After entries on Nvidia’s upcoming GeForce RTX 3070 for notebooks, a result for the mobile one can now be found in Geekbench’s online database Find GeForce RTX 3080. The benchmark has 48 read out shader multiprocessors from the graphics chip, i.e. 6144 Shader cores. Added to this are 16 GByte graphics memory.
The Geekbench run was made by a user with a ROG Zephyrus notebook, which on the CPU side was running on AMD’s not yet announced Ryzen 9 5900 H sets – presumably a Zen 3 combo processor with eight CPU cores and integrated Vega graphics unit (code name Cezanne). Found the entry of the Twitter user “TUM_APISAK”.
Behind the desktop RTX – 3080 With 6144 shader cores, the mobile GeForce RTX 3080 close to the desktop RTX – 3070, which uses 5888 shader cores. 6144 can be fully expanded with the ampere graphic chip GA 104 to which also GByte RAM on 256 data lines would fit. The desktop RTX – 3080 with GA 102 – GPU, 8704 shader cores, 320 – Bit interface and usually higher clock frequencies should be significantly faster.
Geekbench data for the mobile GeForce RTX 3070 already suggested that the graphics chips should be trimmed more than with desktop PCs. The notebook model therefore has 5120 shader cores. The reason for the limitation could be the power consumption, because the RTX – 3000 – graphics cards for desktop PCs are significantly more power hungry than their predecessors . In (tower) cases this can be compensated for by space for cooling and powerful power supplies, not with notebooks.
Back to the old days In recent years, Nvidia has relied on largely similar GPUs in desktop PCs and notebooks. The GeForce RTX 2080, for example, used in both cases 2944 Shader cores that GeForce GTX 1080 previously 2560. Only the GPU clock frequencies were reduced in favor of efficiency.
The 3000 generation, however, reminds us earlier years – the last was the gap between desktop and mobile in the year 2013 with the 700 series so big. At that time the GeForce GTX 700 came with 2304 Shader cores therefore, the GeForce GTX 780 M with 1536.
The appearance of a schematic block diagram of a Ryzen – 5000 processor based on the Cezanne design apparently allows some further conclusions to be drawn about the processors. Videocardz has compared the block diagram to the current Renoir design.
The Cezanne processors should use up to eight Zen 3 cores and eight compute units based on the Vega architecture. With regard to the cores and CUs, the full configuration is identical to the Renoir processors, which, however, use Zen 2 cores. Major changes can be seen in the block diagram, not all of which can be explained with the Zen 3 design and larger caches.
Comparison of the designs
L2 / L3 cache
Die-Size (SoC / CCD)
transistor density
Renoir
4 MB / 8 MB
156 mm²
62, 82 MTr / mm²
Matisse
4 MB / 32 MB
74 mm²
52, 70 MTr / mm²
Cezanne
4 MB / 16 MB
?
?
Vermeer
4 MB / 32 MB
80 , 7 mm²
51 , 43 MTr / mm²
The biggest difference between the desktop design (Matisse) and the mobile design (Renoir) The basis of the Zen 2 architecture was found in the halved L3 cache. Ultimately, a Renoir processor has 9.8 billion transistors. The size of the chip is 147 mm². All of the above processors will be manufactured at TSMC in 7 nm. AMD uses a process called “Deep Ultraviolet (DUV) Photolithography” – you can still get by without EUV exposure (Extreme Ultraviolet).
For Cezanne the L3 cache compared to Renoir is set to 16 MB doubled, but will still be half the size of the current desktop design (Vermeer). In the comparison between Matisse and Vermeer you can see that the CCD of 74 on 80, 7 mm² has grown, what with the changes in Zen -3 design related. Alone the 32 Occupy MB of L3 cache 27 mm² in space. Accordingly, it should be for 16 MB about 13, 5 mm².
Currently we do not yet know any data such as the number of transistors and the size of the Cezanne processors. According to initial estimates based on the block diagram, Cezanne should be around 175 mm² come, which is certainly partly due to the larger L3 cache.
The Zen 3 architecture and the associated changes in the cache hierarchy apparently have an impact on the overall design and size of the chip. However, there are likely to be other factors. AMD limited the Renoir processors to PCI-Express 3.0 and the mobile variants are also only eight instead of the otherwise freely available 20 Lanes available. This is justified with the lower power consumption, which is of course of particular importance in the mobile segment.
It is not known whether the Cezanne processors will support PCI-Express 4.0. It should be another 16 + 4 + 4 configuration for the lanes indicate whether AMD will reproduce them for the mobile variants limited to eight for connecting a dedicated GPU is also unknown. The desktop variants from Cezanne will certainly again offer more PCI Express lanes than the mobile variant.
On 11. January, AMD will give a keynote to the CES 2017 organize. The presentation of the Cezanne processors and the corresponding notebooks is expected there. These are then to be combined with the mobile Ampere GPUs from NVIDIA. When the corresponding notebooks will be available is still in the stars. However, there are indications that we will see a tense delivery situation with the mobile Ryzen processors, which, together with the also scarce ampere GPUs, will affect the entire notebook market. Partly the notebooks are therefore still with Ryzen – 4000 – and Core – 10000 – processors – so of the previous generation – to be equipped.
In the database of the USB Implementer Forum (USB-IF) you can find two more combined processors from AMD’s Cezanne family: the Ryzen 9 5980 HX and Ryzen 7 5700 G. According to the H suffix, the former CPU is intended for notebooks and, judging by the numbering, the new top model for notebooks above the Ryzen 9 5900 H or Ryzen 9 5900 HX.
The specifications of the Ryzen 9 5980 HX are still unknown. Since AMD traditionally relies on fully activated silicon chips for all Ryzen 9 variants – here with eight Zen 3 computing cores, 16 threads and Vega-8 graphics unit – selected variants with particularly high clock frequencies and overclocking options would be conceivable. The naming is strongly reminiscent of Intel’s top notebook models such as the overclockable eight-core Core i9 – 10980 HK. The USB-IF entries were found by the Twitter user “KOMACHI_ENSAKA”.
Ryzen 7 5700 G for desktop PCs For desktop PCs, the USB-IF database runs the Ryzen 7 5700G. The desktop Ryzen-7 with integrated graphics unit usually correspond to the mobile Ryzen 9, because of the even faster 12 and 16 – Kerner for desktop PCs but not sold as Ryzen 9. Eight Zen 3 computing cores including a fast Radeon GPU are likely to appear here as well.
The 4000 Generation AMD had primarily offered complete PCs, including with a focus on the business versions Ryzen 7 Pro 4750 G, Ryzen 5 Pro 4650 G and Ryzen 3 Pro 4350 G. In the end customer trade, the CPUs were only occasionally sold separately. Apparently limited numbers of items were to blame, again caused by insufficient production capacities at the chip order manufacturer TSMC.
On 12. January 2021 at 17 o’clock German time, AMD CEO Lisa Su is holding a keynote stream on the occasion of the virtual consumer electronics fair CES 2021, where the introduction of Cezanne is expected .
If you’re wondering what Zen 3 can offer AMD’s EPYC lineup, the EPYC 7543 (codename Milan) processors can likely answer that question. The 32-core Zen 3 chip (via Leakbench) was tested multiple times in Geekbench 4 last month.
Milan’s formula will be very similar to Rome in terms of the core specifications. The new core-heavy processors will once again top out at 64 cores and feature TDP (thermal design power) limits within the 120W and 225W range. The biggest and maybe most significant difference maker is the transition over to the Zen 3 microarchitecture in addition to the improved 7nm+ process node. Zen 3 has already been proven to provide very important IPC (instruction per cycle) gains in AMD’s Ryzen desktop processors, and we expect to see the same level of treatment for EPYC.
The upgrade path to Milan should be pretty straightforward too. The Zen 3-based chips will continue to live on AMD’s Socket SP3 so it’ll be backwards compatible with previous motherboards that supported Naples and Rome. This also means that Milan retains native support for DDR4-3200 memory and the PCIe 4.0 interface.
AMD EPYC 7543 Milan Specifications
Processor
Cores / Threads
Base / Boost Clocks (GHz)
L2 Cache (MB)
L3 Cache (MB)
TDP (W)
EPYC 7543*
32 / 64
2.8 / 3.7
16
256
?
EPYC 7542
32 / 64
2.9 / 3.4
16
128
225
EPYC 7532
32 / 64
2.4 / 3.3
16
256
200
Xeon Platinum 8280
28 / 56
2.7 / 4.0
28
38.5
205
Given the model of the processor, the EPYC 7543 should be the successor to the EPYC 7542. Both processors are equipped with 32 cores, 64 threads and 16MB of L2 cache. However, the EPYC 7543 flaunts 256MB of L3 cache, twofold of what’s available on the EPYC 7542.
AMD had previously enabled 256MB of L3 cache on other 32-core Rome chips too, such as the EPYC 7532. It really just comes down to the composition. The EPYC 7542 features four CCDs , while the EPYC 7532 makes use of eight CCDs. The end result is the same in regards to core count, but the EPYC 7532 ends up with 256MB of L3 cache since each CCX carries 16MB of L3 cache.
When it comes to clock speeds, the EPYC 7543 has a 100 MHz lower base clock than the EPYC 7542, but the Milan chip does sport a 300 MHz boost clock though. So far, the EPYC 7543 has the highest boost clock speed we’ve seen in a Milan chip, even higher than the EPYC 7763, which hits 3.5 GHz.
The EPYC 7543’s best result had the 32-core processor scoring 6,204 points in the single-core test and 112,152 points in the multi-core test. In single-core performance, the EPYC 7543 seemingly destroys a pair of Xeon Platinum 8280 (codename Cascade Lake) processors by up to 22.9%.
On the flip side, the Xeon Platinum 8280 only beat the EPYC 7543 by 4.5% in the multi-core test, despite the setup having up to 56 cores at its side against the 32-core Milan part.
Admittedly, Geekbench 4 is an outdated benchmark, and not a very good one to evaluate modern processors that have pushed the core limits to new horizons. Nevertheless, that doesn’t make the Zen 3 microarchitecture any less impressive. In a world where the business model is based on a per-core or per-socket basis, the value in Zen 3’s IPC improvements will certainly appease enterprises.
It seems like AMD has a couple of unannounced CPUs in the works, namely the Ryzen 7 5700G and the Ryzen 9 5980HX; Tweeted by @KOMACHI_ENSAKA, these names have just recently shown up in USB-IF’s processor listings. These names should be official, as they come directly from the USB-IF organization. The USB-IF is responsible for creating and developing the USB specification.
This is the first time we’ve seen these CPU names listed anywhere. The Ryzen 7 5700G could be equipped with AMD’s integrated graphics, with the “G” signifying the 5700G has an integrated graphics chip. AMD has the Ryzen 7 4700G 8 core, but it’s aimed at the OEM space. So perhaps this new model with Zen 3 cores inside will be a higher-performing model aimed at DIY builders and budget gamers.
The Ryzen 9 5980HX listing is just as mysterious as the Ryzen 7 5700G — we only know from its name that it’s almost certainly a high-end mobile CPU. Currently, we know of a Ryzen 9 5900HX in the works with a rumored boost frequency of 4.7GHz, and rumored performance close to that of the Core i9-10900K desktop processor. The Ryzen 9 5980HX could be a higher-clocked variant of the 5900HX, or perhaps a higher core count model. But we can’t be sure.
CES 2021, while virtual this year, is just around the corner. So if AMD is close to launching these processors, we may know much more about them as early as next week.
It’s no secret that AMD’s Zen-3 based Ryzen 5000 series CPUs are flying off the shelves faster than AMD can make them, but it looks like the same will be the case for Zen 3 notebook chips when they land in Q1. A report from DigiTimes doesn’t specifically call out the reason behind the issues, but claims they could be due to either PlayStation 5 orders or a lack of packaging and substrate availability.
But the latter issue doesn’t only affect AMD. Reports show that Nvidia, Apple, Huawei, EV cars, and virtually any other market that uses silicon interposers are suffering at the hands of the shortage of critical chip packaging supplies.
AMD Depends on TSMC, Who Depends on…
TSMC manufactures the silicon itself and then packages it onto a substrate so the chip can be soldered or installed onto a motherboard of some type. This is called chip ‘packaging,’ and reports of chip packaging problems have been circulating for a few weeks.
Of course, it doesn’t help that TSMC’s capacity is already fully booked, but this news could shed new light on the reasons behind the issues. Previously, it was suspected that TSMC simply didn’t have enough in-house lithographic capacity to make more chips, but it turns out that its reliance on external sources possibly contributes to the problem. TSMC’s major ABF substrate suppliers, including Unimicron Technology, Kinsus Interconnect Technology, and Nan Ya PCB, are experiencing shortages.
Digitimes’ sources indicate that AMD can currently only satisfy about 50 to 60 percent of Zen 2 demand for notebooks, and that ODM’s (Original Design Manufacturers) expect to run into serious shortage issues when Zen 3-based notebooks enter the market in Q3. That’s narrowed down to two possibilities (or perhaps both): Either TSMC can’t package enough chips, or AMD’s chips for the PlayStation 5 are soaking up all of its production capacity.
So, Just Increase Supply?
The situation isn’t helped by the fact that demand is currently through the roof right now. AMD’s CPUs, almost all GPUs, and the latest consoles are being bought up like pastries at a bakery — except there’s only one bakery for an entire city.
Naturally, in such a situation, AMD is quite powerless as a fabless chipmaker because it relies on TSMC for its parts. One could argue that TSMC’s suppliers should increase supply, but that would require increased capacity and investments from the substrate makers. No one can predict with any certainty that post-pandemic demand will remain at this level, potentially making that a poor investment for those firms, so that doesn’t seem likely.
This means the current difficulties with finding Ryzen 5000, Radeon RX 6000, PS5, and Xbox Series X/S consoles are likely to continue. And the same goes for Nvidia’s RTX 30-series GPUs.
AMD has been doing wonders in the CPU industry, with its well-received and high performing Zen 2 and Zen 3 based processors, but now it seems AMD wants to improve performance not just through faster cores, but through the use of FPGAs. Just a few days ago, AMD filed a patent for integrating FPGAs into a CPU, which would allow the processor to run custom instruction sets to extend the its capabilities. As a side note, this patent was made just a few months after AMD’s acquisition of Xilinx, a company dedicated to making FPGAs.
FPGAs, or Field Programmable Gate Arrays, are simple yet powerful devices that can run specific instruction sets very quickly. This is different from a standard x86 CPU core that’s designed to run a near-infinite variety of instruction sequences, albeit sometimes slowly. If there’s a specific task (graphics, physics, encryption, etc.) that’s used regularly, it might be beneficial to create a custom instruction on an FPGA that will process the code much more quickly. Plus, FPGAs aren’t limited to a single instruction set; they can be re-programmed to run another instruction set if necessary.
This seems to be what AMD is going for, and AMD’s implementation would allow the FPGA unit to share registers with the CPU itself. Simply put, this allows the CPU to very quickly offload instructions to the FPGA unit when necessary. We don’t know what specific tasks AMD is looking at, but presumably anything currently using dedicated FPGAs could see support. We also don’t know where this FPGA (or FPGAs) would be located. If we’re talking about a Zen 2 or Zen 3 based design, the FPGA could be installed on its own separate die (chiplet) connected via the infinity fabric. Alternatively, it could be integrated directly onto the CPU chiplet, sharing a die with the cores. This would be the most optimal setup as far as performance goes, but it would require new compute chiplets.
AMD has yet to announce any new processors that take advantage of an FPGA unit. Still, this technology could be very beneficial in the future for improving processor performance as CPU architectures continue to become more difficult to shrink.
He ASUS ROG Zephyrus GA 15 GA 503 QS has been leaked revealing an interesting choice of components by the Taiwanese company. According to the leak, which appeared in Amazon China, this computer will have one of the new processors AMD Ryzen 7 5800 HS , a high performance variant, but with a TDP limited to 31 W which should replace the current 4800 HS like the one we tested on the ASUS ROG Zephyrus G 14.
Another very interesting choice is the graphics card, since ASUS would have chosen a powerful RTX 3080 which, except for surprise, will be one of the graphics with the best performance on the market for laptops.
The ASUS ROG Zephyrus GA 15 joins other leaks of laptops with Ryzen processors 5000
Lately we are seeing a lot of leaks of by laptops with AMD Ryzen 5000 based on Zen 3, so everything indicates that this new generation will be more present in a market where Intel still has a very dominant position.
That manufacturers are betting on these Ryzen makes all the sense in the world if the performance leaks that we have seen are fulfilled and they are able to offer a performance similar to high-end desktop CPUs , something that would not be far-fetched considering the good performance of computers with Ryzen series processors 4000 H.
The price of this ASUS ROG Zephyrus GA 15 GA 503 QS will be around 1. 800 euros if we make a direct change from the Chinese currency.
End of Article. Tell us something in the Comments or come to our Forum!
Antonio Delgado
Computer Engineer by training, editor and hardware analyst at Geeknetic since 2011 . I love gutting everything that comes my way, especially the latest hardware that we get here for reviews. In my spare time I fiddle with 3d printers, drones and other gadgets. For anything here you have me.
io-Tech’s delivery bids farewell to a pandemic-stained year 2020 and wishes everyone a better year 2021!
In many ways, the special year 2020 is finally coming to an end. SARS-CoV-2 and the resulting COVID – 19 swelled rapidly into a worldwide pandemic that affected everyone’s lives in one way or another.
In computers and consumer electronics, the pandemic was reflected above all in increased demand. This became clear with the release of CPU, graphics and console releases later in the year. Various bots and trocars took a significant share of the products launched until the market, and the queues of ordinary consumers for, among other things, new graphics cards will continue well into next year, even though the first ones went on sale as early as September. Trocars, on the other hand, laugh on their way to the bank after plucking desperate consumers for double or even triple the price of the products. This has led, inter alia, to an initiative by British MEPs to ban the trocha for console and computer components by law
. The year contained many interesting innovations in the field of technology publications. Struggling with problems with its manufacturing processes, Intel was able to release a new generation 10 nanometer Tiger Lake processors for laptops and NVIDIA chose Samsung and its 8-nanometer manufacturing process as the manufacturer of its new consumer circuits. The new GeForce RTX 30 series, in particular, significantly improved beam tracking performance and was given the dubious honor of being the first of the fall releases to really show how badly production is lagging behind demand. AMD, for its part, was able to release the new Zen 3 architecture and export the crown of the fastest gaming processor, at least temporarily, in addition to which the RDNA2 architecture brought accelerated beam tracking to next-generation consoles and Radeon RX 6000 series graphics cards.
Earlier next year, more models are expected to be available for both AMD’s Radeon RX 6000 series and NVIDIA’s GeForce RTX 30 series. In addition, Intel is expected to release new ones 11. generation of Rocket Lake codenamed processors immediately during the first quarter. Intel is also working on the first standalone Xe-HPG game graphics cards.
We at io-Tech want to thank all our readers for the past year and wish everyone a safer and better New Year 2021!
t. Sampsa, Juha, Petrus, Niko, Juha U, Oskari and Joona
The Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 could easily be anybody’s dream memory kit. However, the hardware requirements and the kit’s eye-watering price tag make it an extremely niche product.
For
Fastest memory kit on the market
Fantastic XMP performance
Fun to overclock
Against
Costs a small fortune
Plug-n-Play is out of the question
Steep hardware requirements
Extremely fast memory kits are often frowned upon because of their premium pricing and the fact that modern processors don’t dramatically benefit from the ultra-fast data rates. Nevertheless, that doesn’t stop memory vendors from climbing the frequency ladder to produce the fastest memory that the market has ever seen, often just to make a statement.
Several memory specialists have released DDR4-5000 memory kits, with the big names including G.Skill, Corsair, and Adata all having claimed their bragging rights. However, Crucial has effectively one-upped the other brands by releasing the new Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 memory to claim the title of the fastest retail memory kit that money can buy.
On paper, DDR4-5100 looks absolutely spectacular, but it remains to be seen if it has any significant impact on real-world performance. And that is exactly what we’re here to find out about today.
