Review AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D Review: New Mid-Range Gaming Champ Is a Micro Center Exclusive

[Admin]

We put the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XD through our expansive test suite and found it to be the best value for budget gaming processors, but it is only available at Micro Center for a limited time.

AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D Review: New Mid-Range Gaming Champ Is a Micro Center Exclusive : Read more

 

[-Fran-]

Should we start calling the X3D parts "game accelerators"? Heh.

Thanks for the benchies as well!

Quite the good value for a platform that, quite simply, refuses to die. If there's people that has access to the 5600X3D and was trying to hold out for AM5, well, this CPU may just give them a few more years of not needing an upgrade at all? Maybe?

It also makes a compelling argument for a cheap new budget build, but I would still spend the few extra macarroons and get the R5-7600 in AM5 and wait for later AM5 CPUs.

Regards.

 

[King_V]

Welp, last year (February), I succumbed to a great deal and made an hour-long drive to Micro Center to upgrade from a Haswell system to a 5600X with A520M motherboard.

It's seen less use than I had originally planned.

That all said, had I been a little more patient, and realized at the time that I wouldn't be having that much use, this combo would definitely have been where I said "let me plan my drive to Micro Center," and with the price of SSDs going down, probably wouldn't have cost me much more than my current system.

Still, I don't regret my 5600X.

 

[healthy Pro-teen]

At least for non-US users, 5700X provides comparable performance if you don't have a 4090/4080 or such (probably step up to AM5 if you spend that much on GPUs). I think AMD doesn't have enough cut down 5800X3D dies to justify a global launch.

 

[Co BIY]

Just to remember, they are not making these chips but recycling defective 5800X3D, so the exclusivety is due to really having little to sell.

From the article: "sources close to the matter tell us these chips were “purpose-built” to be launched as Ryzen 5 5600X3D parts. As such, they aren’t made of defective Ryzen 7 5800X3D processors."

I wonder if the design tools and processes that allow for flexible SOCs and such are also allowing much more flexibility in processor production.

With the RTX 4060 that this class of chips is most likely going to be paired with I doubt there is any observable difference in performance between any of the chips. (this would be a worthwhile test).

 

[Amdlova]

Interesting how q cache can eat too many watts... it's a no go for me.

 

[Avro Arrow]

At least for non-US users, 5700X provides comparable performance if you don't have a 4090/4080 or such (probably step up to AM5 if you spend that much on GPUs). I think AMD doesn't have enough cut down 5800X3D dies to justify a global launch.

Looking at the performance available, they were stupid not to produce it in the first place. I said the same thing about their lack of an R5-7600X3D.

 

[TJ Hooker]

I wonder if the design tools and processes that allow for flexible SOCs and such are also allowing much more flexibility in processor production.

X3D chips are just normal CCDs (core chiplet dice) with a separate SRAM die added on top. I would imagine they've had the capability to produce them as lower core count products since day one, in the same way they produce lower core count non-X3D parts (as they use the same CCDs).

 

[TJ Hooker]

Looking at the performance available, they were stupid not to produce it in the first place. I said the same thing about their lack of an R5-7600X3D.

I'm guessing it comes down to margins. So long as yields are good, making an 8 core CPU doesn't really cost them any more than a 6 core CPU, but they can charge more for it. At that point it doesn't make sense to release the 6 core part so long as you're still selling all the 8 core parts you can make reasonably quickly.

Edit: Although I guess the same could be said about non-X3D 8 vs 6 core chips as well. I'm not sure why it made sense to release 6 and 8 core simultaneously for non-X3D, but not for X3D. I still suspect they did so as a result of business considerations though, rather than not understanding that 6 core X3D CPUs would be viable products.

 

[Dr3ams]

In a few years or so an unboxed 5600X3D will be a collectors item, sold on Ebay for a disgusting amount of money.

 

[Elusive Ruse]

AMD can't stop winning.

 

[hotaru.hino]

While the performance looks nice, I just don't see a compelling reason to get a 5600X3D over the 5800X3D, if you were to consider an X3D processor. And if you're just after a good value, I'd argue the 5600X is still a better deal. Especially when the 5600X is around 70% the cost, and recent sales pushed it as low as ~60%.

 

[brandonjclark]

Should we start calling the X3D parts "game accelerators"? Heh.

Thanks for the benchies as well!

Quite the good value for a platform that, quite simply, refuses to die. If there's people that has access to the 5600X3D and was trying to hold out for AM5, well, this CPU may just give them a few more years of not needing an upgrade at all? Maybe?

It also makes a compelling argument for a cheap new budget build, but I would still spend the few extra macarroons and get the R5-7600 in AM5 and wait for later AM5 CPUs.

Regards.

Accelerated Graphics Processors?

oh wait...

 

[oofdragon]

From the article: "sources close to the matter tell us these chips were “purpose-built” to be launched as Ryzen 5 5600X3D parts. As such, they aren’t made of defective Ryzen 7 5800X3D processors."

Lol okay if you believe that....

 

[Avro Arrow]

I'm guessing it comes down to margins. So long as yields are good, making an 8 core CPU doesn't really cost them any more than a 6 core CPU, but they can charge more for it. At that point it doesn't make sense to release the 6 core part so long as you're still selling all the 8 core parts you can make reasonably quickly.

Edit: Although I guess the same could be said about non-X3D 8 vs 6 core chips as well. I'm not sure why it made sense to release 6 and 8 core simultaneously for non-X3D, but not for X3D. I still suspect they did so as a result of business considerations though, rather than not understanding that 6 core X3D CPUs would be viable products.

Well, I can see why they didn't do it with the R5-5600X3D because it was still unfamiliar territory but, from a business perspective, not having an R5-7600X3D was beyond stupid.

Remember that AMD was having difficulty attracting users to the AM5 platform because of the motherboard costs. Having an R5-7600X3D would've definitely increased the AM5 adoption rate. From a business perspective, maximising the adoption rate of AM5 should've been their top priority based on what we saw with AM4.

The reason that AM4 was the best x86 platform ever released was its longevity. Once a user had adopted the AM4 platform, it made absolutely zero financial sense to buy an Intel CPU for the platform's very long duration. For users, these drop-in upgrades were a major boon. There was no way that Intel could compete with AMD once a user had AM4 because even if the user had the budget for a new motherboard, an Intel CPU plus a $120 motherboard would get creamed by an AMD CPU that cost $120 more than the Intel CPU being considered. This is how AM4 brought AMD back from the brink and did severe damage to Intel at the same time. An AM4 user was a captive user and happy to be so. At the same time, the high adoption rate of AM4 really stuck the knife into Intel and gave it a few twists because Intel was completely locked-out of the huge AM4 user base.

The same business philosophy seems to have been applied to AM5 which means the more users that AMD could attract to AM5, the better off they'd be in the mid to long-term. After all, once a user has committed to AM5, it can be expected that their next two CPU upgrades will be AMD. That's essentially guaranteed revenue (never a bad thing) and the popularity of an R5-7600X3D would do even more damage to Intel, punishing them for making CPUs that rival/exceed GPUs when it comes to power consumption.

It's such an obvious thing but AMD managed to mess it up. The same company that showed amazing competence when producing AM4, RDNA and RDNA2 somehow managed the complete opposite when producing AM5 and RDNA3.

I swear, AMD and ATi have become like Jekyll and Hyde.

 

[TechieTwo]

While this is a good deal for gamers on a budget, it's very odd that Micro Center got the exclusive. It's not like they are on every street corner and they typically refuse to sell popular new products online forcing consumers to drive unreasonable distances to purchase in person. That's why they rarely get my business.

 

[King_V]

oofdragon said:

Lol okay if you believe that....

Evidence for your claims?

 

[oofdragon]

Honestly.. I never understood why so many choices. You want to priorize gaming? 7800X3D (gaming processor). You want to priorize work? 7950X (productivity). You want to save? 7600X (cheapest). There.. 6 cores, 8 cores, 12 cores. it could even be called Ryzen 7006, 7008, 7012, and the boxes would be different colors like 7008 RYZEN GAMER or something like that lol. My two cents though .. 99% of the time you won't notice the difference between a 7600X and a 7800X3D when gaming. Their difference be like 60fps vs 72fps.. 200vs240fps.. you can't possible tell which is which in a blind test, no one can. But productivity.... you can definetly tell a 7600X from a 7950X. So in the end the choice of which processor in my opinion is: how much do you code, Photoshop etc? None? Go for the 7600X and use the extra on a better GPU. There. If you are rich and already got the 4090, then go for the 7800X3D why not, you want the ultimate ultra fps performer even if it doesn't matter again because at 4K and max settings again you won't tell from a 7600X for sure, but you want to spend to have "the feeling" of the ultimate machine yeah go for it. But that's it, there's no difference. I would argue right now the 5600X3D is the ultimate performer because.. at $200 it plays just like the 7800X3D 99% of your games, so go for the cheapest when you want a cpu JUST for gaming and be happy. It's not only the cheapest CPU, ddr4 and AM4 mobo are also cheaper. Someone do the math there, I bet you can save $200 AM4 path vs AM5, that a higher tier GPU right there

 

[Math Geek]

While this is a good deal for gamers on a budget, it's very odd that Micro Center got the exclusive. It's not like they are on every street corner and they typically refuse to sell popular new products online forcing consumers to drive unreasonable distances to purchase in person. That's why they rarely get my business.

being a limited amount are going to be made for sale, what do you think would happen if it was sold online? perhaps you've heard about scalpers buying up all the stock and tripling the cost for anyone who wants one? i feel like we've seen such a thing somewhere else.....


so yah it's odd to have it at microcenter with such a small amount of stores, but i applaud it not being online where the bots can grab em all and jack the price up on ebay. but maybe best buy would have been a better partner for the sale of the chips in store only

 

[Assmar]

Blud I'd spend like $100 on gas just to get to the nearest MC. I was so excited over nothing.

Also @oofdragon , you would have to buy a whole different platform for 5xxx chips vs 7xxx chips.

 

[oofdragon]

Btw.. 5800X3D costs $350 best buy, Amazon and ebay right now. At $230 the 5600X3D is a staggering $120 less for the same performance! That's not "20% less", it's almost 40% really

Bro at $230 it's like HALF the price of the $7800X3D, and no one is able to tell both in actual gameplay

 

[TerryLaze]

Remember that AMD was having difficulty attracting users to the AM5 platform because of the motherboard costs.

No, their issue was that they launched only a month before the 13th gen came out so everybody just waited a month to see what to get, and after the 13th gen came out there was very little reason for anybody that build a new system to get the AM5 platform because the lower tier intel CPU would beat the higher tier ryzen CPU, 13700 better than 7900, 13600 better than 7700 and so on.

The x3d chips are their desperate last ditch effort to get at least some people to buy AMD.

The reason that AM4 was the best x86 platform ever released was its longevity. Once a user had adopted the AM4 platform, it made absolutely zero financial sense to buy an Intel CPU for the platform's very long duration. For users, these drop-in upgrades were a major boon. There was no way that Intel could compete with AMD once a user had AM4 because even if the user had the budget for a new motherboard, an Intel CPU plus a $120 motherboard would get creamed by an AMD CPU that cost $120 more than the Intel CPU being considered. This is how AM4 brought AMD back from the brink and did severe damage to Intel at the same time. An AM4 user was a captive user and happy to be so. At the same time, the high adoption rate of AM4 really stuck the knife into Intel and gave it a few twists because Intel was completely locked-out of the huge AM4 user base.

Anybody that isn't rich builds a system and then doesn't touch it for at least 5 years after which they think about maybe replacing the GPU to maybe make it usable for a few years more...
Anybody that has so much money that they can replace a CPU every year or every other year will do that even if they have to spend on the mobo as well...

Also this is the twisted knife in intels back...twice the net income they had before AM4...they only dropped back to 2017 level of net income in the last year and that's because of the obscene amount of money they are spending on the new fabs.

Intel Net Income 2010-2023 | INTC

Intel annual/quarterly net income history and growth rate from 2010 to 2023. Net income can be defined as company's net profit or loss after all revenues, income items, and expenses have been accounted for. <ul style='margin-top:10px;'> <li>Intel net income for the quarter...

www.macrotrends.net

Intel Annual Net Income (Millions of US $)
2022	$8,014
2021	$19,868
2020	$20,899
2019	$21,048
2018	$21,053
2017	$9,601
2016	$10,316

 

[ilukey77]

No, their issue was that they launched only a month before the 13th gen came out so everybody just waited a month to see what to get, and after the 13th gen came out there was very little reason for anybody that build a new system to get the AM5 platform because the lower tier intel CPU would beat the higher tier ryzen CPU, 13700 better than 7900, 13600 better than 7700 and so on.

The x3d chips are their desperate last ditch effort to get at least some people to buy AMD.

actually you may find the reasons why people held off on AM5 was
1. people are not often thrilled with the cost of a new platform ( not to mention ddr5 was still quite expensive )
2. AMD stupidly announced that they were bringing x3d cpu's to the 7000 series before the normal 7000 series released so people held back for the better gaming cpu's !!
3. AMD and board manufactures scared alot of people with the burning CPU's .. (while the bios's have been sorted it was a big hit for the sales of AMD cpu's )

I personally think Intel just doesnt get it they refuse to increase there socket life span(spare me the 14th gen refresh the 14th will be a waste of sand )
In 2 generations now AMD has leap frogged Intels flagship in gaming the 5800x3d did it and now the 7800x3d
while 100% no doubt in my mind the 13900k is the best overall cpu around its only holding the crown because the 7950x3d just not having the 3d v cache sorted yet ..
If the 8950x3d double stacks its cache correctly ( the 7950x3d is basically a 7800x3d) and is a beast in production and not as power hungry as Intel ( Intel no doubt is brute forcing the charts with its cpu's ) then once again Intel will be left with nothing to really answer and a terrible socket life span !!

AMD is eating up the eco system hand helds are becoming more popular and alot are using AMD apu's both the consoles are using AMD cpu's AMD owns the server space ..

 

[kyzarvs]

Can I ask about cooling? The article states:

As with all of AMD’s other X3D models, the Ryzen 5 5600X3D doesn’t have an iGPU or bundled cooler. We haven’t been told of any specific cooler recommendations, but given the TDP rating, it likely requires a 240mm liquid cooler (or air equivalent) like the 105W Ryzen 7 5800X3D.

Going back to previous CPU's (FX8350 springs to mind) I've had, they had a higher TDP, but nothing like as big a deal was made of cooling them. The boxed cooler was noisy as hell, but did the job and was tiny.

Is there some other reason that coolers have become such a big-ticket item now?

 

[A Stoner]

Too bad this was not available earlier. Daughter's school/gaming computer would have been better off with this.