Thursday, October 8th 2020

AMD Launches AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Desktop Processors: The Fastest Gaming CPUs in the World

Today, AMD (NASDAQ: AMD) introduced the highly anticipated AMD Ryzen 5000 Series desktop processor lineup powered by the new "Zen 3" architecture. Offering up to 16 cores, 32 threads and 72 MB of cache in the top-of-the-line AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, AMD Ryzen 5000 series processors dominate in heavily threaded workloads1 and power efficiency2, while the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X processor offers up to a 26% generational uplift in gaming performance3. With extensive improvements throughout the core including a unified 8-core complex with direct access to 32 MB L3 cache, the new AMD "Zen 3" core architecture delivers a 19% generational increase in instructions per cycle (IPC)4, the largest since the introduction of "Zen" processors in 2017.

"Our commitment with each generation of our Ryzen processors has been to build the best PC processors in the world. The new AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Desktop Processors extend our leadership from IPC4, power efficiency2 to single-core5, multi-core performance1 and gaming6," said Saeid Moshkelani, senior vice president and general manager, client business unit, AMD. "Today, we are extremely proud to deliver what our community and customers have come to expect from Ryzen processors - dominant multi-core1 and single-core performance5 and true gaming leadership6 - all within a broad ecosystem of motherboards and chipsets that are drop-in ready for AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Desktop Processors."
AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Desktop Processors
Featuring a remarkable 19% IPC increase4 over the prior generation in PC workloads, the "Zen 3" architecture pushes gaming and content creation performance leadership6,1 to a new level. "Zen 3" architecture reduces latency from accelerated core and cache communication and doubles the directly accessible L3 cache per core while delivering up to 2.8X more performance-per-watt versus the competition2.

The top of the line 16 core AMD Ryzen 9 5950X offers:
  • The highest single-thread performance of any desktop gaming processor5
  • The most multi-core performance of any desktop gaming processor and any desktop processor in a mainstream CPU socket1
The 12 core AMD Ryzen 9 5900X offers the best gaming experience by:
  • Average of 7% faster in 1080p gaming across select game titles than the competition7
  • Average of 26% faster in 1080p gaming across select titles generationally8
AMD 500 series motherboards are ready for AMD Ryzen 5000 Series desktop processors with a simple BIOS update. This broad ecosystem support and readiness includes over 100 AMD 500 series motherboards from all major motherboard manufacturers. AMD Ryzen 5000 Series desktop processors announced today are expected to be available for purchase globally on November 5, 2020.

AMD Ryzen Equipped to Win Game Bundle
The AMD Ryzen Equipped to Win game bundle program is back with the highly anticipated next chapter in the Far Cry series, Far Cry 6. Customers who purchase an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, or AMD Ryzen 7 5800X processor between November 5th, 2020 and December 31st, 2020 will receive a complimentary copy of Far Cry 6 Standard Edition - PC digital when released10 . Additionally, customers who purchase an AMD Ryzen 9 3950X, AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT, or AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT processor between October 20th, 2020 and December 31st, 2020 will also receive a free copy of Far Cry 6 Standard Edition - PC digital10.1 Testing by AMD performance labs as of 09/01/2020. Multi-core performance evaluated with Cinebench R20 nT with a similarly configured Ryzen 9 5950X vs. a Core i9-10900K. Results may vary. R5K-005
2 Testing by AMD Performance Labs as of 09/01/2020 using Cinebench R20 nT versus system wall power during full load CPU test using a Core i9-10900K, Ryzen 9 3900XT, Ryzen 9 5900X, Ryzen 9 3950X, and a Ryzen 9 5950X configured with: 2x8GB DDR4-3600, GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, Samsung 860 Pro SSD, Noctua NH-D15s cooler, and an open-air test bench with no additional power draw sources. Results may vary. R5K-007
3 Testing by AMD performance labs as of 09/01/2020 measuring gaming performance of a Ryzen 9 5900X desktop processor vs. a Ryzen 9 3900XT in 11 popular titles at 1920x1080, the High image quality preset, and the newest graphics API available for each title (e.g. DirectX 12 or Vulkan or DirectX 11). Results may vary. R5K-009
4 Testing by AMD performance labs as of 09/01/2020. IPC evaluated with a selection of 25 workloads running at a locked 4GHz frequency on 8-core "Zen 2" Ryzen 7 3800XT and "Zen 3" Ryzen 7 5800X desktop processors configured with Windows 10, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (451.77), Samsung 860 Pro SSD, and 2x8GB DDR4-3600. Results may vary. R5K-003
5 Testing by AMD performance labs as of 09/01/2020 with a Ryzen 9 5950X processor vs a Core i9-10900K configured with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 2080 Ti graphics, Samsung 860 Pro SSD, 2X8 DDR4-3600, Windows 10 and a Noctua NH-D15s cooler. Single-core performance evaluated with Cinebench R20 1T benchmark. Results may vary. R5K-004
6 Testing by AMD performance labs as of 9/2/2020 based on the average FPS across 40 PC games at 1920x1080 with the High image quality preset using an AMD Ryzen 9 5900X processor vs. Core i9-10900K. Results may vary. R5K-002
7 Testing by AMD performance labs as of 09/01/2020 measuring the Gaming performance of a Ryzen 9 5900X vs a Core i9-10900K in 11 popular titles at 1920x1080, the High image quality preset, and the newest graphics API available for each title (e.g. DirectX 12 or Vulkan over DirectX 11, or DirectX 11 over DirectX 9). GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (451.77), 2x8GB DDR4-3600, Noctua NH-D15s, and Windows 10 May 2020 Update (build 2004) used for all titles. Results may vary. R5K-010
8 Testing by AMD performance labs as of 09/01/2020 measuring gaming performance of a Ryzen 9 5900X desktop processor vs. a Ryzen 9 3900XT in 11 popular titles at 1920x1080, the High image quality preset, and the newest graphics API available for each title (e.g. DirectX 12 or Vulkan or DirectX 11). Results may vary. R5K-009
9 Max boost for AMD Ryzen Processors is the maximum frequency achievable by a single core on the processor running a bursty single-threaded workload. Max boost will vary based on several factors, including, but not limited to: thermal paste; system cooling; motherboard design and BIOS; the latest AMD chipset driver; and the latest OS updates. GD-150
10 Limited time offer available through participating retailers only. 18+ only. Following purchase, product must be installed on system where coupon code will be redeemed. Void where prohibited. Residency and additional limitations apply. Full offer terms at www.amdrewards.com/terms.
Add your own comment

216 Comments on AMD Launches AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Desktop Processors: The Fastest Gaming CPUs in the World

#101
ViperXTR
should i just bite the 5800X or 5600X or still wait™ for the 5700X, ugh ive been itching for a while now, currently searching for some B550 boards now
Posted on Reply
#102
Mouth of Sauron
Nice to see haters in such a number - guess those are the same "but Intel rules FHD on max details" bunch...

Care (or are able) to remember times when AMD ruled the CPU sees, like in 1GHz race or FX64? For performance crown in virtually every scenario, AMD *asked* for a premium price - and why it shouldn't have? A philanthropic corporation?

On "improvement are underwhelming front", please try to remember endless Sandy Bridge revisions, "5-10% faster in very rare memory operations which are almost never used; 2% overall speed improvement, because we added 100Mhz. Main feature: CPU is now cheaper to produce for us (Intel), yet the price haven't moved a bit for customer".

Try to remember the Intel core numbers before Zen(1) - 2(4) / 4(4) / 4(8), weren't they? Only after Zen launch, Intel had an epiphany which lead to the first i3 with 4 real cores, I5 with 6... and i9 as a class... and certain models at significantly lower prices than before... Was there Intel desktop CPU with 8 real cores? Or 10? More? Errrr... What were the prices for non-desktop CPUs with mentioned number of cores?

Is the "philanthropic corporation" responsible for this sudden change of heart? Well, no, because AMD works for profit. However, a "competitive corporation" is. Now we have kind of CPU power we could only dream about few years ago in this price range.

Will I buy Zen3? Hmmmm, reviews first, decision later (thinking about the features inbetween)... Likely not at launch, because the next computer I'm building is midrange... But Zen2 prices will probably drop nicely, so I'll still end with better stuff than I could've before this (pre)launch. If Intel drops prices, then I'll have a privilege of choice, though I doubt I'll take that train out of general principles (486X3 was last Intel CPU I owned, hehehehe - missed the ride on Celeron 300A unfortunately; I don't think about myself as AMD fanboy - I was buying Intel's for a company, but not for myself all this time).

Someone mentioned Intel GPU coming, if we haven't forgotten - how could I ever? A 25-30 years of constant failures, beaten by companies like Tseng Labs, Trident, not to talk about bigger names... Competition, yeyeye, all the stuff I've said above I still hold true, but I kinda have little faith of it being either good globally, or even at price range. Iris Pro 2, more likely. Knights Sinkhole? No, I'm not exactly fair here, Xeon Phi could've been good stuff...
Posted on Reply
#103
dicktracy
So there's nothing worthy to upgrade to for those who's bought a Skylake-based processor in the last few years. Even Zen 3 is a side grade at best if you already have 8700k and above. Yikes! Rocketlake better deliver phenomenal gaming performance or x86 as a whole is screwed!
Posted on Reply
#104
Jism
PooPipeBoy
So the cynical folk who predicted that the 5900X would be a power-hungry overheating pile with a 150W TDP that AMD simply overclocked to reach 5.0GHz were.....what's the word.....WRONG.
Dont listen to these people.

AMD did a very well job to be honest and solved most gaming related performance by cutting up the latency's and penalty's the previous generation of CPU's had.
Posted on Reply
#105
Makaveli
Some of the intel fan boys post in this thread are hilarious.
Posted on Reply
#106
rvalencia
birdie
AMD fans never fail to disappoint with double standards. Intel and NVIDIA have always been "evil" but once AMD does that, suddenly it's perfectly fine because they just follow suit.
Unlike Intel and NVIDIA, AMD is just above the break-even. AMD needs to improve its profitability.
Posted on Reply
#107
Turmania
I'm pretty sure, towards end of the month AMD will issue a statement, saying, we listened to you again as we always do and we lowered the prices by 50 USD! and the fanboyz will go wild again... watch this space!
Posted on Reply
#108
ViperXTR
Turmania
I'm pretty sure, towards end of the month AMD will issue a statement, saying, we listened to you again as we always do and we lowered the prices by 50 USD! and the fanboyz will go wild again... watch this space!
Hope it wont be like the RTX 3080 catastrophe where stocks got low and scalpers everywhere
Posted on Reply
#109
sergionography
So there's something that has been bothering me that I never paid attention to, and could be a big mess when big navi comes out, and that is Ray Tracing performance. In the techpowerup review for the rtx 3080, ray tracing was disabled for "neutrality purposes". How long will this be the case? I paid little attention to that but I think I'd like to see rtx2000 vs rtx3000 since both support rt. The reason I say this is because when looking at the big navi performance mentioned by AMD, first thing I did was look at actual performance to compare to Nvidia and last gen AMD. For starters, these games mentioned by AMD do not support ray tracing to my knowledge. When I compared the number to a rx 5700 xt, they are about twice the performance, which is what we predicted, but this is purely rasterization. Now what about the RT penalty? What if AMD loses more performance when rt is enabled, but matches Nvidia without it. It's going to be a mess since reviewers have not incorporated ray tracing into their benchmarks yet.
Posted on Reply
#110
AlwaysHope
Nice job AMD, but a little disappointed in official DRAM support still on Zen2 spec.
I'd have thought 3466MHz would be the new norm.
Posted on Reply
#111
renz496
uh i was hoping to see the 8 core 16 thread part to become much more cheaper instead the 6 core 12 thread got price increase because it has faster performance than older 6 core 12 thread part?
Posted on Reply
#112
wheresmycar
An honest question....

