![]() ![]() In the stress test, the processor reaches 75 degrees Celsius with the enclosed boxed cooler, which according to the page is five degrees Celsius below the Ryzen 5 2600. El Chapuzas Informatico compares it to its predecessor. There is also information on the consumption and temperature of the Ryzen 5 3600. Significantly cooler and less consumption It is on a par with the Ryzen 7 2700X in Total War – Warhammer 2, but is beaten by the i9-9900K by almost five percent. In Final Fantasy XV the gap shrinks again to seven percent. Here, the 3600 only achieves 117 FPS, while the i9-9900K achieves 145 FPS – but the Ryzen 7 2700X only achieves 96 FPS. The distance in Far Cry 5 is significantly larger. In Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, the Ryzen reac80 FPS, 6 FPS behind the i9-9900K. However, the gaming benchmarks are a bit different. The Ryis also better than the i9-9900K in the Superposition 4K benchmark, but is also defeated by the Ryzen 7 2700X – here again a GPU bottleneck might be the problem. In the Unigine Heaven 4.0 benchmark, the difference to the i9-9900K is only a mere two percent. In Time Spy, the processors run back to the graphics card limit again and are practically completely on the same level. But even in Fire Strike, the i9-9900K is only seven percent faster. In the Port Royal benchmark, it even beats the i9-9900K – but the braking factor here is the graphics card, as it is a raytracing benchmark. In all tests it is equal to or significantly faster than the Ryzen 7 2700X. This shows how well the six-core is actually optimized. El Chapuzas Informatico has tested synthetic benchmarks such as the 3DMark suite on the one hand and regular games on the other. Let’s get to gaming and the first gaming benchmarks of the Ryzen 5 3600. Both should be owed to the new architecture with central management Die for the memory administration. The Intel squad reaches around 50 nanoseconds here, the best Ryzen processor 66.3 nanoseconds. The latency of 80.5 nanoseconds is significantly worse than that of the other processors. In the x264 benchmark, it is also ahead of the i7-8700K with six cores and the Ryzen 7 1700X with eight cores, but lags behind more modern eight cores. In the multicore test, the processor is also faster than the i7-8700K, but due to the missing cores it is slower than the Ryzen 7 2700X and the i9-9900K. In the Singlecore, the Ryis better than the i7-8700K and only has to admit defeat to the i9-9900K and the i7-9700K. Similar distances result also in the Cinebench R20, where the Rycan reach 3.509 points and thus slightly reduces the distance on the Ryzen 7 2700X with 3.919 points. Compared to the Ryzen 7 2700X, however, the missing cores are noticeable. In Cinebench R15, the Ryscores 1,561 points and is thus slightly faster than the Ryzen 7 1700X with 1,550 points. The situation looks different in the multicore tests, of course. ![]() Here the Ryreaches 478 points, only 9 points behind the i9-9900K and 54 points ahead of the Ryzen 7 2700X. The same picture can be seen in the newer Cinebench R20. The Ryzen 7 2700X with 176 points was clearly outperformed. The processor achieves 196 points in the single core score and is thus only eight points behind the Intel Core i9-9900K. ![]() With the Cinebench R15, the Ryalready shows its high optimization. Let’s start with synthetic system benchmarks. Elchapuzasinformatico stresses in the article that the BIOS version still caused problems and the overclocking did not work either – the results nevertheless look very promising. The graphics card used was a Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Founders Edition. Two G.Skill FlareX modules with DDR4-3200 clocking were installed on it. The platform used a Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 WiFi. This time it’s about a Ryzen 5 3600, with which the authors did some benchmarks. This is already common practice on this site. Like last year, the Spanish site has already published a review of an upcoming Ryzen processor. This is now supported by a review of the Rythat was previously posted on the net. This could make the Ryzen 3000 processors true top performers, especially in gaming, and cost Intel some market shares. In the past Ryzen had its problems there – but with the new generation this has apparently changed. Together with an increased clock rate itself, this makes processors faster, especially in tasks that require only a few cores. It is reported to have risen by 15 percent. With the new Ryzen 3000 generation, AMD has placed particular emphasis on increasing the IPC, the Instructions Per Cycle. Ryzen 3000 – finally equal in gaming as well
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |