@@polymorph5067 They are good tests for people to have access to, besides it's not just data for people that are looking to build a new PC but even for people like me who have a 3700X and recently upgraded to a 6800 XT and are trying to determine if upgrading cpu is worth it. Speaking of which there's been CPU drops if you check the stock streams. I haven't been checking them much since getting a GPU last month but do from time to time and Zen 3's pop up regularly on Amazon, Newegg and Micro Center regularly gets stock of Zen2, 3 and Intel 10 series. I understand the frustration but it doesn't mean that RUclipsr's should stop doing what they do because stock is hard to come by in my opinion.
It’s good if you looking at right now, but if you looking let’s say 1-2 years in the future then games will use 8 cores and your 6 core might need upgrading. I would prefer to save just a bit more money get an 8 core CPU because it’s hard to change your CPU because you more or less need to rebuild your whole PC
Man I litterly just replaced my 2600 for a 5600x. She was first CPU and she is still worthy. I was gonna send the 2600 back as the 5600 and say it was faulty but I couldn’t bring myself to do it
Imagine him testing all those settings with different hardware where at the end so much gaming but no actual difference. thank you for all this work done
“Or, you could invest that money on the GPU front.” In a normal, sane world, that’s solid advice. In the real world, good luck buying any new GPU beefier than the upcoming GT 1010... :) Taking the mickey aside, another solid bit of work. Just because the results are boring, doesn’t mean they’re not significant.
In real world, GPU doesn't exist anymore. What we have now are MPU (Mining Processing Unit) lol. RTX3090 is the best MPU now. It cost the same as my sport car.
lmao thats true, at first i want to upgrade my 3600 to 5600x after find the local price here is almost double the 3600, i decide to upgrade my monitor instead
I was going from a 3600X and planned to go 5900X. but, couldnt get any...so i went 5800X instead as it was available. still waiting on a GPU though. So the 2080Ti will have to hang on a while longer it seems
Recently I switched from 10 years old 2-core Intel Core i3 370M(+Intel HD Graphics) to 12-core Ryzen 9 3900x (+RTX 3070) and I feel like I am flying :D :D :D
The 5600x is a great CPU, but a 33% price increase for 7% to 10% performance increase on average over the 3600. This is an Intel move from AMD. I will stick with the 3600 thank you and save over $100.
It's the same with Intel... and check the prices on Amazon, Intel's Rocket Lake isn't so much cheaper than AMD. Actual prices are pretty much the same. Not that much change in performances for both of their new CPUs gens, besides on enthusiast GPUs maybe but not worth it.
@@mowcowbell I never listen to recommendations because they're always a snapshot it time. For a recommendation to have any weight, there has to be a lot of if-then statements thrown into the mix. I use 8 core CPUs for different work. A few weeks ago I bought a 5800X for $350 USD. I also bought one at launch for $450, but it came with Far Cry 6, which is a $60 USD title, so I could fairly say I paid $390 for that CPU. One thing I know about AMD is that MSRP is only a number that represents the RELEASE price. Once a product has been on the market for a while and the stores have plenty in stock, they discount their prices, and that's what I always wait for, instead of throwing out spiteful comments. I'm always quite happy with the purchases I make, and sometimes all that's required is a little patience. Micro Center has the 5600X for $260 USD, and they have the 5600G for $210. I guess I should yell and scream about the evil AMD. Of course someone can always say they're responding to negative publicity, and I would just say they're responding to the market. The Intel 9900K launched at about $500 USD. I don't think it ever dropped below $470 USD until after 10th gen had been on the market for a while. I paid $350 for a FAR superior 5800X which uses about half the power and is a bit better at gaming and far better at other tasks I run. In this video Steve made 2 false assumptions. One is, people don't pair a high quality GPU was 6 core CPUs. Well, if a 6 core CPU is good enough for almost all games, then why not?????????? That seems like the SMARTEST thing to do. Save money on the CPU and buy a better GPU. The other is people aren't gaming at 1080p with a high quality GPU. Both statements are generalizations and therefore not fact. There are plenty of people who are going to buy something like a 6800 XT to pair with something like a 5600X or in my case a 5800X AND game on a 1080p monitor. But I do have a new 2K monitor to go with that 6800 XT. I bought the 6800 XT FOR 2K gaming. If I had anything less I'd be gaming on my 1080p monitor, like I was doing with my GTX 1080.
@@broklond Only if you have an expensive graphic card. Worth pointing out that the tests were made with Radeon 6800, which costs like 800 USD right now in most countries, if it's even in stock. Without at least 3060 Ti level graphic card, there is little point in 1440p monitor.
I can confirm the 2600 with rx390 it bad on star citizen with streaming vs 3600 with 1660 super star citizen with streaming. Well it almost equal yet it struggles even with extra with the exact core usage so you just may need a higher graphic card or the 3600. Yes me & friends were testing it on stream to see for stability to balance out the pre loading issue on the 2600 with rx390, while the 3600 with 1660 super had less. Our specs are almost equal and we found on a 5950x with 3090 still had stability issues, but used 17 gigs ram compared to 20 gigs of ram on ours. Long but information while all this was done live streaming.
I just want to know if it's possible to buy one of those 'hardware on box' tshirts I saw earlier.. Literally just a hammer sitting on a cardboard box, I love it
This goes to show you how amazing the r5 3600 truly was and still is! I've thought about upgrading now that games like Starfield exist but I still don't know if it's even worth it cuz the 3600 is just such a powerhouse for a 6 core
My brain: Upgrade your 3700x to a 5900x Steve: Don’t do it My brain: But it’s faster Steve: Not in gaming above 1080p. Not one bit. Money down the drain. My brain: but SHINY
I'm now really happy that I decided to order a 3600 last week to replace my 1600, as a 5600x would really have been no better and would have been twice the price as i would have needed a new motherboard too.
I just upgraded a streaming pc from a FX 8350 to a 5800X and the difference has been absurd. I am amazed how well the 8350 kept up though, the thing was trucking for 7 years of gaming for me
@@MrOfTheSea Yeah it played all the games I wanted to play with a reasonable framrate rate but in a lot of games lately it reached 90-98% utilization and lots of stuttering. And for emulation it is not good because the single core performance is just not good.
congratz feels good ain't it? no more toaster in a PC and i also just recently upgraded from a Fx 6350 to a 10500 our frame rate suffering is finally gone at last.
@@danishbutter1847 Oh yes it feels amazing :D. That is also a very big Upgrade you did have fun with it. Now the Problem is not the cpu anymore but the gpu
Good info. Upgraded from a 6600K to a 3600 recently with the intent of upgrading to a 5600 down the line, but after seeing this I'll just save the money and put it towards a GPU upgrade once stock is available.
Gotta admit I'm surprised by how squashed the CPU scaling becomes when moving down from the RTX 3090 to an RX 6800, which isn't _Actually_ that much of a downgrade. For people running previous generation GPUs there doesn't seem to be much to be gained with Zen 3.
Yeah, still viable to buy a Zen 2 this year :D Zen 3 looks more like an expensive refresh of Zen 2, except in productivity workload maybe but that is QoL rendering time.
You say most gamers today are gaming at 1440p? That may be true for your viewerbase, but I expect the overwhelming majority of people still game at 1080p, so I'm glad that 1080p data still made the slides. Great video to share around.
You haven't comprehended what I'm saying here. I'm saying most people who have bought or are going to buy a $500 US+ GPU are targeting 1440p. NOT MOST PEOPLE BUY A $500 GPU! ruclips.net/user/postUgwHRRSHC-bsMH9a_uR4AaABCQ
Get Ryzen 3600 instead. Help AMD stay competative vs the Intel MONOPOLY! Only reason Intel is lowering prices is because they want to keep AMD in check. Do not forgot that the reason mainstream pc are 6 core is because AMD made it possible with Ryzen 1600! Intel had 6 core gaming pc long before AMD but they kept the price crazy high so the average gamer could not afford one. Only now is when the release cheap 6 core cpu to hurt AMD!
@Tony Moca Dawg, haven't you watched the prices lately? People are selling their severely outdated GPUs for significantly above MSRP and they are getting away with it. So it won't change for at least half a year. Just saying i have bought a RX580 2 years ago for ca. 250$ - 270$ (215€) brand new, the very same card now sells on the internet 2nd hand for 300$ upwards. 2nd hand is not as a bargain as you'd like to believe. edit: found my GPU "new" on Amazon for 369,00€ (+450$), just stay away from the GPU market, this simply is the manifestation of the market's situation.
@@hugevibez No not everywhere. I won't get mine until February I ordered in December it takes ages especially when they delay them. There is not a single place that has them unless I want to pay a lot more for it.
Yep... AMD is doing the same as INTEL did... i always said that would happen if AMD had slightly better CPUs then INTEL lol Wonder what AMD fanboys are saying now, that Intel has better price to performance (at least where i live) then AMD 5000gen.
@@mihapeterca7940 Can't say about the 3700x since I haven't tried it. But you will definitely feel the difference with the 5800x. Specially single core performance and also for video editing like premier pro :)
@@83RhalataShera 1080p is 2K. 1440p is in-between 1080p (2K) and 4K. 2K and 4K are cinematic resolution standards, which is why they’re a little larger than 1920x1080 or 3840x2160 respectively, but they’re basically the same.
@@silentx9709 99.9% of people wont tune a thing beyond xmp. Or even not set xmp. So at stock its not worth paying 2.5x for what essentially is 20-30fps more but only if you have a gpu capable of bottlenecking the cpu and the fps is already well over 100. Youre not gonna see 100 to 130. If it was 60 vs 90 then yes.
@@MUHIL But I think it may be the primary thing most like me care about when building a new rig. I don’t use any of the productivity applications that these channels benchmark. I think most of us are like “Yadayadayada! Show me the FPS differences please!” 😂
It's a shame you didn't mention Microsoft Flight Simulator. That game is CPU bound, and it would have been interesting to see whether the 5600X was worth it over the 3600.
The answer would be no. It's definately not worth upgrading your CPU and potentially motherboard as well in order to achieve marginal improvement on one game.
@@Dj-Mccullough Yes, this is what I heard. I have a 3600 with an RTX 3070 and it's great, but I wonder whether a 5600x would be a good upgrade as the single core performance is important. I play this simulation a lot and - I'm sure you'll agree - a few extra fps is significant in this sim.
@@Dj-Mccullough there is one problem in 3600. It heavily bottlenecks when paired with 3080. The fps difference is huge between 5600x and 3600. But in case if rx 6800, 3600 perform pretty well. Very weird. May be the architecture of nvudia gpu is more power hungry? I don't know.
In 1440p testing, it is important to consider medium/high/custom settings and Not Maxed out. A few settings tweaked can up fps a lot with minimal impact to visual quality and thus be loading the cpu more. By maxing the setting the tests are biased towards lower end cpus.
Steve, I think 16 games is the PERFECT number of titles to include in a RUclips video. I know you sometimes avoid showing the results from all games tested to avoid making the video look like a PowerPoint and boring your audience, but I think I speak for all of us when I say that seeing only 6 games highlighted in a RUclips video really made me disappointed. I come to your channel for relatively in-depth content, so 6, 8, or even 10-12 games seems like it's coming up a bit short. 25-30 is unnecessary, but 16 is perfect! Thanks for all your hard work!
yeah same, was hoping AMD will announce 5600 non X, but they didnt *sad* so i think i will upgrade to 3600 rather wait for another 3-6 months coming from amd FX user here lol
@@riadifizan6808 yeah. The 5000 series has just been disappointing so far. It reminds me of nvidia's 2000 series where the price increase just offsets any performance gain.
@@odizzido i mean, 5000 series are really great, but the availability, price hike & my need case aren't match right now, i just want 5600 Non X, sweet spot like HUB folks said
Probably would be a good idea to add cpu intensive simulations like Flight Simulator or the less known X4 Foundations to properly test cpu performance.
In this video he is not comparing cpu we all know that 5600x is better but he is translating that performance in games and telling is it worth 150 dollar extra then 10400f
I just built a PC for my Daughter In Law (3rd build) using the R5 2600X, Red Devil 590, 16gb of DDR4-3200 @ 14-14-14-34, all on the B450-F Strix, nicely wrapped in a BeQuiet 500DX :)
Hope this helps someone who plays a lot of BR games. Upgrading from a 3600 to 5600x increased average FPS in Warzone about 20-40 frames at 1080p and 1440p.
I'm still going to wait for the 5600 or maybe a 5700/5700X (if they ever come out). Despite its obvious performance potential, the price of the 5600X is still too high to justify. I skipped the 3600 as I didn't yet want to move up (sic) to Win10, but with Zen3 I suspect leaving Win7 behind is even more unavoidable. However, as your video shows, the comparative value proposition with the 3600 is significant compared to the 5600X, though the prices have gone up yet again, currently around 190 UKP for a 3600 in the UK vs. a whopping 310 UKP for the 5600X; that's a huge difference, easily enough to afford a better GPU and thus more than close the performance gap compared to when both are tested with the same GPU. I upgraded my main daily tasks system recently and had considered buying a 3600, but the stock was nill and pricing daft anyway. In the end I opted for a 2700X which was still well priced (20 UKP cheaper than the no-stock 3600) and 16% faster than the 3600 for my key subsidiary task (video transcoding with Handbrake), offering the best overall value for my particular use case: www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/handbrake_on_ryzen.txt The decision balance may be different for gaming, but as you say that depends on the game, resolution, settings, etc. and in many cases it really doesn't make any significant difference, especially at 1440p or higher (and for some games even at 1080p aswell, such as FC5, SotTR, The Division, Witcher3, etc.), so it's not even just the 3600 that plays into the 'buy something lower and spend the difference on the GPU' angle, ie. Zen+ CPUs are (or at least were) also perfectly valid options in some cases offering even larger margins (prices have gone up of course, but it wasn't long ago the Ryzen 2600 was only 125 UKP) and I expect the same argument could be made of various Intel options too, though I've somewhat left Intel behind for the time being due to power consumption, heat, socket longevity, security and other issues. It's so ironic, AMD has moved into the same condundrum tier that Intel used to solidly inhabit a year+ ago, the products are good but the pricing means alternatives often make more sense. Many will revert to absolutist comments about "the fastest" with references to 1080p and CPU-limited titles (the same excuses made to justify overly costly Intel CPUs before 2020), but the majority of gamers don't play like that. I don't need a new GPU for gaming as I already have something decent (1080 Ti, which for 450 UKP two years ago now looks like a smart buy, it's worth more these days) and all modern products are stupid, but I do want a better base platform as the current i7 2700K is certainly holding it back in some cases despite its mild 4.5GHz oc, and of course the power consumption & efficiency of an oc'd SB kinda suck. But 300+ UKP for a replacement CPU though? Ah, no. And even if an affordable 5600 did come out, if possible I'd stick with B450 or at most X470 since 500 chipset pricing is also kinda crazy atm. I built a gaming PC for someone last summer with a 3600 and Asrock B450M Pro4 (using a GTX 1060 6GB) and was very impressed with its performance (for AC Odyssey it actually beat a 6850K + 1080 Ti for 1080p/Medium), one doesn't need a top end board nor a 500 series chipset to get good results. If MSI rolls out solid Zen3 BIOS updates I think I'll just move to the B450 Tomahawk Max I bought for benching which currently has a 2600X. Can't help thinking though that if AMD did launch a 5600 right now, it would cost a lot more than a 3600, like 250+ UKP, which would still leave in place a significant value argument for the 3600 or other options. AMD is doing to itself what Intel did for almost a decade, its existing products make newer & more expensive options look kinda daft (ah the glories of the immortal 2500K. :D)
@@2KOOLURATOOLGaming Various reasons, most not related to gaming (though, for the particular games I play atm, Win10 doesn't offer any performance advantages), eg. I don't like where MS is going with its OS in terms of personal control over how the OS works, privacy, updates, etc. For some games though Win10 definitely helps, especially the Lows. I absolutely do use Win10 for benchmarking though and have compared the two when I've been able.
@@mapesdhs597 eventually you'll have to bite the bullet, maybe get a pure gaming win10 machine i already experienced nvidia driver issues and some games straight up refusing to boot on win7
@@tyre1337 There's never a 'have to' with this sort of thing. ;) I don't much like most newer games anyway so to a large degree that side of any gains from Win10 are kinda lost on me, but for sure if MS switches to a subscription model (as seems likely) then I will definitely not use Win10. I have lots of games I've still never played (CoD WaW for example), older ones unopened (many which don't need any online nonsense), plenty to keep me going for a long time. Heck, I'm still playing FC2, Stalker COP, GTA V and many others. :D So far though no modern game has appealed sufficiently strongly to entice me completely away from Win7. That's not to say there aren't games I've tested which benefit from Win10 performance-wise (I certainly have, especially for dual XEON setups), rather the games I play don't much gain from it, though some games run slower with Win10 such as RotTR and Hitman 2 (the main one that gained was AC Origins). You may notice a certain bias in the games I've mentioned in that few are multiplayer and that's true, I'm not much of a PvP fan, but then this is kinda the point, everyone's own situation is different. The one game I do (or did) play which does have PvP is Elite Dangerous (I have a full HOTAS setup for it), but I've not played it for a while. Anyway, here are my results so far but the testing has been interupted by family matters, I won't be able to get back into it all until April or May: www.sgidepot.co.uk/sgi.html#PC Tbh what I'm waiting for with modern games is a genuine shift in functional immersion which still hasn't happened. CB2077 looks nice enough (though not that much better than existing titles) but scratch the surface and it's still a rather static world, same as most games. They're all too on rails for my liking. People call them open world but they really aren't; a lot of the time one's actions and options are very guided, encouraged by nonsensical OSD markers & suchlike. This can certainly be done well, such as in the original Last of Us, but for games like CB2077 every time I see something relevant it just irks too much. This is a very personal bias though, so ignore me. :D For some background, see: www.sgidepot.co.uk/reflections.txt Actually this is largely why I stopped playing ED, it has become a game that is very wide but incredibly shallow; too much of how the game world works has been hard coded and thus feels very inorganic, very artificial, especially anything related to economics, but also just in general. A particular task becomes split into smaller elements as if somehow that's better, even though the way this works is identical every time (such as splitting up asteroids). Hmm, I could rant about ED for ages. :} It has (had?) great potential, but risks being overtaken by newer upstarts who are doing it better. Certainly for visuals it's falling behind, infact sometimes updates make things look worse (black holes used to look better). Even Star Citizen is starting to get its act together now. Check the Bluedrake42 channel for some interesting examples of where it's all going with such games. The nature of PC tech is such that we focus a lot on visuals and that's certainly something easier to market than functionality, but to an extent visuals have kinda peaked, the difference between a game now and a game 5 years ago isn't really that much, whereas the advances from say 2005 to even 2008 were much larger. It's a visual law of diminishing returns. I just want to see games come out where water is wet and fire is hot because so far it has happened yet.
funny enough, even the intel core i5 10600KF is sold @ 212 € in germany, while the 5600x went up to 344 €. it seems like an intel is giving you more bang for the buck. strange times.
Yes, 10600kf is exactly the cpu I bought before Christmas for 220euro. I would have gone for the 10400f but if you don't get a z490 board you can only use 2600mhz ram and loose quite a bit of performance. And if you get a z490 board you might as well get a k cpu and overclock. Very happy with it! OC very easily to 5ghz. Things are fast and stable.
It definitely depends on what your use case, budget and country are but it often seems to me that Intel offers better value for money here in Australia too. Intel has consistently been reducing prices whereas AMD have increased.
@@jay-uo2bi Indeed, 3600 went up from 159 € to around 220€, sitting @ 189 € atm. AMD midrange CPU pricing is beyond reasonable since 5xxx series release. I was planning to upgrade this year, really wanted to buy an all AMD system this time. Not in a hurry since GPUs are not available anyway, but as of today, i would probably buy a 10600KF. -.-
My HTPC had a i5-750 from 2009 and an RX 580, I just gave it my i7-4770k after I upgraded to a 5800X on my gaming rig. There was less than a 15% boost putting in a 4 year newer CPU. Everyone said I needed to upgrade my i7 if I got a new GPU because it'll be bottlenecked. If you ask me I reckon I could of just chucked a $400 card into my gaming rig and been good for another 2 years or more. Still gonna finnaly get an rx 6000 series today fingers crossed, been waiting ages. loving the new cpu, old one was 7 years old and still going strong in my HTPC.
The results may be boring but this video has been invaluable. Thank you so much for this format, it really puts things in perspective across the resolutions.
I upgraded from r7 1700 and 1070ti to a 3600x and RTX 3070. I'm happy with my decision. No bottlenecks from my CPU, and I'm glad I didn't go for a 5600x. I could have spent 200$ for no difference in performance from buying a 5600x. I also bought the 3070 early after release, and I'm glad I did because it gave me a year to enjoy it before selling it to upgrade for the 4000 series.
@@pupper42 VR performance is mostly higher resolution (super sampling) and therefore comparable to 4K results and mostly GPU limited. (outside of areas with lots and lots of assets)
I agree. I don't play any of the Games used in these benchmarks, not dissing Steves hard work but I wouldl ike to see FS2020 PubG FS2020 VR Battlefiled 1 Black Ops COLD war DX11! Not DX12 with the terrible DLSS that crashes the Game. I would like to see 1440p mixed settings in FS2020 PubG Cold War Battlefield 1. Its great he added the 3950x since its the chip I own, I also own a 3600x. I would also like to see multiple GPU's tested like the 3090 6900xt 6800xt 3070. I really think he needs to look at what's actually being played on Steam and go from there because PubG is right up there. I guess he has to concentrate on what most of his viewers want to see and that is fine, just wish I could see performance in Games I actually play. No disrespect Steve and Tim, love ya work guys.
@@hardcorehardware361 you could always do a video of what performance you are getting in those games on your system.......at least give others a rough idea of what to expect.
Did I manage to buy in the sweet spot again haha. My last system was a 2600k and it served me very well over the years. Now I have the 3600 and I don’t see a reason to upgrade apart from if I decide to do productivity tasks.
Very nice video. It would have been cool to include older processors in the comparison. E.g. 7700k. I would assume, that people looking for an upgrade in video cards would be interested how their CPUs fare against the newer ones.
You need to add CPU demanding games and metrics other than FPS to your comparisons. Some people play football manager and care about how many leagues they can add or how long it will take the CPU to process one month for example. Or how long AI turn will take in Civilizations 6 or other turn based stragety games.
I was lucky to get a 5600x to swap out my 3600 for 1440P gaming. You might be thinking: "But dude, didn't you just watch the video? Go return the thing it's not worth it!" My 3600 is crazy low roll silicon. Consistently get Event Viewer telling me a core has failed, the CPU can not OC even juiced on 1.45v to 4.2 (it can only boost to 4.192) with temps under control (unless it spikes so hard it crashes but under normal testing conditions it stays within 80c). I've tried like, a dozen or two undervolting conditions that just tank the performance hard. I'm ready to get rid of the thing and if your 3600 is the same, you should too if you could. I also wanted to get the "end of life" for my x570 most likely, and the 5600x is probably going to be that. Coupled with possibly getting access to SAM if I get a 6800xt down the road, I'm happy to know this will be it until I buy a whole new rig at one time.
When building a new gaming PC "on a budget" for 1080p / 1440p where an RTX 3060 Ti is already purchased, would you go with a 3600 or 5600X CPU? Here in Germany, we're talking about a 150 EUR price difference between the two (200 EUR vs 350).
For a new build, I still think there is value of going for a stronger CPU for future proofing. In 2-3 years when you want to upgrade your graphics card, the 3600 might very well bottleneck a lot more than the 5600x.
Very true! I originally built my pc with a 3600x since I paired it with a 2060 at first. But I upgraded to a 3080 recently and while the 3600x still gives very playable frame rates at 1440p, there is still some performance left on the table with the 3 year old cpu. I will pop in a 5700x in soon and let that cpu ride me out for a few years until I get the urge to upgrade to AM5 or intel. Whichever will give me best price to performance in the future
@@Oz_Gnarly_One By that logic, why test any games? This isn’t about cores, it’s about the heavy cpu usage in MSFS 2020 which would make it a great candidate for this kind of article.
My 8700K is still very strong for gaming. I am not surprised by these test results, but I am very grateful that you did these test as they provide very practical information.
after this test am really curious about something like 3060TI with R5 2600 compared to newer processor, and btw the data in this video is more exciting than anything that is not realistic like 1080p 3090 combo. we need more videos like this.
Great work Steve! It would be interesting to see the SAM numbers in here as well. I think for some games it may make for a compelling upgrade over the 3600 if you have an rx 6800.
so happy with my 3600XT purchase for 190 bucks in dec. 2020. I was about to wait for the 5600 and pay like twice the price. and for what at the end? for nothing, gaming related at least.
Worth noting as well, if you look only at the zen3 lineup (so same architecture), whilst you will see very little difference in games released today which typically use up to 6c12t, if you plan to keep your PC for a long time then games are likely to start taking advantage of the extra CPU capability that we see in productivity benchmarks. We saw this with Intel Sandybridge. The i5 2500k 4c4t was that generation's 5600x, and the i7 2600k 4c8t was deemed a complete waste of money for gaming as benchmarks showed no appreciable improvement. Fast forward a few years and the i7 with its 4 extra threads blew the i5 out of the water in almost all new titles, offering an extra 30-50% FPS in many cases. People are making those exact same arguments today against the higher end CPUs. So how often you intend to upgrade your system is a huge factor in determining which CPU to buy. You showed in your review that Death Stranding uses more than 6 cores. What was the utilisation of those cores on the i9 10900k compared with the 5600x out of interest? Were all cores at 100% on both CPUs?
1:53 really dude? most gamers play in 1440p? 1080p is by FAR the most used resolution for gamers, what youi said its simply not true I mean cmon, it takes 2 seconds to google it, my question is why would u go out of your way to remark something that is just not true?
Just managed to snatch a 5600x for the pc I'm building for my brother. It's replacing a 2500k. He's also getting a 3060ti to replace his gtx 460. Needless to say, he'll feel a difference.
@Dindu Price difference isn't that big here due to shortages of the 3600. Anyway he'll keep that PC for years and years so the compute performance difference will eventually come in handy.
I'm not sure how big the audience is for that thou. Maybe something like COD:Warzone which kind of treads both worlds of competitive esports and single player game.
@@francis771 I'm sure there's a huge audience interested in titles like valorant, fortnite, csgo, Apex legends etc. to see if zen3 is worth the upgrade.
@@condorado theres definitely an audience for that. But based on polls they have posted in the past this channels fanbase isnt made up of many of those people
We definitely need an Esport section of cpu benchmarks. There were CPUs make a real difference because everybody play at 1080p and are cpu bottlenecked.. moreover , they tend to stream as well so it would really be intresting to cover games like cs valorant apex fortnite cod r6 in low and high 1080p graphics
Just before everything went bananas right after Ryzen 3 release; I rebuilt 2 PCs using Ryzen 3700 and 3700X at less than Ryzen 5600 @ suggested retail prices. I used new mobo/ram/cpu. While older, they aren't going to be missing the latest cpu. Daughter and SIL are quite happy with their rebuilds. Me; I'm stuck with Intel 8700K @4.8Ghz and Nvidia 1060. I wanted a newer gpu, but no way in Hell for current prices. The kids get the new stuff and I plod along! Thanks for your efforts, I feel the second generation cpu and faster RAM was a good choice now. :)
Being a VR gamer that also records video/streaming, I'd love to see a video on how much impact that has 8 vs 6 cores. I have a lot of stuff running in the background, should I upgrade my 3600 to a 3700 or 5800?
I suppose if you’re using CPU encoding then, but I think a lot of people will use nvenc if they have a Turing or newer Geforce card which means there will be basically no difference. If you do a lot of multitasking, more cores can only help. If you’re doing video work, either the 3700X or 5600X or 5800X will render faster than the 3600, but it might not be worth it for you to spend another $300-$450 for a new CPU. Honestly, I’d say wait until you really notice something isn’t working right, and then in a year or so, get a 5900X when it goes on sale to make sure you have plenty of fast cores. It’ll help in keeping high refresh rates, won’t get bogged down due to lack of cores/threads, and be a substantial upgrade. The 5800X is hard to justify when for only $100 more, you get 50% more cores.
Recently Upgraded my CPU from a 2400g to a 3600. I plan to stream soon cause doing it on my old build was next to impossible due to frametime issues when the cpu briefly hits 100. No problems so far on my 3600 and Project Wingman VR (low). As for NVENC, If you have a beefy RTX GPU, you should be fine streaming on that. Though I personally avoid it since i only have a 1660s and a Quest2 (Link or ALVR also uses NVENC so thats an additional encoding stream) 3700 is a safer choice imo. (given that zen3 inflated prices rn)
I was planning on upgrading from my 3600 to a 5600x a few months back, but now I'm glad they were all sold out. Especially since I like to game at as high a resolution as possible. It's easy to get swept up with new products without thinking it through properly. Pretty sure if I had bought one I'd be making excuses for myself to justify buying it, and this video wouldn't be nearly as satisfying.
As my son computer died without reason I bought 10400f on z490 gigabyte gaming x , waiting for delivery, he plays at 1440p what a great decision I made!Thank for the video!
Asus x570 Dark Hero 32GB 4000 cl 16. with R7 5800X. has been running soooo smooth. though it wasnt quite the step up from my previous compared to yours. I really hope you are loving it =)
Got my 3600 on release to replace a 1700, pretty good at 1440p 144hz. Maybe only about 10% under maxing that setting. By the time stock comes back and the 6000s are out I’m sure it will be more viable for me to upgrade
impressive performance for the i5 10400f here in europe it cost only 140 euro while r5 3600 210 euro and r5 5600x 390 euro too bad for intel that continues to fuck up by limiting ram speed on lower end mobo...... at this point i think intel it's just triyng to kill itlself, even lowest amd chipset allows for ram oc.. cmon intel...
The result of extremely ancient mindsets. Overclocking was reserved for the highest end motherboards for a long time simply due to the required quality of the components resulting in high prices. But technology has progressed so far that even the cheapest mobo components could OC, and now intel simply artificially limit their boards for the money, and well, because they never had external pressure to normalise such things.