Image 1 of 5
Crucial Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 5
Crucial Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 5
Crucial Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 5
Crucial Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 5
Crucial Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 press kit came inside an exclusive Pelican case with some added accessories. Unfortunately, Crucial ships the retail kit in its standard packaging without the bells and whistles we found in the reviewer kit.
Fittingly, the combination to unlock the padlock is 5-1-0-0. Inside, we found a small LEGO figurine of The Flash (alluding to how fast the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 memory modules are), an electric screwdriver with an integrated light and a set of corresponding tips, along with a Strike Force Energy packet in case we needed a shot of energy during overclocking sessions.
The Ballistix Max memory modules are essentially a replica of the Ballistix Max RGB, sans the RGB lighting. The black, anodized aluminum heat spreader looks minimalistic, but in a good way, explaining why Crucial has been reluctant to alter the design. Even without the RGB diffuser, the Ballistix Max measures 39.17mm (1.54 inches) tall, which isn’t intrusive at all. These shouldn’t present any compatibility issues with many CPU air coolers.
Crucial Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Crucial commercializes the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 in a dual-channel 16GB package, meaning you get two memory modules that are each 8GB in capacity. The memory modules are manufactured with an eight-layer PCB, utilizing Micron’s own D9TNW (MT40A1G8WE-075E:B) integrated circuits (ICs), known by most people as Micron B-die. The Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 retails for $899.99, and rightfully so since Crucial invested a lot of time into binning Micron B-die ICs that can hit DDR4-5100.
Without any surprises at all, the memory defaults to DDR4-2666 with 19-19-19-43 timings. Crucial includes one XMP that profile automatically cranks the memory modules up to DDR4-5100 and sets the timings and DRAM voltage to 19-26-26-48 and 1.5V, respectively. For more on timings and frequency considerations, see our PC Memory 101 feature, as well as our How to Shop for RAM story.
Comparison Hardware
Memory Kit
Part Number
Capacity
Data Rate
Primary Timings
Voltage
Warranty
Crucial Ballistix Max
BLM2K8G51C19U4B
2 x 8GB
DDR4-5100 (XMP)
19-26-26-48 (2T)
1.50
Lifetime
Thermaltake ToughRAM RGB
R009D408GX2-4600C19A
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4600 (XMP)
19-26-26-45 (2T)
1.50
Lifetime
Patriot Viper 4 Blackout
PVB416G440C8K
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4400 (XMP)
18-26-26-46 (2T)
1.45
Lifetime
Klev Cras XR
KD48GU880-40B190Z
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4000 (XMP)
19-25-25-45 (2T)
1.40
Lifetime
TeamGroup T-Force Xtreem ARGB
TF10D416G3600HC14CDC01
2 x 8GB
DDR4-3600 (XMP)
14-15-15-35 (2T)
1.45
Lifetime
On this occasion, we couldn’t test the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 memory on our Intel platform. Neither our Core i7-10700K nor Core i9-10900K had a strong enough IMC (integrated memory controller) to handle DDR4-5100.
It wasn’t smooth sailing on the AMD platform, either. While our Ryzen 5 3600’s IMC was more forgiving, our ASRock B550 Taichi simply wouldn’t post with the memory. It wasn’t until we switched over to Gigabyte’s B550 Aorus Master that we finally found the Ryzen 5 3600 and the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 kit in complete harmony. Naturally, you’ll need to make sure that your chip and motherboard can support these types of clocks before you splurge on this pricey kit. As usual, our MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Gaming Trio handled the graphical workloads.
AMD Performance
Image 1 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 15 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 16 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 17 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 18 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 19 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
It’s common knowledge that Ryzen processors have a latency penalty when the chip’s Infinity Fabric clock (FCLK) and the memory clock (MCLK) are not on the same page (1:1 ratio). However, if you go up high enough on the data rate spectrum, you’ll eventually hit a point where the higher data rate negates the penalty.
The Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 outpaced its competitors on our application performance tests without much effort. The memory was faster than the T-Force Xtreem ARGB DDR4-3600 C14, where DDR4-3600 is widely considered the sweet spot for Ryzen processors. It wasn’t a perfect performance, though, as the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 had a bad showing in the Microsoft Office tests where it fell behind other slower rivals.
Regarding gaming performance, the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 is right up there with the best. The memory kit was only a few decimal points from matching the T-Force Xtreem ARGB DDR4-3600 C14’s performance.
Overclocking and Latency Tuning
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
Crucial Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
After some thorough testing, we determined that our Ryzen 5 3600 sample has hit a wall with DDR4-5100. The chip simply wouldn’t budge beyond that frequency. Sadly, we’re still in the middle of the great Ryzen 5000 shortage, so finding a Zen 3 processor at a reasonable price is practically a wild-goose chase. Rest assured that we will definitely revisit the overlocking headroom aspect of the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 once we get our hands on a more proficient Intel or AMD processor.
Lowest Stable Timings
Memory Kit
DDR4-3600 (1.46V)
DDR4-4000 (1.45V)
DDR4-4400 (1.45)
DDR4-4500 (1.50)
DDR4-4600 (1.55V)
DDR4-4666 (1.56V)
DDR4-5100 (1.60V)
Crucial Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 C19
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
17-25-25-48 (2T)
Thermaltake ToughRAM RGB DDR4-4600 C19
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
18-24-24-44 (2T)
20-26-26-45 (2T)
N/A
Patriot Viper 4 Blackout DDR4-4400 C18
N/A
N/A
17-25-25-45 (2T)
21-26-26-46 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
Klev Cras XR DDR4-4000 C19
N/A
18-22-22-42 (2T)
19-25-25-45 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
TeamGroup T-Force Xtreem ARGB DDR4-3600 C14
13-14-14-35 (2T)
N/A
19-19-19-39 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
It isn’t every day that we get a memory kit with the caliber of the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 in our labs. While we were eager to pump huge amounts of voltage into the memory to see how high it’ll go, we also wanted to preserve its integrity. For academic purposes, we’ve increased the DRAM voltage from the XMP default of 1.5V to 1.6V to get some headroom to optimize the timings. Logically, 1.6V is not a voltage that we would recommend for daily usage.
The Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 had no problems running stably with a CAS Latency of 17, which was pretty amazing considering the frequency that the memory operates at. While it was possible to drop both the tRCD and tRP from 26 to 25, we didn’t have any luck with the tRAS, though. Any value below 48 wasn’t stable. The final outcome resulted in 17-25-25-48.
Bottom Line
The Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 isn’t your typical memory kit, so the set-it-and-forget-it approach will not fly here. First and foremost, you’ll need to own a processor with a competent IMC to run DDR4-5100 in conjunction with a motherboard that supports that frequency. The memory will likely require a bit of patience and manual finetuning too, which might not be everyone’s cup of tea. If you’re not into that type of activity, you’ll probably be better served by a mainstream kit that doesn’t push the frequency boundaries.
Crucial’s lightning-fast memory will in all likelihood appeal to professional overclockers that need quality memory to break world records, or that inner circle of elite enthusiasts that love exotic hardware or simply want that last percent of performance that’s on the table.
We’re nearing the end of the DDR4 era, so the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 could be the highest-frequency DDR4 memory kit that we see before DDR5 hits the market next year. Crucial sells the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 for $899.99. With that kind of money, you could probably put together an entire gaming PC. Crucial produced the Ballistix Max DDR4-5100 kits in limited quantity, so they may ultimately turn into a collector’s item.
As outlined in a recent post on Chip Hell, one of its users reportedly grabbed an early B560 motherboard and engineering samples of three of Intel’s new Rocket Lake CPUs, including the Core i7-11700, Core i9-11900, and Core i9-11900K.
The tested pitched each processor against AMD’s Zen 3-powered Ryzen 7 5800X to see just how they compare to AMD’s best eight-core chip. Since these are engineering samples, the Intel chips’ clocks speeds are significantly lower than we would likely see with retail models. The poster also threw in Intel’s previous-gen Core i9-9900K and Core i7-10700K as well to compare gen-on-gen performance gains.
The testbed used the same B560 board discussed above, a B550 Taichi Razer Edition for the AMD tests, ASRock Radeon RX 6800 Taichi, 2x8GB kit of ZADAK Spark DDR4-3600 RAM, 1000W Antec HCG-X1000 power supply, and a 360mm AIO liquid cooler.
Here are the Rocket Lake engineering samples tested:
QV1J, Core i7-11700 ES — 1.8GHz base frequency, 4.4GHz boost frequency.
QVTE, Core i9-11900 ES — 1.8GHz base frequency, 4.5GHz boost frequency.
QV1K, Core i9-11900K ES — 3.4GHz base frequency, 4.8GHz boost frequency.
Even though there is a wide selection of benchmarks posted at Chip Hell, we’re only covering the locked 4GHz benchmark results. We chose to focus on this test because the engineering samples for Rocket Lake are clocked so low that any performance benchmarks from these samples are specific to these samples alone, and will not represent actual Rocket Lake performance when the retail SKUs hit shelves this year.
Chip Hell ran the Core i9-9900K, Core i7-10700K, Core i9-11900K ES, and Ryzen 7 5800X in Cinebench, but with all the chips locked at 4GHz, allowing us to see how much of an IPC gain Rocket Lake-S has purely from an architectural standpoint, as clock speed is no longer the deciding factor to performance.
Processor
Cinebench R15 Single-Threaded
Cinebench R15 Multi-Threaded
Ryzen 7 5800X
221
1,121
Core i9-11900K ES
200
1,029
Core i7-10700K
176
888
Core i9-9900K
168
852
We can see the gains from Comet Lake to Rocket Lake are quite decent; Rocket Lake commands a 13% lead over its predecessor. Compare this to the generational leap from Coffee Lake to Comet Lake at just 4%.
However, despite the architectural gains, it’s not enough for Intel to beat AMD’s Ryzen 7 5800X, which wins by 8%.
It appears that Intel will use clock speed rather heavily to try to gain an advantage over AMD’s Zen 3 architecture, as AMD still appears to win on clock-for-clock performance. But at least the architectural changes were significant enough to give Rocket Lake a decent IPC increase over Comet Lake. The overall performance gap should also widen rather significantly if clock speeds are higher on shipping Rocket Lake models.
However, Intel will continue to struggle against AMD’s Zen 3 platform, whether or not Intel manages to beat AMD in the single-threaded battle, as Rocket Lake will be severely behind in core count and that won’t change until Intel’s 12th-Gen Alder Lake architecture arrives.
At the CES in early January 2021 AMD will present the next generation of mobile Ryzen processors alias Cezanne and Lucienne . At the same time, many notebook manufacturers are taking the opportunity and will be announcing the corresponding notebooks. NVIDIA will also probably present the mobile Ampere variants, which also means that we will see notebooks with new processors and GPUs.
IThome already seems to have corresponding information on a variant of the ASUS ROG Zephyrus G. 15. With the new CPUs and GPUs, these will of course be available in different equipment variants. The high-end model will apparently be equipped with an AMD Ryzen 9 5900 HX, the new top model with eight cores. This achieves a base and boost clock of 3.3 and 4.7 GHz, respectively. The CPU cores are based on the Zen 3 architecture. On the GPU side, a GeForce RTX 3080 is mentioned, which is likely to be installed in a Max-Q variant – but this has not yet been confirmed.
Equipment with up to 17 GB DDR4 memory and a 1 TB SSD is also possible. In addition to this maximum configuration, there are also model variants with a Ryzen 7 5800 H and Ryzen 5 5600 H as well as smaller GeForce RTX models.
When it comes to the display, the willing buyer has the choice between a 4K display with 60 Hz, WQHD display with 165 Hz or FHD display with 300 Hz. Depending on the display and The resolution of the screen diagonal is 15, 6 or 17 Customs.
Flood of mobile hardware and notebooks expected
The CES 2021 should have the notebook market in focus. As I said, AMD will present its Ryzen 5000 series for notebooks. NVIDIA, the mobile amp versions, and Intel is responding to the stronger competition with Comet Lake-H and Tiger Lake-H. The main focus is on the gaming hardware and so, in addition to ASUS, manufacturers such as Acer, Gigabyte, MSI, Razer and some other new notebooks will be presented.
Thanks to this tool, at the debut in January 2021, it will be possible to intervene in the optimization and tweaking of the AMD Ryzen series CPUs 5000 with a very high level of intervention
of Paolo Corsini published on 29 December 2020 , at 16: 41 in the Processors channel Zen RyZen AMD Threadripper
ClockTuner for Ryzen (CRT) is a utility that allows you to perform advanced management of various operating parameters of AMD Ry processors zen, with access to settings that are typically not accessible to the user from the motherboard bios or operating system.
ClockTuner for Ryzen has recently been updated to version 2.0 , currently available as internal beta and from the end of January 2021 scheduled for public release. It introduces support for the new Ryzen CPUs of the family 5000 based on Zen 3 architecture as well as the APUs of the Renoir family. The most interesting news concerns the inclusion of a new mode for processor overclocking, called Hybrid OC and compatible with Ryzen CPUs based on Zen 2 and Zen 3 architectures.
With it it is possible to follow an intermediate approach that combines the benefits of manual overclocking with those of the boost clock implemented in the processor, obtaining a tangible performance increase when all cores are used in processing. The utility also allows you to intervene in undervolting , reducing the power requirements of the processor in fact with the same clock frequency so as to reduce overall power consumption and temperatures.
The developer of ClockTuner for Ryzen has also made available a roadmap of future versions : that 2.1 will arrive during the first half of 2021 introducing support for the automatic curve optimizer for CPUs with Zen 3 architecture. For version 2.2, expected in the third quarter, implementation of the support for AMD Ryzen Threadripper CPU 5000 next generation in addition to Ryzen 5000 for mobile systems .
If you’re after the best processor for work, a lot of the decision boils down to just what your work is. Most processors can handle just about any workload you throw at them, given enough time. But faster CPUs (with more cores and/or faster clock speeds) chew through tough workloads in much less time, making them great CPUs for productivity. This list focuses on performance in productivity applications for workstations, while our Best CPUs for Gaming article will give you a better picture of gaming performance. Our CPU Benchmark Hierarchy has all the processors ranked based on performance in gaming, single- and multi-threaded workloads.
A processor that excels at gaming isn’t always the best CPU if your workload is productivity-focused. In fact, as highly threaded CPUs become more common, gaming CPUs and work CPUs are increasingly different silicon beasts, making it tougher to choose which CPU is the best for your workload. So we’ve compiled a list of processors representing the best bang for your buck in common productivity tasks, based on our years of benchmarking and testing data.
Unfortunately, the semiconductor industry is in the midst of crushing shortages spurred by the pandemic and limited production capacity at industry-leading fab TSMC, which produces AMD’s CPUs. As a result, many chips are hard to find at retail, so we’ve bulked up our recommendations with value alternatives that might be easier to find at retail.
When choosing a non-gaming-focused CPU, consider the following:
Know the apps you use: If your apps take advantage of AMD’s superior cores / threads per dollar, you might want to get an AMD chip. But if you’re using lightly-threaded apps or Adobe products, Intel will perform better.
Get the latest gen: You usually won’t save a lot by going with an older chip, and you may limit your upgrade options down the road.
Keep the motherboard in mind: The priciest CPUs require more expensive motherboards than cheaper chips.
For even more information, check out our 2020 CPU Buyer’s Guide, where we discuss how much you should spend for what you’re looking to do, and when cores matter more than high clock speeds.
Architecture: Zen 2 | Socket: sTRX4 | Cores/Threads: 64/128 | Base Frequency: 2.9 GHz | Top Boost Frequency: 4.3 GHz | TDP: 280W
Reasons to Buy
Competitive per-core pricing
Excellent rendering performance
Overclockable
Indium solder
PCIe 4.0
ECC support
Reasons to Avoid
Benefits a narrow cross-section of workloads
Intel’s seemingly-endless delay in transitioning to the 10nm node for the desktop, not to mention a new architecture beyond Skylake, has left the industry ripe for disruption. As a result, AMD’s new Threadripper 3000 processors march into the upper segment of the HEDT market uncontested.
AMD’s Threadripper 3990X slots in as the industry’s uncontested leader in multi-threaded work with 64 cores and 128 threads, but this processor is most effective for a narrow selection of workloads that can benefit from the tremendous thread count while not being impacted by the vagaries of the multi-chip design. As a result, the overwhelming majority of users will be better served with the Threadripper 3970X listed below.
In either case, the Zen 3-powered Threadripper 3990X is pretty much exactly what AMD says it is: A highly specialized processor that provides incredible performance in a narrow cross-section of workloads, but at an extremely attractive price point given its capabilities.
AMD’s decision to pair 64 cores and 128 threads with higher boost frequencies pays big dividends in VFX, 3D animation, and ray tracing workloads with more performance than you would expect from any comparable workstation-class solution, not to mention even some dual-socket servers. The higher boost frequencies provide snappy performance in everyday lightly-threaded applications and devastating threaded performance in workloads that scale well. You also get access to 64 lanes of PCIe 4.0, which is useful for powerful SSD RAID arrays and other high-performance additives.
The $3,990 price tag is eye-watering, but for professionals that can benefit from the 3990X’s hefty allotment of cores and threads, it’s worth every penny.
Read: AMD 64-Core Threadripper 3990X Review: Battle of the Flagships
2. AMD Threadripper 3970X
Best High-End Workstation CPU
SPECIFICATIONS
Architecture: Zen 2 | Socket: sTRX4 | Cores/Threads: 32/64 | Base Frequency: 3.7GHz | Top Boost Frequency: 4.5GHz | TDP: 280W
Reasons to Buy
Excellent single and multithreaded performance
Competitive per-core pricing
Power efficient
Indium solder
Reasons to Avoid
Lack of backward compatibility
While the Threadripper 3990X brings the utmost performance possible to bear, the exotic design does result in slower performance in some common workloads, leaving room for the Threadripper 3970X to serve as the more reasonable option for the productivity-minded.
The 32-core, 64-thread Threadripper 3970X delivers devastating threaded performance in its price range, often trouncing Intel’s most exotic silicon. Intel’s Xeon W-3175X is ill-suited to take on the comparatively power-sipping Threadripper processors on a power efficiency basis, not to mention pricing. Just for comparison’s sake – the overclocked W-3175X pulled 768 watts under load, while the overclocked Threadripper 3970X peaked at 356 watts while often providing more performance in threaded workloads. That math is easy. Threadripper 3000 also brings a solid gain on the single-threaded performance front, too.
Finally, AMD’s forward-thinking adoption of the PCIe 4.0 interface is another attraction that will help win over the semi-professional crowd. While the faster interface isn’t as useful on the mainstream desktop, the ability to stack up throughput-craving devices behind the chipset without the radical throughput restrictions we see with Intel’s DMI is another big win.
AMD’s chips are nearly impossible to find at retail, while Intel now has a steady supply of chips readily available at retail. That makes the Core i9-10980XE an alternative pick that you can snag now, while you’ll likely have to exercise some patience or settle for paying scalper pricing for AMD’s new chips. Just be aware that you’ll sacrifice quite a bit of threaded horsepower by selecting the Core i9-10980XE.
For streamers and professionals who can make use of the extra I/O of and quad-channel memory, Intel’s Cascade Lake-X flagship earns its niche, but the Ryzen 5950X and 3950X are a better value for most productivity workloads where the more-robust HEDT platform is less important. That leaves a preciously slim slice of the market where Intel has an advantage in this price bracket (users that need quad-channel memory or more PCIe lanes). Overclocking performance is a factor if you’re willing to spend the cash. You can drop the -10980XE into an existing X299 board if you’re willing to sacrifice a few PCIe lanes, but be aware that this is the end of the line for the X299 platform.
The refined 14nm process equates to faster clock speeds, and thus performance, at lower overall power consumption. The Core i9-10980XE also has much higher overclocking headroom than its predecessor. But the 10980XE’s advantage after tuning over the AMD Ryzen 5950X comes at a $280 premium and requires more robust cooling and power delivery, so you should factor that into your purchasing decision. In most cases, the Ryzen 9 5950X and 3950X, both listed below, remain the better choice if you can find those chips on shelves.
Read: Intel Core i9-10980XE Review
3. AMD Ryzen 9 5950X
Best High Performance Value
SPECIFICATIONS
Architecture: Zen 3 | Socket: AM4 | Cores/Threads: 16/32 | Base Frequency: 3.4GHz | Top Boost Frequency: 4.9GHz | TDP: 105W
Reasons to Buy
Class-leading 16 cores & 32 threads
Overclockable
Higher boost frequencies
Reasonable price-per-core
Power efficiency
PCIe Gen 4.0
Reasons to Avoid
Requires beefy cooling
No bundled cooler
Higher gen-on-gen pricing
No integrated graphics
High end desktop (HEDT) processors have long offered the ultimate in performance, as long as you were willing to pay the price. Aside from high pricing, HEDT chips also require expensive accommodations, like beefy motherboards and the added cost of fully populating quad-channel memory controllers. Add in the inevitable trade-offs, like reduced performance in lightly-threaded applications and games, and any cost-conscious users who could benefit from the threaded horsepower of a HEDT chip just settle for mainstream offerings.
AMD’s Ryzen 9 5950X, with 16 cores and 32 threads, expands on its predecessors’ mission of bringing HEDT-class performance to mainstream motherboards, lowering the bar for entry. The 5950X carries a $799 price tag, but that’s downright affordable compared to competing HEDT processors that don’t offer the same class of performance.
The Ryzen 9 5950X’s healthy slathering of cores and threads are incredibly adept at productivity workloads. Still, it does come with a dual-channel memory controller that can restrict performance in workloads constrained by memory throughput. However, outside of that notable restriction, if you’re after a chip and platform that can do serious work seriously fast, but still be nimble enough to deliver high-refresh gameplay at the end of the day, the Ryzen 9 5950X fits the bill like no other CPU before it, blurring the lines between HEDT and mainstream platforms.
Architecture: Zen 2 | Socket: AM4 | Cores/Threads: 16/32 | Base Frequency: 3.5GHz | Top Boost Frequency: 4.7GHz | TDP: 105W
Reasons to Buy
Class-leading 16 cores & 32 threads
Overclockable
Higher boost frequencies
Reasonable price-per-core
Power efficiency
Compatible with most AM4 boards
PCIe Gen 4.0
Reasons to Avoid
Requires beefy cooling
Limited overclocking headroom
The Ryzen 9 3950X is a previous-gen processor, and we typically don’t recommend investing in older chips for productivity-focused builds. However, given the ongoing chip shortages that likely won’t end soon, the Ryzen 9 3950X might be the only option if you’re looking for a 16-core 32-thread processor to drop into a mainstream motherboard.
AMD’s 16-core 32-thread Ryzen 9 3950X brings HEDT-class performance to mainstream motherboards, lowering the bar for entry. The 3950X carries a $749 MSRP, but you can find this nimble chip for ~$715 at retail. Perhaps the most attractive aspect of this chip right now is that you can find it in stock, whereas the more powerful Ryzen 9 5950X is subject to crushing shortages, and thus price gouging.
Read: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (Image credit: AMD)
4. AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
Best Overall Value
SPECIFICATIONS
Architecture: Zen 3 | Socket: AM4 | Cores/Threads: 12/24 | Base Frequency: 3.7GHz | Top Boost Frequency: 4.8GHz | TDP: 65W
Reasons to Buy
Support for PCIe 4.0
Unlocked multiplier
Compatible with 500-series motherboards
Excellent gaming performance
Excellent single- and multi-threaded performance
Reasons to Avoid
No bundled cooler
Higher gen-on-gen pricing
No integrated graphics
If you’re truly only concerned about the best gaming CPU and basic productivity tasks, you should go with the Ryzen 5 5600X and save yourself some money. However, if you prize a brutal mix of performance in all aspects, like single- and multi-threaded work and gaming, the Ryzen 9 5900X is your chip – it delivers in all facets.
The 12-core 24-thread Ryzen 9 5900X is rated for a 3.7 GHz base and 4.8 GHz boost, but we clocked it in at 5.0 GHz during our own testing. Not only is the 5900X incredibly potent in threaded applications given its price point – it is also the uncontested fastest gaming chip on the market, so you’ll get the best of both worlds.
There’s also support for PCIe 4.0 and overclockability to consider. The Ryzen 9 5900X drops into existing 500-series motherboards, and support for 400-series motherboards is in the works for early 2021. You’ll need to bring your own cooler, and the bigger, the better – cooling definitely has an impact on performance with the higher-end Ryzen 5000 processors. However, if you’re looking for a chip with a great mixture of both single- and heavily-threaded performance, the Ryzen 9 5900X is a great option.
Read: AMD Ryzen 9 5900X Review
(Image credit: Intel)
Intel Core i7-10700K
Alternate Pick – Best Overall Value
SPECIFICATIONS
Architecture: Comet Lake | Socket: 1200 | Cores/Threads: 8 / 16 | Base Frequency: 3.8GHz | Top Boost Frequency: 5.1GHz | TDP: 125W
Reasons to Buy
Lower per-thread pricing
Turbo Boost Max 3.0
Excellent gaming performance
High overclocking headroom
Reasonable cooling requirements
Reasons to Avoid
No bundled cooler
PCIe 3.0 interface
Requires new motherboard
Not much faster than Core i5 (in gaming)
The Ryzen 9 5900X is superior to the Core i7-10700K in nearly every facet, but again, crushing shortages of AMD’s chips make the 5900X a rarity at retail. The Core i7-10700K slots into the middle ground between the Ryzen 9 5900X and the Ryzen 5 5600X listed below, and given the current state of the market, it might be the best pick in its price range. You can currently find this chip for ~$360, which is slightly below its official $387 MSRP.
The Core i7-10700K comes armed with eight cores and 16 threads that operate at a 3.8 GHz base and 5.1 GHz boost, making them adept at chewing through threaded workloads. The Core i7-10700K is a speedy chip with plenty of overclocking headroom, and it also comes with integrated graphics, which isn’t an option with AMD’s 5000-series processors.
You’ll need to bring your own cooler for the 10700K, but higher-end watercoolers can unlock quite a bit of overclocking headroom. Intel’s next-gen Rocket Lake processors will also be drop-in compatible with the LGA 1200 motherboard you’ll need for this processor.
Read: Intel Core i7-10700K Review
(Image credit: AMD)
5. AMD Ryzen 5 5600X
Best Budget CPU
SPECIFICATIONS
Architecture: Zen 3 | Socket: AM4 | Cores/Threads: 6 / 12 | Base Frequency: 4.1GHz | Top Boost Frequency: 4.8GHz | TDP: 65W
Reasons to Buy
Strong gaming performance
Strong in single- and multi-threaded workloads
Relatively easy to cool
PCIe 4.0
Bundled cooler
Power efficiency
Works with existing 500-series motherboards
Reasons to Avoid
Higher gen-on-gen pricing
The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X offers a compelling blend of pricing and performance in its price range, but the six-core 12-thread chip lands at $299, a $50 price hike over its previous-gen counterpart. However, the 5600X brings more than enough extra application performance to justify the premium, not to mention that it’s the most power-efficient desktop PC processor we’ve ever tested. That means it is easier to cool than competing chips in its price range, ultimately resulting in a quieter system.
AMD’s Zen 3 microarchitecture results in a stunning 19% increase in IPC, which floats all boats in terms of performance in gaming, single-threaded, and multi-threaded applications. The 5600X serves up more than enough performance for day-to-day application workloads, but you’ll need to align your expectations with the fact that this is a six-core processor. That said, you won’t find this level of performance from any other six-core chip on the market. If entertainment is also on the menu, the 5600X is an incredibly well-rounded chip that can handle any type of gaming, from competitive-class performance with high refresh rate monitors to streaming.
The Ryzen 5 5600X has a 3.7 GHz base and 4.6 GHz boost clock, but with the right cooling and motherboard, you can expect higher short-term boosts. The chip also has a 65W TDP rating, meaning it runs exceptionally cool and quiet given its capabilities (the previous-gen model was 95W).
Existing AMD owners with a 500-series motherboard will breathe a sigh of relief as the 5600X drops right into existing 500-series motherboards. Support for 400-series motherboards will come next year, so those users will have to wait for a drop-in upgrade until then. If you need a new motherboard to support the chip, both 400- and 500-series motherboards are plentiful and relatively affordable, with the B550 lineup offering the best overall value for this class of chip.
Read: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Review: The Mainstream Knockout
£150)Architecture: Zen 2 | Socket: AM4 (1331) | Cores/Threads: 6/12 | Base Frequency: 3.8GHz | Top Boost Frequency: 4.4GHz | TDP: 65W
Reasons to Buy
Low price
Excellent performance in gaming and applications
PCIe 4.0 support
Bundled cooler
Low power consumption
Unlocked multiplier
Backward compatibility
Reasons to Avoid
No cheap B-series motherboards with PCIe 4.0
Limited overclocking headroom
No integrated graphics
The Ryzen 5 3600 represents the lowest-end processor we’d recommend for a productivity-focused machine, but again, this is a previous-gen processor. However, due to ongoing product shortages, it might be the best bang for your buck that’s actually available at retail outlets.
Intel’s entry-level Comet Lake processors have made strides in the battle against AMD’s Ryzen, but in threaded apps, there really is no contest again: The Ryzen 3000 processors offer far more value than Intel’s competing chips. For instance, the Ryzen 5 3600 offers nearly the same amount of threaded horsepower as Intel’s $262 Core i5-10600K but retails for ~$200.
The 3600X might be worth the extra coin if you aren’t interested in overclocking, as it does provide more performance out of the box and comes with a better cooler. However, it’s hard to justify the $50 premium over the Ryzen 5 3600.
A Ryzen 5 3600 paired with a B550 motherboard (or even a B450 if you aren’t interested in PCIe 4.0 connectivity) will make a great setup for mainstream users focused on light productivity tasks, like streaming, rendering, and encoding.
Over the Christmas holidays (and shortly before) there were numerous sightings of the next generation of processors from AMD and Intel. First of all, there are signs of the imminent launch of the Intel Rocket Lake processors, as more and more samples are apparently in circulation. Intel has already officially announced this for the first quarter 2021 and also given the first details.
The 11. Core generation from Intel will use the existing LGA socket 1200 of the Comet Lake generation. They will use up to eight of the new Cypress Cove cores and should clock significantly more than 5 GHz for the high-end models. The most important new feature of the platform are four additional PCI Express lanes, all of which will also be upgraded to the 4.0 standard. All other, so far official details can be found in the message to Intel’s announcement.
The performance of the Rocket Lake processors cannot really be estimated at the moment. But Intel should be able to catch up with AMD again – at least where AMD had a small lead with the Zen 3 architecture. At the moment, however, there are no reliable figures for performance.
The mainboard manufacturers are currently preparing for the launch of Rocket Lake-S for the existing LGA 1200 – mainboards. The first BIOS updates are already being distributed and carry out the 11. Core Generation as supported models.
Alder Lake-S still raises many questions
With Alder Lake (and Alder Lake -S for the desktop), Intel is transferring the strategy of Lakefield processors to a larger product range. Alder Lake-S will be the successor to the Rocket Lake processors mentioned in the first section. The hybrid design will no longer only be used in the ultra-mobile area, but also on the desktop.
Up to 16 Cores should use the Alder Lake S processors. So far there has been talk of an 8 + 8 configuration – so eight high-performance cores should be combined with eight particularly efficient ones.
Data protection notice for Twitter
At this point we would like to show you a Twitter feed. Protecting your data is important to us: By integrating the applet, Twitter sets cookies on your computer, with which you can possibly be tracked. If you want to allow that, just click on this feed. The content is then loaded and displayed to you.
Your Hardwareluxx-Team
Show tweets directly from now on
More and more samples appear for Alder Lake-S too. However, one should not accept the details of the information read out as complete and secure. The cores seem to be following the path that Intel has taken with Sunny Cove, Willow Cove and the Atom designs. This can be seen from the size of the cache.
The question of which cores support simultaneous multithreading (SMT) and which do not remain open. At Lakefield, Intel deactivated the SMT for the Sunny Cove core because the small Atom cores did not support this. For the Alder Lake S processor shown here with 16 cores, support for 24 threads listed. Eight large cores with SMT come on threads, the eight smaller cores must therefore manage without SMT.
The Alder Lake S processors are expected at the end of 2017 and lead with the LGA socket 1700 a new platform. In addition to DDR4 and PCI-Express 4.0, it probably also supports DDR5 and PCI-Express 5.0. So far, Intel has not yet commented on which architectures or cores are used. According to the latest information, this should be Gracemont for the small cores and Golden Cove for the large cores.
Cezanne and Lucienne for notebook and desktop
AMD will present the next generation of APUs at the virtual CES in early January. As Cezanne and Lucienne, they use Zen 3 and Zen 2 cores and an integrated Vega graphics unit. By using the Zen 3 architecture, AMD of course makes a big leap in CPU performance. First benchmarks show an increase of up to 25%. In the TDP classes, AMD of course remains at the level of its predecessors.
Data protection notice for Twitter
At this point we would like to show you a Twitter feed. Protecting your data is important to us: By integrating the applet, Twitter sets cookies on your computer, with which you can possibly be tracked. If you want to allow that, just click on this feed. The content is then loaded and displayed to you.
Your Hardwareluxx-Team
Show tweets directly from now on
Cezanne apparently also serves as Renoir’s successor – at least for OEM use. It remains to be seen whether Cezanne, like Renoir, will be withheld from the retail market. First of all, Cezanne and Lucienne are expected for the notebooks.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
