AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Linux Performance

[mppix]

Moving the goalposts much? Last time AMD announced the full lineup there was a deficit, right, but CPUs became available sooner or later. This time around there's been zero indication that 5600/5700X will be released at all. End of story.
....

Great, homo neandertalensis has learned words "moving goalposts". Now he just needs to learn how to apply them correctly:

There is still an expectation that more models will follow: non X version, PRO versions, and APUs. The 5000X SKUs replace 3000X SKUs and the 3000 remain available for foreseeable future. Maybe they skip some and go straight to Zen4 for those models, which is fine because 3000 series is still more than competitive especially at the mid to lower end.

[ms178]

You are birdie/yeshua aren't you?

Haha, no. We just share the same position on this topic and have to fight all the people here who are acting like following a hardware cult and not within reason.

[birdie]

You like to accuse 'AMD fans' abandoning logic, but it appears that your grasp of it is tenuous at best.

If one wishes to compare two items on a value basis, it matters sweet FA what the list price is if that price doesn't match street pricing. And in your Intel example I used street pricing because someone who was comparing them back when the 6700K was released would have paid $350 for the 6700K or $50 for the 860. Now a days one pays $300 for the 5600X or $239 for the 3600X (or the 3600 for $199 if they don't want to pay for the guaranteed speeds of the X model).

My point about Nvidia wasn't to 'cleverly make up arguments' but to demonstrate your blatant hypocrisy and lack of self awareness. On the one hand you are 'Given NVIDIA's history I'm 100% sure' but provide no evidence that AMD's history would preclude them from releasing a 5600 or a 5700(X). It's not as if there weren't those models in the 1***, 2***, and 3*** series, but that wouldn't fit your narrative would it?

Let's roll with your love of MSRP; the 3080 has the same as the 2080 as was the 3070/2070. Granted Nvidia did knock off $100 on the FE 3070 but you tell everyone not to buy those models don't you?

And yes, Nvidia can price their cards as high as they want. When it's more than the market will bear the prices will have to be lowered. Nvidia can take all that extra money and keep investing in new technologies which drive the market forward. These higher price brackets allow their competition to price higher also and hopefully pull ahead of Nvidia thus pressuring Nvidia to lower their prices to maintain market share. It can be a yo-yo affect where there's 5 years of stagnation with ~10% performance increase each year or there can be cut throat competition that benefits the consumer.

Maybe you should think of it this way. Imagine the economy is a company. And you are the old established Nvidia who has been consistently putting out good work that gets better every year. Now imagine that I am AMD that has much less seniority and am much more inconsistent. Or imagine you are the hot shit new AMD who came in with a bang, brought in a bunch of new ideas that revolutionized the product and I was stodgy old Intel that did just satisfactory work and coasted by on past glories.

Which of us should be able to command more money?

Oh god, you just cannot stop moving the goalposts, can you? This topic is about the new Ryzen CPUs, in particular the overpriced junk called 5600X which in terms of value per cost is a lot worse than AMD's own previous generation products and it's even worse than ... the Intel Core i5 10600 which retails for $270, and comes with an iGPU and you're now talking about NVIDIA?

Can you just admit that AMD has pulled an Intel this time around and since they have the ultimate performance lead they've decided to abandon any reminiscence of decency or customer first strategy and now charge you top dollar for the product which costs them a lot less to produce. The node is the same, yields are much better, wafers cost less.

Tell me, why are you defending a corporation which decided to make their margins really fat by selling us an entry level CPU for fucking 300 US dollars? I don't give a damn it's the fastest six core x86 CPU (and not even in all workloads as it sometimes loses to Comet Lake which is based on the five years old Sky Lake uArch), it's the entry level CPU for this generation and it costs 50% more than their previous gen entry CPU. Period.

[artivision]

The starting CPU of the previous lineup was 3600, not 3600X. The 5800X doesn't replace the 3800X because again, the the starting eight-core CPU of the previous lineup was 3700X, not 3800X. Neither the 3600X, nor the 5700X have been announced in any shape or form, so it's all about pricing and clever marketing. If we had a 5600 for $250 and a 5700X for $380, I would probably cut AMD some slack but they deliberately chose not to announce them (now or maybe ever - no one knows). I haven't commented on the three released Ampere cards because it's not my price range. And the RTX 3000 cards are sold significantly cheaper than the RTX 2000. Given NVIDIA's history I'm 100% sure an RTX 3600 will follow. AMD on the other hand changes naming schemes so often you never know what's coming and how it's going to be christened.

Your price comparison of the i860 in ... 2015 when we are talking strictly about release prices? I knew AMD fans abandon all logic when defending their company but, sorry, sir, that's just asinine.



By the same token NVIDIA should have priced their Ampere cards 3 times higher, right? The demand is there, right? NVIDIA is still commanding a massive lead according to the Steam HW survey (over 80% of GPUs are NVIDIA's) - should they price all their products to reflect that, right? You cleverly make up "arguments" to vindicate AMD only they fall apart immediately upon close examination.

Learn to read my friend, i never said that it is right, i just stated what actually happens. It doesn't effect you tho if you buy latter and if it does that's a psychological problem.

[dave_boo]

The starting CPU of the previous lineup was 3600, not 3600X. The 5800X doesn't replace the 3800X because again, the the starting eight-core CPU of the previous lineup was 3700X, not 3800X. Neither the 3600X, nor the 5700X have been announced in any shape or form, so it's all about pricing and clever marketing. If we had a 5600 for $250 and a 5700X for $380, I would probably cut AMD some slack but they deliberately chose not to announce them (now or maybe ever - no one knows). I haven't commented on the three released Ampere cards because it's not my price range. And the RTX 3000 cards are sold significantly cheaper than the RTX 2000. Given NVIDIA's history I'm 100% sure an RTX 3600 will follow. AMD on the other hand changes naming schemes so often you never know what's coming and how it's going to be christened.

Your price comparison of the i860 in ... 2015 when we are talking strictly about release prices? I knew AMD fans abandon all logic when defending their company but, sorry, sir, that's just asinine.



By the same token NVIDIA should have priced their Ampere cards 3 times higher, right? The demand is there, right? NVIDIA is still commanding a massive lead according to the Steam HW survey (over 80% of GPUs are NVIDIA's) - should they price all their products to reflect that, right? You cleverly make up "arguments" to vindicate AMD only they fall apart immediately upon close examination.

You like to accuse 'AMD fans' abandoning logic, but it appears that your grasp of it is tenuous at best.

If one wishes to compare two items on a value basis, it matters sweet FA what the list price is if that price doesn't match street pricing. And in your Intel example I used street pricing because someone who was comparing them back when the 6700K was released would have paid $350 for the 6700K or $50 for the 860. Now a days one pays $300 for the 5600X or $239 for the 3600X (or the 3600 for $199 if they don't want to pay for the guaranteed speeds of the X model).

My point about Nvidia wasn't to 'cleverly make up arguments' but to demonstrate your blatant hypocrisy and lack of self awareness. On the one hand you are 'Given NVIDIA's history I'm 100% sure' but provide no evidence that AMD's history would preclude them from releasing a 5600 or a 5700(X). It's not as if there weren't those models in the 1***, 2***, and 3*** series, but that wouldn't fit your narrative would it?

Let's roll with your love of MSRP; the 3080 has the same as the 2080 as was the 3070/2070. Granted Nvidia did knock off $100 on the FE 3070 but you tell everyone not to buy those models don't you?

And yes, Nvidia can price their cards as high as they want. When it's more than the market will bear the prices will have to be lowered. Nvidia can take all that extra money and keep investing in new technologies which drive the market forward. These higher price brackets allow their competition to price higher also and hopefully pull ahead of Nvidia thus pressuring Nvidia to lower their prices to maintain market share. It can be a yo-yo affect where there's 5 years of stagnation with ~10% performance increase each year or there can be cut throat competition that benefits the consumer.

Maybe you should think of it this way. Imagine the economy is a company. And you are the old established Nvidia who has been consistently putting out good work that gets better every year. Now imagine that I am AMD that has much less seniority and am much more inconsistent. Or imagine you are the hot shit new AMD who came in with a bang, brought in a bunch of new ideas that revolutionized the product and I was stodgy old Intel that did just satisfactory work and coasted by on past glories.

Which of us should be able to command more money?

[chrisjames61]

Oh my god, you just made a fool of yourself in applauding a 50% price increase for a 22% performance uplift when compared to the 3600X. The margin is even worse when compared to the 3600 which could be brought up to the performance level of the 3600X when both are overclocked for even less money.

You are birdie/yeshua aren't you?

[ms178]

I didn't expect such an honesty from Hardware Unboxed but they are perhaps the only reviewers who've called AMD out for this crap and Steven twice in his review mentioned that the 5600X is 50% more expensive that the 3600. Thanks God, not everyone is ass-licking AMD's marketing machine:

I've seen two more critical voices in addition to Hardware Unboxed: Tech Yes City and Tech Deals. The latter had to excuse himself for his attitude in a later video but he still stands to his opinion.

[ms178]

What you say is sound just the conclusion is wrong. You analysis should conclude that a Ryzen 3600(x) or 5600X gives you a better system performance and better system performance per dollar (with HEDT, whatever you save on the chip, you spend a lot more on the system and on the power bill).

Seriously, I don't know what they taught you guys in math. Let me calculate it through for you with pricing as of today: A new Huananzhi X99-TF is around 90 EUR on Aliexpress, the used Xeon 2678 V3 is around 75 EUR on Aliexpress (with worldwide shipping), and I got used 32 GB DDR3-ECC-RAM for 55 EUR on eBay from a local e-waste recycle company. With AM4 you would have to invest 180 EUR for a 3600, you could get away with a B450 board for around 80 EUR, but you would need to invest at least 123 EUR for a 32 GB DDR4-3000 Crucial Kit to get most of your Ryzen (thanks to overclocking the Micron Rev E chips on there to at least 3466 Mhz with a bit of luck even 3600 Mhz). That makes it 220 EUR for the X99 combo, 383 EUR for the Ryzen 3600 or 552 EUR for a Ryzen 5600X (last street price over here in Germany: 349 EUR). This means the Ryzen 3600 combo is 74% more expensive and the Ryzen 5600X 251% than the X99 combo. Even if the 2678 V3 would be on average 10% slower in games than the 3600, that would still be offset by its better price by a large margin. Hence overall price/performance is best with the Xeon 2678V3-X99-DDR3 combo.

Before you ask, I got the game performance numbers from here:

Of course you could try to get better deals with Ryzen on the used market (the 3600 is 163 EUR on Aliexpress without the fan which would bring the numbers down to 65% more expensive), but these prices I cited above are the ones I can get without problems today here in Germany (except for the 5600X which is out of stock).

My power testing revealed that load power consumption was comparable with a 3600 at around 74-80W. The idle power consumption of Haswell-EP might be a tad higher due to the DDR3-RAM I use, which burns double the energy than my Crucial DDR4 RAM (at idle: 28W vs 14 W, thankfully with the Huananzhi X99-TF and the 2678V3 I could test or use DDR3 and DDR4 on the same mainboard). The Ryzen ran around 20°K hotter with a Wraith Prism, but I could use a better Thermalright Macho cooler on the Xeon platform which I couldn't use with AM4. Hence I conclude that I cannot see anything drastic here which would make an impact on the long term value of the X99 platform.

Also, I insist: recommending old Xeon or Threadripper parts, no-name Chinese motherboards, undervolting/overclocking to people is borderline stupid.

I don't know why you still cast any doubt here. Yes, there are some quirks with these Chinese motherboards, but they are not a deal braker in my eyes and can be worked around. You claim something without showing any evidence to support it. Of course tinkering around with these components is not something I would recommend for average Joe who doesn't know what he is up to, and not every Chinese X99 board is up to the task of handling a 2678V3 properly, but there are enough reviews and guides out there which help you to pick a good quality board and setting up the BIOS mod yourself (if you don't want to flash a pre-modded BIOS file). And you don't need to be an engineer to follow these how-to's. By the way, there is a huge russian and latino community around these parts due to their value and lack of a working used market locally, but even for the english speaking audience out there there are enough videos to get familiar with these Xeons for desktop use. For enthusiasts, I'd definetly recommend to take this option into consideration to show these price hiking companies the middle finger.

[birdie]

Agree, do want to give 'reasonable' or 'objective assessment' a try?
Try have a look: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryzen
Not all 3000 series processors were launched at the same time and that launch was before covid (when corporations didn't need to review schedules every week to factor in new delays). You can safely expect more SKUs from AMD 5000.

Moving the goalposts much? Last time AMD announced the full lineup there was a deficit, right, but CPUs became available sooner or later. This time around there's been zero indication that 5600/5700X will be released at all. End of story.

I didn't expect such an honesty from Hardware Unboxed but they are perhaps the only reviewers who've called AMD out for this crap and Steven twice in his review mentioned that the 5600X is 50% more expensive that the 3600. Thanks God, not everyone is ass-licking AMD's marketing machine:

[mppix]

It doesn't matter which market these CPUs were made for as long as they meet your needs. You need to know your workloads though, but I do game a lot on Windows (mainly Battlefield series but also strategy games) and also enjoy to tinker around with compiling code on Linux - that Xeon serves this purpose very well. I even sold my former Ryzen 2600/MSI B450 Tomahawk combination as in my testing I got equal/slightly better gaming performance and much better compile performance out of the Xeon. Watch the video, the Haswell-Xeons can be unlocked to run at Turbo speed at all-cores, this particular 2678V3 can run at 3.3 Ghz on 12 Cores (I use a -70mV/-20mV undervolt to stay in the TDP limit and can sustain the high clocks even in AVX2 workloads). That is enough to get at least decent performance in every present game I own, sure it is not the best choice for some games which need high single-thread performance but with more DX12/Vulkan games and better multi-thread optimizations, this is more likely to improve in the future. As I've only a Vega 56 @ 64 BIOS to work with right now, the differences in CPU power are less important anyway (the numbers in the linked video are drawn with a 2080 Ti, and 15/16% on average is in my eyes not very much of a difference even with such a high end card). People can draw their own conclusions though, I just throw this video into the discussion here because a lot of people don't even know all of their options and would be better off with these Xeons if they fit their needs.

It is an added bonus that I can run this particular SKU with cheap DDR3-ECC-RAM and enjoy the added benefit of its improved stability. Also there are some decent quality Chinese X99 motherboards nowadays, I've tested two of them myself intensively during the last couple of months. If you know what you are doing and not afraid of BIOS modding (flashing from a UEFI-USB stick is enough, there are pre-modded BIOSes out there already), this is a tinkerer's dream.

What you say is sound just the conclusion is wrong. You analysis should conclude that a Ryzen 3600(x) or 5600X gives you a better system performance and better system performance per dollar (with HEDT, whatever you save on the chip, you spend a lot more on the system and on the power bill).

This does not mean that the Xeon chip, i.e. Ryzen 2000 level performance, is not enough. Few consumers really need the performance that today's CPUs have nor can they properly leverage it. Just don't justify it with a $50 (~70EUR margin.. I looked it up).

On a separate note, you can certainly run both Ryzen chips with ECC memory with supported motherboards, e.g. the Asus WS.

Also, I insist: recommending old Xeon or Threadripper parts, no-name Chinese motherboards, undervolting/overclocking to people is borderline stupid.

Take this from someone that massively overclocks his 6700k and runs 2x Titan Xp for schientific computation and machine learning workloads. It works but newer CPU+GPU achieve higher performance + performance/cost + performance/watt.