@@crazeddutchman4957 I mean, even with limited speed performance is comparable to 3600 at the very least, so it's not like they are losing anything by doing it. Right now Intel seems to be the best value in the budget segment.
Their 11th series sockets (500 series, and as rumors) are going to have an unlocked motherboard. However, Intel being Intel, I am very skeptical and suspicious on their move. There will be and HAS to be a catch. It's not a "good news", more like "not bad news." Intel will have to play with the pricing for people to be swayed from AMD, not to mention, that their pathetic excuse of stock coolers that requires additional purchase of CPU cooler.
@@miniweeddeerz1820 Decent Z490 boards are really expensive though. At that point might as well get 3600 instead and a good B550 or B450 board, and then replace 3600 with 5600x when prices go down. But realistically, budget Intel boards are still okay, you don't need to oc 10400f to get decent performance, and you can save money on ram as well.
Steve you nailed what I already knew but with NO supply of GPU's where I'm at here in Canada and infrequent blips of Ryzen3's (usually 5800X) and itching to do some sort of upgrading, this just reinforces my resolve to wait for Ryzen 3 to come down in price. Just to be clear I have a R5-3600 which I've been very lucky to have 4.5GHz all core @ 1.29v. It was purchased in July 2020 after 3600XT release so it might have just slipped thru the binning process. It might clock higher but I'm happy with it here as temps are very reasonable 50's C. Finished ripping my Blu-Ray & DVD collection to my Server over a year ago so there's little need for more cores atm not to mention 5800X here costs almost as much as a 3900X when they're available. I'm definitely GPU bound after upgrading to UW1440p (also in July) but with nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing better than my OC'd 1070Ti in stock I just gotta tuff it out. Resolution scaling here I come ...
First off I really was wanting to know this, and second I wanted to come back and get some of your older videos more views, because of what RUclips did. Thanks for the good content
@@velzing22 intel 2500K (when OC) was capable of playing games far ahead of its time. The Ryzen 5 3600 can possibly be a good CPU for years and years to come for games as well.
1:50 you do know that the majority of gamers is still at 1080p , right? did you look at the steam hardware survey? 1440p is not the standard resolution , at least not yet
well the 3090, its surprisigly the cheapest card here, (oh dont think its cheap, its just at msrp.. and rarely available) but the rest just r out of stock or a 3070 for 2k$ so. nope
I am not entirely sure why the 36/39 ryzen CPUs were shown, would it not be a better argument to show the 1600/2600 to see what the differences are between those to the 5600 since that, I assume, would make for a far better case of weather those folks should upgrade or not (given it would make far more sense for people with those to upgrade rather than someone with a 3600)? I do not want to start a whole heated discussion or the like, I just thought it was already pretty evident that there was little (general) difference between the 36/56 CPUs and watched primarily out of curiosity for any outliers.
IMO the most important factor to gaming quality has been variable refresh rate monitors. Some of the games I am have huge variances in frame rate and having G Sync has mitigated the bulk of former annoyances.
The MIA 10600k currently at $230 in USA's Microcenters and $270 on Newegg would have been a nice addition to that test, price-performance wise at 1080p:)
this editorial direction is pretty lit ngl
I'd like to point out that Gamers, POTUS, and the United Nations would like to see it changed though.
@@seppomuppit As well as the Galactic Federation, and the Empire.
I see what you did there.
@@josebr0 10400F is 6 cores, not 4
@@TollTollerson Yep, somehow I thought that intel was still doing those 4 core i5's
This video is spot on what a lot of people want to know
Who cares about these tests? The price of all CPUs is higher we have ever seen before. Now is not the time to build a new PC
@@polymorph5067 budget gaming crap never coming back
Exactly
@@polymorph5067 They are good tests for people to have access to, besides it's not just data for people that are looking to build a new PC but even for people like me who have a 3700X and recently upgraded to a 6800 XT and are trying to determine if upgrading cpu is worth it.
Speaking of which there's been CPU drops if you check the stock streams. I haven't been checking them much since getting a GPU last month but do from time to time and Zen 3's pop up regularly on Amazon, Newegg and Micro Center regularly gets stock of Zen2, 3 and Intel 10 series.
I understand the frustration but it doesn't mean that RUclipsr's should stop doing what they do because stock is hard to come by in my opinion.
It’s good if you looking at right now, but if you looking let’s say 1-2 years in the future then games will use 8 cores and your 6 core might need upgrading. I would prefer to save just a bit more money get an 8 core CPU because it’s hard to change your CPU because you more or less need to rebuild your whole PC
looking at my R5 2600
"Shush, little prince. You're still my war machine."
My 2600 isn't worried because I wouldn't have the money to change it anyways xD
Man I litterly just replaced my 2600 for a 5600x. She was first CPU and she is still worthy. I was gonna send the 2600 back as the 5600 and say it was faulty but I couldn’t bring myself to do it
My 2600 is still going strong. Definitely an upgrade from my i7 860...
Oh and it can EASILY be overclocked to 4ghz.
@@jameshau7408 lmao
@@odogg6899 ROFLcopter
Imagine him testing all those settings with different hardware where at the end so much gaming but no actual difference. thank you for all this work done
Mucho es trabajo reciclado.
“Or, you could invest that money on the GPU front.”
In a normal, sane world, that’s solid advice. In the real world, good luck buying any new GPU beefier than the upcoming GT 1010... :)
Taking the mickey aside, another solid bit of work. Just because the results are boring, doesn’t mean they’re not significant.
In real world, GPU doesn't exist anymore. What we have now are MPU (Mining Processing Unit) lol. RTX3090 is the best MPU now. It cost the same as my sport car.
I'm seriously tempted to sell my current pc's. Especially when I can get 3x what I paid, just for a gpu.
Your R5 3600 is safe to keep boys! You couldn't replace it even if you wanted to!
lmao thats true, at first i want to upgrade my 3600 to 5600x after find the local price here is almost double the 3600, i decide to upgrade my monitor instead
I'm a bad boy - I've got an R5 3600x with an MSI X570 Carbon Pro Wi-fi. Both of which I bought before discovering this channel...
I was going from a 3600X and planned to go 5900X. but, couldnt get any...so i went 5800X instead as it was available. still waiting on a GPU though. So the 2080Ti will have to hang on a while longer it seems
@WhyAlways upgrade that pos
@@chriswright8074 I think he wants to but stock is a little scarce for AMD parts...
These timestamps are much much appreciated!
Recently I switched from 10 years old 2-core Intel Core i3 370M(+Intel HD Graphics) to 12-core Ryzen 9 3900x (+RTX 3070) and I feel like I am flying :D :D :D
What?! That is an insane jump! Enjoy your awesome rig :)
One hell of an upgrade
Enjoy :)
Hell yeah! Enjoy it dude
Woah that is an insane upgrade, must feel amazing
3600 really was a amazing deal when it came out for $199
@@idkwhatname3133 honestly the 9400f wasn't half bad either considering it's cost
@@idkwhatname3133 so i shud go with the intel?
@@tazboy1934 absolutely, AMD Ryzens are over hype now over price
@@idkwhatname3133 I bought it in 2019 for 190€, it was a great deal ! in 2022 I would go your way.
@@ariellopezdumapias1291 5600 18$ cheaper than 12400
The 5600x is a great CPU, but a 33% price increase for 7% to 10% performance increase on average over the 3600. This is an Intel move from AMD. I will stick with the 3600 thank you and save over $100.
where i live 5600x cost 190% 3600x price hhhh
240 for 3600x
and 420 for 5600x
It's the same with Intel... and check the prices on Amazon, Intel's Rocket Lake isn't so much cheaper than AMD. Actual prices are pretty much the same. Not that much change in performances for both of their new CPUs gens, besides on enthusiast GPUs maybe but not worth it.
Do not forget, that 33% increase in price on the CPU is more like a 5-10% increase in price over the entire system
I just ordered a 5600x from Amazon for $272 USD. The 3600 costs $298. I'm going to swap out my Ryzen 7 2700x for this 5600x.
@@mowcowbell I never listen to recommendations because they're always a snapshot it time. For a recommendation to have any weight, there has to be a lot of if-then statements thrown into the mix.
I use 8 core CPUs for different work. A few weeks ago I bought a 5800X for $350 USD. I also bought one at launch for $450, but it came with Far Cry 6, which is a $60 USD title, so I could fairly say I paid $390 for that CPU.
One thing I know about AMD is that MSRP is only a number that represents the RELEASE price. Once a product has been on the market for a while and the stores have plenty in stock, they discount their prices, and that's what I always wait for, instead of throwing out spiteful comments. I'm always quite happy with the purchases I make, and sometimes all that's required is a little patience.
Micro Center has the 5600X for $260 USD, and they have the 5600G for $210. I guess I should yell and scream about the evil AMD. Of course someone can always say they're responding to negative publicity, and I would just say they're responding to the market. The Intel 9900K launched at about $500 USD. I don't think it ever dropped below $470 USD until after 10th gen had been on the market for a while. I paid $350 for a FAR superior 5800X which uses about half the power and is a bit better at gaming and far better at other tasks I run.
In this video Steve made 2 false assumptions. One is, people don't pair a high quality GPU was 6 core CPUs. Well, if a 6 core CPU is good enough for almost all games, then why not?????????? That seems like the SMARTEST thing to do. Save money on the CPU and buy a better GPU. The other is people aren't gaming at 1080p with a high quality GPU. Both statements are generalizations and therefore not fact. There are plenty of people who are going to buy something like a 6800 XT to pair with something like a 5600X or in my case a 5800X AND game on a 1080p monitor. But I do have a new 2K monitor to go with that 6800 XT. I bought the 6800 XT FOR 2K gaming. If I had anything less I'd be gaming on my 1080p monitor, like I was doing with my GTX 1080.
So basically keep my 3600 and get a 1440p monitor instead of the 5600x
yep. Go for ultrawide if you can
thats what i've done lol
Or neither, really.
