• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

***OFFICIAL*** Ryzen 5000 / Zen 3 Launch Thread REVIEWS BEGIN PAGE 39

Page 40 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

therealmongo

Member
Jul 5, 2019
82
156
66
Everything as expected however I am not a fan that AMD has OC'ed their CPUs to the absolute limit this time around in order to beat Intel at 1080p by a few percent and by doing so worsened their thermals quite a lot. It would be nice to see all these CPUs with TDP being lowered by 5-20% - that could make them a lot more power efficient and colder.

https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-5800x/images/cpu-temperature.png (75C under load FFS).

Also, and I know I've repeated it a dozen times already but I don't understand why AMD has the right (and not only that people somehow find a justification for that) to increase their prices so much. Intel used to release new substantially faster CPU architectures without doing this: Sandy Bridge, Haswell, Sky Lake were all a lot faster than previous generation CPUs without price hikes and in certain cases even cost substantially less than their predecessors, e.g. the Intel Core i5-2500K was released for $216 while the Intel Core i7-920 cost $305.

People keep saying that $50 is practically nothing, only AMD has decided to start the lineup with the 5600X which costs $300, vs the 3600 which costs $200. It's not a $50 price hike, it's a $100/50%(!) price hike. Intel would have been decimated by the internet mob if they had ever attempted to be sneaky like this. I don't give a damn about the X suffix because it doesn't change anything and it's just a marketing differentiation. There's no 5600 CPU for $250.

Lastly, AMD is playing a monopoly card and it's just ugly. They force people to buy the 5900X/5950X CPUs because both the 3600/3700X were the most popular models for the Ryzen 3000 series, while for this generation, the 5800X is the worst (!) investment in terms of the bang for the buck. Margins decide everything not only for Intel and NVIDIA, as AMD has happily joined the "we'll rip you off because we are the fastest" club. I'm quite appalled by all of this.
J u s t b u y a n I n t e l . . . . .
 

NostaSeronx

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2011
3,215
732
136
With Zen3, they are back to integer macro-op execution capability. Which will definitely help with smoothness ( ;) ).
 

tamz_msc

Platinum Member
Jan 5, 2017
2,802
2,475
136
Gaming seems to be a wash, with a slight lead to the 5950X over the 10900K, but what I don't understand is the high temperatures on the 5800X - 20 degrees over the 5600X according to ComputerBase is a lot. I think it might be due to the fact that per core power draw is the highest for the 5800X. I wonder if it can be fixed with eco mode, otherwise I'd want a 65W 8-core part.
 

MrTeal

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,061
714
136
TPU is showing a slight gaming lead for the i9-10900k, but they're also running the Ryzen system with 3200MHz RAM. It will be interesting to see some memory scaling benchmarks.
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,129
2,088
136
TPU is showing a slight gaming lead for the i9-10900k, but they're also running the Ryzen system with 3200MHz RAM. It will be interesting to see some memory scaling benchmarks.
As per TPU's 10900K review, OCing that chip brings no difference in gaming, so stock is basically the same. Similar can be seen with Ryzen, so out of the box performance in games is basically the best. What can make a great difference is IF clock speed and memory clock, I'm looking forward to some deep dive gaming tests with high IF/mem clock pushed to the limit.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and Zucker2k

Abwx

Diamond Member
Apr 2, 2011
9,145
936
126
AMD included several games in their IPC test to get to the 19% increase. Not saying that's invalid, it's perfectly valid, but computerbase measured ~15% IPC increase in multi-threaded non-gaming loads. AMD had a pretty big increase in "gaming IPC" with this gen which has now given AMD the lead in pretty much every category. Interesting how this CPU turned out.
Actually that s 11% in MT and 15% for ST, wich mean that they ate in the max throughput to improve ST, thus leaving less unused ressource for a second thread.
Although new the uarch has same number of exe units but somewhat overhauled and better fed.


Also they pushed the 5800X quite hard compared to the two chiplets CPUs, a non X version should be released for the general public that dont want to tweak, while the 5600X is actually a 5600 TDP wise since it s within 65W.
 

Kuiva maa

Member
May 1, 2014
166
188
116
There are a few outlier reviews out there gaming wise. Hardware unboxed for example. But rest assured, the tables have turned and it is the 720p and esports gaming that paints Ryzen 5000 in the best light. Valorant (especially) and CS:GO results are a straight up execution, not a fight. Brings back original FX memories from 2005.
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,509
565
126
So...is a 240 mm AIO enough to cool the 5950x? I've got a Noctua DH-15s currently - is that enough? :)
 

exquisitechar

Senior member
Apr 18, 2017
461
533
106
Overall, I'm very impressed by these chips. AMD has increased clock speeds by quite a bit and increased IPC massively in the same power envelope on the same node. Cezanne will be a killer laptop CPU. :)

I haven't looked too much into gaming, but the results seem very inconsistent, even with the same games. Also, I see Zen 3 smashing CML in performance at 720p but sometimes slightly losing at higher resolutions? PCGH did a quality 720p review here.
 

Gideon

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,188
2,179
136
Yup. Not quite the "utter destruction" some were predicting. I'd love to see overclocked + 4000MHZ RAM OC results as well. I suppose this means Rocket Lake S is going to dominate in gaming, no question?

@inf64? Are you there?
Igor already did test 4000 Mhz. In some games the difference is staggering


while in some not so much:



At least now there are more than one or two valve games where even 3600X is faster than 10900K. MIcrosoft Flight Simulator, Hitman, World War Z ... plenty of others. Where AMD is slower, it only by a hair.

As for Rocket Lake "dominating", I believe when I see it. Gaming performance seems to be a fickle thing not really helped much by IPC but really dependent on memory latency and such. It will probably be faster, but surely not in games AMD dominates.
 

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
739
337
106
Yup. Not quite the "utter destruction" some were predicting. I'd love to see overclocked + 4000MHZ RAM OC results as well. I suppose this means Rocket Lake S is going to dominate in gaming, no question?

@inf64? Are you there?
I will believe Those gaming numbers when I test the chip myself in gaming critical situation with tuned system. I already made a mistake by buying 3900x as gaming chip, tested in running alone on the grass field....
APP wise we are continuing in the era of hedt renamed chips and 250-300w on desktop for total system power.
Great in 2020....
5600 non x will be imo the sweet spot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zucker2k

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,129
2,088
136
Yup. Not quite the "utter destruction" some were predicting. I'd love to see overclocked + 4000MHZ RAM OC results as well. I suppose this means Rocket Lake S is going to dominate in gaming, no question?

@inf64? Are you there?
I'm here, I nailed my prognosis 99% ;) .
Proof: https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/official-ryzen-5000-zen-3-launch-thread-confirmed.2585890/post-40341327

It is even worse for intel, there is no reason to recommend any intel SKU any more. Funnily enough, 720p gaming AMD's lead extends due to a massive 26-27% IPC lead. Oh and AT confiirmed AMD has ~7% lead over best Coves in Spec 2017/2006.

How are you, not in ruins yet? :D
 

Zucker2k

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2006
1,320
678
136
Igor already did test 4000 Mhz. In some games the difference is staggering


while in some not so much:



At least now there are more than one or two valve games where even 3600X is faster than 10900K. MIcrosoft Flight Simulator, Hitman, World War Z ... plenty of others. Where AMD is slower, it only by a hair.

As for Rocket Lake "dominating", I believe when I see it. Gaming performance seems to be a fickle thing not really helped much by IPC but really dependent on memory latency and such. It will probably be faster, but surely not in games AMD dominates.
Thanks! But it seems the chips themselves are not overclocked?
 

Zucker2k

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2006
1,320
678
136
I'm here, I nailed my prognosis 99% ;) .
Proof: https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/official-ryzen-5000-zen-3-launch-thread-confirmed.2585890/post-40341327

It is even worse for intel, there is no reason to recommend any intel SKU any more. Funnily enough, 720p gaming AMD's lead extends due to a massive 26-27% IPC lead. Oh and AT confiirmed AMD has ~7% lead over best Coves in Spec 2017/2006.

How are you, not in ruins yet? :D
2933 Mhz testing in 720p test, I guess? Did you include gaming tests in your ipc calculation as well, ala AMD? The Cove cores will do better on desktop, ipc-wise. Hold your horses, dude.
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,129
2,088
136
2933 Mhz testing in 720p test, I guess? Did you include gaming tests in your ipc calculation as well, ala AMD? The Cove cores will do better on desktop, ipc-wise. Hold your horses, dude.
I have just proven I nailed my whole chip performance projection to a ~99% precision and this is all you have to say? :laughing:
You are hilarious, dude!

PS I was right with original Zen, you can find the discussions with ShinatiDK when he called me crazy back in 2015. I was right with Zen3 IPC, I was right with the projected performance for whole Zen3 lineup. Please just give up.
 

tamz_msc

Platinum Member
Jan 5, 2017
2,802
2,475
136
I'd like to have more clarity on the situation with high temperatures on the 5800X.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY