Skip to content

Ryzen 5000 vs 3000

Only five months after the launch of the Intel i510600K, AMD has released an impressive new product line of Ryzen 5000 series CPUs. Among the new chips is Ryzen 5 5600X. Many people speculate that this CPU may be the best mid-range CPU in 2020. The award is currently held by Intel.

Ryzen 5 5600X will directly compete with Intel i510600K, which is one of the best CPUs you can buy in terms of gaming performance.

Although it is clear that Ryzen 5 5600X will stand out in terms of productivity workflow, some preliminary benchmark data actually show that from a gaming point of view, its performance will also be better than 10600K.

Fortunately, we will test these two chips to see if these claims are worthy of belief. We will also consider all other specifications to determine which one is best for you as a consumer.

So there are many things to experience, let's dive in!

speed 3.7 GHz/4.6 GHz

core (thread)

6/12

plug-in

AM4 TDP

65W

clock speed (boost)

4.8 GHz

core (thread)

6/12

plug-in

LGA1200 TDP

125W

As far as I can remember, Intel has been at the top of the CPU hierarchy. For more than a decade, it has brought some of the best gaming CPUs to the desktop market. With the launch of the Intel i510600K 5 months ago, another term from Intel executives seems to be coming to an end. However, AMD has other plans.

As we all know, AMD has just released the highly anticipated Ryzen 5000 series CPU lineup, which was boldly advertised as "the beginning of the game" by AMD CEO Dr. Su. The new CPU product line is expected to bring competitive performance, and I dare say that this may knock Intel out of the top spot in gaming. Yes, thanks to AMD's new Zen 3 microarchitecture, Ryzen's latest lineup may challenge Intel in gaming. Although Ryzen CPUs have always had very good multi-core performance in their lockers, they have always struggled to keep up with Intel in gaming. However, due to a series of improvements, including a larger L3 cache and the new CCX, the pendulum may eventually win the favor of the red team.

Let's take a quick look at the general specifications provided by these two high-end CPUs.

As you can see, once you understand the fact that both CPUs are 6 cores and 12 threads, there are actually not many similarities. They all provide different architectures, computing nodes, and have very different cache and TDP classifications.

Having said that, each CPU brings a comprehensive personal advantage, which means that many performance advantages will come down to microarchitecture. Before we get into performance, let's take a closer look at the architecture.

Starting from Intel, Comet Lake is the successor to Intel’s Coffee Lake microarchitecture, providing an improved 14-nanometer process and all new hyper-threading features. The latest Comet Lake CPU can turn on and off Hyper-Threading on a core-by-core basis, thanks to lower power consumption and lower heat output. Additionally, with the ability to change over-processing, the Comet Lake core can maintain turbo mode for a longer period of time. For all intents and purposes, this means higher performance over a longer period of time, especially in productivity workflows.

Although Intel appears to focus on compute and hyper-processing nodes, AMD spends more time expanding its core complex, allowing for better communication between the core and the L3 cache.

Compared to the Zen 2 architecture, Zen 3 effectively doubles its capacity by accommodating 8 cores (instead of 4) and 32MB of L3 cache (instead of 16MB). This architectural advance helps increase performance exponentially, reducing overall latency when core-to-core communication is required.

When comparing the two architectures, Zen 3 appears to be among the best in most areas. The improvements made allow AMD not only to lead Intel in terms of productivity, but also ahead of Intel in terms of games. Although Intel now offers Hyper-Threading (which bridges the gap between them and AMD in productivity tasks), AMD is still far superior to them in the highly onerous multi-threaded scenario. Intel also insists on using the less efficient 14-nanometer compute node, something AMD dropped some time ago.

clock speed 3.7 GHz / 4.6 GHz

core (thread)

6/12

socket

AM4 TDP

65W

clock speed (boost)

4.8 GHz core (thread)

6/12

socket

LGA1200 TDP

125W

This gives us a good understanding of the performance of the game. As we mentioned earlier, preliminary benchmark data from AMD and independent critics indicates that Ryzen may regain top spot (in the gaming arena) for the first time in more than a decade. So, let's test this theory with our own benchmarks.

We will test Ryzen 5 5600X and Intel i510600K in many different games and comprehensive benchmarks.

We started by running Assassin's Creed Odyssey, a less demanding game that is still quite popular with board game players. We used an in-game benchmarking tool in this particular test to provide us with a level playing field for two CPUs.

As can be seen from the results above, there is not much difference between the two benchmarks. Although 10600K is 1% higher, the results are refreshed periodically. That being said, on average in many different tests the 10600K just scraped it off. The

Microsoft Flight Simulator is the most demanding game we've tested, pushing the frame rate well below 60 for the first and only time during testing. We run a simple landing scenario for this test, and

Seemingly restored in Red Dead Redemption 2, Intel's i510600K outperformed AMD's 5600X by a few FPS. When we look at the lower 1%, the trend is even more aggressive, Intel has dropped about 22 times.

The last game we tested was "Tomb Raider: Shadow", this is a heavy DX12 game, if you have a GPU to accommodate it, it will provide ray tracing. For this test, we ran the game's benchmarking tool.

AMD leads again in this title, with almost 200FPS at 1080p at maximum settings. Compared to i510600K, an average increase of 15%. The 1% drop is more forgiving, but AMD's Ryzen 5 5600X still tops the list with an 8.7% lead.

It's safe to say that when comparing these two mid-range processors, we were very surprised by the benchmark test results. I almost expect to see most of the victory fall on Intel's corner, but this is not the case. In almost all cases, the red team is ahead of Intel's opponents. Regardless of the performance of the

game, we decided to run several different full benchmarks to see if there are any noticeable differences in workstation type tasks. We tried to test single-core and multi-core solutions to get a more complete conclusion about their performance.

speed 3.7 GHz / 4.6 GHz

core (thread)

6/12

socket

AM4 TDP

65W

clock speed (boost)

4.8 GHz core (thread)

6/12

socket

LGA1200 TDP

125W

We decided to run Cinebench R15 and R20 at the same time, mainly because some people still use R15 and it is easier to directly compare with old data. That said, in these two cases, the Ryzen CPU clearly won by 25% (R20 multi-core) and 28% (R15 multi-core). When looking at the

's single-core performance, the Red Team improvement is equally impressive: 22% (R20) and 31% (R15) higher than i510600K.

Next, we run Blender, which is one of the most popular image rendering tools. For the purpose of this test, I ran BWM and the classroom mixer, using all the cores.

It can be seen from the results that Ryzen is once again the clear winner, 19% and 13% higher than the two tasks respectively.

Vray is the next benchmark we run to test the CPU's ability to render 3D-based images. Although this is not the most popular benchmark in the world, it provides compatibility with many popular commercial imaging applications, including 3ds Max, Maya, Unreal, Cinema 4D, and Blender.

Having said that, Ryzen CPU has won once again, and compared to similar Intel products, the performance has increased by 25%.

Corona is rated as the popular 3ds Max high-performance rendering engine, and it also provides Cinema 4D support. For this particular test, the military vehicle used multiple renderings, calculating scene, geometry, preprocessing, and rendering. Performance here is measured in terms of time to completion - the shorter the better.

It can be seen from the results that Ryzen performed well again, with a performance increase of almost 16% compared to the blue team.

In general, it is not surprising to see AMD chips ranked first in these particular tests. Ryzen, even since the initial release of Zen, has always been much better than Intel in multitasking scenarios.

Having said that, it is still impressive to see AMD achieve another year of brilliant results in this endeavor. The recently launched

Ryzen was a huge success. However, like most hardware versions today, inventory levels are a bit problematic, and most newly added products are sold out within a few minutes. Literally.

Now, you have to say that from a usability standpoint, Intel seems to have an advantage, a slight advantage. If you know where to look, you can still use the Intel i510600K. On the other hand, Ryzen seems to be completely out of stock on most vendors, leaving many AMD fans unhappy.

When we look at the price, many people will be a bit surprised to learn that AMD has overpriced CPUs for the first time in years. Historically, we have always seen Ryzen CPUs destroying Intel, hoping to produce additional conversions. However, this time, AMD seems to really know the value of its latest CPU lineup-the price of the Ryzen 5 5600X ($299) is much higher than the i510600K ($265).

So the only question that needs to be answered is, which of these CPUs is better? For me it is very simple. It must be AMD Ryzen 5 5600x.

AMD has made great strides in performance over the past few years, exponentially narrowing the gap between itself and Intel. As we approach the end of 2020, AMD seems to have finally completed its mission to overthrow Intel at the top of the gaming hierarchy.

Having said that, the Ryzen 5 5600X and Intel i510600K are both excellent CPUs that provide (arguably) the best value that the market must provide right now. Both will provide you with excellent gaming performance of 1080p and 1440p, far exceeding its previous iteration, and even challenge its current flagship product with a slight overclocking.

However, in the end there can only be one winner. In this case, the red team is actually sitting in the driver's seat.

speed 3.7 GHz/4.6 GHz

core (thread)

6/12

plug-in

AM4 TDP

65W

clock speed (boost)

4.8 GHz

core (thread)

6/12

plug-in

LGA1200 TDP

125W

Previous article Flight simulator intro games hardware

Leave a comment

Comments must be approved before appearing

* Required fields