSRP would be good enough.
I think the channel Hardware Unboxed is referring to that wanted 8+ cores has pretty much been killed off. They only play reruns of their member-only content last I checked
I snagged a 5700X from Amazon with a Resident Evil 4 code back in Nov of 2022 for $160 shipped. Great upgrade from the 1700X and tears through 4K with my 6950XT. That 3D Cache for the 1% lows do look enticing though not gonna lie lol
Seems that way with some parts then you have parts like the RTX 4060Ti still a few days under one year since release. Feels to me like that came out two years ago. I think its a matter of how relevant a part remains over time and how it retains a relevant demand.
I honestly don't remember the x3d variant of the 5800 having such a big margin over its non x3d variant... Maybe its because of the choice of games that were specifically chosen as more cpu-demanding?
It depends on how much of a games impactful files fits on the standard 5000 CPU's L3 cache. CSGO, for example, can fit entirely on the standard 5000 series cache eliminating the X3D cache advantage completely. In this situation it comes down to clock speeds and/or cores and standard 5000 series has higher clocks
Almost certainly due to them using a 4090 GPU today. CPUs get pretty close in games once you start using a more normal video card, and those tests you remember were probably prior to the 4000 series.
Great tests, thank you! In order to confirm the theory about core count, would be also interesting to see the same tests with the same CPU but different core count choosen in the Windows, like going from 16 down to 4 or even 2 cores. Thanks for the video!
@@Hardwareunboxed thank you. Would love to watch an updated comparison of SAM/REBAR On vs Off, because although my max and avg fps get a noticeable boost, my 1% and 0.1% drops a bit, and I feel a bit of stuttering in some games, like Warzone.
When I helped my friend build his 5800X build in 2020, he scored a working great open box deal, saved $100 on that chip. Still happy with that rig for 1080P, GPU was upgraded to a midrange one later. He's more of a multitasker first and a gamer second poweruser. Had it released sooner, I would have ended up on a similar rig. Have a few 12th gen around, good sales on them last year. Nobara is great enough where I can abandon 11 and just keep around a 10 install if something breaks. At the time 12700KF & 12900KF were good deals (still see some cheap combos or options there), though I think 7500F is the value AM5 play now, certainly more platform longevity. I notice the IPC and the OS a lot between machines, though I'm not sure with P cores E cores. I'm sure I could put my 6 core into a CPU bound game scenario where it might dip more in FPS but still be entirely playable. Not sure when I need to upgrade again 12900KF 4090, but I'd likely hop on AM5 later. I kinda want to throw my 7900XTX into a Nobara rig see how well that does as an experiment. I would stay on Windows 10 with that 5600 until EOL. 130 was a good value for 5600 though for a new build, though it's still a used price performance deal now. My mother likes a lot of 6 core chips, so they can have a second life after gaming, she doesn't mind the old 9600K or 12400F, just browses the web and doesn't want the latest and greatest.
If someone has the money for RTX 4090 then i dont expect that person to buy just "a 6 core CPU" to pair it with that graphics card. Fitting the budget expectation to reality will "shrink" the difference.
Idk I paired a i7 4790K with a RTX 3080Ti And then later paired an R5 3900X with an RTX 4090 For 4K 60Hz gaming you don't need a crazy good CPU. So it's a fair combination to have. Even for 4k 120Hz it works fine for all but the most CPU demanding newer titles. Unless you're trying to push 700fps in counter strike you don't need the craziest CPU even if you have a 4090, why spend more if it's not going to give you a better experience. Just because you have a 4090 doesn't mean you don't care about value or are willing to throw money at the wall for no benefit
This has been explained before, you need to test with eccentric set up & resolution to evaluate the CPU ceiling capability. When buying into a platform you can buy a cost effective CPU and upgrade later if your GPU upgrade makes it desirable, or try and future proof by spending more on a halo CPU and gamble that something like 5800x3D won't be much faster and cheaper some years later.
well, it depends (upgrade or not) : you can have enough money for that GPU, but nothing else. In my case, I already had a 5600X for a couple of year, before deciding to upgrade my GPU. At that time, the 5800X3D was at 600€ and the RTX 4080 at 1300€+ (founder edition), while the RTX 4090 (with much better Ray tracing performance and more VRAM) was at 1750€ (less than the combo 5800X3D + RTX 4080)... so, I chose the RT 4090 FE. The result ? 0-noise playing 4k (latest games ? according MSI afterburner : 90%+ GPU utilization) ... so, everything is fine / good enough... and, I was thinking about upgrading to ZEN 5, but in the end, I think it's going to wait until ZEN 6 + RTX 6090 / RDNA 5 equivalent (if there is one, lol)
Replaced my 2600 1 year ago and was thinking of 5700x or 5600, went 5600 and has been running great, I use my PC mostly for gaming. I have a 2060 super, looking between 7700xt or 4070 vanilla for my next upgrade.
If I may ask why don't you ever test in heavy combat scenarios? For example Helldivers 2 in the higher difficulties against the automatons where there are alot of enemies, explosions everywhere, drop ships coming in, etc. Would more cores make a better difference in those scenarios and/or would less cores start stuttering in those scenarios?
The FPS margins will continue to shrink in more GPU bound scenarios and higher resolutions, if you have an extra $300 for a 5950x you are better off putting that money towards a higher tier GPU. $300 is enough to move from like a 6600 to a 6800 which is like a 70-80% improvement in fps.
Big jump in performance. I got a 5600X3D end of March, replaced a 2600X, and the gains in games even on a 6750XT are amazing. My five year old build beats 7600X/4060Ti 16GB builds that cost several hundred more and I have CPU room for a GPU upgrade or two.
When I built my PC I was between the 3600 and the 10400f, the intel option was cheaper and better performing, but how I missed the option to upgrade to an x3d (Got a 10900f for cheap last year but the x3d would be much better for gaming.)
Day one with my 5950X and using Asus DOCS on Asus Dark Hero X570 where made for each other , choice of Ram x4 8GB 3600cl14 tuned , only play at 4K max with my 4090 .
Ratchet and Clank is a glimpse to a future where more cores will help games: Data streaming over the CPU, using background cores, thus offloading the GPU as it doesnt have to do the heavy lifting when there is available cores on the CPU to do it. We will see more games like that, however Unreal engine games likely wont make use of it for a decade, since Epic still are too incompetent to make data streaming not cause stutters along with their shader compilation mess
The majority of 'shader compilation' issues are caused by improperly implemented or effectively ignored pipeline state objects. In other words, you don't know what you're talking about, just like a good number of developers pushing out games on UE5 as quickly as they can without doing the necessary research and work.
@@g10118 Well, they should've have known better. The engine will be used by tons of incompetent or overworked programmers either way, might as well make it easier do do the right thing.
I leave my 5600X on 65 watt defaults and it runs most stuff fine. I uncork the power limits when it needs a bump then it maxes around 110 watts. Rarely need to do that with a 3080 10GB. I don't feel the need to go 5800X3D at this point, I'll wait for a full platform update in a year or two (or three).
i'm in this predicament myself. at the time i purchased, the X3D hadn't yet got released. So i settled for the 5600X on tight budget. Gaming wise 1440p on a RX 7800 XT, i get playable fps for the games i play. From what i heard and this video, the gain is about 25% fps or so if upgrading to that cpu from the current one. I get there is gains to be had, but if the fps i currently have is sufficient, then why pay that? So like you i also rather wait for a big change before upgrading the cpu and the motherboard for the AM5 or whatever comes out then. May have to pay for DDR5 too if the motherboard does not support DDR4. so that is 3 things to pay for. These days though, pc next gen parts especially cpu and gpu it's harder to outperform the previous gen. So you can see why people are waiting longer before upgrading. Cauz really there is no good reason these days to have shorter upgrade cycles since no point.
Huh? The 65W is TDP long term power, the 5600x max power is more IIRC 89W by default, in my experience an under volt with curve optimiser helped have higher all core frequencies for heavy workloads. The 5800x3D price spiked, 5700x3D or finding a used bargain is the way to go if you extend your rigs useful lifespan. Personally I like the strategy of buying into AM5 after Zen5 but using a value CPU like 7600, then upgrading later late platform to utilise a better GPU with an x3D when it's value. I have a 5800x3D, it improves power efficiency (partly as AMD released an improved stepping late '21) and improved performance greatly on some strategy games and other software I run.
My friend was on a strict budget and wanted the best optomizied system for Ultra 1440p Helldivers 2, and didn't want to pay more for future upgrades or future proofing. I recommended for him to get the 4070TI Super ($1079 CAD) coupled with the 5700X ($244 CAD) and we went with 32GB of 3600 CL18 Corsair Vengeance for a full system build of $2293 CAD. Did I misguide him? Will the 5700X limit the 4070TI Super in any Ultra 1440p scenarios? I wish HardwareUnboxed would address the pairing of CPUs and GPUs.
Yes. You had led him to a dark path and his soul is now forever lost to seething and edge. On more serious note, you guys did the lazy thing in trying to save a buck instead of buying Ryzen 5 7600 CPU and then having an option many years from now on to get something really good. There is practically no price difference or performance difference between two platforms. As for GPU, it is largely resolution based limitation. If it is not 1080p, you should not need to worry.
I'm trying to find "intel offers more value" at the entry level but i need help. In what scenario does 13400f or 13500 come above ? D5? Loses to 7600 both to performance and price. D4? Loses to 5700x3d in both. What am i missing...
The 5600 and 5600X are actually a LOT faster than the Ryzen 3600 in a lot of games. In some benchmarks done by Gamer's Nexus maybe half a year ago, I was surprised to see how far ahead the 5600 was over a 3600 in some games in FPS as well as in 1% lows. The margin was as big as about 35% in a few games. You can see a pretty big gap in the averages shown at the end of this video as well. Even the 3700X and 3950X are getting soundly beaten by the 5600X, but the margin in some games is obviously much higher than the average difference. I think the only reason it was able to win by such a wide margin in some games is because the 3600 has a split L3 cache (16MB per core cluster), whereas single chiplet Zen 3 CPUs have a unified 32MB L3 cache shared by all 6-8 cores. I think the Zen 3 CPUs actually use the same I/O chiplets as Zen 2 CPUs, so if the cache hadn't been re-designed for Zen 3, the performance improvement (in games) between these two generations would have been much smaller. I was honestly surprised how much the 5800X's extra two cores were able to help in some games, but having a more modern CPU is typically a lot more important than having more cores. It's not just the per-core performance improvement from one generation to the next which matters a lot, it's also the the other CPU components which aren't contained within each core which also make a huge difference in CPU performance, and these things tend to improve with each CPU generation, namely I/O speed and L3 cache size and L3 cache design. With AMD multi chiplet CPUs, the I/O chiplet can be used for multiple generations, and this could contribute to Zen 5 not offering a very big performance improvement in gaming over Zen 4. If Zen 6 uses an updated I/O chiplet, that could make Zen 6 a significantly bigger improvement than Zen 5 for gaming performance, especially if the CPU chiplets are also made using the more advanced TSMC 3nm process.
You have to factor in core utilization as well with some games still using a few primary cores and others using all the cores. That said, nothing seems to mean more to performance than the undeniable impact of 3D cache in modern gaming. I would have liked to seen the 5600X3D in this test over the 5800X3D, it would be a more impactful demonstration of 3D cache if a 6 core part crushed the 8 and 16 core 5000 CPUs.
".. despite my best efforts to explain it.. it can be misleading.." you keep trying to reach these ppl. They need you Steve ❤️❤️❤️ Still celebrating 1mill 🎉🎉🎉🎉
I still play on a 5600X and a 2070S on 3440x1440, so no easy task. And I still can play basically all games I want to play, even tho some do require DLSS and friends to actually skip the 60 FPS mark, but that's exactly what these features were made for. I'll probably upgrade my GPU after the 50-series launch, either by buying those or a used 40-series. The CPU can probably wait a few more years, maybe Ryzen 9000-series (assuming no name skips)?
I still kinda want to pick up a 5950x and toss it into one of my spare AM4 systems for a video editing rig. Love my 5800X3D in my gaming PC but for CPU encoding with kdenlive (cuz I hate adobe), it struggles a bit.
@@cameronbosch1213 It works fine using CPU rendering from a technical standpoint. It's just the X3D chips run hot when maxed out, and the 5800X3D still only has 8 cores & 16 threads. A 5950X would be faster with twice the threads. It'd be nice if AMD hardware acceleration in KDEnlive was better supported on windows. Then I could use my 6950XT and not worry about the CPU as much.
Thanks for doing this throwback comparison. I'm glad to see that even four years after release, for some of these chips, they are still performing well in some of the latest titles.
You must choose another kind of games: Simulation games in VR like: AMS2 RF2 ACC, CPU is super important in VR. Also, we need at minimum 90FPS, at a resolution superior to 4k.
Games like ACC aren't that CPU demanding, they're thread limited, so the 5600X should be similar to the higher core count models. Rather it's 3D V-Cache that makes the most difference there. We test boat loads of games, we know which titles are the best for testing CPU performance.
View their video on understanding CPU benchmarking and use the 1080p numbers. The very short, oversimplified version: look at the 1080p CPU numbers to see how many FPS your CPU can do best-case, then look at GPU benchmarks to see how many your GPU can handle at 1440p. The lowest of the two numbers will be close to your 1440p framerate.
@notDroxy sorry you didn't get my point. For 1440p, you just have to find the middleground between the 1080p and 4K data. This isn't a review of a certain CPU, just a comparison between different one of one generation with different core configurations. If you need a buying decision, get the cheapest one if you're just gaming. Only consider more than the 5600 if a better CPU would just be a bit more expensive and if you can't invest the money in another component.
Would love if you start including RT benchmarks on these chips. In Cyberpunk my 5800X3D is strained a lot more even with just RT reflections enabled. Having these comparisons can be helpful for anyone interested in RT in RT heavy titles. Wondering if theres any reason this isnt done already. Thanks Steve!
This happens because tech reviews focus 100% on current games, but rarely speak about future profing, my advice id always spend more on the CPU than you think you need
@@dinokknd there is one problem, socket compatibility, if you buy Intel usually each generation or two they change socket, as for AMD, you have some backwards compatibility, but is not forever
@marcos1669 What's your source for advice: Trust Me Bro... Maybe start giving advice after you've proven you know what you're talking about... Run benchmarks, make reviews on products then give advice on what people should buy
@@keyboardkung-fuwarrior8932 experience on not putting the top procesor for a specific socket because "it was not needed" (bought a 4690 instead of i7) and then not able to run things smothly because of that mistake, on the oposite side, I bought my last procesor (9900K) exactly with that in mind and still are able to run everything smothly (I couldnt if I have had gone for something lower)
Is helldivers 2 tested on a difficulty 1 mission? Because I have 5600x and have 0 issues on lower difficulties while on 7-9 stuttering and frame drops aren't uncommon, and I don't think only gpu is to blame. At least task manager often shows very high cpu load. Haven't seen any testers compare trivial to helldive performance yet.
Just to add a specific case to why I do look (quickly) at the 4k chart in videos like this: First, I totally understand, appreciate, and agree with your thorough explanations about why 4k CPU testing is almost always between misleading and meaningless. However, I play mostly VR games so that aligns closer to the 4k part of the chart for how a CPU/GPU combo would perform. I have a 5800x. If I look at this 1080p chart it would be easy to conclude that an in-socket upgrade to 5800x3D would get me average +27% performance. But in VR games the resolution and stress on the GPU is very high and really doesn't come down much with settings tweaks since resolution is the major limiting factor and upscaling looks even worse in headsets, when it's even available. So eyeballing the 4k chart where that 27% reduces to maybe 3-8% at most makes it very clear that in my case the CPU is not the part holding back my system, even if I was using a 4090. So I appreciate the use of that in your test, even though my GPU is much slower. It still tells me what I want to know: Would a 5800x3D increase my performance from my current 5800x? No, not nearly enough to justify the cost. Thanks!
My PC is primarily for DAW stuff with sim racing on the side. I'm running a 5800X + 4x8GB 3866MHz + Liquid Devil 6800 XT and the 4 extra threads have been nice to have, and despite only running a single 240mm radiator, the 5800X and 6800 XT are both so efficient that they still stay cool and quiet. I usually am never completely satisfied with a build and I start feeling an upgrade itch about every 3 years, but that has not been the case with this build, and I would not be surprised to find myself still running it in 5 years, it has no issue tearing through anything I throw at it.
Used the 5600X for years, and it was great. Got a used 5900X for $243 about a month ago, and it's doing a great job and is a good bit faster than my 5600X.
Unfortunately, until devs use engines that can properly handle core scaling, every "future proof, higher core count" cpu is a waste of money if your rig is gaming oriented.
Can we do an upgrade path video between AM4 and AM5? I have a R7 3700 on a decent AM4 motherboard, and doing mostly video editing. I'm thinking about an upgrade, but would a 5000 series be enough of an upgrade for the money, or should I go whole hog and go to a 7800x or 7900x system, requiring a motherboard and RAM upgrade?
Good question and since you do video editing I think the value x3d chip 5700x3d is worse than a 5800x. It is easier like me where going from r5 2600 to a 5600 is an easy decision. If I were you I would either wait it out or go best value with a 5700x.
Bought last year a Ryzen 5 5500 and it seems I have a golden sample. Undervolted to -29, added +200 Mhz to the boost and it runs in bechmarks above R5 5600X (tested with Passmark, CPUID Validator, Userbenchmark)
I have a question for the group. I have a 5600x with a 2080Ti. My target is 60FPS, medium-high quality settings. Currently playing CP2077, which hits 60 with ease, but I really like RT effects. I’m usually at 60 with RT on, but will drop to mid-high 40s in sections. Also the 60FPS doesn’t “feel” like smooth 60. I noticed that GPU usage NEVER hits 100%. Would a change to an x3D chip get me to a smoother experience with solid 60?
My parents are running a 5600G, a gift for their birthday. They have never seen a faster computer in their life 😂
Do your parents play PC games on that PC?
@@gucky4717yeah minesweeper
Lol right?! I found a 7th Gen Intel tower with 128gb pcie drive at the local dump few years ago and I'm like.. this is perfect for my mom to check emails and do spread sheets for work. Replaced her 11 year old AMD athlon with astronomically more performance. She knows nothing about computer and said "son.. if you're recommending it I know it's an amazing upgrade.. IDC what is inside it" lol
@@AKK5I That will run on a 486 CPU...
It's a great CPU for a basic home theater PC that runs older and indie games and programs like Jellyfin
Still rocking a r5 5600 with rx 6600 xt which i built myself on September of 2022. Has been a charm, no issues whatsoever. My friends suggested me to buy rtx 3050/60 instead of an AMD card saying that amd cards have driver issues. I researched and bought 6600 xt and had no issues. Its good that i didn't listen to them Lmao
Nvidia has had driver issues too, it's just that people ignore and forget them. In my experience, Nvidia often don't fix them before putting GPU into legacy category or notoriously saying their GPU was "only for Windows 8" refusing to fix installing updates on W10.
You sir deserve a cookie
Yeah, when gaming at 1080p the 6600 XT with a 5600 is more than enough for another generation.
Honestly, you aren't really going to get any real performance benefit switching to Nvidia at that tier. You'd need to get a 3070 or better to really take advantage of the architecture with raytracing or DLSS upscaling for 4K and at that point you'd need a better CPU to push it.
Good decision. It rarely makes sense to get an Nvidia GPU when your budget isn't high.
I had lots of driver issues with amd until I figured the problem was with the ram voltage by being too low, I dont know why asus uses a measly 1.136 in their b650 bios. I got it to 1.265 and all the timeouts were gone.
I just love how the 5600 was a mid range CPU to 'almost budget' price and you get 90-130 fps even in highly demanding tripple A games on ultra. Its so nice when you get actually good value for your money, and dont have to count pennies and make multi year plans.
Now if GPU pricing could stop being cancer...
I think that's happening. Used graphics card prices are falling again in anticipation of upcoming next generation graphics card releases from both AMD and Nvidia.
Also, sales of current gen graphics cards have slumped a lot, and prices for new graphics cards have already started trending downward, though there hasn't been any major price movement yet on the cards which were already offering the best value, such as any RX 6000 series cards from the 6600 and up (but some are mostly sold out now), the RX 7800 XT, and the RTX 4070, and 4070 Super. The RX 7700 XT and the 16GB RTX 4060 ti have both come down in price somewhat, making either of them potentially good, though I still don't think either of them is all that good.
The 16GB 4060 ti is probably only worth considering if you really really care about power efficiency for some reason, and the RX 7700 XT still isn't really that much cheaper than the 6800 XT and 7800 XT, despite having 25% less vram in addition to significantly less GPU compute performance.
I honestly think the whole negativity surrounding GPU prices is BS. Point in case: The "90 class" were previously called "Titan class" and was just as bitterly expensive. Gamers just ignored their existence because they were marketed towards semi-pro users. But well-off gamers bought them anyway.
Back in 2013 I payed $1000 (MSRP) for my Radeon HD 7990. I bought it because I wanted a fun toy, full well knowing that the dual GPU layout would probably become an issue down the road. In 2016 I bought an RX 580 for $220 to replace it, precisely because too many games were starting to have issues. The RX 580 is nominally 5-10% faster than the HD 7990 and has 2GB VRAM more. I know this is a bit of an extreme case, but that was "20% for the same performance 3 years later". I'm currently running an XTX at 1440p (not stupid enough to get on the 4k train!), but nobody on a budget should even go 1440p. 1080p 144/165Hz monitors are cheap, and GPUs that can give you 90-120FPS@1080p at high or ultra settings, in today's most demanding games, are $300-400.
A 4090 is only nominally 2.6x faster than a 6750XT. But 4k requires roughly 4x as much compute power as 1080p. So a 6750XT at 1080p is faster than a 4090 at 4k. Resolution is expensive as fuck. Not GPUs.
I bought a used 6700XT for $250, free shipping, last summer. I did the 6750XT factory OC myself and enjoy better raw performance than the then $500 4060Ti 16GB. You can get a used 6700XT for less now, the 4060Ti 16GB is still $450.
Gpu pricing is fine. Just buy an AMD gpu below $500, and a 4070ti super or 7900xt at most. You can still get the fantastic 6600xt for near $200, which is more than good enough for entry level gaming, the 4070 super and 7800xt are still good for their price, and the 4070ti vram bump and price cuts of the 7900xt made both of those cards as viable options. If you ignore the whale garbage that is the $1000+ gpus, or the obviously terrible choices like the 7700xt, 4060ti, etc, you can find acceptable prices for good gpus.
@@syncmonismthe 4060 Ti is a fucking joke of a card lolol. Not even faster than 3070
Thank you for including the 5800X3D Steve, but still, where is the Phenom 2 x6 1055T?
Probably cowering somewhere behind a Sandy Bridge i3....
And the FX 6300.
And don’t forget the brothers rockin pentoum 4, where is our CPU representation
Selling for way too much money even today, when an FX8350 will drop in on most boards that support it and give far better performance... but neither are worth the money they still sell for for some reason.
Well,
Better pick the FX6100/6300,
Im pretty sure the X6 cant even run some of these
Steve learned his lesson about 5800x3d
now what am i supposed to do with this pitchfork and torch?
Keep it nearby incase he ever slips up again @@Hardly_Party
@@Hardly_Partymove hay I guess
@@Hardly_Party Complain about 7800X3D in some other video lol
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat I have a 7800x3D with a 3080 and 64GB ram.... I plan on updating one day but absolutely no time soon
I got a 5800X for free. People paid me to build them an editing machine and specified a 5800X. They then said it was too slow and asked me to drop a 5950X in the machine. When I asked what they wanted done with the 5800X they said to just keep it. No problem. I swapped out my 3700X. Pure bliss.
a fire stick is 25 whats the price of team fortress 2 original xbox 360 these does still just free or sumn on the internet i total to i wish i hade a original xbox 360 copy with used whats a block buster price tag on her and the price one prerelease triple a Title whatever i just search duh other subect plus engineer your so so trans parents crazy train news politics the sky is falling your parents music sucked you probably going to grow up to be your parents i have a horrid sense of humor like i would have to be payed for or i have no idea any way about it it is really bad have to be career only for certain markets
i would get religious after that :D
Always happy seeing the 5800X3D be included so I do appreciate it. I need my bias confirmed regularly 🙃
so happy i bought 5700x3d coming from 3600xt and always seeing 5800x3d to be my reference for these kinds of benchmark
Yep. One of my reasons to jump on the 5800x3d is that the best gaming CPU of a popular socket is likely to appear in benchmarks for years to come. There's no shame in encouraging my favorite hardware channel to continue to cover it.
The 5700X3D is goated too. I was on the fence of upgrading to a 5800X3D for a long time, but I finally got a discounted 5700X3D for 290 CAD. It's the cheapest 3D VCache chip most of the world can buy
@@hey01e5Yeah it's almost the same as 5800X3D but a lot cheaper. Over here in europe it's currently discounted to just $250 compared to the 5800X3D which is almost as expensive as the 7800X3D at $315.
Haha, same i went from r5 3600 to the r7 5800x3d and couldn't be happier, it should last me for years to come
Ryzen 5 5600 still a midrange beast
it"s now a budget cpu tbh.
Midrange for budget price, it's good
Clearly based on the charts its a budget banger meaning its 10% to 20% slower BUT 30% to 100% cheaper then the faster parts out now. @@Scott99259
its budget, midrange should be 7500f or 5700x3d
@@polly_2526 i3 14100f and Ryzen 5 4500 are budget mate but its whatever for whoever.
Ryzen 5 5600 is still a beast. Probably the best choice for a budget gaming machine. Toss in something like RX 6800 second hand with it and you have one hell of a machine to enjoy literally anything on the market at 1440p.
I concur, this is literraly my current build of the last 2 years (5600x + RX 6800 non XT) and I really don't have any incentive to replace it today (I mean, the money I would have to spend is not worth it atm for me). Costed me around 1200€ for the total system (and 32Gb, 2.5To SSDs total, great case etc...) and will surely last at least a couple more years.
yup, and considering the 5800X3D and 5950X run on the same platform, if the 5600 ever gets too slow, used higher end chips shouldn't be hard to find.
I've got a lopsided build with 5600x + 4080super, but it's a great combo for a 120hz VRR screen. And the option to upgrade is always there.
66 titles accounted for 80 percent of all playtime in 2023.
And 60 percent of that playtime was spent in games that are six years old or older.
Only a minority of gamers are actually playing recent AAA titles.
Yep, have this setup and really have no reason to upgrade. Really happy with the buy
One of the best Amd CPUs ever imo
It's competition is the 1600af and 5800x3d, these were huge at their release. Such value and gains within the same generation.
@@jocerv43 I went for the 12400F, because AMD delayed the 5600 a long time. Also a really nice GPU, and the price was forced quite low by AMDs competition.
In retrospect a 5800x3D would been goated tho, if I were able to make it run on my older AM4+ Motherboard.
am4 was a great one, personally started out with a b350. Used it from first gen all the way to the 5800x3d, eventually got a nice b550 for some updated io/features. I would have never thought that socket would last that long.
@@jocerv43 especially the new 5700x3D, which is way cheaper makes am4 Upgrade so worthy
@@jocerv431600af was huge on release? Damn, 2019 must have sucked then
It's more than enough to drive my RX 6600, very happy with my whole setup so far :)
yup!
If that's the realistic price range you shop GPUs in, then there will be at least another GPU upgrade and possibly two before you have to consider a system upgrade. A 5600(X) can max out a 6800XT at 1080p, if you crank up the settings, in nearly all games (that don't already run at stupid good framerates), so something like an RX 8600(TX) will certainly still be a good pairing once their price becomes reasonable.
Yeah, I had a 5900x and 6900xt which was pretty much the best when I bought it. Worked really well and you don't really use the extra cores so 5600x is similar enough. I would only upgrade the cpu if you have at least a 6700xt and are cpu bottlenecked hard (which can be the case for specific games like Satisfactory or X4).
Same!
YES ! Got mine last year, very happy. I am also really enjoying my older games like Dying Light on highest settings.
clarification needed, AUDIO says CL14 for the RAM but the text on screen says CL 16.
14
It's CL14, the test system image has the wrong timings, sorry about that.
@@Hardwareunboxed thank you!
@@Hardwareunboxed I've recently been seeing the ryzen 5 5500 $75 Canadian brand new ... is it that much better than my ryzen 5 2600 ?
@@Haywood-JablomieIT IS, but i would at least Go for a 5600 bc the 5500 has only half the Cache .... And IS therefore crippled in many games
That 5800x3d is really AMD 2500k moment.
eh, the fx 8350 is still playable in games today so long as it's not restricted via software
@@skorpers but the fx 8350 is kind of bad?
@@josh2238350 aged better than some newer Intel CPUs that (at the time) offered better performance. i3 that left FX in the dust eventually became insuficcient with 2 cores and 4 threads, while FX chugged along with consistently underwhelming performance. It's an unstoppable tortoise, probably will die when it's 100 years old. i7 2600 is all around better except price and niche use cases like x264 encoding (it's ALU heavy and FX 8000 has 8 ALUs vs. 4 in Intel).
More like 2600k. Id say the 5600(x) is pretty comparable to the 2500k in todays standards.
@@josh223 By what metric? It's 12 years old.
I'd trust my own experience over what people who were infants when it released would say.
It's been pretty well documented it has better frametimes than quad core intel CPU's from its era.
I bought the 5600 in april 2023 for 120€ and that was the best purchase ever. It is enough for the games i play in combo with rx 7800xt.
I had 5600, 5700x and 5800x3d all with rtx 3060ti later rx6800, know rx7800xt. It was all great with 5600 until i bought 240hz screen. Then i started to chase that 240 fps and ended with 5800x3d. I got gift card for some web shop at work and bought 5800x3d for the money i got from selling that 5700x while it was still worth a lot..
My Ryzen 5600 literally just came 15 minutes ago.
Time to finally enter a world of higher IPC than Haswell/Broadwell lol
You can finally install Windows 11 (without fiddling with the install or registry).
Haswell? you bourgeois! my 5600x replaced a sandy bridge (I5 2500). Enjoy the warp speed mate!
Why did you get AM4 for a new system build when it's essentially a dead platform?
@@cameronbosch1213You really don't know? Go look at the price/performance of AM5 at the current moment.
@@cameronbosch1213 The motherboards are cheaper, there's a better selection, you can keep your RAM. I've been looking at this option.
5950X and RTX 3080 for productivity and some light gaming. Absolutely flies even after 3 years, great CPU.
Same combo and same usage.
make sense for gaming only it would not but if u are doing like 3d staff editing or compression for sure good combo
It is a stunningly powerful and efficient CPU for productivity work, one of the best ever, and highly relevant today. I will be picking one up in a month or so for a lower cost/high performance work PC.
Got my 5950X durring pandemic/newegg shuffle, wasn't really wanting that particular cpu but you couldn't buy anything, won shuffle by surprise so went with it. Since I also have a bunch of DVD and blurays to rip and put on the NAS it's come in very useful. With it and the 3080 also newegg shuffle I haven't had any issues in gaming especially at 1440p. Honestly were I to upgrade to a 9000 series I'd save up for the 9950X.
why the fuck would it not "fly" after 3 years, it should fly even after 6
*'60 Percent Of Playtime In 2023 Went To 6-Year-Old Or Older Games'*
League of Legends, Roblox, Minecraft, CG:GO, Sims 4, Rocket League, Rainbow 6 Siege, Fortnite, Apex.
5600/5600X is more than excellent for the vast majority of games people actually play.
Plus the 5800X3D and 5950X are a thing for an upgrade later on. So when the 5600 stops giving playable framerates, the higher end chips will be available used for a good price. Or just an upgrade to a newer platform.
@@HappyBeezerStudios yep totally, very upgradeable, keep in mind only a minority of gamers are actually playing recent AAA titles.
the best thing is excelent upgrade path to 3d chips if u are gamer like 5600x3d or 5700x3d even 5800x3d or if u looking for productivity 5950x and so on you have so many options after so many years which is truly excelent for people so much options to upgrade no need to replace whole platform and spend so much cash $$
The 5600 costs like 80 dollars at aliexpress. So it's a no brainer for budget gamers.
Yh crazy deals atm even on AM5 CPUS
@@AlexHusTech its am4
@@BenStatehe's saying there are good deals for am5 too
@@BenState i mean if you just reread his comment it clearly says even on AMD cpu lmao
I bought 7500f for 137USD (tax included) and i think it's a good deal. Waiting for zen 6 :>
Lol, no not a mistake. That part's sold for as low as $120 from what I've seen.
Got my 5600 Mobo and ram for $220 out the door at microcenter almost 2 years ago at this point. 4.7ghz all core is still working well.
right now it sells for just above $100 on Amazon where I live, thats with 25% tax!
a steal
@@user-wq9mw2xz3jmind blowing to me. I'd buy that for a home nas, or basic home server or something. Wish it were so cheap in my region 🥲
@@user-wq9mw2xz3j25%???
got mine used for 80 over a year ago
cant argue with the value ive gotten out of this cpu
You don't know how I wanted this video. I really do.
I am putting together a pc mini itx 5L, with which I want to last about 4 or 5 years. But I don't want to spend more than I need.
I have found the 5600 for 95$ and the 5700x for 150$. I have watched thousands of videos including yours. But I've always been left with that pimple as the videos are a few years old and I would like more recent information.
And here you come to the rescue. It's as if you have listened to my wishes. Thank you.
Built my son a gaming PC for Christmas. 5600, B550 mATX board, an Asrock 6600, and reused a spare kit of DDR4 I had. CPU was 190, Mobo was 130 and GPU was 220. All in CAD. All he plays is Fall Guys, Roblox and Minecraft, so its more than enough for now, and should be enough for him to grow in to. Probably isn't a better budget combo for what you get out there right now.
w dad
You can hook that baby up to a 1080p tv and he will have lots of fun with it
I worked in IT and have built my self many systems at home. Good job ! When playing in 1080p your son will use this PC for several more years, easy.
I bought an 5950X a couple of years ago and love it to this day. I don't think I'll need to upgrade for another few years yet.
Especially Music DAWs they love cpu cores.
Had to wait longer then hoped to upgrade pc, wanted ryzen 5900x but was last of AM4 and price was long time high, so meh. Now spiked on a 699€ 7950x3d cause only 250€ more then 7800x3d for double cores, glad i did, i sometimes alt tab between game and picture software, and this works amazing, soon video editing as well.
5600 is a great cpu
Seems to be a solid upgrade choice still for AM4 picking the 5800X3D & a 4000 series rtx card above the 4070.
5800x3D pricing spiked here more than a year ago (checked after a commenter claimed upgrade to AM5 wasn't much more), the 5700x3D is the viable option. It's almost like AMD have a new range coming soon!
@@RobBCactive I wouldn't consider going from 269 to 279 over a month a spike when the 5700X3D when from 205 to 225 within the last week alone. In fact, the 5800X3D has been stable in that 270-280 range since the price drop at the beginning of the year.