@@broklond Only if you have an expensive graphic card. Worth pointing out that the tests were made with Radeon 6800, which costs like 800 USD right now in most countries, if it's even in stock. Without at least 3060 Ti level graphic card, there is little point in 1440p monitor.
Gonna do the same man. In my country 3600 costs half of 5600x somehow xD
would be nice to have 2600 there too, just to compare how the platform grow.
Think of it this way... the r5 3600 is roughly 15-20% "better" than the 2600
Honestly a 1600AF would be more relevant. Both would be nice though!
I can confirm the 2600 with rx390 it bad on star citizen with streaming vs 3600 with 1660 super star citizen with streaming. Well it almost equal yet it struggles even with extra with the exact core usage so you just may need a higher graphic card or the 3600.
Yes me & friends were testing it on stream to see for stability to balance out the pre loading issue on the 2600 with rx390, while the 3600 with 1660 super had less.
Our specs are almost equal and we found on a 5950x with 3090 still had stability issues, but used 17 gigs ram compared to 20 gigs of ram on ours.
Long but information while all this was done live streaming.
@@seppomuppit more relevant how? The 2600 is available everywhere unlike the 1600 AF
Isn't 2600/1600AF the same chip? :)
Welcome back to Harvard unboxed.
Thats not what i subbed for. Im here only for harbour unboxed.
@@renerant i’m afraid that you are both mistook the channel, good sir. This channel is Hardcore Unboxed.
@@dariusdoan3294, I am afraid you are wrong. This channel is mustache unboxed.
I just want to know if it's possible to buy one of those 'hardware on box' tshirts I saw earlier..
Literally just a hammer sitting on a cardboard box, I love it
@@jeffthegamerboy3476 I'm sorry to tell you but you are wrong, this Channel is Cardboard Unboxed
This goes to show you how amazing the r5 3600 truly was and still is! I've thought about upgrading now that games like Starfield exist but I still don't know if it's even worth it cuz the 3600 is just such a powerhouse for a 6 core
My brain: Upgrade your 3700x to a 5900x
Steve: Don’t do it
My brain: But it’s faster
Steve: Not in gaming above 1080p. Not one bit. Money down the drain.
My brain: but SHINY
Yes but just wait if you can you you can get the shiny cpu at mich cheaper
Man of culture
Your brain = Darth Sith Kermit
SHINY!
Why upgrade such a fast cpu? I am still a 3570k and plan to be for another year
@@illavitar Oh there's no reason. I mean a 5900x would be much faster in certain applications but none that I use very much.
My r5 3600 :
I'm still worthy
I'm now really happy that I decided to order a 3600 last week to replace my 1600, as a 5600x would really have been no better and would have been twice the price as i would have needed a new motherboard too.
still going to upgrade it to a 5600x soon tho :)
R5 3600 is a myth on my country XD but R5 3500 is, below only by 3% still worth too hahaha
3700x!
3950x overclocked to 4.3Ghz 😋...
Looks like 10400f is the most enticing for me. The low price (in my country) and availability makes it looks the best out of the three.
Same in my country
yes in mine too and the 3600 is 70$ more
same here ..10400f is sooo much cheaper than ryzen 3600 in my country
@Tony Moca there's no need of 3600mhz
Upgraded from my Fx 8350 to a 3600 recently and I am more than happy :D
I just upgraded a streaming pc from a FX 8350 to a 5800X and the difference has been absurd. I am amazed how well the 8350 kept up though, the thing was trucking for 7 years of gaming for me
@@MrOfTheSea Yeah it played all the games I wanted to play with a reasonable framrate rate but in a lot of games lately it reached 90-98% utilization and lots of stuttering. And for emulation it is not good because the single core performance is just not good.
congratz feels good ain't it? no more toaster in a PC and i also just recently upgraded from a Fx 6350 to a 10500 our frame rate suffering is finally gone at last.
@@danishbutter1847 Oh yes it feels amazing :D. That is also a very big Upgrade you did have fun with it. Now the Problem is not the cpu anymore but the gpu
Upgraded from my FX 8300 to a 3500X and I am also happy :D
Good info. Upgraded from a 6600K to a 3600 recently with the intent of upgrading to a 5600 down the line, but after seeing this I'll just save the money and put it towards a GPU upgrade once stock is available.
Gotta admit I'm surprised by how squashed the CPU scaling becomes when moving down from the RTX 3090 to an RX 6800, which isn't _Actually_ that much of a downgrade. For people running previous generation GPUs there doesn't seem to be much to be gained with Zen 3.
Yeah, still viable to buy a Zen 2 this year :D Zen 3 looks more like an expensive refresh of Zen 2, except in productivity workload maybe but that is QoL rendering time.
You say most gamers today are gaming at 1440p? That may be true for your viewerbase, but I expect the overwhelming majority of people still game at 1080p, so I'm glad that 1080p data still made the slides.
Great video to share around.
Most people spending over $500 US on a GPU ;)
@@Hardwareunboxed Fair enough. You did briefly touch on that at 1:05. Cheers.
@@benjaminoechsli1941 out of the top 20 GPUs on steam only 5 are over $500, so he's wrong here
You haven't comprehended what I'm saying here. I'm saying most people who have bought or are going to buy a $500 US+ GPU are targeting 1440p. NOT MOST PEOPLE BUY A $500 GPU! ruclips.net/user/postUgwHRRSHC-bsMH9a_uR4AaABCQ
@@Hardwareunboxed in that case i misunderstood your reply to benjamin, my bad
i agree that $500 gpus are for 1440p
In my country there's a $200 price difference. So I'm not even gonna argue
10400f is 200$ and the 3600x is 340$ in my country
Imma settle for a 3600 for now. LOL fuck that stupid pricing of 5600x
Got 5600x before the price hike, so am happy.
@Mr Anderson good for you bro, but I originally wanted the non x version, but amd hasn't annohnced one as of the moment.
@Mr Anderson yep. I dont see it going down soon.
You guys are literally reading my mind! Was just about to search for a comparison video... and a quick inbox refresh was all it took.
Two years later and I'm still rocking on with my Ryzen 5 3600 and 1080ti 🙌
10400f is available at 180EUR in my country. Ryzen 5600x is like 400. Sorry amd, know you were my first choice.
Get Ryzen 3600 instead. Help AMD stay competative vs the Intel MONOPOLY! Only reason Intel is lowering prices is because they want to keep AMD in check. Do not forgot that the reason mainstream pc are 6 core is because AMD made it possible with Ryzen 1600! Intel had 6 core gaming pc long before AMD but they kept the price crazy high so the average gamer could not afford one. Only now is when the release cheap 6 core cpu to hurt AMD!
3600x ~ 120.00 on ebay, sorry 10400f, your time has passed
@@aceous99 amd doesn't need you help, they are producing best x86 CPU's possible in 2021...
I’d like to invest the money I saved by getting a 3600 on a GPU but I can’t!
Maybe wait until the next gen or perhaps a mid gen refresh. Depends on demand I guess.
Gpu Is costly this year, you wait
@Tony Moca Dawg, haven't you watched the prices lately? People are selling their severely outdated GPUs for significantly above MSRP and they are getting away with it. So it won't change for at least half a year. Just saying i have bought a RX580 2 years ago for ca. 250$ - 270$ (215€) brand new, the very same card now sells on the internet 2nd hand for 300$ upwards. 2nd hand is not as a bargain as you'd like to believe.
edit: found my GPU "new" on Amazon for 369,00€ (+450$), just stay away from the GPU market, this simply is the manifestation of the market's situation.
@@umelzulueta3066 yeah, I bought a 6900xt on stockx. I decided to finance it since it was three hundred dollars above MSRP.
got 3600x (used 120.00) for cheaper than 3600 (used 150.00
Last time I was this early, Zen 3 CPU's were in stock
5600X is in stock in EU at least, since like yesterday lol
@@hugevibez No not everywhere. I won't get mine until February I ordered in December it takes ages especially when they delay them. There is not a single place that has them unless I want to pay a lot more for it.
@@hugevibez They're selling like hotcakes in Australia, all major online stores don't have any stock ATM
@@hugevibez EU is not just 1 country. Here in my country is available but it cost 400+ , no way I'm paying that
Lol there's a lot of them in stock where I'm from, maybe it's cos with the price increase it's not an intriguing buy.
In my country: Hungary, Europe
- 10400F: 180 USD
- 3600: 260 USD
- 5600X: 400 USD LOL
similar story in here
3600 - £180 in the UK
Similar in india
In my country:
-3600 and 10400: $220
-5600x: $400
-3700x: $350
-10700k: $400
Yep... AMD is doing the same as INTEL did... i always said that would happen if AMD had slightly better CPUs then INTEL lol
Wonder what AMD fanboys are saying now, that Intel has better price to performance (at least where i live) then AMD 5000gen.
I upgraded from a 2600 to 5800x and it is very noticeable :) Very happy with the purchase!
Really?
I have 2600 but im wondering with what to replace it with .. 3700x or 5800x
@@mihapeterca7940 Can't say about the 3700x since I haven't tried it. But you will definitely feel the difference with the 5800x. Specially single core performance and also for video editing like premier pro :)
I just upgraded from ryzen 5 1600 to 5600x+mainboard. Sure could've went with the 3600 but I couldn't be happier the leap is HUGE!
01:48 Interestingly, over 82% of gamers are still playing at a resolution of 1080p (66,77%) or lower.
(According to the steam hardware survey)
Yeah well most gamers play on laptops with iGPUs.
Most gamers who consider the 10900K either play on greater than 1080p or greater than 60fps soo...
also imo 1080p 144hz+ is much better than 2K or 4K at 60fps
@@83RhalataShera 1080p is 2K. 1440p is in-between 1080p (2K) and 4K. 2K and 4K are cinematic resolution standards, which is why they’re a little larger than 1920x1080 or 3840x2160 respectively, but they’re basically the same.
Funny thing is that the 5600x costs twice as much as a 3600 and 2.5x more than the 10400f LMFAO
This is stock vs stock 3200mhz configs. The 5600x single core speed is why it costs a bit more. 5600 heavily tuned by gamer nexus shows why.
