News Ryzen 5 5500 Slightly Slower Than Ryzen 5600G in Geekbench

The Core i5-12400 is faster than the Ryzen 5 5600X, so it makes perfect sense that the Ryzen 5 5500 isn't a match for the hexa-core Alder Lake chip.
I guess that depends on what workloads you are testing, along with the system configuration. Geekbench is a pretty questionable benchmark that legitimate review sites are not going to use, so it's not exactly something to base meaningful performance numbers off of, at least when comparing processors with different architectures.

In actual application and game workloads, many reviews show the 5600X to be a little faster than a 12400, though I've seen others that suggest the 12400 might be slightly faster. They're likely in a roughly similar performance tier overall. The exact numbers can also can depend on whether a review site paired the 12400 with unrealistic hardware, like DDR5-6000 on a high-end Z690 motherboard, which would make no sense for a $200 processor.

Another thing to consider when comparing prices is that B660 motherboards currently tend to cost more for a given feature-set than a similar B550 motherboard, resulting in the cost between a 12400 and 5600X build being rather close, at least ever since the 5600X's price was reduced. And of course, that could give the 5500 a bit more of a pricing edge in budget systems.

Aside from possibly pricing, the 5500 doesn't seem all that interesting though, seeing as it appears to be based off a cut-down 5600G, with slightly lower clocks and lacking the integrated graphics. It could be a fine enough option for a budget gaming system, but the current cost of graphics cards makes budget gaming systems a bit impractical for the time being, aside from perhaps for a big system builder has a steady source of reasonably-priced GPUs.
Reactions: King_V
meh, those Zen3 core are starting to show their age; nothing to see here
AMD waited too long to drop price / introduce new SKU
The 5600X (and likely the 5600) offers similar performance and pricing to Intel's products around this price range, at least once the adjusted pricing and motherboard costs come into play, so they are viable products. The 5500 is based on the 5600G though, with half the cache and only PCIe 3.0 to allow for the (disabled) integrated graphics, so it performs a little behind those other models, though it's also priced lower to account for that. About the only real issue I see with the 5500 is that it lacks the integrated graphics, which isn't ideal for a more budget-oriented processor, at a time when budget dedicated cards are lacking. Of course, these prices can be reduced further if needed, just as we saw Intel slash prices in response to the Ryzen 5000 series when it first launched a little less than a year and a half ago.