AMD Ryzen 5000 Builders Thread

[B-Riz]

	Cores Threads	Base Freq	Turbo Freq	L3 Cache	TDP	MSRP
Ryzen 9 5950X	16c/32t	3400	4900	64 MB	105 W	$799
Ryzen 9 5900X	12c/24t	3700	4800	64 MB	105 W	$549
Ryzen 7 5800X	8c/16t	3800	4700	32 MB	105 W	$449
Ryzen 5 5600X	6c/12t	3700	4600	32 MB	65 W	$299

5600X comes with cooler, the rest do not.

above from https://www.anandtech.com/show/1614...en-3-on-nov-5th-19-ipc-claims-best-gaming-cpu

 

[Abwx]

The 5700X3D should fill the 65W TDP/88W PPT range, although the 5800X3D use only 78W in games it s still rated 105W TDP and as such use much more in applications.

There will be no difference in games but in apps the 5700X3D should perform like a 5700X, that s about 10% below a 5800X and 7% below the 5800X3D.

 

[PJVol]

The 5700X3D should fill the 65W TDP/88W PPT range, although the 5800X3D use only 78W in games it s still rated 105W TDP and as such use much more in applications.

Only 78W ?
The highest I've seen - in the CP2077 - is low 50s, staying in the 30-40W range mostly

 

[Abwx]

Only 78W ?
The highest I've seen - in the CP2077 - is low 50s, staying in the 30-40W range mostly

78W is the average measured by Computerbase over 14 games or so, indeed there s a lot of variance from a game to another but that s also GPU dependant, they measured with a 4090 at 720p, wich is very CPU demanding, a RX 7800XT at say 1080p/1440p should take way less CPU usage.

 

[Makaveli]

Its cool that they are adding these options there are numerous people on reddit asking for a 5950X3D but that has been covered and will most likely never see the light of day.

AMD Shows Off Original Ryzen 9 5950X3D V-Cache Prototype

16 cores with two V-Cache chiplets were tested, but not realistic for the mainstream market

www.tomshardware.com

 

[DAPUNISHER]

The other Steve giving the 5800X3D a bunch of love.

I think the 5600/X used for about $100 is the best value if you aren't going to spring for a 3D. Iceberg's results for the 6 vs 8 Zen 3 are not too far off of GN's. He uses a 6900XT but the 2 CPUs remain close.

 

[Thunder 57]

The other Steve giving the 5800X3D a bunch of love.

I think the 5600/X used for about $100 is the best value if you aren't going to spring for a 3D. Iceberg's results for the 6 vs 8 Zen 3 are not too far off of GN's. He uses a 6900XT but the 2 CPUs remain close.

Steve mentioned he is doing a 2600/X to 5800X3D video next. I am intrested in that one as I went from a 2600X to a 5700X. I don't play newer more demanding games so I didn't see the need for the 3D. I do think that 8 cores will age better than 6 cores though so that's why I went with the 5700X.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

It seems logical that 8 cores are a better bet since that's what's in the consoles. But I don't think it is working out that way. If you look at GNs results for Zen+, Zen2, and Zen3, 6&8 cores in demanding new games like BG3 and Starfield, where it's tough to get 60fps, there is not much separation.

 

[Abwx]

Steve mentioned he is doing a 2600/X to 5800X3D video next. I am intrested in that one as I went from a 2600X to a 5700X. I don't play newer more demanding games so I didn't see the need for the 3D. I do think that 8 cores will age better than 6 cores though so that's why I went with the 5700X.

5800X3D has 2x the gaming perf of the 1800X, so it should be the same compared to a 6C Zen+, and the X3D will age better than a 5700X, even in non gaming apps, because of the cache.

 

[Thunder 57]

It seems logical that 8 cores are a better bet since that's what's in the consoles. But I don't think it is working out that way. If you look at GNs results for Zen+, Zen2, and Zen3, 6&8 cores in demanding new games like BG3 and Starfield, where it's tough to get 60fps, there is not much separation.

Sure, but I do more than just game. For gaming only a 6 core Zen 3 is better than an 8 core Zen 2 used in consoles more often than not.

5800X3D has 2x the gaming perf of the 1800X, so it should be the same compared to a 6C Zen+, and the X3D will age better than a 5700X, even in non gaming apps, because of the cache.

Most apps don't care much about cache. The 5800X/5700X both clock higher which always helps. I very much doubt I would notice much difference between the three, espcially when using PBO and CO.

 

[Seba]

I am in a similar situation.

I have a Ryzen 5 3600 (X570 motherboard; 32 GB RAM; Radeon RX 7600 8GB), which is still fine for my needs.

But lately I was thinking about upgrading to either an Ryzen 7 5700X or to an Ryzen 7 5800X3D.
5800X3D is about 70% more expensive than 5700X in my area.

Logic dictates to wait.

But I think that AMD might soon discontinue production of these CPUs. In that case 5800X3D (the remaining stocks) might get more expensive initially. And by the time it gets cheap (Second Hand), a whole platform upgrade could be a better option for me.

 

[igor_kavinski]

All in favor of 6950X on AM4 with updated IOD supporting DDR4-4400 minimum say yes.

Just say yes. No excusing for why AMD may not be able to do it. Be positive. Let your yes bring this product into reality. MANIFEST!

 

[DrMrLordX]

All in favor of 6950X on AM4 with updated IOD supporting DDR4-4400 minimum say yes.

Just say yes. No excusing for why AMD may not be able to do it. Be positive. Let your yes bring this product into reality. MANIFEST!

That'll go great right next to my equally-fictional R5 3600X2 or whatever it is.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I am in a similar situation.

I have a Ryzen 5 3600 (X570 motherboard; 32 GB RAM; Radeon RX 7600 8GB), which is still fine for my needs.

But lately I was thinking about upgrading to either an Ryzen 7 5700X or to an Ryzen 7 5800X3D.
5800X3D is about 70% more expensive than 5700X in my area.

Logic dictates to wait.

But I think that AMD might soon discontinue production of these CPUs. In that case 5800X3D (the remaining stocks) might get more expensive initially. And by the time it gets cheap (Second Hand), a whole platform upgrade could be a better option for me.

Wait and see if the 5500X3D is available in retail and in quantity. It should be around $200-$225. BTW I got the 5800X3D for 277.70 on Prime day before the 6% cash back. It might be that cheap here in the U.S. in a week.

 

[Seba]

If I do buy another AM4 CPU, I want one with at least 8 cores.

Here lowest price for 5800X3D was about $320 (including VAT). Usually goes for $350-$370 these days.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

If I do buy another AM4 CPU, I want one with at least 8 cores.

Here lowest price for 5800X3D was about $320 (including VAT). Usually goes for $350-$370 these days.

I grok.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

This week's theme is - The 5800X3D is the GOAT in socket upgrade. 💪

He hits every salient point. Calls out Intel to start offering better longevity. And like many of us, worries AMD will find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory with AM5. 🤣 That's my biggest concern with AMD; the idiots in charge can't even stick a finger in the wind. They are bumbling morons. Let's hope this lesson is so obvious they can't figure out a way to screw it up.

9600k aged better than I thought. It aged like cold milk instead of warm milk. Still, yet another Intel platform that is long irrelevant while AM4 still fights it out for serious sales.

 

[Hans Gruber]

AMD originally said that AM4 would support all AMD CPU's through Zen 3. Then they said the B350/x370 would not support Zen 3 then I guess it supports Zen 3 CPU's. Then there was the memory issue which really was an AMD bios AGESA issue that they worked out after 4 years.

I would like to see AMD machines boot faster. The reason AM4 is still doing well is the legacy AM4 motherboard support through all the Ryzen generations. Intel has the tick/tock approach or what I call the 2 and out penalty with the Intel motherboards.

AMD still doesn't understand the value play. So you sell tons of server chips, a few threadripper CPU's. They need the value for generational upgrades to meet the market to maximize sales. They also need a return to inexpensive motherboards. The high value motherboards AMD had in the 1st and 2nd generation AM4 chipsets is what is continuing to drive sales today.

In defense of AMD. They do fix their chipsets, it just takes awhile. Intel says, don't worry about it we will fix it in the next generation. Intel wants you to buy another motherboard and CPU that fix issues they could resolve in current generation hardware.

Technological obsolescence is what the market really wants. Something that never breaks, is reliable but becomes obsolete because of new generation hardware. Those are the classic PC's. The Sandybridge/Ivy Bridge stuff. AMD didn't have any classics because everything sucked before Ryzen. Zen 2 and Zen 3 CPU's will age really well.

 

[Thunder 57]

AMD originally said that AM4 would support all AMD CPU's through Zen 3. Then they said the B350/x370 would not support Zen 3 then I guess it supports Zen 3 CPU's. Then there was the memory issue which really was an AMD bios AGESA issue that they worked out after 4 years.

I would like to see AMD machines boot faster. The reason AM4 is still doing well is the legacy AM4 motherboard support through all the Ryzen generations. Intel has the tick/tock approach or what I call the 2 and out penalty with the Intel motherboards.

AMD still doesn't understand the value play. So you sell tons of server chips, a few threadripper CPU's. They need the value for generational upgrades to meet the market to maximize sales. They also need a return to inexpensive motherboards. The high value motherboards AMD had in the 1st and 2nd generation AM4 chipsets is what is continuing to drive sales today.

In defense of AMD. They do fix their chipsets, it just takes awhile. Intel says, don't worry about it we will fix it in the next generation. Intel wants you to buy another motherboard and CPU that fix issues they could resolve in current generation hardware.

Technological obsolescence is what the market really wants. Something that never breaks, is reliable but becomes obsolete because of new generation hardware. Those are the classic PC's. The Sandybridge/Ivy Bridge stuff. AMD didn't have any classics because everything sucked before Ryzen. Zen 2 and Zen 3 CPU's will age really well.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Or you are just young. Doesn't matter. You have been a passive-agressive AMD hater for some time now. "everthing sucked before Ryzen", what an ill informed statement.

AMD needs to "boot faster"?

AMD said they would support CPU's through Zen 3? False. They said AM4 through 2020. There are slides that say that. AMD went above and beyond with AM3.

 

[Thunder 57]

AMD originally said that AM4 would support all AMD CPU's through Zen 3. Then they said the B350/x370 would not support Zen 3 then I guess it supports Zen 3 CPU's. Then there was the memory issue which really was an AMD bios AGESA issue that they worked out after 4 years.

I would like to see AMD machines boot faster. The reason AM4 is still doing well is the legacy AM4 motherboard support through all the Ryzen generations. Intel has the tick/tock approach or what I call the 2 and out penalty with the Intel motherboards.

AMD still doesn't understand the value play. So you sell tons of server chips, a few threadripper CPU's. They need the value for generational upgrades to meet the market to maximize sales. They also need a return to inexpensive motherboards. The high value motherboards AMD had in the 1st and 2nd generation AM4 chipsets is what is continuing to drive sales today.

In defense of AMD. They do fix their chipsets, it just takes awhile. Intel says, don't worry about it we will fix it in the next generation. Intel wants you to buy another motherboard and CPU that fix issues they could resolve in current generation hardware.

Technological obsolescence is what the market really wants. Something that never breaks, is reliable but becomes obsolete because of new generation hardware. Those are the classic PC's. The Sandybridge/Ivy Bridge stuff. AMD didn't have any classics because everything sucked before Ryzen. Zen 2 and Zen 3 CPU's will age really well.

I just re-read your post and see I left some things out. So AMD doesn't understand the "value play" by allowing users to upgrade early CPU's to much faster ones on the same mobo? AMD needs to return to "inexpensive motherboards"? AMD doesn't set the price for motherboards. If anything, AMD has kept the cost down on motherboards by allowing old chipsets to work with newer CPU's. That is unlike Intel, who cuts off support quickly to sell more chipsets.

You pretty much acknowledge that right away. Then you go on as if SNB/IVB was the start of CPU's. Did you know there is literally an Athlon "Classic"? Plenty of great AMD chips before Zen.

 

[Ranulf]

This week's theme is - The 5800X3D is the GOAT in socket upgrade. 💪

He hits every salient point. Calls out Intel to start offering better longevity. And like many of us, worries AMD will find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory with AM5. 🤣 That's my biggest concern with AMD; the idiots in charge can't even stick a finger in the wind. They are bumbling morons. Let's hope this lesson is so obvious they can't figure out a way to screw it up.

9600k aged better than I thought. It aged like cold milk instead of warm milk. Still, yet another Intel platform that is long irrelevant while AM4 still fights it out for serious sales.

Well to be fair, the i5 K models have been a bad deal since haswell if not Ivy bridge even. Once it became obvious of the long term value of the i7 chips with hyperthreading and performance, there was no reason to buy an i5 unless it was the $180-200 and cheaper models and you wanted 4 cores (later 6). It wasn't until 10th gen did the i5 make sense as the whole lineup gets HT and i7 prices go up to $400+.

Technological obsolescence is what the market really wants. Something that never breaks, is reliable but becomes obsolete because of new generation hardware. Those are the classic PC's. The Sandybridge/Ivy Bridge stuff. AMD didn't have any classics because everything sucked before Ryzen. Zen 2 and Zen 3 CPU's will age really well.

Yes to the first two sentences. Yes, to the sandy bridge or really the first 3 generations of the "i5/i7" chips starting in 2009. No to the no AMD classics before Zen. Go back to the Athlon/Duron days of 2001-2005. Though I'd argue the phenoms and the cheap FX chips were good values at the right times. I had an active daily use AM3+ board for 10 years, 2011 to 2021.

 

[Thunder 57]

Well to be fair, the i5 K models have been a bad deal since haswell if not Ivy bridge even. Once it became obvious of the long term value of the i7 chips with hyperthreading and performance, there was no reason to buy an i5 unless it was the $180-200 and cheaper models and you wanted 4 cores (later 6). It wasn't until 10th gen did the i5 make sense as the whole lineup gets HT and i7 prices go up to $400+.



Yes to the first two sentences. Yes, to the sandy bridge or really the first 3 generations of the "i5/i7" chips starting in 2009. No to the no AMD classics before Zen. Go back to the Athlon/Duron days of 2001-2005. Though I'd argue the phenoms and the cheap FX chips were good values at the right times. I had an active daily use AM3+ board for 10 years, 2011 to 2021.

Sandy Bridge was a great CPU but a crappy platform. Limited to PCIe 2 and USB 2. Chipset issues. Ivy Bridge was much better all around even if it didn't move the bar much in performance.

I also agree that the Ivy Bridge i5 did not age well. Even with a nice OC it did not do well in BF1 compared to a stock 2600X.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I also agree that the Ivy Bridge i5 did not age well. Even with a nice OC it did not do well in BF1 compared to a stock 2600K.

Fixed that for you.

And hindsight is perfect. The i5 was the bang for buck gaming darling of the review industry for a long time. Even most outlets were lauding the 9600K for gaming when it came out. The only one that felt it was sus because of frame pacing was Gamers Nexus. For pure gaming, pretty much everyone else was giving it the editor's choice awards and such.

Yeah, the i7 was the real deal, but especially in adjusted dollars, most did not spend that much on a CPU. I myself bought a 4690K for my son because he was putting mad hours into ARMA 3.

Back to the 5000 series. These reviews have the vibe of a hall of fame induction for AM4. With the 5800X3D being the team MVP.

I do still have a laugh at how the usual suspects spent so long mocking AMD with the MOAR COREZ!!1!!1! sloganeering. How'd that work out? 🤣

 

[Makaveli]

Fixed that for you.

And hindsight is perfect. The i5 was the bang for buck gaming darling of the review industry for a long time. Even most outlets were lauding the 9600K for gaming when it came out. The only one that felt it was sus because of frame pacing was Gamers Nexus. For pure gaming, pretty much everyone else was giving it the editor's choice awards and such.

Yeah, the i7 was the real deal, but especially in adjusted dollars, most did not spend that much on a CPU. I myself bought a 4690K for my son because he was putting mad hours into ARMA 3.

Back to the 5000 series. These reviews have the vibe of a hall of fame induction for AM4. With the 5800X3D being the team MVP.

I do still have a laugh at how the usual suspects spent so long mocking AMD with the MOAR COREZ!!1!!1! sloganeering. How'd that work out? 🤣

AM4 has been a great socket I jumped on in 2019 and i've used 3 different CPU's 3800X - 5800X- 5800X3D on this board and it will easily last me until Zen 5 is out.

The only thing I had previously that I kept longer was my Socket 1366 board which saw i7-920 and i7-970 but I sat on that build for about 10 years. I will probably get 5 years out of AM4 before moving on.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

The only thing I had previously that I kept longer was my Socket 1366 board which saw i7-920 and i7-970 but I sat on that build for about 10 years. I will probably get 5 years out of AM4 before moving on.

Thanks to 8th gen consoles having weak CPUs, HEDT stayed relevant a looong time. Hell, so did mainstream i7.

I read someone mention only skt 7 lasted longer. Even including super 7, No, no it didn't. By '99 there was slot A and the next year we had skt A when I got my first Abit + Duron combo.

My first AM4 was a 1500X + B350 which I gave to a friend. Built another with a 1600. After that, I've built and used more than I can remember. For myself, friends, family, and clients. I will have AM4 in my home for years to come. I have 6 AM4 based PCs at the moment; from full towers to mini-ITX to a Deskmini. 4 are 5000 series which is relevant to this builders thread. I may build an AM5 system, much like yourself, in a year or 2. But I won't be selling off ALL of my AM4 stuff any time soon.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I read someone mention only skt 7 lasted longer. Even including super 7, No, no it didn't. By '99 there was slot A and the next year we had skt A when I got my first Abit + Duron combo.

When was the first Socket 7 board? 1995? And the K6-III came out in 1999 (February). That's almost 4 years. Maybe you can give it credit for lasting longer than that depending on whether you think AMD (or Cyrix) were selling budget chips for that platform after Slot A Durons became available. However AM4 dates back to 2017 - actually 2016 if you count the CPU/board combo that was being sold in Japan and Germany that had Bristol Ridge on it - and it's still going. So six years at least for AM4. Yeah, I think it wins.