5600x only has gen4 to back it up that's about it :/
@@silentx9709 99.9% of people wont tune a thing beyond xmp. Or even not set xmp. So at stock its not worth paying 2.5x for what essentially is 20-30fps more but only if you have a gpu capable of bottlenecking the cpu and the fps is already well over 100. Youre not gonna see 100 to 130. If it was 60 vs 90 then yes.
gaming is NOT the ONLY reason they make CPUs for
@@MUHIL But I think it may be the primary thing most like me care about when building a new rig. I don’t use any of the productivity applications that these channels benchmark. I think most of us are like “Yadayadayada! Show me the FPS differences please!” 😂
It's a shame you didn't mention Microsoft Flight Simulator. That game is CPU bound, and it would have been interesting to see whether the 5600X was worth it over the 3600.
The answer would be no. It's definately not worth upgrading your CPU and potentially motherboard as well in order to achieve marginal improvement on one game.
Zen 3 seriously speeds up msfs if you have a good gpu. Went from 45 fps to almost 60 on 2080 super. Better gpu would be nice.. cant find them though.
@@Dj-Mccullough Yes, this is what I heard. I have a 3600 with an RTX 3070 and it's great, but I wonder whether a 5600x would be a good upgrade as the single core performance is important. I play this simulation a lot and - I'm sure you'll agree - a few extra fps is significant in this sim.
Check Jarrod’s video for the Ryzen 5600X vs 3700X. The 5600X gives you 45% better FPS at 1080P with Flight Simulator.
@@Dj-Mccullough there is one problem in 3600. It heavily bottlenecks when paired with 3080. The fps difference is huge between 5600x and 3600.
But in case if rx 6800, 3600 perform pretty well. Very weird. May be the architecture of nvudia gpu is more power hungry? I don't know.
In 1440p testing, it is important to consider medium/high/custom settings and Not Maxed out. A few settings tweaked can up fps a lot with minimal impact to visual quality and thus be loading the cpu more. By maxing the setting the tests are biased towards lower end cpus.
Steve, I think 16 games is the PERFECT number of titles to include in a RUclips video. I know you sometimes avoid showing the results from all games tested to avoid making the video look like a PowerPoint and boring your audience, but I think I speak for all of us when I say that seeing only 6 games highlighted in a RUclips video really made me disappointed. I come to your channel for relatively in-depth content, so 6, 8, or even 10-12 games seems like it's coming up a bit short. 25-30 is unnecessary, but 16 is perfect! Thanks for all your hard work!
The video I’ve been waiting for!
same!
Not the video we wanted, but the video we deserved.
yeah same, was hoping AMD will announce 5600 non X, but they didnt *sad*
so i think i will upgrade to 3600 rather wait for another 3-6 months
coming from amd FX user here lol
@@riadifizan6808 yeah. The 5000 series has just been disappointing so far. It reminds me of nvidia's 2000 series where the price increase just offsets any performance gain.
@@odizzido i mean, 5000 series are really great, but the availability, price hike & my need case aren't match right now, i just want 5600 Non X, sweet spot like HUB folks said
Probably would be a good idea to add cpu intensive simulations like Flight Simulator or the less known X4 Foundations to properly test cpu performance.
In this video he is not comparing cpu we all know that 5600x is better but he is translating that performance in games and telling is it worth 150 dollar extra then 10400f
Brilliant editorial, just what I was looking for.
I just built a PC for my Daughter In Law (3rd build) using the R5 2600X, Red Devil 590, 16gb of DDR4-3200 @ 14-14-14-34, all on the B450-F Strix, nicely wrapped in a BeQuiet 500DX :)
Hope this helps someone who plays a lot of BR games. Upgrading from a 3600 to 5600x increased average FPS in Warzone about 20-40 frames at 1080p and 1440p.
I'm still going to wait for the 5600 or maybe a 5700/5700X (if they ever come out). Despite its obvious performance potential, the price of the 5600X is still too high to justify. I skipped the 3600 as I didn't yet want to move up (sic) to Win10, but with Zen3 I suspect leaving Win7 behind is even more unavoidable. However, as your video shows, the comparative value proposition with the 3600 is significant compared to the 5600X, though the prices have gone up yet again, currently around 190 UKP for a 3600 in the UK vs. a whopping 310 UKP for the 5600X; that's a huge difference, easily enough to afford a better GPU and thus more than close the performance gap compared to when both are tested with the same GPU.
I upgraded my main daily tasks system recently and had considered buying a 3600, but the stock was nill and pricing daft anyway. In the end I opted for a 2700X which was still well priced (20 UKP cheaper than the no-stock 3600) and 16% faster than the 3600 for my key subsidiary task (video transcoding with Handbrake), offering the best overall value for my particular use case:
www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/handbrake_on_ryzen.txt
The decision balance may be different for gaming, but as you say that depends on the game, resolution, settings, etc. and in many cases it really doesn't make any significant difference, especially at 1440p or higher (and for some games even at 1080p aswell, such as FC5, SotTR, The Division, Witcher3, etc.), so it's not even just the 3600 that plays into the 'buy something lower and spend the difference on the GPU' angle, ie. Zen+ CPUs are (or at least were) also perfectly valid options in some cases offering even larger margins (prices have gone up of course, but it wasn't long ago the Ryzen 2600 was only 125 UKP) and I expect the same argument could be made of various Intel options too, though I've somewhat left Intel behind for the time being due to power consumption, heat, socket longevity, security and other issues.
It's so ironic, AMD has moved into the same condundrum tier that Intel used to solidly inhabit a year+ ago, the products are good but the pricing means alternatives often make more sense. Many will revert to absolutist comments about "the fastest" with references to 1080p and CPU-limited titles (the same excuses made to justify overly costly Intel CPUs before 2020), but the majority of gamers don't play like that.
I don't need a new GPU for gaming as I already have something decent (1080 Ti, which for 450 UKP two years ago now looks like a smart buy, it's worth more these days) and all modern products are stupid, but I do want a better base platform as the current i7 2700K is certainly holding it back in some cases despite its mild 4.5GHz oc, and of course the power consumption & efficiency of an oc'd SB kinda suck. But 300+ UKP for a replacement CPU though? Ah, no. And even if an affordable 5600 did come out, if possible I'd stick with B450 or at most X470 since 500 chipset pricing is also kinda crazy atm. I built a gaming PC for someone last summer with a 3600 and Asrock B450M Pro4 (using a GTX 1060 6GB) and was very impressed with its performance (for AC Odyssey it actually beat a 6850K + 1080 Ti for 1080p/Medium), one doesn't need a top end board nor a 500 series chipset to get good results. If MSI rolls out solid Zen3 BIOS updates I think I'll just move to the B450 Tomahawk Max I bought for benching which currently has a 2600X.
Can't help thinking though that if AMD did launch a 5600 right now, it would cost a lot more than a 3600, like 250+ UKP, which would still leave in place a significant value argument for the 3600 or other options. AMD is doing to itself what Intel did for almost a decade, its existing products make newer & more expensive options look kinda daft (ah the glories of the immortal 2500K. :D)
0 _ 0 Why didn't you want to move to Win10?
I'm just waiting for a 3060...
@@2KOOLURATOOLGaming Various reasons, most not related to gaming (though, for the particular games I play atm, Win10 doesn't offer any performance advantages), eg. I don't like where MS is going with its OS in terms of personal control over how the OS works, privacy, updates, etc. For some games though Win10 definitely helps, especially the Lows. I absolutely do use Win10 for benchmarking though and have compared the two when I've been able.
@@mapesdhs597 Oh Ok, you're just missing out on a lot of features though right? Like programs that only run on windows?
@@mapesdhs597 eventually you'll have to bite the bullet, maybe get a pure gaming win10 machine
i already experienced nvidia driver issues and some games straight up refusing to boot on win7
@@tyre1337 There's never a 'have to' with this sort of thing. ;) I don't much like most newer games anyway so to a large degree that side of any gains from Win10 are kinda lost on me, but for sure if MS switches to a subscription model (as seems likely) then I will definitely not use Win10. I have lots of games I've still never played (CoD WaW for example), older ones unopened (many which don't need any online nonsense), plenty to keep me going for a long time. Heck, I'm still playing FC2, Stalker COP, GTA V and many others. :D So far though no modern game has appealed sufficiently strongly to entice me completely away from Win7.
That's not to say there aren't games I've tested which benefit from Win10 performance-wise (I certainly have, especially for dual XEON setups), rather the games I play don't much gain from it, though some games run slower with Win10 such as RotTR and Hitman 2 (the main one that gained was AC Origins). You may notice a certain bias in the games I've mentioned in that few are multiplayer and that's true, I'm not much of a PvP fan, but then this is kinda the point, everyone's own situation is different. The one game I do (or did) play which does have PvP is Elite Dangerous (I have a full HOTAS setup for it), but I've not played it for a while. Anyway, here are my results so far but the testing has been interupted by family matters, I won't be able to get back into it all until April or May:
www.sgidepot.co.uk/sgi.html#PC
Tbh what I'm waiting for with modern games is a genuine shift in functional immersion which still hasn't happened. CB2077 looks nice enough (though not that much better than existing titles) but scratch the surface and it's still a rather static world, same as most games. They're all too on rails for my liking. People call them open world but they really aren't; a lot of the time one's actions and options are very guided, encouraged by nonsensical OSD markers & suchlike. This can certainly be done well, such as in the original Last of Us, but for games like CB2077 every time I see something relevant it just irks too much. This is a very personal bias though, so ignore me. :D For some background, see:
www.sgidepot.co.uk/reflections.txt
Actually this is largely why I stopped playing ED, it has become a game that is very wide but incredibly shallow; too much of how the game world works has been hard coded and thus feels very inorganic, very artificial, especially anything related to economics, but also just in general. A particular task becomes split into smaller elements as if somehow that's better, even though the way this works is identical every time (such as splitting up asteroids). Hmm, I could rant about ED for ages. :} It has (had?) great potential, but risks being overtaken by newer upstarts who are doing it better. Certainly for visuals it's falling behind, infact sometimes updates make things look worse (black holes used to look better). Even Star Citizen is starting to get its act together now. Check the Bluedrake42 channel for some interesting examples of where it's all going with such games.
The nature of PC tech is such that we focus a lot on visuals and that's certainly something easier to market than functionality, but to an extent visuals have kinda peaked, the difference between a game now and a game 5 years ago isn't really that much, whereas the advances from say 2005 to even 2008 were much larger. It's a visual law of diminishing returns. I just want to see games come out where water is wet and fire is hot because so far it has happened yet.
funny enough, even the intel core i5 10600KF is sold @ 212 € in germany, while the 5600x went up to 344 €. it seems like an intel is giving you more bang for the buck. strange times.
Yes, 10600kf is exactly the cpu I bought before Christmas for 220euro. I would have gone for the 10400f but if you don't get a z490 board you can only use 2600mhz ram and loose quite a bit of performance. And if you get a z490 board you might as well get a k cpu and overclock. Very happy with it! OC very easily to 5ghz. Things are fast and stable.
It definitely depends on what your use case, budget and country are but it often seems to me that Intel offers better value for money here in Australia too. Intel has consistently been reducing prices whereas AMD have increased.
@@jay-uo2bi Indeed, 3600 went up from 159 € to around 220€, sitting @ 189 € atm. AMD midrange CPU pricing is beyond reasonable since 5xxx series release. I was planning to upgrade this year, really wanted to buy an all AMD system this time. Not in a hurry since GPUs are not available anyway, but as of today, i would probably buy a 10600KF. -.-
Would've been nice to see an overclockable option from Intel too, a 10600K for comparison in the full 6-core range
My HTPC had a i5-750 from 2009 and an RX 580, I just gave it my i7-4770k after I upgraded to a 5800X on my gaming rig. There was less than a 15% boost putting in a 4 year newer CPU.
Everyone said I needed to upgrade my i7 if I got a new GPU because it'll be bottlenecked. If you ask me I reckon I could of just chucked a $400 card into my gaming rig and been good for another 2 years or more. Still gonna finnaly get an rx 6000 series today fingers crossed, been waiting ages.
loving the new cpu, old one was 7 years old and still going strong in my HTPC.
I love this style of information. It's shows real world gains instead of benchmarks. I liked that you used ultra settings in 1080p.
I approve of this editorial direction! :P On a serious note, really important info for us mid-budget to broke gamers, i.e. the vast majority.
I3-10100F/3100G+3200G is a broke gamer's paradise.
The results may be boring but this video has been invaluable. Thank you so much for this format, it really puts things in perspective across the resolutions.
Im still using a Ryzen 5 2600 and a 1070Ti and it serves me pretty well. Does everything I want to do so theres no need for me to upgrade
I upgraded from r7 1700 and 1070ti to a 3600x and RTX 3070.
I'm happy with my decision. No bottlenecks from my CPU, and I'm glad I didn't go for a 5600x. I could have spent 200$ for no difference in performance from buying a 5600x.
I also bought the 3070 early after release, and I'm glad I did because it gave me a year to enjoy it before selling it to upgrade for the 4000 series.
Loving my 5600x and 3080 combo. Before I could run cod at 10-20 FPS and Valorant at 60 and now cod floats around 120-220 and Valorant at like 300+
Still missing FS2020 in different Quality settings at lower resolutions... 😔
Results won't be boring, compared to the usual benchmarks!!!
yeah im really curious on how it goes with flight sims like fs2020 and dcs world. i wonder what the vr performance is like as well
@@pupper42 VR performance is mostly higher resolution (super sampling) and therefore comparable to 4K results and mostly GPU limited. (outside of areas with lots and lots of assets)
@@Bluth53 ah ok thanks for the info
I agree. I don't play any of the Games used in these benchmarks, not dissing Steves hard work but I wouldl ike to see FS2020 PubG FS2020 VR Battlefiled 1 Black Ops COLD war DX11! Not DX12 with the terrible DLSS that crashes the Game. I would like to see 1440p mixed settings in FS2020 PubG Cold War Battlefield 1. Its great he added the 3950x since its the chip I own, I also own a 3600x. I would also like to see multiple GPU's tested like the 3090 6900xt 6800xt 3070. I really think he needs to look at what's actually being played on Steam and go from there because PubG is right up there. I guess he has to concentrate on what most of his viewers want to see and that is fine, just wish I could see performance in Games I actually play. No disrespect Steve and Tim, love ya work guys.
@@hardcorehardware361 you could always do a video of what performance you are getting in those games on your system.......at least give others a rough idea of what to expect.
I 've canceled a 5600x. Thank you from Japan.
Well done. I've always wanted to know how 3600 performs when compared to 5600X at 1440P.
I run a 1440p monitor with a 3600. No issues on the games I play.
I just bought an open boxed 3600 for $160 at Microcenter the other day
That's a really good purchase my friend
@@Aki_Lesbrinco it ended up by 191 after tax and insurance. But still happy about my purchase
Did I manage to buy in the sweet spot again haha. My last system was a 2600k and it served me very well over the years. Now I have the 3600 and I don’t see a reason to upgrade apart from if I decide to do productivity tasks.
Very nice video. It would have been cool to include older processors in the comparison. E.g. 7700k. I would assume, that people looking for an upgrade in video cards would be interested how their CPUs fare against the newer ones.
I really thought he said "War Funder". I'd play that game.
I've been playing that game for 8 years now and I think it could be named that.
You guys talking about Wort Under?
@@lucascampos5498 Wort Under, e-sports ready!
@@Trigg3rHippie no. just no.
You need to add CPU demanding games and metrics other than FPS to your comparisons. Some people play football manager and care about how many leagues they can add or how long it will take the CPU to process one month for example. Or how long AI turn will take in Civilizations 6 or other turn based stragety games.
Valorant too
@@nkl7345 valorant.... its ez asf to run lol
I was lucky to get a 5600x to swap out my 3600 for 1440P gaming. You might be thinking: "But dude, didn't you just watch the video? Go return the thing it's not worth it!"
My 3600 is crazy low roll silicon. Consistently get Event Viewer telling me a core has failed, the CPU can not OC even juiced on 1.45v to 4.2 (it can only boost to 4.192) with temps under control (unless it spikes so hard it crashes but under normal testing conditions it stays within 80c). I've tried like, a dozen or two undervolting conditions that just tank the performance hard. I'm ready to get rid of the thing and if your 3600 is the same, you should too if you could.
I also wanted to get the "end of life" for my x570 most likely, and the 5600x is probably going to be that. Coupled with possibly getting access to SAM if I get a 6800xt down the road, I'm happy to know this will be it until I buy a whole new rig at one time.
When building a new gaming PC "on a budget" for 1080p / 1440p where an RTX 3060 Ti is already purchased, would you go with a 3600 or 5600X CPU? Here in Germany, we're talking about a 150 EUR price difference between the two (200 EUR vs 350).
I would also like to know some opinions here.
Seems like I made a good choice going with an R5 3600 for 1440p gaming.
For a new build, I still think there is value of going for a stronger CPU for future proofing. In 2-3 years when you want to upgrade your graphics card, the 3600 might very well bottleneck a lot more than the 5600x.
Very true! I originally built my pc with a 3600x since I paired it with a 2060 at first. But I upgraded to a 3080 recently and while the 3600x still gives very playable frame rates at 1440p, there is still some performance left on the table with the 3 year old cpu. I will pop in a 5700x in soon and let that cpu ride me out for a few years until I get the urge to upgrade to AM5 or intel. Whichever will give me best price to performance in the future
@@Bdot888Did you end up getting the 5700x? And was it worth it?
@@chunkylover48 yes! The 5700x has been treating me well! Its power efficient and runs cool for an 8 core chip. So far handles any game i throw at it
Do you mind including Total War and MSFS2020 in your benchmarks?
I second Total War. they're taxing games on the hardware, popular and you don't have any RTS type genre in your games list.
MSFS2020 should be a must.
Great video as always but genuinely surprised MSFS2020 wasn’t included as it is heavily cpu dependent.
MSFS2020 is not going to tax any 6 core CPU until DX12 is implemented. Not much point until then.
@@Oz_Gnarly_One By that logic, why test any games? This isn’t about cores, it’s about the heavy cpu usage in MSFS 2020 which would make it a great candidate for this kind of article.
My 8700K is still very strong for gaming. I am not surprised by these test results, but I am very grateful that you did these test as they provide very practical information.
Youre doing the work of the people. I was agonizing on if i needed to upgrade from a 3700x to a 5900x for 1440p and the answer is no.
Just bought a 5600x 😁 Got lucky because I got the last of all the 5000 series at Micro Center.
after this test am really curious about something like 3060TI with R5 2600 compared to newer processor, and btw the data in this video is more exciting than anything that is not realistic like 1080p 3090 combo. we need more videos like this.
Great work Steve! It would be interesting to see the SAM numbers in here as well. I think for some games it may make for a compelling upgrade over the 3600 if you have an rx 6800.
so happy with my 3600XT purchase for 190 bucks in dec. 2020. I was about to wait for the 5600 and pay like twice the price. and for what at the end? for nothing, gaming related at least.
Worth noting as well, if you look only at the zen3 lineup (so same architecture), whilst you will see very little difference in games released today which typically use up to 6c12t, if you plan to keep your PC for a long time then games are likely to start taking advantage of the extra CPU capability that we see in productivity benchmarks. We saw this with Intel Sandybridge. The i5 2500k 4c4t was that generation's 5600x, and the i7 2600k 4c8t was deemed a complete waste of money for gaming as benchmarks showed no appreciable improvement. Fast forward a few years and the i7 with its 4 extra threads blew the i5 out of the water in almost all new titles, offering an extra 30-50% FPS in many cases. People are making those exact same arguments today against the higher end CPUs. So how often you intend to upgrade your system is a huge factor in determining which CPU to buy.
You showed in your review that Death Stranding uses more than 6 cores. What was the utilisation of those cores on the i9 10900k compared with the 5600x out of interest? Were all cores at 100% on both CPUs?
1:53 really dude? most gamers play in 1440p? 1080p is by FAR the most used resolution for gamers, what youi said its simply not true
I mean cmon, it takes 2 seconds to google it, my question is why would u go out of your way to remark something that is just not true?
I've moved from 4670k to 5600x. So it was worth it for me.
Just managed to snatch a 5600x for the pc I'm building for my brother. It's replacing a 2500k. He's also getting a 3060ti to replace his gtx 460. Needless to say, he'll feel a difference.
@@Bynming Just a tiny difference, maybe he'll get like 20 fps now and 200fps after.
I'm going to be going from i5-2500 to hopefully a Ryzen 9 5900x if that ever comes back in stock
@Dindu Price difference isn't that big here due to shortages of the 3600. Anyway he'll keep that PC for years and years so the compute performance difference will eventually come in handy.
Yup, your case warranted the upgrade.
I'd love to see a similar comparison for Esport titles with competitive settings and see how zen3 compares... maybe with a even lower spec'd gpu
I'm not sure how big the audience is for that thou. Maybe something like COD:Warzone which kind of treads both worlds of competitive esports and single player game.
@@francis771 I'm sure there's a huge audience interested in titles like valorant, fortnite, csgo, Apex legends etc. to see if zen3 is worth the upgrade.
@@condorado theres definitely an audience for that. But based on polls they have posted in the past this channels fanbase isnt made up of many of those people
We definitely need an Esport section of cpu benchmarks. There were CPUs make a real difference because everybody play at 1080p and are cpu bottlenecked.. moreover , they tend to stream as well so it would really be intresting to cover games like cs valorant apex fortnite cod r6 in low and high 1080p graphics
@@condorado This should give you a pretty good idea: ruclips.net/video/MDGWijdBDvM/видео.html&ab_channel=HardwareUnboxed
Just before everything went bananas right after Ryzen 3 release; I rebuilt 2 PCs using Ryzen 3700 and 3700X at less than Ryzen 5600 @ suggested retail prices. I used new mobo/ram/cpu. While older, they aren't going to be missing the latest cpu. Daughter and SIL are quite happy with their rebuilds. Me; I'm stuck with Intel 8700K @4.8Ghz and Nvidia 1060. I wanted a newer gpu, but no way in Hell for current prices. The kids get the new stuff and I plod along! Thanks for your efforts, I feel the second generation cpu and faster RAM was a good choice now. :)
Been building and selling the i5 10400/GTX 1660S/16gb ram as budget gaming PC's now that stock is hard to get. Absolutely bangs for the price.
Being a VR gamer that also records video/streaming, I'd love to see a video on how much impact that has 8 vs 6 cores. I have a lot of stuff running in the background, should I upgrade my 3600 to a 3700 or 5800?
I suppose if you’re using CPU encoding then, but I think a lot of people will use nvenc if they have a Turing or newer Geforce card which means there will be basically no difference. If you do a lot of multitasking, more cores can only help. If you’re doing video work, either the 3700X or 5600X or 5800X will render faster than the 3600, but it might not be worth it for you to spend another $300-$450 for a new CPU. Honestly, I’d say wait until you really notice something isn’t working right, and then in a year or so, get a 5900X when it goes on sale to make sure you have plenty of fast cores. It’ll help in keeping high refresh rates, won’t get bogged down due to lack of cores/threads, and be a substantial upgrade. The 5800X is hard to justify when for only $100 more, you get 50% more cores.
U can check Gamers Nexus's video 'Friendly Fire: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X CPU Review & Benchmarks vs. 5600X & 5900X
'.
Recently Upgraded my CPU from a 2400g to a 3600. I plan to stream soon cause doing it on my old build was next to impossible due to frametime issues when the cpu briefly hits 100.
No problems so far on my 3600 and Project Wingman VR (low).
As for NVENC, If you have a beefy RTX GPU, you should be fine streaming on that. Though I personally avoid it since i only have a 1660s and a Quest2 (Link or ALVR also uses NVENC so thats an additional encoding stream)
3700 is a safer choice imo.
(given that zen3 inflated prices rn)
Im here just to validate my r5 3600 + rtx 3070 combo lel.
I would love to see the same tests but do them while you simulate a stream and see how that affects the frame rate
I was planning on upgrading from my 3600 to a 5600x a few months back, but now I'm glad they were all sold out. Especially since I like to game at as high a resolution as possible.
It's easy to get swept up with new products without thinking it through properly.
Pretty sure if I had bought one I'd be making excuses for myself to justify buying it, and this video wouldn't be nearly as satisfying.
As my son computer died without reason I bought 10400f on z490 gigabyte gaming x , waiting for delivery, he plays at 1440p what a great decision I made!Thank for the video!
This is exactly what I was hoping to see as I shop for a new CPU, thank you!
B450 Tomhawk - 16Gb 3200mhz CL16 with the amazing R5 3600. Was and still feel a massive step from my FX-9590 lol
Edit* GPU is 1080 GTX 8GB OC.
I just finished my first ever build for my brother that is basically identical minus the gpu, being a rx 5700 xt.
Asus x570 Dark Hero 32GB 4000 cl 16. with R7 5800X. has been running soooo smooth. though it wasnt quite the step up from my previous compared to yours. I really hope you are loving it =)
Finally, 10400F vs. 5600x in a video content!
Really happy just finished my build for really really cheap with a 3600 and a 5700xt
Got my 3600 on release to replace a 1700, pretty good at 1440p 144hz. Maybe only about 10% under maxing that setting. By the time stock comes back and the 6000s are out I’m sure it will be more viable for me to upgrade
impressive performance for the i5 10400f here in europe it cost only 140 euro while r5 3600 210 euro and r5 5600x 390 euro
too bad for intel that continues to fuck up by limiting ram speed on lower end mobo......
at this point i think intel it's just triyng to kill itlself, even lowest amd chipset allows for ram oc.. cmon intel...
The result of extremely ancient mindsets. Overclocking was reserved for the highest end motherboards for a long time simply due to the required quality of the components resulting in high prices. But technology has progressed so far that even the cheapest mobo components could OC, and now intel simply artificially limit their boards for the money, and well, because they never had external pressure to normalise such things.
Bruh just buy a z490 with the spare money.
@@crazeddutchman4957 I mean, even with limited speed performance is comparable to 3600 at the very least, so it's not like they are losing anything by doing it.
Right now Intel seems to be the best value in the budget segment.
Their 11th series sockets (500 series, and as rumors) are going to have an unlocked motherboard.
However, Intel being Intel, I am very skeptical and suspicious on their move. There will be and HAS to be a catch.
It's not a "good news", more like "not bad news." Intel will have to play with the pricing for people to be swayed from AMD, not to mention, that their pathetic excuse of stock coolers that requires additional purchase of CPU cooler.
@@miniweeddeerz1820 Decent Z490 boards are really expensive though. At that point might as well get 3600 instead and a good B550 or B450 board, and then replace 3600 with 5600x when prices go down.
But realistically, budget Intel boards are still okay, you don't need to oc 10400f to get decent performance, and you can save money on ram as well.
Thank you guys for the effort to keep us informed!
Death stranding is really a mark in gaming, awesome graphics with outstanding performance
Steve you nailed what I already knew but with NO supply of GPU's where I'm at here in Canada and infrequent blips of Ryzen3's (usually 5800X) and itching to do some sort of upgrading, this just reinforces my resolve to wait for Ryzen 3 to come down in price. Just to be clear I have a R5-3600 which I've been very lucky to have 4.5GHz all core @ 1.29v. It was purchased in July 2020 after 3600XT release so it might have just slipped thru the binning process. It might clock higher but I'm happy with it here as temps are very reasonable 50's C. Finished ripping my Blu-Ray & DVD collection to my Server over a year ago so there's little need for more cores atm not to mention 5800X here costs almost as much as a 3900X when they're available. I'm definitely GPU bound after upgrading to UW1440p (also in July) but with nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing better than my OC'd 1070Ti in stock I just gotta tuff it out. Resolution scaling here I come ...
First off I really was wanting to know this, and second I wanted to come back and get some of your older videos more views, because of what RUclips did. Thanks for the good content
The 3600 is going to be remembered as a legendary cpu , like the i5 2400k .
2400k? I think you mean 2500k
True, i upgraded to 5600x and the fps difference is not that big even with a 3060ti at 1080p
Why is it legendary? And why 3600 also going toward that title? googling but cannot find the answer
@@velzing22 intel 2500K (when OC) was capable of playing games far ahead of its time. The Ryzen 5 3600 can possibly be a good CPU for years and years to come for games as well.
@shortshins
*i7 2600k.
1:50 you do know that the majority of gamers is still at 1080p , right?
did you look at the steam hardware survey?
1440p is not the standard resolution , at least not yet
But within the cohort of people upgrading it is more meaningful than 1080p.
because majority of those people still using GTX 1000 series or older GPUs. Certainly not RX 6800 equivalent nor higher.
3600 owners: now only if we could find some damn current gen gpu's at reasonable prices!
well the 3090, its surprisigly the cheapest card here, (oh dont think its cheap, its just at msrp.. and rarely available) but the rest just r out of stock or a 3070 for 2k$ so. nope
@@arencorparencorp2189 anything over 800$ is unreasonable imo. but hey, at least those who can afford the 3090 are happy.
I am not entirely sure why the 36/39 ryzen CPUs were shown, would it not be a better argument to show the 1600/2600 to see what the differences are between those to the 5600 since that, I assume, would make for a far better case of weather those folks should upgrade or not (given it would make far more sense for people with those to upgrade rather than someone with a 3600)?
I do not want to start a whole heated discussion or the like, I just thought it was already pretty evident that there was little (general) difference between the 36/56 CPUs and watched primarily out of curiosity for any outliers.
IMO the most important factor to gaming quality has been variable refresh rate monitors. Some of the games I am have huge variances in frame rate and having G Sync has mitigated the bulk of former annoyances.
This is what I need... this is what I need... THIS IS WHAT I NEED!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Welcome Back to Hardware Out-of-stock!! Haha!
Love these Benchmarks Steve! Keep 'em coming! Cheers! 👍🍻😎
Great content!! Right on the money with real news we gamers can use. Thanks for all the testing and info presented.
Thank you. I feel good now. I bought 3600 for 170E instead of paying 350E for 5600X. Whole Mobo+CPU+RAM cost the same as just the 5600X.
The MIA 10600k currently at $230 in USA's Microcenters and $270 on Newegg would have been a nice addition to that test, price-performance wise at 1080p:)