Review AMD Ryzen 7 5700X Review: A Price Cut Disguised as a New Chip

[Admin]

We put AMD's Ryzen 7 5700X through the wringer in our expanse set of benchmarks.

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X Review: A Price Cut Disguised as a New Chip : Read more

 

[Liquidrider]

Ignoring the misleading article for one second. What is the point of this article? It's a serious question? Because there was a price cut?

"Intel beats AMD in EVERY facet" 🤣 Really? Does power consumption no longer matter to your readers? A 50% difference seems significant
Intel includes a cooler. Does it include a motherboard too? Because that is what is required when you buy ANY of Intel's 12000 series.

What is more shocking is creating an article that complains about a price cut coming too late. 5700 was released two months ago. And who complains about a price cut regardless of what it comes. Maybe the point of this article was that Intel is becoming desperate to sell more CPUs before their next earnings.

I am not trying to be mean, but it is a little bit frustrating for wasting a reader's time to push nonsense. You may even take this comment as an example

 

[mathextremist]

We put AMD's Ryzen 7 5700X through the wringer in our expanse set of benchmarks.

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X Review: A Price Cut Disguised as a New Chip : Read more

Are we sure this isn't just the public release of a re-named, OEM-only Ryzen 7 5800 (non-X) from the Alienware Aurora? I can't see any difference in the specs at all.

 

[agello24]

Ignoring the misleading article for one second. What is the point of this article? It's a serious question? Because there was a price cut?

"Intel beats AMD in EVERY facet" 🤣 Really? Does power consumption no longer matter to your readers? A 50% difference seems significant
Intel includes a cooler. Does it include a motherboard too? Because that is what is required when you buy ANY of Intel's 12000 series.

What is more shocking is creating an article that complains about a price cut coming too late. 5700 was released two months ago. And who complains about a price cut regardless of what it comes. Maybe the point of this article was that Intel is becoming desperate to sell more CPUs before their next earnings.

I am not trying to be mean, but it is a little bit frustrating for wasting a reader's time to push nonsense. You may even take this comment as an example

i agree with you 100%. Toms ALLWAYS finds something negative to say about AMD, then turns around and praises a weak INTEL chip with a higher price.

 

[hotaru251]

I can't see any difference in the specs at all.

amd's spec page has oem cpu with a 5c higher max temp than 5700x.


and on topic: if u go intel you HAVE to buy new MB alogn with the cpu (and possibly ram)

if ur upgrading from any zen1-zen3 its still better to stay on am4.

if u were going to go to intel and pay new chipset anwyays wait few months and go am5.
AM5 is goign to thrash 12th gen from leaks (and 13th gen doesnt look too much better than 12th gen from them leaks) & AMD has said they will keep AM5 for a long time like AM4 (so betetr future upgrade paths too)

 

[TerryLaze]

"Intel beats AMD in EVERY facet" 🤣 Really? Does power consumption no longer matter to your readers? A 50% difference seems significant

Which intel CPU are you comparing to to get that result?
First of all a 65W TDP AM4 cpu draws at least 88W.
https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3491-explaining-precision-boost-overdrive-benchmarks-auto-oc
Secondly if you compare to the 12600k at stock settings that has 125w TDP the intel CPU is also more than 20% faster and is still cheaper.

The i5-12400 draws 117W max, is only insignificantly slower than the 5700x in multithread and is almost half the price.

 

[scottscholzpdx]

Benchmarks are useless without including 2700x, 2700 (65w), 2600, 1500, 1600af, and 1800x. Those are the people who are interested in a chip such as this and the article even alludes to this. It's a drop in replacement in an aging platform.


Why they wouldn't include these in benchmarks is mind boggling. No one cares how this compares to a 5900x.

 

[Juergenonly]

This article has been published weeks back when the 5700X was released. Why does it show up now on the home page? I don't see any new content that would justify it.

Outside of that, I agree that it is a more power efficient version of the 5800X which I can see is why AMD does offer it. Power efficiency is an advantage they have over Intel at this point and until they come with their own next gen platform, what else outside lower pricing could they have offered?

 

[daeros]

Thanks Toms, for reminding us where your budget comes from.

Intel beats AMD at every metric. You know, other than total platform cost, power consumption, gaming performance (thanks to the 5800X3D), and all-out performance for HEDT/workstation users (hello Threadripper Pro 5995WX).

 

[Why_Me]

Ignoring the misleading article for one second. What is the point of this article? It's a serious question? Because there was a price cut?

"Intel beats AMD in EVERY facet" 🤣 Really? Does power consumption no longer matter to your readers? A 50% difference seems significant
Intel includes a cooler. Does it include a motherboard too? Because that is what is required when you buy ANY of Intel's 12000 series.

What is more shocking is creating an article that complains about a price cut coming too late. 5700 was released two months ago. And who complains about a price cut regardless of what it comes. Maybe the point of this article was that Intel is becoming desperate to sell more CPUs before their next earnings.

I am not trying to be mean, but it is a little bit frustrating for wasting a reader's time to push nonsense. You may even take this comment as an example

Power consumption is more of a thing with laptops ... not so much with desktops. With that said a i7 12700F can be had for $15 USD more.

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-12700F-2-1GHz-6xxChipset-BX8071512700F/dp/B09NPJDPVG/
Intel Core i7-12700F $312.97

 

[Wisecracker]

Uhhhhh ...

Has not the AMD Ryzen 7 "x700X " nomenclature always included a "Tame 65W TDP" ___ like the AMD 8/16 core/thread Ryzen 7 3700X ??

Maybe Paul needs to reconsider his Verdict ...

 

[-Fran-]

Too little too late for sure.

Everyone that wanted a 5800X already got one or went for the 5900X/5800X3D or just got a 5600X instead. The only people left looking at this CPU seriously are people with Zen2 or before CPUs. This is more like a slap on the face from AMD. This CPU was needed at launch and not now.

As for its performance, nothing shocking there. Sits right between a 5600X and a 5800X. Funny thing is I can see the 5700X retailing for like 10% less than the 5800X anyway. That's just stupid. AMD, what the hell were you thinking?

As for the Intel comparison, this CPU does nothing to change things comparing to Alder Lake: Intel is dominating the budget and mid-level for new builds. Not by a huge margin, mind you, but they are. AMD is barely competitive. And no, please don't give Intel the "but it comes with PCIe5!" technical win. That support is heavily caveated, specially on B660. Assume X570 and B660 are roughly on par as platforms, with B550 slightly behind them.

Regards.