AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Linux Performance

[Jabberwocky]

These glued dies are doing quite well.

[jrch2k8]

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.

1.) 50$ more is not an 50% increase, do you even math?

2.) 5600 is coming, remember the non X SKU are made with lesser quality CCXs that build up over time and it seems this time the process is so efficient those parts didn't came frequent enough compared to previous iterations + AMD is in no rush either with that massive performance anyway.

If you gonna cry for 50$ then wait a couple of months for the B450 BIOS updates and the 5600 to release.

50$ is more than very reasonable giving it beat even the 3800X that is in the next price bracket

[ms178]

1.) 50$ more is not an 50% increase, do you even math?

Excuse me, I don't get it why people are so wrong with their facts today. 200 EUR is the cost of a 3600X in Germany right now, wheras the 5600X did cost around 329 - 369 EUR yesterday but is out of stock currently due to high demand. With Zen 2 AMD was keen to enforce their MSRP at launch but they don't seem to bother anymore with Zen 3. If you do your math right, that is even a worse margin than the stated 50% as I was generiously taking the 300 EUR price for the 5600X for my calculation. And where I live 300 - 200 = 100 which is a half of 200, hence 300 is 50 % more than 200. If I took the 329 EUR which was the best price which I have seen yesterday, it would be 64,5 % more in price for 22 % more performance. No, thank you - that is not a deal for me.

1.) 5600 is coming, remember the non X SKU are made with lesser quality CCXs that build up over time and it seems this time the process is so efficient those parts didn't came frequent enough compared to previous iterations + AMD is in no rush either with that massive performance anyway.

As long as we haven't heard a formal announcement this SKU doesn't exist and is a rumor. We don't even know when it will arrive and at which price. AMD could also fill the missing slots with APUs next year, I certainly don't know yet. Of course I would alter my stance if they did release such a SKU without altering the specs too much.

[pmorph]

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.

So... by that value assessment, you expect almost no one to buy a 5600X?

[jrch2k8]

Excuse me, I don't get it why people are so wrong with their facts today. 200 EUR is the cost of a 3600X in Germany right now, wheras the 5600X did cost around 329 - 369 EUR yesterday but is out of stock currently due to high demand. With Zen 2 AMD was keen to enforce their MSRP at launch but they don't seem to bother anymore with Zen 3. If you do your math right, that is even a worse margin than the stated 50% as I was generiously taking the 300 EUR price for the 5600X for my calculation. And where I live 300 - 200 = 100 which is a half of 200, hence 300 is 50 % more than 200. If I took the 329 EUR which was the best price which I have seen yesterday, it would be 64,5 % more in price for 22 % more performance. No, thank you - that is not a deal for me.



As long as we haven't heard a formal announcement this SKU doesn't exist and is a rumor. We don't even know when it will arrive and at which price. AMD could also fill the missing slots with APUs next year, I certainly don't know yet. Of course I would alter my stance if they did release such a SKU without altering the specs too much.

1.) Fair enough but that is why is important to give CONTEXT because for other markets the price difference is indeed 50$ but ok i get Europe market may behave differently

[Marco-GG]

Intel is irrelevant at these obscene price levels. But this is not a new insight. For the record, such a comparison between a 10900K and a 5600X tells you nothing about the value of the 5600X, as a comparison between the 5600X with the 3600X tells you a completely different story. But as AMD keeps selling these better value parts, I guess we can still thank AMD for that. Just a reminder in case you missed it: You could have gotten a 1700 for less than 200 EUR 1,5 years after launch, but we are far away from that mark with the 3700X yet.

If this prices are obscene, current Intel prices are obscene too, doesn't it?

[piotrj3]

If this prices are obscene, current Intel prices are obscene too, doesn't it?

Phoronix has very specific linux benchamarks and when you buy CPU and you do majority of certain work you probably look at just this usage. But for example on Windows Hardware Unboxed made price/performance and Intel doesn't look that bad here with price increases, mostly because in productivy older 3000 series is winning price/performance and in games cheaper Intel chips are also doing fine. Intel at least towards windows market doesnt' have that obscene prices unless you do tons of rendering at CPU.

Thing is that 50$ flat price increase is really bad way to increase prices. I understand AMD wants to earn more money with such good chips, but 5950x is price increase of 50$ (MSRP value which is 6.6% increase) while Ryzen 5600x is 20% price increase over 3600x at MSRP. If you add to calculation fact that 3600 existed that was better value then 3600x that is even 40% price increase until 5600 come. 5800x is the worst case because it replaces 3800x that in reality is 3700x if you buy per value. GamersNexus in their benchmarks literally said that if you play games, buy 5600x and forget about stronger model it makes no diffrence (even similar cache is here), if you go productivity saving 100$ for 5900x is huge uplift, and if you don't want to do that, get 3900x which will oscilate around same price now on market and will be faster in productivity.

Like i understand 50$ price increase on 5950x and 5900x. But 5600x should really have smaller price increase (like 20-30$), and 5800x if 5700x is not comming shouldn't have price increase at all.

[ThoreauHD]

So, I'll be upgrading the desktops to this. And looking forward to the 6xxx series apu derivatives of zen 3. That's gonna make a helluva plex/emby/VM cpu. One bright ray of hope from this catastrophic year.

[Teggs]

These glued dies are doing quite well.

If that slide isn't being used as a cautionary marketing tale in college instruction, it should be.

In any case, AMD's engineers made a hell of an achievement. In fact, Intel aren't the only ones who are going to look bad. Apple's ARM-based Macintosh offerings were going to be disappointing already, now they are probably going to look like garbage. The 'x86 is dead because Apple/Nvidia/ARM!' crowd is going to have to wait a while.

[jrch2k8]

Phoronix has very specific linux benchamarks and when you buy CPU and you do majority of certain work you probably look at just this usage. But for example on Windows Hardware Unboxed made price/performance and Intel doesn't look that bad here with price increases, mostly because in productivy older 3000 series is winning price/performance and in games cheaper Intel chips are also doing fine. Intel at least towards windows market doesnt' have that obscene prices unless you do tons of rendering at CPU.

Thing is that 50$ flat price increase is really bad way to increase prices. I understand AMD wants to earn more money with such good chips, but 5950x is price increase of 50$ (MSRP value which is 6.6% increase) while Ryzen 5600x is 20% price increase over 3600x at MSRP. If you add to calculation fact that 3600 existed that was better value then 3600x that is even 40% price increase until 5600 come. 5800x is the worst case because it replaces 3800x that in reality is 3700x if you buy per value. GamersNexus in their benchmarks literally said that if you play games, buy 5600x and forget about stronger model it makes no diffrence (even similar cache is here), if you go productivity saving 100$ for 5900x is huge uplift, and if you don't want to do that, get 3900x which will oscilate around same price now on market and will be faster in productivity.

Like i understand 50$ price increase on 5950x and 5900x. But 5600x should really have smaller price increase (like 20-30$), and 5800x if 5700x is not comming shouldn't have price increase at all.

They know this and the answer is very simple, neither Intel/AMD give a damn about what you or me would consider good value or reviewers for that intent, because average joe/investors expect a product portfolio with certain steps and that's all there is to it.

Sure, they know the 5800x is not going to be that hot, so they simple make less of them but with absolute disregard of your opinion or feelings about it the 5800x will exists and the 6800x and 7800x until some suit decide that step is not "cool" anymore and then we will be discussing the new step is useless, bla bla, rinse and repeat.

Why? because neither suits or your average buyers either watch reviews or care about them, they will simply pick the box that the salesman push on them and use prices for reference!!!(<- this is why the 50$ up), simply because average joe buyer will find counter intuitive that the best CPU is cheaper than the other blue one not so good CPU