But the 5700X3D has also been on a slow decrease down from 260 in january (when the 5800X3D was at 300 from the christmas peak)
@@HappyBeezerStudios my local price is €380 against €230, I paid €300 for an 5800x3D. I checked because others in other countries were saying they saw bad prices too.
Even with your numbers the 5700x3D looks better gaming value.
I did a 5600x3d with 4070Super for my kids. It is by far the best value out there. My much more expensive system is a bit of a disappointment to that value king.
@forcedcobra If you have a microcenter nearby that is.
I ran a 5600X until I upgraded to a 5800X3D, it worked pretty well for me. Thumbs up!
Waiting for black friday, 5700x3d is 160usd already so pretty excited :)
@@tilapiadave3234 Ever thought about that maybe he upgraded when AM5 was super expensive or when the 5800x3D was the only x3D chip and no one knew if there would be anything after it for AM4?^^
@@tilapiadave3234 But your time has value too :) +New sockets always have problems and are quite expensive. . Waiting is rarely worth it in pc building.
4:38 were these CPUs tested with DDR4 3600mhz cl 16 (as shown in the graph) or cl 14 (as you said)?
CL14
@@Hardwareunboxed That is not the "norm". Most use 16CL as 14CL is more expensive, and don´t give much more performance to justify the price difference.
The difference is minimal and as long as all parts were tested with the same memory it doesn't really matter, scaling will be much the same.
@@pedroferrr1412 CL14 is very cheap if you know were to buy it. Team Group 8Pack RIPPED Edition 16GB is less than £100 were I live for 16GB.
Hi Steve, thanks for looking into this. I've been recommending a good solid 6 core processor to budget minded ,gaming focused customers for years. Thankfully I'm not too far off the mark. One for other people to look into is the whole gaming experience is more than just fps. I've found that loading times, game update, and asset streaming for computers with beefier processors tend to load much more quickly. Overall the gaming experience when quick travelling or loading in new areas feel much more immersive. If I were to aim for a budget focused computer, the lion's share of the budget should be for the gpu. For more balanced builds, I would definitely pick a solid 8core cpu. The next question that I would like a revisit the intel big and little core designs. Did they improve the scheduler at all? Some games just run weird with little cores active.
Finally 6-core content not focused on the 3600; 5600 with unified cache is the gaming baseline really, 3600 was just ok. Sold my 3600 for $200 and got the 5600 for $280 at launch from microcenter... Been great so far. Appreciate the 4k benchmarks as thats what res i play at, as there's virtually no difference between them at the res, im sticking with the 5600x till next gen at least. Unfortunately the x3d upgrade costs too much to be worth it really.
The 7600 and 7600X are available, so next gen is now.
Yeah I plan to wait till AM6
@@HappyBeezerStudiosnext, next Gen. If I wanted 7600 performance I'd get one of the 5000 x3d parts.
Can we get a old HEDT platforms re-visit video with LGA 2066 Xtreme series and OG Threadripper
No Mistake at all, been running this beauty for 2 years and she's running strong!
can confirm! especially for 1440p with high to ultra settings it's a breeze, even for cpu-heavier games
Agreed. I paired a 5600x and 6750XT last summer and its been a fantastic performer at 1440P.
Same, with a 6900 XT.
To be fair I wouldn't ask someone if the product they bought is good enough for me.
It's a common trope by now that netizens will justify their purchases regardless of how bad it was.
I replaced my I5-9600K with a 7600 last year even though it was good enough and going strong with the RTX3080.
Turns out the 7600 was better and much more convenient regardless of how much i wanted to justify the 9600K.
Something about being able to better render videos in the background during Apex Legends sessions and having less frame drops in smoke and explosions.
@@joni8401 HUH? nah i'm not even comment on this
Awesome video!!! Thank you for this bench :D, appreciate so many bench's :)
Just ordered a 5600x 2 days ago (before watching this video) to replace my aging Ryzen 3 3100, for around 120$ (new). It's an incredibly cheap upgrade. Was thinking about waiting for the 5500x3d but they keep delaying it and i doubt' it'll be much less than double the 5600x's price.
More cores doesn't mean more performance necessarily, true. But 10 years ago people were saying that 4 core/8 threads was all we would ever need. More cores' performance will scale with time that's for sure, but will that scale quickly enough to take advantage of Zen 3 or Zen 4 while they're still relevant? Probably not, hard to say.
I guess the point is to buy a processor that fits your needs and bugdet in the current window in time, like always.
TLDR: I like commas.
My 5600x has served me well over the last 3 years and I have no regrets! Paired with my 7800XT, it's been a great little combo and I don't feel a need to upgrade yet.
got 5 5600x no problems my games run more smoother than with 5 2600 on the same graphic card 1060 6gb
Heck a Ryzen 5500 would run a lot faster than the 2600
Paired two 5600 with 6650XT and the other with 6700xt. It's more than enough for another at least 2 generations of middle class GPUs.
Got a 5600 actually this year, to pair with 6700xt for 1440p gaming. Couldn't be happier. It's definitely fast enough for everything I play.
60fps+ on all games = great. Does it ever stutter?
What happens if you activate DLSS in 4k in cpu bound games? Does the 1% low and average improve? If so, how much?
Considering DLSS is rendering at a lower res and then upscaled, I'd say performance would either stay the same, or even go down if the upscaling runs on something that doesn't have the resources available.
We get it. X3d or bust lol.
The 5600X3D would beat all the non-3D chips in this test. They limited it to Microcenter to upsell the 8-core variant. In the same way a 7600X3D would be almost as fast as the 7800X3D, but obviously they want you to buy a more expensive CPU.
@@THU31 5700x3d is widely available and almost the same price now.
Why there wasnt 1440p resolution in those tests? 4K is heavy GPU limit and doesnt reflect core counts tests.
1440p and 4K are both dumb for CPU testing.
@@Hardwareunboxed Well 4K sure is, but 1440p still has some cpu limitations in games. 1080p is true cpu power test i agree, but comparison tests with 4K in there doesnt add anything valuable :)
Still cool test about 6core cpu's.
@@supremeboy Cool we got people complaining about not having 4k tests, and now about having 4k tests, sometimes you just cant make it right.
Been happy with my 5600x and 4080 in 1440p and 4k.
ever since the R5 1600 came out. ryzen's R5 X600 a godsend for budget minded people who want a powerful CPU without burying wallet-kun with your sold organ.
@Clearsight-oo2ezI wouldn't say "heavily" especially at those resolutions. 1080p maybe.
@Clearsight-oo2ez never did I mention budget
@Clearsight-oo2ez nobody said budget. Sure, I could spend more money for marginally better performance. But I'm happy with the performance at those resolutions. Why are you mad?
@Clearsight-oo2ez only in games that take advantage of the 3d cache, most of which I don't play. It's not worth spending another $410 CAD at this time. If the 5800x3d existed at the time of build, sure.
I've commented this before, but I'd be curious to see how ray tracing in these games scales with the cores, it it's single core intensive or can it scale to multiple cores. The games here that scaled better than 3 to 4% on 5600 were the ones that needed more processing power to generate the frames. Hence, RT might also scale similarly, maybe not, will be curious to see that.
Nice Steve.
Can you also do this with the 7000 series?
Thanks for always bring good content.
We really have this data for the new processors. But basically the gap is much smaller as the 7600 is about on par with the 5800X3D.
@@Hardwareunboxed someone said 5800x3d?!?!?
@@HardwareunboxedI'd say the ryzen 7 7700 is more on par with 5800X3D.
Nope, 7600 beats the 5800x3d in newer games, if they don't need vast amounts of cache (which is only a handful)@anitaremenarova6662
@@dereklang4451 Well you see, in the games that utilize 3D cache the uplift is huge so it's overall the better CPU.
Quite the timing. Recently upgraded my 2600 with 5600 and very happy with it, especially in modded Minecraft, where difference is almost x2 fps
I had a nice chuckle when you showed the 4K data. Y'all have been talking about why it doesn't matter for a solid year and enough viewers are still confused
Even on this very video there are viewers complaining that we didn't include 1440p :D lol
Could have been nice to retest with the same hardware as was done in the original review, to get a how well did it age with new bios, windows updates, and drivers
The 5700x3d and 5800x3d are beast of CPUs for the price if you already are on an am4 platform if not then 5600 is enough
Not really, at least in Europe, where you can get 7500f for much lower price than 5700X3D, let alone insanely overpriced 5800X3D. While in terms of performance 7500f with tuned RAM is right on par with 5800X3D, if not a bit faster. So you can just sell your old AM4 kit, add what 5800X3D costs here and get a new platform with great future upgradeability.
@@stangamer1151 The 7500F is only on par with the 5800X3D in titles that don't benefit much from the extra cache. For stuff that likes the cache (and/or more cores) it's nowhere near. AM5 motherboards and DDR5 are also MUCH more expensive than a setup you can slap a 5800X3D into, so it's a false equivalence. Not that I'd necessarily recommend someone doing an entirely new build go for AM4 at this point (though nor would I recommend buying into AM5 right now with Zen 5 arriving shortly), but the 5800X3D remains a great upgrade option for people who want something easy to drop in. Incidentally, I don't know where you are in Europe, but it's certainly not "insanely overpriced" in my country.
@@CaptainKenway €315 VS €170. That is €145 difference. You can get 32GB of DDR5 6400 MHz / CL32 for €145. If you overclock it to 6400MHz and also use CU to make 7500f function at +200MHz, you can actually get similar performance to 5800X3D even in those games, which benefit from bigger L3 cache, thanks to much higher single core performance of Zen 4 and much faster RAM. In CPU heavy games, like Spider Man, 7500f is even a bit faster than 5800X3D.
As a result, I do not see any reason to spend €315 for an old gen CPU, which not that much faster than my tuned 5600. I'd rather sell my existing AM4 kit and get new AM5 kit with 7500f by simply adding the same €315, since new AM5 kit costs just around €450.
Or finish the platform with a used 5950x for like 250bucks and get both the best gaming and productivity in 4k
Thanks for testing in 4k, also. While some people are convinced CPUs don't matter that much when gaming at 4k and will say so on every forum there is, it's good to see how much they don't matter...
For example, I have a 5600x and was looking to upgrade once I eventually bought a 4k monitor (in like 2 weeks time), but the 5800x3d is hella expensive at the moment (if I can even find one). Then there's the 5950x, which costs the equivalent of 340 USD. But now I know for sure I don't have to upgrade until I have enough of a budget to switch to a newer socket.
Seeing is believing, mate!
I did a side-grade from a 9900k to a 5600X and dropped the heat in my room massively and gained PCIe 4.0 with gen 4 SSDs. I still have both of those systems as well as a 7700X and 7800X3D+4090 system. The 5600X was a bargain in a $230 Microcenter combo with a MSI motherboard.
I have a 9900k (AIO), 5600x3d (Air), and a 14700k (AIO) in the same room. The 9900k on a 360 AIO in a Fractal North Case with Noctua fans is definitely the coolest of the bunch. The 5600x3d is in a Fractal Torrent Nano (180mm fan in the front) cooled with a Noctua NH-12UA. What case, fans, and cooler where you using?
@@forcedcobrawhat? He's talking about heat generated, not temperature of the die.
@@forcedcobra yes I'm talking about the BTUs per hour of heat generated and put into the room. There's 3.41 BTU/h per watt. That's the heat you feel coming from your PC.
The 5600X can be cooled by a potato. I have a Hyper 212 Evo on it and that's all it needs 😂. My 9900k had a 280mm Corsair H115i Elite Capellix RGB and it struggled. Intels basically all need a 360mm at this point 🤦
MicroCenter is ridiculous with their bundles. Picked up a 7800X3D, MB, and 32gigs for $460. Had to suffer through some issues with the gigabyte MB initially, but after figuring out the issue it has been rock solid. Just incredible value.
@@AshtonCoolman Hyper 212 is quite the potato ;-) I cool a 5700x with sub $30 air cooler to near silence.
Just a suggestion and i know it would be probably alot of work but would you guys ever create a spreadsheet with these graphs for each game you test for each cpu and gpu that you use and log 1080, 2k and 4k results? It might be handy for users to look at a game for a particular cpu that they have and want to compare it to a certain GPU that they want to buy etc
So, you can actually do that yourself by drawing a venn diagramm with (fps cpu can drive at lowest res) & (fps gpu can drive at target res), of already exsisting cpu and gpu benchmarks! Hope this helps!
The idea that memory cache is important was already back in the socket 370 pentium 3 era.
They were similar clocked Celerons with a lot less memory cache, while most other things were practically equal. Those Celerons were a lot slower. Basically scaling in a similar fashion actually.
This is also one of the reasons these older Intel Xeon's still cope pretty decently. They also have a lot of cache.
Yup, the knowledge that larger caches and more memory bandwith improve performance in games is more than 20 years old. That isn't just a Ryzen thing.
_"memory cache is important was already back in the socket 370 pentium 3 era"_ That's actually categorically incorrect. The Mendocino Celeron 300A, with 1/4 the L2 cache of the P2, was an absolute beast with a simple bump to 100MHz FSB, besting the Pentium II 450 in almost everything. Even with Coppermine, the differences were not that significant. What you _might_ be referring to is the original _Slot 1_ Covington Celerons that had *zero* L2 cache and were horribly crippled.
@@HappyBeezerStudios No, it's not. See my reply in this thread...
@@awebuser5914 I used to have a Celeron 667Mhz, the P3 equivalent was way faster.
These were overclocking monsters btw. Mine was able to reach 1050Mhz easily. Probably more, but I ran into the limits of my motherboard. Good old times!
And no, I am most certainly talking about socket 370.
Please do include the frame per dollar charts more often. Its useful almost in every video but especially in those kind of videos where you specifically compare how good each part was/is between generations.
Remember that that is basically a weekly snapshot. Prices change quickly, new games are released, old games get patched.
@@HappyBeezerStudios yeah, and? If that logic draws pricer per dollar chart meaningless then it also draws other charts meaningless. As for the price changes yeah that makes sense to some degree, but cpu prices don't really jump all that much - GPUs do. Even comparing MSRP would be good enough.
I think the channel Hardware Unboxed is referring to that wanted 8+ cores has pretty much been killed off. They only play reruns of their member-only content last I checked
Sad, really nice people.
I snagged a 5700X from Amazon with a Resident Evil 4 code back in Nov of 2022 for $160 shipped. Great upgrade from the 1700X and tears through 4K with my 6950XT. That 3D Cache for the 1% lows do look enticing though not gonna lie lol
NGL had to double check those release dates! Sheesh how time flies!!
Seems that way with some parts then you have parts like the RTX 4060Ti still a few days under one year since release. Feels to me like that came out two years ago. I think its a matter of how relevant a part remains over time and how it retains a relevant demand.
Not really related to the vid, but will there ever be a buyers guide for the 60 fps, 1440p/vr market?
I honestly don't remember the x3d variant of the 5800 having such a big margin over its non x3d variant...
Maybe its because of the choice of games that were specifically chosen as more cpu-demanding?
yeah it will show at heavier cpu deepending games lowe resolution and lower graphics settings in titles they test
It depends on how much of a games impactful files fits on the standard 5000 CPU's L3 cache. CSGO, for example, can fit entirely on the standard 5000 series cache eliminating the X3D cache advantage completely. In this situation it comes down to clock speeds and/or cores and standard 5000 series has higher clocks
Almost certainly due to them using a 4090 GPU today. CPUs get pretty close in games once you start using a more normal video card, and those tests you remember were probably prior to the 4000 series.
Great tests, thank you!
In order to confirm the theory about core count, would be also interesting to see the same tests with the same CPU but different core count choosen in the Windows, like going from 16 down to 4 or even 2 cores.
Thanks for the video!
Was resizable bar turned on?
Yes
@@Hardwareunboxed thank you. Would love to watch an updated comparison of SAM/REBAR On vs Off, because although my max and avg fps get a noticeable boost, my 1% and 0.1% drops a bit, and I feel a bit of stuttering in some games, like Warzone.
When I helped my friend build his 5800X build in 2020, he scored a working great open box deal, saved $100 on that chip. Still happy with that rig for 1080P, GPU was upgraded to a midrange one later. He's more of a multitasker first and a gamer second poweruser. Had it released sooner, I would have ended up on a similar rig. Have a few 12th gen around, good sales on them last year. Nobara is great enough where I can abandon 11 and just keep around a 10 install if something breaks. At the time 12700KF & 12900KF were good deals (still see some cheap combos or options there), though I think 7500F is the value AM5 play now, certainly more platform longevity. I notice the IPC and the OS a lot between machines, though I'm not sure with P cores E cores. I'm sure I could put my 6 core into a CPU bound game scenario where it might dip more in FPS but still be entirely playable. Not sure when I need to upgrade again 12900KF 4090, but I'd likely hop on AM5 later. I kinda want to throw my 7900XTX into a Nobara rig see how well that does as an experiment. I would stay on Windows 10 with that 5600 until EOL. 130 was a good value for 5600 though for a new build, though it's still a used price performance deal now. My mother likes a lot of 6 core chips, so they can have a second life after gaming, she doesn't mind the old 9600K or 12400F, just browses the web and doesn't want the latest and greatest.
If someone has the money for RTX 4090 then i dont expect that person to buy just "a 6 core CPU" to pair it with that graphics card. Fitting the budget expectation to reality will "shrink" the difference.
Until you go to a big box store where they pair up a 4090 with some mid-range gen 11 Intel CPU, low speed RAM and a no-brand PSU 😕
Idk
I paired a i7 4790K with a RTX 3080Ti
And then later paired an R5 3900X with an RTX 4090
For 4K 60Hz gaming you don't need a crazy good CPU. So it's a fair combination to have.
Even for 4k 120Hz it works fine for all but the most CPU demanding newer titles.
Unless you're trying to push 700fps in counter strike you don't need the craziest CPU even if you have a 4090, why spend more if it's not going to give you a better experience. Just because you have a 4090 doesn't mean you don't care about value or are willing to throw money at the wall for no benefit
This has been explained before, you need to test with eccentric set up & resolution to evaluate the CPU ceiling capability.
When buying into a platform you can buy a cost effective CPU and upgrade later if your GPU upgrade makes it desirable, or try and future proof by spending more on a halo CPU and gamble that something like 5800x3D won't be much faster and cheaper some years later.
You're missing the point entirely. The 4090 is simply there to remove any GPU bottleneck.
well, it depends (upgrade or not) : you can have enough money for that GPU, but nothing else. In my case, I already had a 5600X for a couple of year, before deciding to upgrade my GPU. At that time, the 5800X3D was at 600€ and the RTX 4080 at 1300€+ (founder edition), while the RTX 4090 (with much better Ray tracing performance and more VRAM) was at 1750€ (less than the combo 5800X3D + RTX 4080)... so, I chose the RT 4090 FE. The result ? 0-noise playing 4k (latest games ? according MSI afterburner : 90%+ GPU utilization) ... so, everything is fine / good enough... and, I was thinking about upgrading to ZEN 5, but in the end, I think it's going to wait until ZEN 6 + RTX 6090 / RDNA 5 equivalent (if there is one, lol)
Replaced my 2600 1 year ago and was thinking of 5700x or 5600, went 5600 and has been running great, I use my PC mostly for gaming. I have a 2060 super, looking between 7700xt or 4070 vanilla for my next upgrade.
AM4 thr platforn that keeps on giving !!!
If I may ask why don't you ever test in heavy combat scenarios? For example Helldivers 2 in the higher difficulties against the automatons where there are alot of enemies, explosions everywhere, drop ships coming in, etc. Would more cores make a better difference in those scenarios and/or would less cores start stuttering in those scenarios?
When I play HD2 on Hazard 7+ missions, every single thread of my 5950x is used. Upwards of 70% utilization
The guy who runs the channel "Tech Deals" could really learn a lot from these videos
Bro has been preaching more cores forever. He’s more right now than ever
You need 512 gigs of ram
@@AngryChineseWoman ok got me there
@@snarlynx1 yea those ryzen 1800x's he was pushing are really running well these days.
@@TheDaswilhelm stop. His thing is overkill. You’re embarrassing yourself
The FPS margins will continue to shrink in more GPU bound scenarios and higher resolutions, if you have an extra $300 for a 5950x you are better off putting that money towards a higher tier GPU.
$300 is enough to move from like a 6600 to a 6800 which is like a 70-80% improvement in fps.
So happy to have upgraded to the 5800x3d from a 3600.
Big jump in performance. I got a 5600X3D end of March, replaced a 2600X, and the gains in games even on a 6750XT are amazing. My five year old build beats 7600X/4060Ti 16GB builds that cost several hundred more and I have CPU room for a GPU upgrade or two.
When I built my PC I was between the 3600 and the 10400f, the intel option was cheaper and better performing, but how I missed the option to upgrade to an x3d (Got a 10900f for cheap last year but the x3d would be much better for gaming.)
built my first pc with ryzen 5600 paired with rx 6800 for 1440p, definitely not disappointed
That's an excellent value build! Hope you're enjoying it.
I have the same with a 7600 instead. Such a good value
Day one with my 5950X and using Asus DOCS on Asus Dark Hero X570 where made for each other , choice of Ram x4 8GB 3600cl14 tuned , only play at 4K max with my 4090 .
Ratchet and Clank is a glimpse to a future where more cores will help games: Data streaming over the CPU, using background cores, thus offloading the GPU as it doesnt have to do the heavy lifting when there is available cores on the CPU to do it. We will see more games like that, however Unreal engine games likely wont make use of it for a decade, since Epic still are too incompetent to make data streaming not cause stutters along with their shader compilation mess
The majority of 'shader compilation' issues are caused by improperly implemented or effectively ignored pipeline state objects.
In other words, you don't know what you're talking about, just like a good number of developers pushing out games on UE5 as quickly as they can without doing the necessary research and work.
@@g10118 Well, they should've have known better. The engine will be used by tons of incompetent or overworked programmers either way, might as well make it easier do do the right thing.
@@dat_21 That's true, documentation is lacking without a doubt.
The ancient Ryzen 5 1600 having a 98 FPS 1% low average in ultra quality settings just blows my mind. What a time to be alive.
That graph is from late 2020. You'd struggle to hit 60 FPS with that CPU in any current AAA title.
@@THU31 He can patch his bios and put a ryzen 5000 in his mobo. amd did us a solid with am4
I leave my 5600X on 65 watt defaults and it runs most stuff fine. I uncork the power limits when it needs a bump then it maxes around 110 watts. Rarely need to do that with a 3080 10GB. I don't feel the need to go 5800X3D at this point, I'll wait for a full platform update in a year or two (or three).
i'm in this predicament myself. at the time i purchased, the X3D hadn't yet got released.
So i settled for the 5600X on tight budget.
Gaming wise 1440p on a RX 7800 XT, i get playable fps for the games i play. From what i heard and this video, the gain is about 25% fps or so if upgrading to that cpu from the current one. I get there is gains to be had, but if the fps i currently have is sufficient, then why pay that?
So like you i also rather wait for a big change before upgrading the cpu and the motherboard for the AM5 or whatever comes out then. May have to pay for DDR5 too if the motherboard does not support DDR4. so that is 3 things to pay for.
These days though, pc next gen parts especially cpu and gpu it's harder to outperform the previous gen. So you can see why people are waiting longer before upgrading. Cauz really there is no good reason these days to have shorter upgrade cycles since no point.
Huh? The 65W is TDP long term power, the 5600x max power is more IIRC 89W by default, in my experience an under volt with curve optimiser helped have higher all core frequencies for heavy workloads. The 5800x3D price spiked, 5700x3D or finding a used bargain is the way to go if you extend your rigs useful lifespan.
Personally I like the strategy of buying into AM5 after Zen5 but using a value CPU like 7600, then upgrading later late platform to utilise a better GPU with an x3D when it's value.
I have a 5800x3D, it improves power efficiency (partly as AMD released an improved stepping late '21) and improved performance greatly on some strategy games and other software I run.
My friend was on a strict budget and wanted the best optomizied system for Ultra 1440p Helldivers 2, and didn't want to pay more for future upgrades or future proofing. I recommended for him to get the 4070TI Super ($1079 CAD) coupled with the 5700X ($244 CAD) and we went with 32GB of 3600 CL18 Corsair Vengeance for a full system build of $2293 CAD. Did I misguide him? Will the 5700X limit the 4070TI Super in any Ultra 1440p scenarios? I wish HardwareUnboxed would address the pairing of CPUs and GPUs.
Yes. You had led him to a dark path and his soul is now forever lost to seething and edge.
On more serious note, you guys did the lazy thing in trying to save a buck instead of buying Ryzen 5 7600 CPU and then having an option many years from now on to get something really good. There is practically no price difference or performance difference between two platforms. As for GPU, it is largely resolution based limitation. If it is not 1080p, you should not need to worry.
AM4 is the GOAT platform.
I'm trying to find "intel offers more value" at the entry level but i need help. In what scenario does 13400f or 13500 come above ?
D5? Loses to 7600 both to performance and price.
D4? Loses to 5700x3d in both.
What am i missing...
The 5600 and 5600X are actually a LOT faster than the Ryzen 3600 in a lot of games. In some benchmarks done by Gamer's Nexus maybe half a year ago, I was surprised to see how far ahead the 5600 was over a 3600 in some games in FPS as well as in 1% lows. The margin was as big as about 35% in a few games. You can see a pretty big gap in the averages shown at the end of this video as well. Even the 3700X and 3950X are getting soundly beaten by the 5600X, but the margin in some games is obviously much higher than the average difference.
I think the only reason it was able to win by such a wide margin in some games is because the 3600 has a split L3 cache (16MB per core cluster), whereas single chiplet Zen 3 CPUs have a unified 32MB L3 cache shared by all 6-8 cores. I think the Zen 3 CPUs actually use the same I/O chiplets as Zen 2 CPUs, so if the cache hadn't been re-designed for Zen 3, the performance improvement (in games) between these two generations would have been much smaller.
I was honestly surprised how much the 5800X's extra two cores were able to help in some games, but having a more modern CPU is typically a lot more important than having more cores. It's not just the per-core performance improvement from one generation to the next which matters a lot, it's also the the other CPU components which aren't contained within each core which also make a huge difference in CPU performance, and these things tend to improve with each CPU generation, namely I/O speed and L3 cache size and L3 cache design.
With AMD multi chiplet CPUs, the I/O chiplet can be used for multiple generations, and this could contribute to Zen 5 not offering a very big performance improvement in gaming over Zen 4. If Zen 6 uses an updated I/O chiplet, that could make Zen 6 a significantly bigger improvement than Zen 5 for gaming performance, especially if the CPU chiplets are also made using the more advanced TSMC 3nm process.
they are lot faster specially low 1% fps and frametimes can also tank better gpus opposite to previous 3xxx series gen
You have to factor in core utilization as well with some games still using a few primary cores and others using all the cores. That said, nothing seems to mean more to performance than the undeniable impact of 3D cache in modern gaming. I would have liked to seen the 5600X3D in this test over the 5800X3D, it would be a more impactful demonstration of 3D cache if a 6 core part crushed the 8 and 16 core 5000 CPUs.
10:00 my 5600 perform in act 3 with 60fps + stutters, how did you achieve the performance shown in the graphs?
".. despite my best efforts to explain it.. it can be misleading.." you keep trying to reach these ppl. They need you Steve ❤️❤️❤️
Still celebrating 1mill 🎉🎉🎉🎉
I still play on a 5600X and a 2070S on 3440x1440, so no easy task.
And I still can play basically all games I want to play, even tho some do require DLSS and friends to actually skip the 60 FPS mark, but that's exactly what these features were made for.
I'll probably upgrade my GPU after the 50-series launch, either by buying those or a used 40-series.
The CPU can probably wait a few more years, maybe Ryzen 9000-series (assuming no name skips)?
3D Cache Gang lets gooooo
I still kinda want to pick up a 5950x and toss it into one of my spare AM4 systems for a video editing rig. Love my 5800X3D in my gaming PC but for CPU encoding with kdenlive (cuz I hate adobe), it struggles a bit.
Fair enough. Given you're already on AM4, that's perfectly acceptable. Interesting that Kdenlive doesn't work well on the Ryzen 7 5800X3D...
@@cameronbosch1213 It works fine using CPU rendering from a technical standpoint. It's just the X3D chips run hot when maxed out, and the 5800X3D still only has 8 cores & 16 threads. A 5950X would be faster with twice the threads.
It'd be nice if AMD hardware acceleration in KDEnlive was better supported on windows. Then I could use my 6950XT and not worry about the CPU as much.
Still rocking a 3600
Thanks for doing this throwback comparison. I'm glad to see that even four years after release, for some of these chips, they are still performing well in some of the latest titles.
You must choose another kind of games: Simulation games in VR like: AMS2 RF2 ACC, CPU is super important in VR. Also, we need at minimum 90FPS, at a resolution superior to 4k.
Games like ACC aren't that CPU demanding, they're thread limited, so the 5600X should be similar to the higher core count models. Rather it's 3D V-Cache that makes the most difference there. We test boat loads of games, we know which titles are the best for testing CPU performance.
Steve, you said your test system uses CL14 memory, but you test system specs show CL16 memory. Which one is it?
No 1440p benchmarks? Thats literally all I clicked this video for. Smh
What would you need 1440p for? 1080p/high fps ist the worst case, 4K/lower fps, is the best case for a CPU. 1440p is just in between.
View their video on understanding CPU benchmarking and use the 1080p numbers.
The very short, oversimplified version: look at the 1080p CPU numbers to see how many FPS your CPU can do best-case, then look at GPU benchmarks to see how many your GPU can handle at 1440p. The lowest of the two numbers will be close to your 1440p framerate.
Obviously person have 1440p screen like I do aswell so the videos does nothing for them users@@Drumonymus
Its shocking the amount of people who don't understand how CPU benchmarks work.
@notDroxy sorry you didn't get my point. For 1440p, you just have to find the middleground between the 1080p and 4K data. This isn't a review of a certain CPU, just a comparison between different one of one generation with different core configurations. If you need a buying decision, get the cheapest one if you're just gaming. Only consider more than the 5600 if a better CPU would just be a bit more expensive and if you can't invest the money in another component.
Would love if you start including RT benchmarks on these chips. In Cyberpunk my 5800X3D is strained a lot more even with just RT reflections enabled. Having these comparisons can be helpful for anyone interested in RT in RT heavy titles. Wondering if theres any reason this isnt done already. Thanks Steve!
This happens because tech reviews focus 100% on current games, but rarely speak about future profing, my advice id always spend more on the CPU than you think you need
What happens? You get the correct advice... buy 6 or 8 core for gaming, not 16 core because financially that's dumb.
Future proofing isn't relevant as much as you think. Especially since one can switch out the CPU if need be.
@@dinokknd there is one problem, socket compatibility, if you buy Intel usually each generation or two they change socket, as for AMD, you have some backwards compatibility, but is not forever
@marcos1669 What's your source for advice: Trust Me Bro...
Maybe start giving advice after you've proven you know what you're talking about...
Run benchmarks, make reviews on products then give advice on what people should buy
@@keyboardkung-fuwarrior8932 experience on not putting the top procesor for a specific socket because "it was not needed" (bought a 4690 instead of i7) and then not able to run things smothly because of that mistake, on the oposite side, I bought my last procesor (9900K) exactly with that in mind and still are able to run everything smothly (I couldnt if I have had gone for something lower)
First!
confirmed
Im curious to see how did you take these Benchmarks in details, can these be seen on Patreon or Floatplane?
Is helldivers 2 tested on a difficulty 1 mission? Because I have 5600x and have 0 issues on lower difficulties while on 7-9 stuttering and frame drops aren't uncommon, and I don't think only gpu is to blame. At least task manager often shows very high cpu load. Haven't seen any testers compare trivial to helldive performance yet.
Just to add a specific case to why I do look (quickly) at the 4k chart in videos like this:
First, I totally understand, appreciate, and agree with your thorough explanations about why 4k CPU testing is almost always between misleading and meaningless.
However, I play mostly VR games so that aligns closer to the 4k part of the chart for how a CPU/GPU combo would perform. I have a 5800x.
If I look at this 1080p chart it would be easy to conclude that an in-socket upgrade to 5800x3D would get me average +27% performance.
But in VR games the resolution and stress on the GPU is very high and really doesn't come down much with settings tweaks since resolution is the major limiting factor and upscaling looks even worse in headsets, when it's even available.
So eyeballing the 4k chart where that 27% reduces to maybe 3-8% at most makes it very clear that in my case the CPU is not the part holding back my system, even if I was using a 4090. So I appreciate the use of that in your test, even though my GPU is much slower. It still tells me what I want to know:
Would a 5800x3D increase my performance from my current 5800x? No, not nearly enough to justify the cost.
Thanks!
My PC is primarily for DAW stuff with sim racing on the side. I'm running a 5800X + 4x8GB 3866MHz + Liquid Devil 6800 XT and the 4 extra threads have been nice to have, and despite only running a single 240mm radiator, the 5800X and 6800 XT are both so efficient that they still stay cool and quiet. I usually am never completely satisfied with a build and I start feeling an upgrade itch about every 3 years, but that has not been the case with this build, and I would not be surprised to find myself still running it in 5 years, it has no issue tearing through anything I throw at it.
Used the 5600X for years, and it was great. Got a used 5900X for $243 about a month ago, and it's doing a great job and is a good bit faster than my 5600X.
Unfortunately, until devs use engines that can properly handle core scaling, every "future proof, higher core count" cpu is a waste of money if your rig is gaming oriented.
What about PBO, CO, PPT TDC EDC limits during the test? 5900 and 5950X can keep mutch higher clock speed with boost with adjusted limits and CO.
Can we do an upgrade path video between AM4 and AM5? I have a R7 3700 on a decent AM4 motherboard, and doing mostly video editing. I'm thinking about an upgrade, but would a 5000 series be enough of an upgrade for the money, or should I go whole hog and go to a 7800x or 7900x system, requiring a motherboard and RAM upgrade?
Good question and since you do video editing I think the value x3d chip 5700x3d is worse than a 5800x. It is easier like me where going from r5 2600 to a 5600 is an easy decision. If I were you I would either wait it out or go best value with a 5700x.
Wait for a few months. Zen 5 launches soon and will push down the price of Zen 4 CPUs.
Bought last year a Ryzen 5 5500 and it seems I have a golden sample. Undervolted to -29, added +200 Mhz to the boost and it runs in bechmarks above R5 5600X (tested with Passmark, CPUID Validator, Userbenchmark)
I have a question for the group. I have a 5600x with a 2080Ti. My target is 60FPS, medium-high quality settings. Currently playing CP2077, which hits 60 with ease, but I really like RT effects. I’m usually at 60 with RT on, but will drop to mid-high 40s in sections. Also the 60FPS doesn’t “feel” like smooth 60. I noticed that GPU usage NEVER hits 100%. Would a change to an x3D chip get me to a smoother experience with solid 60?