• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD Zen 3 (5000 Series), rumored 17% IPC gain.

Status
Not open for further replies.
clv101 said:
It's been obvious since the announcement that the 5600X would be the gaming sweet spot. All those 'but consoles have 8 cores etc' folk were told, even by HU Steve a couple weeks back that cores are ~irrelevent.
Click to expand...

Yet some people just order the fastest and most expensive CPU regardless, even when all they will do is gaming. It's a mix of FOMO and adopting a strategy to upgrading that just means automatically ordering the fastest components you can buy regardless of whether it makes sense or not.

luggles said:
I recommended a 5600x to my mate for gaming and then on launch I didn't follow my own advice and went with a 5800x :D

Kinda regretting spending the extra money after I saw the reviews come in, but I'm just telling myself the extra cores will be great when it eventually ends up in my NAS for virtual machines...
Click to expand...
If you are wanting more cores then I would genuinely go for a 5900x instead as the cost increase is not to significant for the 4 extra cores vs what the 5800x was over the 5600x.

All of the major professional review sites I have seen are now saying outright that the 5800x is a poor purchase relative to the rest of the line-up and people have also been saying this on the forum for weeks from a cost perspective. It's either the 5600x for gaming or the 5900x as best of both worlds. A 5800x is definitely not a wise choice when you weigh up all of the pros and cons.

 
Last edited:
Richdog said:
All of the major professional review sites I have seen are now saying outright that the 5800x is a bad purchase relative to the rest of the line-up and people have also been saying this on the forum for weeks from a cost perspective. It's either the 5600x for gaming or the 5900x as best of both worlds. A 5800x is definitely not a wise choice when you weigh up all of the pros and cons.
Click to expand...

Yea watching all the reviews after securing my order on launch day was funny. I had a 5600x in my basket at a competitor too, but didn't want to deprive someone else seeing I'd already secured the 5800x. The 5900x is moving too far over how much I wanted to spend, even though it is better value.

If I thought I could get a 5600x within my return window and before Cyberpunk finally releases I probably would return the 5800x, but I'm doubtful so I'm just gonna eat the cost.

I've had my current rig for 5 years so if this one lasts me that long that's only 28 quid extra a year I threw away :D

Edit - Though watching Hardware unboxed's 5600x review the Death Stranding and Serious Sam 4 results give me hope that the 5800x might be the better choice in the long term, still probably not £140 worth but more a difference than older games.
 
Last edited:
luggles said:
Yea watching all the reviews after securing my order on launch day was funny. I had a 5600x in my basket at a competitor too, but didn't want to deprive someone else seeing I'd already secured the 5800x. The 5900x is moving too far over how much I wanted to spend, even though it is better value.

If I thought I could get a 5600x within my return window and before Cyberpunk finally releases I probably would return the 5800x, but I'm doubtful so I'm just gonna eat the cost.

I've had my current rig for 5 years so if this one lasts me that long that's only 28 quid extra a year I threw away :D
Click to expand...
Don't get me wrong man the 5800x is still an objectively monstrously powerful CPU and you WILL love it... it's just not the value proposition in the line-up. If you are prepared to eat the cost knowing full well what you are buying then you will no doubt be happy. Enjoy. :)
 
Grim5 said:
Valorant really likes Zen 3 and it really really likes the 5950x. 5950x beating the 10900k by 50% at 1080p.

Click to expand...
Oh wow, a free to play multiplayer game likes an £800 CPU? That's amazing grim and definitely a reason for buying one! That 5900x is ass-slow in comparison yo!

Ahh Grim... the very embodiment of 'all the gear and no idea'. :D
 
Richdog said:
All of the major professional review sites I have seen are now saying outright that the 5800x is a poor purchase relative to the rest of the line-up
Click to expand...
Curious how unanimous they are. And when you read their argument closely, its only the price that is wrong about 5800X.

My gripe with 5800X (which I ordered) is a limit on its boost clocks. For segmentation reasons AMD has hardcoded boost clocks in AGESA. 5025 MHz for 5950X, 4925MHz for 5900X and 4825MHz for 5800X. These are not binning, silicon lottery limits. This is artificial ceiling.
If 8 core was allowed to boost as high as 16 core, it would make top SKUs look bad in games.

I say price is good. It delivers 1% lower gaming performance than 5900X and 5950X while being 100 and 350 cheaper. And it actually wins in some games. And it wins or ties in low threaded workloads like browser javascript and some photoshop tasks. I know I'm not encoding videos or doing blender. So what I got is a fastest CPU for things I do.

That is after I find a way to get it boost higher...
 
alec said:
Curious how unanimous they are. And when you read their argument closely, its only the price that is wrong about 5800X.
Click to expand...
Yes, obviously it's the price and value relative to the rest of the line up... what else would it be? It's still a high-end Zen3 and it's going to perform like one.
 
Richdog said:
Yes, obviously it's the price and value relative to the rest of the line up... what else would it be? It's still a high-end Zen3 and it's going to perform like one.
Click to expand...
Yes, but they make no attempt to point out that this CPU is actually best in the lineup in some instances.
Or that "hilarious" 1.72745% better than 5600X rant from Steve. How about 5950X being only 1.5491% better than 5800X? Or sometimes worse. And its much more expensive
 
alec said:
Yes, but they make no attempt to point out that this CPU is actually best in the lineup in some instances.
Or that "hilarious" 1.72745% better than 5600X rant from Steve. How about 5950X being only 1.5491% better than 5800X? Or sometimes worse. And its much more expensive
Click to expand...
You can justify the 5800x in your head by picking apart any little niggling details that you want, it's your money and your right, but it doesn't change the facts that it's worse value than the 5600x as a pure gaming CPU and worse value than the 5900x as a mixed gaming and productivity CPU.

The only people who should buy a 5950x are people who NEED 16 cores for productivity purposes, otherwise it's a complete waste of money.
 
Richdog said:
You can justify the 5800x in your head
Click to expand...
I can and I have. And I kept eyes open for markers of low latency single CCX benefit in day 1 reviews (which are obviously not very much in depth). And it is there, just masked by fact that top cpus are allowed to boost higher.

Maybe upcoming 40 game comparison from HU will show it.
 
alec said:
I can and I have. And I kept eyes open for markers of low latency single CCX benefit in day 1 reviews (which are obviously not very much in depth). And it is there, just masked by fact that top cpus are allowed to boost higher.

Maybe upcoming 40 game comparison from HU will show it.
Click to expand...
The latency in Zen3 is no longer an issue that significantly affects real-world performance comparded to Zen2 and is not visible in anything other than specific benchmarks.

A 5900x boosts only 100mhz higher than a 5800x. Seems like you are obsessing over trivial and unimportant details that don't actually matter and those are in turn leading to purchasing decisions that may not actually make sense.
 
alec said:
I can and I have. And I kept eyes open for markers of low latency single CCX benefit in day 1 reviews (which are obviously not very much in depth). And it is there, just masked by fact that top cpus are allowed to boost higher.

Maybe upcoming 40 game comparison from HU will show it.
Click to expand...
I'm with you. I'm sure the 5800X will prove its worth (over and above the 5600X) in the future.

It is just price keeping this from being a recommended CPU. Hopefully this price will drop - once every single darn CPU stops selling out instantly, that is :p Strange times, these.
 
alec said:
Curious how unanimous they are. And when you read their argument closely, its only the price that is wrong about 5800X.

My gripe with 5800X (which I ordered) is a limit on its boost clocks. For segmentation reasons AMD has hardcoded boost clocks in AGESA. 5025 MHz for 5950X, 4925MHz for 5900X and 4825MHz for 5800X. These are not binning, silicon lottery limits. This is artificial ceiling.
Click to expand...
Will there be an easy way to remove these or is it reliant on AMD updating the code at some point?
Seems a bit rubbish to do that then also charge proportionally more per core. I'd expect with decent cooling that that 5800X should sustain higher boost clocks than the 12 & 16 core parts which would see it perform better in games rather than very marginally worse.
 
alec said:
My gripe with 5800X (which I ordered) is a limit on its boost clocks. For segmentation reasons AMD has hardcoded boost clocks in AGESA. 5025 MHz for 5950X, 4925MHz for 5900X and 4825MHz for 5800X. These are not binning, silicon lottery limits. This is artificial ceiling.
If 8 core was allowed to boost as high as 16 core, it would make top SKUs look bad in games.
Click to expand...

Given the 5800X runs quite hot perhaps there's a good reason they've limited its boost?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom