News AMD Ryzen 7 5700G APU Pictured, Powered On and Tested

[Admin]

Chinese journalists grab commercial AMD Ryzen 7 5700G, run some benchmarks.

AMD Ryzen 7 5700G APU Pictured, Powered On and Tested : Read more

 

[digitalgriffin]

10:1 oems only. They crave these parts.

 

[helper800]

10:1 oems only. They crave these parts.

Which is very unfortunate because there is a huge demand for AMD desktop chips that can run graphics to a screen while builders wait for graphics cards to be in stock. This would be amazing if they had similar performance to a 5800x.

 

[HideOut]

It should be just barely slower than a 5800x. If it is indeed only 100mhz slower overall, itll be barely noticable. And able to do a good bit on its own without a GPU. Heck it might be able to game better than my 1070 that I can't seem to ever get a replacement for.

 

[cryoburner]

10:1 oems only. They crave these parts.

AMD's "director of technical marketing" already announced last year when they released the 4000-series APUs that their next line of APUs should be coming to retail...

...while I cannot go into the details of our roadmap, there is a next-gen APU coming for DIY customers, and it will fit into 400- and 500-series boards. So if those enthusiasts are reading the news tomorrow and thinking ‘where's my upgrade?!’ I promise it’s coming.

Now, it's certainly possible that they might only be available in limited quantities, or at an unattractive price point, but it doesn't sound like they will be OEM-only.

Heck it might be able to game better than my 1070 that I can't seem to ever get a replacement for.

Probably not. I wouldn't expect graphics performance much faster than their existing APUs, which are typically around the performance level of a GT 1030, or a fraction of a 1070's performance. They will still likely be over twice as fast as Intel's UHD 750 found in Rocket Lake, but don't expect them to compete with any modern gaming cards.

 

[digitalgriffin]

AMD's "director of technical marketing" already announced last year when they released the 4000-series APUs that their next line of APUs should be coming to retail...

AMD's diy fanbase is mostly into buying CPUs and dGPUs.

Oems are facing GPU shortages and dGPU only adds to the total BOM. APUs are the bread and butter of most systems because of the lower BOM. While they aren't the highest margin systems, they are the bulk of sales.

Right now Intel can't make demand and offer an inferior product that's hard to cool. They are seriously hurting. AMDs APU is the attractive item. Especially true office systems.

And AMD has made it clear they don't mind stabbing their fan base in the back with lower value/higher prices now they are in the lead. There's more profit to be made selling to the fanbase more CPU + dGPU than just an APU.

 

[Conahl]

And AMD has made it clear they don't mind stabbing their fan base in the back with lower value/higher prices now they are in the lead.

just like intel did themselves for all those years before Zen was released, right ? come on, people whining and complaining about AMD's prices, while i bet most were quite happy paying the prices intel was charging for how many years ? ( effectively between A64, and Zen ) i dont recall many people complaining about intels prices then.

amd has the lead pretty much across the board, they should be charging for it, the price difference between ryzen 3000 and 5000 here isnt all that much, the difference between the 3900x and 5900x, is about $70 bucks where i am.

simply put, its OK for intel do charge what they want, as much as they want, but if amd does it, its crime.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

simply put, its OK for intel do charge what they want, as much as they want, but if amd does it, its crime.

Most people are hypocrites when it comes to Intel pricing and AMD pricing.

They put Intel on a pedastal and allow them to get away with anything while AMD has to be the budget & bang for your buck brand.

God forbid AMD makes profits and grows a war chest to be long term competitive against Intel.

Have they ever thought of telling Intel to lower their prices.

 

[taz-nz]

Which is very unfortunate because there is a huge demand for AMD desktop chips that can run graphics to a screen while builders wait for graphics cards to be in stock. This would be amazing if they had similar performance to a 5800x.

One thing to note with the AMD APUs is they only have 12 PCI Express lanes, compare with the other AMD desktop CPUs that have 20 Lanes, this is because the integrated GPU is internally connected by 8 PCI Express lanes. The APUs also only support PCI Express 3.0 not 4.0, so if you use an AMD APU your PCI Express x16 slot only has a quarter of the bandwidth of the same motherboard with a 5800x, and your M.2 slot is limited to PCI Express 3.0 too, so has half the bandwidth. They are still great chips but hey make less sense if your not using integrated GPU.

 

[digitalgriffin]

just like intel did themselves for all those years before Zen was released, right ? come on, people whining and complaining about AMD's prices, while i bet most were quite happy paying the prices intel was charging for how many years ? ( effectively between A64, and Zen ) i dont recall many people complaining about intels prices then.

amd has the lead pretty much across the board, they should be charging for it, the price difference between ryzen 3000 and 5000 here isnt all that much, the difference between the 3900x and 5900x, is about $70 bucks where i am.

simply put, its OK for intel do charge what they want, as much as they want, but if amd does it, its crime.

The 3900X was often on sale. and came with a pretty capable wraith stealthy RGB Cooler. The 5900X is $70 and LACKS a cooler. That's at least another $50 you have to throw at it. So price went up $120 really if you based it on MSRP only. Sale prices made it much worse. I picked up my 3900X for $340

There's a reason I never upgraded my 3770k. I saw no reason given the paltry performance increases for the price they were charging.

AMD came along and offered us 8/16, and then 16/32 on the cheap with a MB upgrade path, all while being very price competitive with Intel. The value WAS there. That's why I bought a 2400g, 3400g, and 3900X. For video cards I bought 7970, 580, and 5700XT.

If they get greedy, I just don't buy. Anything above 5600X is not a value. Current GPU lineup isn't a value either. I switched over to NVIDIA, despite the fact I don't like them as a company.

 

[cryoburner]

The 3900X was often on sale. and came with a pretty capable wraith stealthy RGB Cooler. The 5900X is $70 and LACKS a cooler. That's at least another $50 you have to throw at it. So price went up $120 really if you based it on MSRP only. Sale prices made it much worse. I picked up my 3900X for $340

The MSRP increase of the 5900X is arguably not that bad considering 12-core processors are still kind of a niche product generally in a higher price tier, and many will want a better cooler for running heavily-multithreaded workloads on a processor with that many cores anyway. And even at the higher MSRP (actually just $50 more), they are in short supply and there are certain "enthusiasts" willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for them from resellers (even if the reseller pricing is arguably bad). I think it's pretty clear that AMD is very limited on 7nm production, with a lot of their capacity going toward console APUs that they had pre-existing contracts for, which is likely why they went with higher pricing this time around. They knew they wouldn't be able to keep up with demand either way.

The MSRP of the 5800X is arguably a lot worse, considering 8-core processors have been becoming more mainstream as of late. Since AMD still doesn't have value-priced 5000-series offerings over 5 months after launch, it's the only 8-core processor in the series so far, and compared to the 3700X its MSRP is $120 (36%) higher, in addition to lacking the Wraith Prism. At least the resellers can't really turn a profit on it now due to the high MSRP, and some are currently selling for below that.

Even the 5600X I wouldn't consider to be a "value", by any means. It's at least in a more accessible price tier, but it's ultimately a 6-core processor priced nearly as high as the 8-core 3700X was at launch, while only including the tiny Wraith Stealth cooler, the same one that the 3600 had at its $100-lower price point. That's a 50% price hike per core compared to that processor, even ignoring the lower pricing that the 3600 saw for much of last year.

From a performance-per-dollar standpoint, AMD's processors are kind of a poor value compared to Intel's offerings right now. Something like an 11400/11400F might not be quite on par with a 5600X, but they generally outperform the 3600 at lower prices than that processor is currently selling for. And even the prior-gen 10700/10700F are competitive with the 5600X at prices that are currently lower than its MSRP. It's not necessarily all AMD's fault that their pricing and availability is not particularly good right now, but unlike some prior generations, their current processors are clearly not a better value than those from Intel.

 

[helper800]

One thing to note with the AMD APUs is they only have 12 PCI Express lanes, compare with the other AMD desktop CPUs that have 20 Lanes, this is because the integrated GPU is internally connected by 8 PCI Express lanes. The APUs also only support PCI Express 3.0 not 4.0, so if you use an AMD APU your PCI Express x16 slot only has a quarter of the bandwidth of the same motherboard with a 5800x, and your M.2 slot is limited to PCI Express 3.0 too, so has half the bandwidth. They are still great chips but hey make less sense if your not using integrated GPU.

12 lanes is the bear minimum for 1 nvme drive and a graphics card, for sure, but perfect for that scenario as long as you dont need more than that.

 

[Conahl]

The 3900X was often on sale

heh, ive seen intels cpu's on sale more often here, then amds cpus

The 3900X was often on sale. and came with a pretty capable wraith stealthy RGB Cooler. The 5900X is $70 and LACKS a cooler. That's at least another $50 you have to throw at it. So price went up $120 really if you based it on MSRP only

ok point made but, how many would actually use the wraith cooler ? i have 2 3600x's, and a 3900x, and well. all 3 have NH-D15 coolers on them, the wraith coolers, are STILL in the box, only took the cooler out of the 3900x's box, to see what the cooler looked like when plugged in, after that, back in the box it went. a few i work with picked up 3000 series cpus, and they did pretty much the same things with the cpus they got, one even picked up a 3900x as well, and only used the wraith prism cooler, cause..... the NH-D15, was out of stock at the time, and wanted to get the system up and running, once he was able to get a NH-D15, back in the box the wraith prism went while having a cooler with the cpu is nice, how many people actually use the stock cooler ? how many intel cpus came with a cooler, and was it actually used.

bottom line is still the same, people are complaining about AMD's prices, and value, but WHERE were they when intel was charging what they did ? again, intel cause keep raising their prices gen over gen, and no one complains, amd does it, and well................

Current GPU lineup isn't a value either. I switched over to NVIDIA,

sorry, but nvidia has never really been a good value, they have always charged a premium for their gpu's as well, and still do, its one of the reasons i am STILL running with a 1060. AMD didnt have anything that was worth it performance wise, and to upgrade to a GTX 20 series, i would of needed to go at least a mid range 2070, and those were alot more then i was willing to pay to upgrade to, right now, i am waiting to see where the prices for GPUs settle down to, and at this point, i am looking at RDNA2, just not sure which yet due to the current market situation.

current market situation aside, and that being said, how will the prices of cpus and gpus be once this shortage, and crypto thing settles down ?

 

[digitalgriffin]

heh, ive seen intels cpu's on sale more often here, then amds cpus


ok point made but, how many would actually use the wraith cooler ? i have 2 3600x's, and a 3900x, and well. all 3 have NH-D15 coolers on them, the wraith coolers, are STILL in the box, only took the cooler out of the 3900x's box, to see what the cooler looked like when plugged in, after that, back in the box it went. a few i work with picked up 3000 series cpus, and they did pretty much the same things with the cpus they got, one even picked up a 3900x as well, and only used the wraith prism cooler, cause..... the NH-D15, was out of stock at the time, and wanted to get the system up and running, once he was able to get a NH-D15, back in the box the wraith prism went while having a cooler with the cpu is nice, how many people actually use the stock cooler ? how many intel cpus came with a cooler, and was it actually used.

bottom line is still the same, people are complaining about AMD's prices, and value, but WHERE were they when intel was charging what they did ? again, intel cause keep raising their prices gen over gen, and no one complains, amd does it, and well................


sorry, but nvidia has never really been a good value, they have always charged a premium for their gpu's as well, and still do....

3080 vs 6800
Faster 4k
2x faster rt (at least)
Dlss 2.0 makes it much faster
Doesn't require amd 500 series chipset to win
$50 more

I'll pay the $50

Now from what I gathered a little over half did replace the stock cooler. I will admit I did replace mine. But I also transferred that cooler down to my 2400g. Stock 2400g cooler was crud. I could hit into mid 90s all the time. The wraith stealth kept me below 80c

That cooler is actually a very good cooler for space limited installations. And because it blows downward it's good at keeping VRMs in check heat wise.

 

[cryoburner]

...how many would actually use the wraith cooler ? i have 2 3600x's, and a 3900x, and well. all 3 have NH-D15 coolers on them...

The vast majority of people are not putting massive $100 coolers on these CPUs though. And while aftermarket coolers may be more common among the demographic regularly posting at this site, that's less likely to apply to the public at large. There are plenty of people trying to get the most performance for their money who are willing to trade some additional fan noise for better capabilities elsewhere in the system.

In any case, if AMD is saving money by cutting out (or downgrading) the cooler, that savings could arguably be passed on to the consumer, but instead the opposite was done. A 5600X doesn't likely cost any more to manufacture than a 3600, and a 5800X likely costs less to make than a 3700X, given the elimination of the cooler. And yet their MSRPs are $100-$120 higher.

Of course, as I pointed out before, they don't really have the production capacity right now to keep their processors in stock at these high prices, let alone lower ones, so it's kind of understandable why the prices are like they are. Still, if pricing has increased significantly and the profit margins on these parts are higher than ever, it doesn't exactly look good to be cutting corners elsewhere.

Ultimately, AMD is making very little profit per wafer off the large console APUs that are cutting into their production capacity, so they are raising prices for their PC components to compensate, and the PC market is effectively paying for that console hardware as a result. The PS5 and Series X APUs are each as large as 4-5 Ryzen chiplets, after all, so as much 7nm silicon goes into a single console chip as goes into a couple thousand dollars worth of 5800X CPUs. And they are not likely charging Microsoft and Sony much more than a couple hundred dollars each for those, probably more or less what it costs to make them. The desktop processors do have another 12nm IO chip and additional packaging costs to account for, but the 5600X and 5800X probably don't cost AMD much more than a hundred dollars or so to manufacture. So they would still be making good profit off of them even at the price points the 3600 and 3700X sold for.

 

[Conahl]

3080 vs 6800
Faster 4k
2x faster rt (at least)
Dlss 2.0 makes it much faster
Doesn't require amd 500 series chipset to win
$50 more

entry level 6800 $ 950, entry level 3080 $1060 price difference: $110
top end 6800 $1190, top en 3080 $ 1410, price different : $220
yea, i WISH the price difference between them was only 50 bucks here. hence why i am still looking at an RDNA2 based vidcard, that, and i dont really need DLSS or raytracing, as the games i play dont have RT, and playing them at 2k should still be fine. the price premium for the RTX 3000 cards, isnt worth it for me for the games i play.

And yet their MSRPs are $100-$120 higher.

but yet, the performance is there to justfy the cost is it not ? after all that is what intel was doing gen on gen before zen came out. once again, if intel does it, it is perfectly fine, AMD does it and its wrong, even when factoring you did get a better cooler with the AMD cpus, and intel' stock cooler, well, sucked. the one that came with my 5930k, was nothing more then an aluminum block, with a fan on it. i have an AMD HSF here that i think came with the Phenom X4 cpu i have, even that is a copper base, with aluminum fins, and 4 heat pipes. in your value thinking, intel was a terrible value cause the of the cheap HSF's they came with, and you still pretty much needed to go get a better HSF for it, or you would be looking at high temps. and intel STILL charged alot for them then.

 

[digitalgriffin]

entry level 6800 $ 950, entry level 3080 $1060 price difference: $110
top end 6800 $1190, top en 3080 $ 1410, price different : $220
yea, i WISH the price difference between them was only 50 bucks here. hence why i am still looking at an RDNA2 based vidcard, that, and i dont really need DLSS or raytracing, as the games i play dont have RT, and playing them at 2k should still be fine. the price premium for the RTX 3000 cards, isnt worth it for me for the games i play.


but yet, the performance is there to justfy the cost is it not ? after all that is what intel was doing gen on gen before zen came out. once again, if intel does it, it is perfectly fine, AMD does it and its wrong, even when factoring you did get a better cooler with the AMD cpus, and intel' stock cooler, well, sucked. the one that came with my 5930k, was nothing more then an aluminum block, with a fan on it. i have an AMD HSF here that i think came with the Phenom X4 cpu i have, even that is a copper base, with aluminum fins, and 4 heat pipes. in your value thinking, intel was a terrible value cause the of the cheap HSF's they came with, and you still pretty much needed to go get a better HSF for it, or you would be looking at high temps. and intel STILL charged alot for them then.

At these prices you should not be buying these cards for 2K. Absolutely not in a million years. These cards should be 4K. And last I checked there were over 40 games that now use RT. There is no excuses for them not to be used at this resolution. Even at $650/$700, every person should be demanding best in class at 4K. AMD doesn't have that.

I'm going MSRP for reference model GPUs which are still available. Hard to come by, but available. And at the prices you are suggesting, NO ONE should be buying a GPU. These are quite simply price gouging by everyone in the chain. And it's why I haven't bought one.

The $/Frame has stayed flat at best, or is increasing.

 

[Conahl]

At these prices you should not be buying these cards for 2K. Absolutely not in a million years. These cards should be 4K.

at current prices, maybe, but i wouldn't pay the current prices, i didn't say i was going to. i was just showing to the the prices between a 6800 and 3080, may not be 50 bucks as you said, everywhere. i want to play my games with the GFX options set to max, like i am currently doing right now, at 1080p. " but then just use DLSS " ok fine, but in that cause i may as well just get a 3060, and use DLSS to run that card at 2k. the better idea, get a 3080, run it at 2k, and when it starts to show its age with games at that time, then use DLSS to keep playing at 2k.

i bought the 1060 i have like 4 years ago as that's what i could afford at the time, as AMD didn't have any thing compelling, and nvidia, was taking advantage of it with their prices, this time around, i want to get something higher up the product stack, that i can use for about the same time span, before i would be looking at an upgrade. the 5930k i had, lasted just over 5 years before i upgraded to the 3900x i have now, looks like my 1060, is going to last me about that as well, the only reason i am considering the upgrade, is i would like to play at a higher res then 1080p, if it wasn't for that, my 1060 would be fine till rdna 3, maybe 4 is out ( or the nvidia equivalent to those )

And last I checked there were over 40 games that now use RT.

and your point is ? as i said, none of the games i am currently playing, use RT, well, make that one game, WoW, but from what i have heard, it barely uses RT, and for the most part, doesn't do much for the game. i don't see any of the games i could be playing at this time, using RT. so to use RT as a argument in my case, is moot, non issue, if there is 40 games, or 100 games, it doesn't matter if none of them a person plays, doesn't use it. not going to pay for a feature, that i wont use, same for DLSS, if i can play the games i do at 2k native, and still get frame rates that i am happy with, why use it?

I'm going MSRP for reference model GPUs which are still available. Hard to come by, but available

the store i buy my comp hardware from has zero radeons in stock from the 6900XT to the 5700XT, and geforce, out of stock from the 3090 down to the 1030, and some of those are out of stock as well, so VERY hard to come by, reference, or not

And at the prices you are suggesting NO ONE should be buying a GPU. These are quite simply price gouging by everyone in the chain. And it's why I haven't bought one.

im not suggesting, those are the prices the store i buy from, has them listed on their site for, and that is why i am still using my top end strix 1060. because of this shortage, i am still saving, by the time vid cards are in stock, its possible i would have the funds to buy pretty much any card i can get, right now though based on current prices, i could get a strix 6800XT, but i wouldn't as they are over priced, so like you, its why i haven bought one

 

[cryoburner]

but yet, the performance is there to justfy the cost is it not ?

Not really. A 5600X gets maybe 15-20% more performance in applications, and perhaps a bit more in certain CPU-limited gaming scenarios compared to a 3600, but it costs 50% more. The performance is arguably not quite there to justify that kind of generational price hike. The 3000-series provided similar gains in application performance without raising prices.

And compared to an 11400/11400F with its power limit disabled, the 5600X is typically only around 10% faster at both light and heavily-multithreaded workloads, and those processors are well under $200. For gaming setups that are not heavily CPU-limited, performance should be quite similar, but even in CPU-limited gaming scenarios you are generally looking at a less-than 10% difference. Is it reasonable to pay around 60-75% more for a processor that gets just 10% more performance in applications, with even less of a difference in games?

And just because Intel had arguably "bad" pricing on their processors in the past, and still has "bad" pricing on some models like the 11900K now, doesn't make AMD's pricing on these CPUs any better. No one was saying Intel's prior pricing was "perfectly fine", just that AMD's current pricing is not as competitive as Intel's at many price levels. Up around the 5900X-5950X level, AMD is offering better value, assuming you have need for a processor with that many cores, and can actually find one that hasn't been marked up hundreds of dollars by resellers due to the limited supply. At these lower price levels though, Intel is currently the one offering better value.

...even when factoring you did get a better cooler with the AMD cpus...

Who cares if you "did" get a better cooler on prior-generation Ryzen processors. The current-generation models stripped that out, aside from the 5600X that only comes with the cheap Wraith Stealth that was previously only found on their sub-$200 processors, a small block of aluminum with no copper or heatpipes, that isn't really much better than the stock Intel coolers. Sure, the Ryzen processors are more efficient, and can cope better with a smaller cooler, but if they're pushing the 5600X as a premium processor and trying to justify a significantly higher price point near the level of their prior 8-core models, they should have at least given it the larger Wraith Spire that the 3600X had, if not the Prism found on the 3700X.

 

[Conahl]

Not really. A 5600X gets maybe 15-20% more performance in applications, and perhaps a bit more in certain CPU-limited gaming scenarios compared to a 3600, but it costs 50% more. The performance is arguably not quite there to justify that kind of generational price hike.

tell that to intel pre zen.

Is it reasonable to pay around 60-75% more for a processor that gets just 10% more performance in applications, with even less of a difference in games?

again ask your self this when you swap AMD for intel pre zen. was intel justified raising their prices as they did, for what was it, maybe 10% or less performance gen over gen before Zen was released ? remember when Zen 1 was released and when intel released its next gen, intel pretty much dropped their prices up to $1000 at the top end vs its previous gen, that should tell you either 1) they were charging ALOT more then they should of or 2) at those previous gen prices, intels cpus, wouldn't of sold well, if at all, vs Zen 1, unless you were only playing games.

And just because Intel had arguably "bad" pricing on their processors in the past, and still has "bad" pricing on some models like the 11900K now, doesn't make AMD's pricing on these CPUs any better. No one was saying Intel's prior pricing was "perfectly fine",

that STILL doesn't make the fact any different, pre zen, i dont recall as many people now, complaining about intels prices like they are doing now with AMDs. and that is the whole point. intel can do what ever they want, charge what that want and very few complained, but now that amd is pretty much the performance leader, there are quite a few people complaining.

Who cares if you "did" get a better cooler on prior-generation Ryzen processors

who cares ? you serious ? intels coolers, if their cpu came with one were crap compared to the ones amd bundled with their cpus, and you pretty much needed to spend 50+ on a better cooler just to use those cpus (intel), the cooler the 5600x comes with, is just fine for the cpu, , and maybe amd should of put the cooler you are referring to in the box, agreed, but its still better then the coolers intel bundles. and im sure we both can agree, even IF amd bundled the wraith prism with the 5800x and higher, to get the best performance out of them, you might need to get a better one, with intel currently, its practically a MUST, to get a better cooler.
i also just checked the 11900k and 11700k also dont come with a cooler by the looks of it, so those 2 cpus compared to the 5950x and 5900x are all in the same boat, all 4 need a cooler, so which is the better value now?

a small block of aluminum with no copper or heatpipes, that isn't really much better than the stock Intel coolers

i think you meant with copper or heatpipes. are you sure about that ? the stock cooler i mentioned that is beside me from my Phenom x4 with the copper base, 4 heat pipes, and aluminium fins, would cooler better then just a block of aluminum, that should be pretty clear, by how much, i dont know, i have no way to test that.

maybe its time people stopped looking at AMD as the value brand that it was, and started looking at it as the performance/premium brand, sounds like intel is now the value brand, because it isnt the performance leader it once was.

but to also be fair, its possible that the prices for ryzen 5000 are a little higherthen they could be due to the current situation and shortages, and maybe prices will settle down a bit once that clears up.

 

[cryoburner]

tell that to intel pre zen.

Why do you keep bringing up what the pricing was like years ago? What matters to anyone buying now is what the pricing is like now, not what it was like in the past. And for that, Intel is currently offering better value and availability at the more mainstream price points. Certainly, Intel has been adjusting their prices in response to Ryzen, but AMD has taken a big step in the opposite direction with the 5000-series, and it's harder to recommend going with them until they start launching more value-oriented models that can compete better from a price to performance standpoint.

i think you meant with copper or heatpipes. are you sure about that ? the stock cooler i mentioned that is beside me from my Phenom x4 with the copper base, 4 heat pipes, and aluminium fins, would cooler better then just a block of aluminum, that should be pretty clear, by how much, i dont know, i have no way to test that.

Nope, the 5600X's Wraith Stealth cooler is a little block of aluminum fins much like the Intel stock coolers...
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-5-5600x/2.html

And it has about half the metal of the otherwise similar but taller Wraith Spire previously included with the less-expensive 3600X. And even that was a downgrade from the original version of the Spire included with the 1600, which had a copper vapor chamber in the center. The Wraith Prism included with the 3700X was a far more substantial cooler with heat pipes and a copper base, along with RGB lighting, but that's not included with any of the 5000-series processors. And keep in mind, the 3700X was an 8-core model that only cost $30 more than the 6-core 5600X. The cooler alone was arguably worth that to the end-user, meaning the 5600 and 3700X are effectively priced about the same...
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-3700x/2.html

 

[Conahl]

Why do you keep bringing up what the pricing was like years ago?

why ? simple. very few IF any complained about intels pricing gen over gen at that time. intels performance increases where not as good (<10%) gen over gen then, but they kept raising prices, amd does >10%, even up to 19% from Zen 2 to zen 3, and they increase MSRP 50 bucks, and people complain ? come on. as you said " The performance is arguably not quite there to justify that kind of generational price hike. " was it there for intel ? probably not, but they kept raising prices. again, if intel does it, its fine, if amd does it, its wrong.

What matters to anyone buying now is what the pricing is like now, not what it was like in the past.

of course not, cause then there was no covid, and im sure that is part of the reason for the increased prices, intel raised them, own their own, cause there was no one to challenge them performance wise, now, AMD has the performance crown pretty much across the board, there fore, they should increase prices, after all, intel kept doing it, right ??????????????????

Nope, the 5600X's Wraith Stealth cooler is a little block of aluminum fins much like the Intel stock coolers...

i just checked the cooler for the 3600x here, and agreed, but i also compared it to a stock intel cooler i have here, i think it was from socket 775 or socket 1156/55 and the AMD one looks a bit bigger, but you can feel the weight difference between them, amd's being heavier. so still, intels coolers were cheaper then amds, even then. now ? i wouldn't use any stock cooler on their cpus, or even suggest someone to, i would suggest they also get a better cooler to cool the intel chips down, some thing along the lines of the cooler master hyper 212 evo, at least, so the " advantage " of intels cpu having cooler, is moot.

intel costs less, cause they are the value option now, not amd. there is no way any one would pay the prices of intels cpus, if they were priced higher or the same as amd, aka 5800x to i5 11600k, would they ?