I'm somewhat new to the world of PC hardware (3 years or so but a quick learner) and not so much familiar with the historic justifications for brand loyalty. TBH, no matter how hard I try I can't justify anyone's brand-leanings and don't expect to find any valid cause for it. So I'm not going to ask "why the favouritism?".... but will ask, "is this something you intend on pursuing, even if the other side delivers something better and more useful?"

Or maybe i'm seeing things the wrong way. Maybe you're open to purchasing from both AMD/INTEL to best accommodate your personal performance requirements/features/budget/etc ....but outwardly favour one brand over the other? (...maybe rooting for the underdog? overclocking margins/enthusiasm? etc?)
Posted on Reply
#113
AlwaysHope
wheresmycar
An honest question....

I'm somewhat new to the world of PC hardware (3 years or so but a quick learner) and not so much familiar with the historic justifications for brand loyalty. TBH, no matter how hard I try I can't justify anyone's brand-leanings and don't expect to find any valid cause for it. So I'm not going to ask "why the favouritism?".... but will ask, "is this something you intend on pursuing, even if the other side delivers something better and more useful?"

Or maybe i'm seeing things the wrong way. Maybe you're open to purchasing from both AMD/INTEL to best accommodate your personal performance requirements/features/budget/etc ....but outwardly favour one brand over the other? (...maybe rooting for the underdog? overclocking margins/enthusiasm? etc?)
When you consider there are only 2 major x86 cpu manufactures in the world today, there is not much choice for end users. So a 50/50 chance of siding with one or the other. Most users will go by their last experience with a product & in this game, factor in socket compatibility it then becomes clearer as to why an end user will favor one brand over the other.
An exception here is if an end user has significant disposable income to invest in whole platform upgrades eg. motherboard & cpu etc..
In some cases even RAM compatibility can factor in to an end users final choice product.
Posted on Reply
#114
Rob94hawk
Makaveli
Some of the intel fan boys post in this thread are hilarious.
And who would they be?
Posted on Reply
#115
chstamos
Rob94hawk
And who would they be?
All I've seen are AMD toxic fanboys attacking anyone and everyone that was not POSITIVELY ENTHUSED by the announcement. But what do I know. The fanboys know for a fact I'm just another intel shill for writing this. How dare anyone not be pissed with joy at the prospect of 300 dollars for the lowest end cpu, they're obviously shilling for intel or spoiled brats demanding free CPUs from amd.
Posted on Reply
#116
Zubasa
chstamos
All I've seen are AMD toxic fanboys attacking anyone and everyone that was not POSITIVELY ENTHUSED by the announcement. But what do I know. The fanboys know for a fact I'm just another intel shill for writing this. How dare anyone not be pissed with joy at the prospect of 300 dollars for the lowest end cpu, they're obviously shilling for intel or spoiled brats demanding free CPUs from amd.
It is not like the current Zen2 cpus just all goes poof and gone overnight and are suddenly horrible chips.
Buy Zen2 if you want best value, not like you need that extra few fps gaming on a 2060 or 5600xt anyway.
Posted on Reply
#117
chstamos
Zubasa
It is not like the current Zen2 cpus just all goes poof and gone overnight and are suddenly horrible chips.
Buy Zen2 if you want best value, not like you need that extra few fps gaming on a 2060 or 5600xt anyway.
Yes, your point is perfectly valid, but don't you think it's annoying that the minute anyone passes any kind of judgement on AMD's pricing, they're either intel shills or "entitled"? It's almost as if only intel's prices can be subject to criticism. The 5600X is -in my opinion, and a lot of others', it would seem- a terrible value for money compared to 3600 and noone should be subject to fanboi ad homs for thinking so.
Posted on Reply
#118
PooPipeBoy
I wonder if the unified cache will mean that the budget quad cores (3300X successor) will have access to the full 32MB of cache. Unless AMD are planning on neutering the cache on the budget chips, I can't see why not.
Posted on Reply
#119
Mysteoa
sergionography
So there's something that has been bothering me that I never paid attention to, and could be a big mess when big navi comes out, and that is Ray Tracing performance. In the techpowerup review for the rtx 3080, ray tracing was disabled for "neutrality purposes". How long will this be the case? I paid little attention to that but I think I'd like to see rtx2000 vs rtx3000 since both support rt. The reason I say this is because when looking at the big navi performance mentioned by AMD, first thing I did was look at actual performance to compare to Nvidia and last gen AMD. For starters, these games mentioned by AMD do not support ray tracing to my knowledge. When I compared the number to a rx 5700 xt, they are about twice the performance, which is what we predicted, but this is purely rasterization. Now what about the RT penalty? What if AMD loses more performance when rt is enabled, but matches Nvidia without it. It's going to be a mess since reviewers have not incorporated ray tracing into their benchmarks yet.
If benchmarking is not done on equal configuration/settings what is their purpose?
Ray Tracing will be normal when there are more new games with it than without. Currently, it's like PhysX, not many games have it and it wouldn't be fair comparison if you can't run it on AMD also.
Posted on Reply
#120
Rob94hawk
chstamos
All I've seen are AMD toxic fanboys attacking anyone and everyone that was not POSITIVELY ENTHUSED by the announcement. But what do I know. The fanboys know for a fact I'm just another intel shill for writing this. How dare anyone not be pissed with joy at the prospect of 300 dollars for the lowest end cpu, they're obviously shilling for intel or spoiled brats demanding free CPUs from amd.
I've build all my high end rigs based on what hardware can handle what I want to play that particular year. This year it's whoever can play my game of choice in 4k with all the bells and whistles wins.
Posted on Reply
#121
sepheronx
People should be happy about this. No matter which side you are on.

Forces the opposition to improve themselves, and also possibly lower prices. Currently I am rocking a 10500 ES and if it wasn't for this processor, I would have just purchased a 5600X. But now I hope Intel will try to be more competitive by dropping prices on current cpu's. So I can pick up a 10900 or 10850 for even cheaper to replace this engineering sample.

A few FPS here and there of AMD's top of the line over Intels Top of the line wont make a difference, just like the reverse didn't make much of a difference. Both are great buys and both serve their purpose and its better to go with the best bang for your buck.

Good show AMD! Now I am eagerly waiting for the 28th so I can see the RDNA2 performance and if it has fully functional built in support for RT and other little features before I make a decision on a GPU purchase.
Posted on Reply
#122
ViperXTR
coming from a 3770K from many years ago, either intel or amd now will be good, just disappointed no hint of 5700X so far.
Posted on Reply
#123
beedoo
chstamos
Yes, your point is perfectly valid, but don't you think it's annoying that the minute anyone passes any kind of judgement on AMD's pricing, they're either intel shills or "entitled"? It's almost as if only intel's prices can be subject to criticism. The 5600X is -in my opinion, and a lot of others', it would seem- a terrible value for money compared to 3600 and noone should be subject to fanboi ad homs for thinking so.
Can't say I've noticed too much, though there are definitely individuals out there who are blatantly antagonistic in both directions, and their postings are frequently predictable.

I actually think AMD is making a mistake to increase prices, and should have waited for the next generation to do so - but whatever; I only buy HEDT and looking at a 32 core Threadripper as my next gaming set up so I'm not really going to notice $50 here or there...

My biggest hope for Zen 3 is that AMD have learned from the terrible press with the boost frequencies. My hope is that when these CPU's finally get plugged in, the number on the box is conservative.
Posted on Reply
#125
Zubasa
chstamos
Yes, your point is perfectly valid, but don't you think it's annoying that the minute anyone passes any kind of judgement on AMD's pricing, they're either intel shills or "entitled"? It's almost as if only intel's prices can be subject to criticism. The 5600X is -in my opinion, and a lot of others', it would seem- a terrible value for money compared to 3600 and noone should be subject to fanboi ad homs for thinking so.
IMO, people complaints on just about everything in existence on the internet, I wouldn't stress myself over it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment