AMD Ryzen 5 5600x vs Ryzen 7 5800x vs Ryzen 9 5900x vs Ryzen 9 5950x- Technical news, Firstpost

[ad_1]

As we saw in Part I, AMD’s Zen 3 microarchitecture has finally and definitively overtaken Intel as the most powerful and high-performance option for high-end desktop users, especially if productivity is important. Now let’s take a look at the performance of AMD’s various Zen 3 processors and reset the chip that best suits your needs.

Before we dive into the test results and analysis, here’s how Team Red (AMD) best opposes Team Blue (Intel):

Model Cores / threads Turbo frequency (GHz) TDP (W) Price (INR)
Intel Core i5-11600K 6/12 4.9 125 25 150
AMD Ryzen 5 5600x 6/12 4.6 65 27 250
Intel Core i7-11700K 8/16 5.0 125 38 100
AMD Ryzen 7 5800x 8/16 4.7 105 39 300
AMD Ryzen 9 5900x 24.12 4.8 105 54 750
Intel Core i9-11900K 8/16 5.3 125 60 900
AMD Ryzen 9 5950x 16/32 4.9 105 73 899

It is immediately obvious that Team Blue chips are rated higher in TDP than AMD, meaning they get more power. And when it comes to nuclear calculations, Team Red is far ahead.

The only advantages of Team Blue are clock speed and a slight pricing edge with i5 and i7 parts. However, as discussed in Part 1, these blister speeds (5.3 GHz is a big deal) become expensive and require expensive cooling installations.

The same goes for pricing. AMD’s entire lineup works great with mid-range B550 motherboards that cost about $ 15,000. The more expensive X570 disks add features and support more PCIe Gen 4 bands for more GPUs and NVMe storage, but that’s all. X-Series AMD processors can be overclocked with B550 cards, and you can use fast RAM.

While Intel’s K-series processors can run on B560 motherboards, which retail for about 15,000 KB, and are the first of the Intel x60 series chipsets to support memory overclocking (thank you, AMD), you can’t overclock your processor, which is the size to initially acquire K-series processor. To do this, you will need to purchase premium Z590 chipset-based boards, which will cost an additional € 10-20,000. From a value perspective, this makes little sense.

With this out of the way, my test equipment was configured as follows:

Test settings

Motherboard: We used MSI’s MAG B550M mortar as the motherboard. Retailing at around 15kb, this disc supports 4 sticks of DDR4 memory at up to 4400 MHz, comes with two PCIe x16 slots (x16 + x4) and two M.2 slots (one PCIe Gen 4) and supports USB 3.2 Gen 2 .The board withstood the test well and allowed all the processors to run at full tilt without any problems.

RAM: We had four sticks of Corsair Vengeance Pro RGB RAM, a total of 32GB. The RAM was 3200 MHz C16. RGB was just bling, of course (and why not?).

Power supply: The reliable Corsair AX850 used this device. The 850 W power and 80+ titanium efficiency class of this modular power supply had no problems keeping hot, power-intensive components running normally.

GPU: For the GPU, AMD sent its best, the 6900XT, for testing. This graphics processor beast has 16GB of VRAM and an awesome 5120 stream processor, not to mention 128 BOBs and 320 texture units. A recent update that added support for DXR (Microsoft’s API for ray tracing) means that these graphics processors are finally up to date with Nvidia’s RTX cards.

Storage: We had to go here with the Corsair MP600. This PCIe Gen4 compatible NVMe drive is one of the fastest drives you can get and can achieve read / write speeds in excess of 5 Gbps. All applications and games were installed on this drive. The Samsung 870 QVO and a pair of WD Red NAS drives were used to store the stored data and footage.

Cooling setting: To keep these processors cool, I used a liquid cooler for the NZXT Kraken x53 processor. I used thermal paste with the Arctic Silver MX4, and the chassis cooling fans included two 120mm Noctua NF-F12s and one 140mm NF-P14 fan. The Noctua engines were configured as an exhaust and an x53 intake at the front of the fuselage.

Chassis: The equipment was installed in the 750sa tower space of the Corsair Obsidia. This cabinet beast is an old design, but it is still one of the most spacious and airy cabinets you can get today. It’s also one of the few cabinets where I can install a RAID 5 hard drive system.

Monitor: I used a BenQ EX2780Q for the screen. This 2K 144 Hz panel supports G-Sync and FreeSync technologies and is rated for the HDR400 standard. It is fast, accurate and most importantly, supports 4K 60 Hz when needed.

How we tested

  • We used a new installation of Windows 10 with all the necessary drivers and updates installed.
  • Applications and games were installed on the Corsair MP600 SSD to remove any storage bottlenecks.
  • The chassis fans and x53 cooler are configured for performance mode.
  • All tests were looped three times to ensure consistency.
  • Game benchmarks were recorded CapFrameX. This was the only app that was explicitly allowed to run in the background when testing games. All games were tested at 1080p because we focused on CPU performance and not the GPU.

Performance Analysis: Gaming

Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition: This is the only AAA game to date that has dropped raster graphics in favor of a fully beam-traced environment. The game looks amazing, and understandably brings even the best GPUs to its knees. Since this is a GPU-bound game, we don’t expect a big difference in CPU performance. This is exactly what we saw in our results.

The average frame rates ranged from 88.6 frames per second to 5600x and 92.6 frames to 5900x. The lowest 1 percent, stability indicators, were stable at 56 frames per second.

Metro Exodus EE FHD Ultra

Metro Exodus EE FHD Ultra

As can be seen from the frame rate diagram above, the 5900x and 5950x showed a slight instability compared to the 5600x and 5800x. Perhaps this is due to some sort of latency problem when using two CCXs.

When DXR quality is lowered to medium, frame rates rise to 130+ on all processors. The 5600x was the smallest here and was able to pump 131 frames per second. The 5950x dominated 133, and the rest of the processors managed to push 139. That’s not a negligible difference, but the 1 percent downs were consistent across all processors and for the average user, that 8 fps difference goes unnoticed.

Red Dead Redemption 2: Another GPU-bound game, but that supports both DirectX 12 and Vulkan APIs. Since other games used DirectX 11 and 12, we tested this game to test the performance of Vulcan.

Red Dead Redemption 2 FHD Ultra

Red Dead Redemption 2 FHD Ultra

Once again, there is no noticeable difference in performance between these processors. The 5600x succeeded at the lowest 107 average fps, while the 5950x succeeded 114. Interestingly, for some reason, the game seems to prefer 8-core CCXs, 5600x and 5900x (using 1x 6-core CCX and 2x 6-core CCX ) hits the 1 percent lower limit of 60, while the 5800x and 5950x hits for the total of one and two 8-core CCXs are 65. The difference is, of course, insignificant when playing.

F1 2019: This is an old game, but it depends a lot on the IPC and the clock speed. There is a clear “loser” in this test, but no clear winner.

F1 2019 FHD Ultra

F1 2019 FHD Ultra

The “loser,” 5600x, managed 239 frames per second to 5800x 256. The other two processors also managed to get more than 250 frames per second. In the worst case, this is a 7 percent difference in performance, but we’re also talking about 200+ fps. Looking at the 1 percent low, we see the same difference when the 5600x dominates 160, while all other processors remained above 170.

Is it worth paying 12,000 rubles for 7-10 frames per second to improve the performance of a game that is already running at 240 frames per second? I don’t think so.

Horizon Zero Dawn FHD Ultra

Horizon Zero Dawn FHD Ultra

With Horizon: Zero Dawn, Battlefield V and Counterattack global attack, we see a similar story. The 5600x is slower on CPU-bound titles, but not by much. In GPU-bound games, there is no difference in performance. At higher resolutions, where the GPU is more important, this difference disappears.

Conclusion: If you play, don’t waste your money on multiple cores

  • If you only plan to play with this configuration, use the 5600x and invest the money you save in a more powerful graphics processor and / or faster RAM.
  • If you plan to stream while playing, I recommend the 5800x. Four extra threads and an extra heat load leave you enough headroom for high-resolution streaming.

Productivity benchmarks

Here, things finally become interesting, and these processors come into their own.

The relative performance of the AMD processor

The relative performance of the AMD processor

In PCMark 10 and Speedomoter 2.0, benchmarks that show performance in common computing tasks and web browsing, there is no difference in performance. The same goes for image processing Photoshop and Lightroom. The 5900x and 5950x show a 13-14 percent increase in performance over the 5600x inch Lightroom, but you end up paying 27,000 rubles for this privilege. You could literally buy another 5600x for that price. Is it worth it? You decide.

AMD processor in the real world

AMD processor in the real world

If you edit video, compile code, or work with 3D objects, performance scales linearly according to the number of cores. When used Blender – Advanced 3D modeling and animation tool – 5950x is 2.5 times faster than 5600x. When you encode video to the handbrake or encode code, you can expect a 70% improvement in performance with the 5950x. The 5600x is a good performer, but it surpasses everyone else in the lineup.

Heat, power consumption and overclocking

On average, these processors tend to run at an average of 40 ° C to 80 ° C, depending on whether I played gaming or stress tests. Temperatures never rose to the 90s, and unlike Intel and its power-hungry 14nm node, power consumption remained relatively low, with only 5950x close to crossing the 200W hurdle.

Note that I did not manually overclock these processors. With Intel, overclocking is as simple as adjusting the CPU factor and adjusting the minute voltage until you get stable performance. With Zen 3, it’s not that simple. You have many more cores and performance needs to be optimized based on workload. You are basically looking at an extensive chart of clock frequencies and voltages that need to be adjusted on a core-by-core basis. It’s a nuanced process that takes a lot more time and effort than Intel chips.

AMD’s options are scary with Indian processors all their lives. If, like me, you’re not yet comfortable enough with a manually overclocked Zen 3 chip, AMD Ryzen Master the software comes with an Auto OC option that does a decent enough job to push these chips higher. Auto OC increased the turbo frequencies of all processors by an average of 100 MHz, and the 5800x saw the largest increase of 150 MHz.

Bottom line: Are you a player or a content creator?

I keep this simple:

  • If you need a powerful CPU for gaming and general work, all you need is a 5600x.
  • If you’re struggling with video editing, 3D rendering, encoding, or streaming, you might want to opt for 5800x. Adding cores and higher clock speeds will speed up your work significantly. Unless, of course, you only work with photos, then 5600x is enough.
  • If you’re serious about video editing, 3D rendering, and other CPU-intensive tasks, choose the right CPU for your budget. Just remember: More cores = more performance. Don’t bother with the 5600x.

Supplier Note: We would like to thank AMD, Corsair, and MSI for providing hardware that allows this review.

.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *