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

#126
ratirt
I'm ok with the prices. I think i will change my CPU and I don't worry about the cooler since I got my water already running.
I will still wait for the benchmarks and reviews. No need to rush the purchase. What AMD did with the new Ryzen is great and if Intel did something similar, we would have had a real competition.
Your move Intel, show us what you got and don't disappoint.
Posted on Reply
#127
Pumper
birdie
I like compiling and doing video encoding which both should become quite faster with this generation as well. I couldn't care less about normal resolution gaming because I don't have and I don't intend to buy a high refresh rate monitor and my 1660 Ti drives my old 1080p 74Hz monitor just fine.
No they won't. Look at the slide showing 3950X vs. 5950X. Zen3 is only 5% faster at encoding and 9% at compiling:

Posted on Reply
#128
quadibloc
Unless the wider floating-point unit of these new chips also means they have AVX-512 support added, I think I'll stick with my 3900X for the time being. I don't see a point in getting rid of a perfectly good CPU just because one slightly better is out. But a few years down the road, no doubt AMD will have something new and exciting. I am happy for AMD achieving the top tier in single-thread performance. Of course, last time, they were already so close to Intel that it hardly mattered, so even at 19% IPC, it's still not as big a jump in some ways then the 3000 series was.
Supposedly, Intel has 10nm available, and it's fixed some initial issues with it. I wonder why they aren't trying harder. Maybe they will now, since they're in the right position to do so. Or will AMD have to outstrip them in sales volume first?
Posted on Reply
#129
ratirt
quadibloc
Unless the wider floating-point unit of these new chips also means they have AVX-512 support added, I think I'll stick with my 3900X for the time being. I don't see a point in getting rid of a perfectly good CPU just because one slightly better is out. But a few years down the road, no doubt AMD will have something new and exciting. I am happy for AMD achieving the top tier in single-thread performance. Of course, last time, they were already so close to Intel that it hardly mattered, so even at 19% IPC, it's still not as big a jump in some ways then the 3000 series was.
Supposedly, Intel has 10nm available, and it's fixed some initial issues with it. I wonder why they aren't trying harder. Maybe they will now, since they're in the right position to do so. Or will AMD have to outstrip them in sales volume first?
Yes, in your case the change may not be as significant. In my case with 2700X the bump in performance would be significant if I get 5900X. The coolest thing is, I just need to buy the CPU and nothing more.
That's just great and I hope my 470 Carbon Gaming will do fine with the new gen Ryzen and there will be no significant penalties in performance due to the older gen motherboard.
I'm still waiting to see how things will go with the new Ryzen CPUs. Either way it does look promising though.
With the 10nm Intel, it will probably end up in Mobile segment as the last time. Hopefully I'm wrong.
Posted on Reply
#130
TheLostSwede
Animalpak
Will they finally supporting XMP from RAM's ? Because AMD was and is now still is a disaster on XMP memory modules.
You are aware XMP is an Intel specific standard, so why would it work well with AMD CPUs? The timings aren't going to be the same for two entirely different memory controller architectures. Yes, some board makers have made it sort of work, with some RAM, but that's it. XMP was never designed to work with AMD CPUs. It also takes all of two minutes to configure the RAM if you use the Ryzen DRAM calculator.
xman2007
No, no they're not. Yes AMD support a lower overall RAM speed than Intel CPU's but buying a suitable kit when building a PC should be the same as any other expensive purchase you make, you research what you are buying and don't just throw money at it cause "dats the fastest and mostest xpensivvvv/cheapest so it must be de besssssttt" :kookoo: XMP is an intel technology and whilst it is good and all, if you don't do some basic homework on what parts you're buying and if they're compatible, how is that down to AMD? for AMD there are recommended kits of DDR4 RAM and tested kits for each and every motherboard that you can buy, but as we see with all the "My Ryzen motherboard doesn't run my RAM at their rated speed" threads people don't do that, they buy a CPU and motherboard and any old RAM they feel like throwing in there without doing so much of a smidgeon of googling about compatibility and complain when it doesn't work right. The fact that AMD motherboards support XMP is a plus point, but building a PC is not the same as building a lego set and if you have little experience in doing so but just wanted to try after watching 1 YouTube video on "how easy" it is then you really should stump up the extra $50/$100 bucks to get someone or a company who has the required knowledge and experience to do it for you and then just use your consumer rights to return it and get it sorted instead of wondering why your Corsair LPX 3200 won't run at it's rated speed on your Ryzen build.
That's not true though, AMD can support just as fast RAM as Intel in most instances, you just don't benefit of going over 3800MHz in 98% of cases. There are benchmarks showing that some games are happy with an AMD CPU running with 4400MHz at 1:2 to the IF, but most other software doesn't benefit from it.
Also, the DDR4 overclocking world record is with an AMD CPU...
www.techpowerup.com/260467/micron-memory-sets-new-ddr4-overclocking-world-record
Personally I bought some random RAM and it works really well, better than the spec it was sold at, without being on any QVL. However, XMP doesn't work, but who cares, as it performs better than it was meant to, not using XMP.
Posted on Reply
#131
ratirt
TheLostSwede
You are aware XMP is an Intel specific standard, so why would it work well with AMD CPUs? The timings aren't going to be the same for two entirely different memory controller architectures. Yes, some board makers have made it sort of work, with some RAM, but that's it. XMP was never designed to work with AMD CPUs. It also takes all of two minutes to configure the RAM if you use the Ryzen DRAM calculator.
Yeah I read those comments and I'm really surprised that people still consider XMP as something AMD should have. The influence of the Intel's marketing is just outstanding how people perceive the technology now. Just a while back, someone said, AMD should support CUDA cores. :) It's a flying circus in their heads with some users though
Posted on Reply
#133
ratirt
TheLostSwede
Cleaner slides below:
videocardz.com/newz/amd-announces-ryzen-5000-series-zen3



The graphs and stuff looks great but I'm still waiting for the reviews. If this turns out to be exactly how the graphs show, it will be a hell of performance bump for me. If my Mobo can pull it off, I'm going 12 core this year :)
Posted on Reply
#134
laszlo
rvalencia
Unlike Intel and NVIDIA, AMD is just above the break-even. AMD needs to improve its profitability.
is not all about profit in their case... they had loans/investments when they were on the ground and not forget the R&D which is a fraction of Intel or NV allocated amounts...

we can't expect cpu& gpu at cost prices ....when you are small compared to big dogs you must find a way to please investors and also buyers
Posted on Reply
#135
Mouth of Sauron
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.
5600X is not lowest-end CPU, and if we go along the Zen2 6core lineup, there are 3600 (also 6/12, like 50g cheaper and much more popular), 3500X and 3500 (both 6/6), all classified as 'mainstream' by AMD.

3300x and 3100 4/8 are the "entry level" by AMD on Ryzen brand, and they come pretty cheap - so calling 5600X "lowest end chip" is kinda not right.

Line-up was simply represented by 4 chips, out of 10 or more - even 5800X was skipped...

Besides, the bunch of 1xxx, 2xxx etc are still live and well and cheap. Guess the same will be true for Zen2 family...
Posted on Reply
#136
TheLostSwede
ratirt
The graphs and stuff looks great but I'm still waiting for the reviews. If this turns out to be exactly how the graphs show, it will be a hell of performance bump for me. If my Mobo can pull it off, I'm going 12 core this year :)
I'm sure no-one takes AMD on their word here, I simply wanted to share the easier to read slides, as it was kind of hard to see some of the info from the phone l live stream. There were obviously some additional data provided by AMD that wasn't shown in the live stream.
Posted on Reply
#137
SIGSEGV
Do I have to wait for AM5 socket? :confused:
I think I am gonna upgrade my current CPU with 5950X. Besides, I also want to commemorate AM4 socket. :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#138
ratirt
SIGSEGV
Do I have to wait for AM5 socket? :confused:
I think I am gonna upgrade my current CPU with 5950X. Besides, I also want to commemorate AM4 socket. :laugh:
Wait for the reviews of the new Ryzens CPUs and then decide. You can wait like a month I guess. You will get review, comparisons and how it works in a different configurations and then you will have a bigger picture what to buy to match your expectations.
I'm waiting with purchases.
Posted on Reply
#139
HD64G
AMD has cornered down Intel as hard as ever. Has the best CPUs in both vfm (Zen2) and absolute performance (Zen3). Absolute market dominance for desktop. The same for mobile and server is a matter of time now.
Posted on Reply
#140
ratirt
HD64G
AMD has cornered down Intel as hard as ever. Has the best CPUs in both vfm (Zen2) and absolute performance (Zen3). Absolute market dominance for desktop. The same for mobile and server is a matter of time now.
Well, I wouldn't give up on Intel yet. I'm sure they have some more tricks up their sleeves to diminish the 5000 series new Ryzen.
Posted on Reply
#141
wahdangun
RandallFlagg
Hm, seems like the shoe might be on the other foot with AMD vs Intel.

Let me see if I can switch my arguments.

So, is it really worth it to spend an extra $100 on AMD for 1-2 fps? Intel is good enough and is a better price/performance ratio, nobody will notice those 2 fps.

How am I doing?
good, except this time amd also win in productivity
Posted on Reply
#142
londiste
ratirt
I'm ok with the prices. I think i will change my CPU and I don't worry about the cooler since I got my water already running.
I will still wait for the benchmarks and reviews. No need to rush the purchase. What AMD did with the new Ryzen is great and if Intel did something similar, we would have had a real competition.
Your move Intel, show us what you got and don't disappoint.
Rocket Lake, Q1 2021.
If the rumors are true (expecially the Willow Cove backport part), it actually might be a worthy upgrade for people who do not need 12 or 16 cores.
TheLostSwede
I guess you're not aware that all of that was fixed after about six months worth of UEFI and AGESA updates? Ignorance is bliss...
I guess my personal experience clouds my judgement here. My 3600X never managed to run at over 4.2GHz for anything but a split second and I did not see 4.4GHz even then. UEFI/AGESA updates made negligible difference in that regard. So, YMMV. And while CPUs produced later may have an easier time hitting the intended speeds, that doesn't exactly fix the problem I had.
HD64G
AMD has cornered down Intel as hard as ever. Has the best CPUs in both vfm (Zen2) and absolute performance (Zen3). Absolute market dominance for desktop. The same for mobile and server is a matter of time now.
Have they? 10600K sells for about 250 these days (KF a bit lower), 10700K sells for about 350 (again, KF a bit lower). 5600X in between them is not exactly in a nice spot all things considered. 5900X was 6-7% faster in games on average compared to 10900K, so while it leads that lead is small and depending on eventual prices Intel might be the one with more cores for the same money this time around.
RandallFlagg
It seems Intel may not have anything to compete directly with a 5900X, assuming those benchmarks are representative of overall performance.
Intel did not and does not have anything that would directly compete with 3900X either, much less 3950X.
Posted on Reply
#143
RandallFlagg
wahdangun
good, except this time amd also win in productivity
How sure are you of that? On a cost comparison AMD has only displaced the 10900k.

Zen 3 vs 10th Gen By cost :

$299 6c/12t 5600X vs $310 8c/16t 10700

$450 8c/16t 5800X vs $450 10c/20t 10850K

I don't know - and seriously doubt - that same cost Zen 3 will win in those price / performance comparisons. At those prices, you actually get more cores / threads with Intel than with AMD except at the very top.
Posted on Reply
#144
ratirt
londiste
Rocket Lake, Q1 2021.
If the rumors are true (expecially the Willow Cove backport part), it actually might be a worthy upgrade for people who do not need 12 or 16 cores.
I could actually use more cores. Considering my two TR 3960's, I could use some more power in my regular desktop. Intel is not an upgrade for me actually. I already have Ryzen and what I will need to upgrade is a CPU only. The 5000 series seems pretty good in any case and switching to Intel now (whatever performance benefit willow cove will bring) is not an upgrade but new system build which I will need to spend a lot for. Considering Intel's new gen new chipset idea, I'm OK with, going Ryzen and now I see it payed off since I don't need anything aside CPU change. Besides, looking at Intel's CPU iterations in the past 3-4 years I'm not convinced the 11th gen CPU will bring anything new in general just some minor changes and still 14++ node with kinda big power consumption.
I will upgrade later this year or at the beginning of the 2021 (my board will need an Bios update for the new Ryzen) so if Intel releases something till then I might reconsider but I seriously doubt anything is going to be released from Intel now or in few months in the desktop department so I'd rather stick to Ryzen.
Posted on Reply
#145
Jayp
birdie
To add to my previous post: I hate when people choose companies - you should choose products and root for healthy competition and AMD now has perfectly shown that when competition falters, customers get punished hard. I've been eagerly waiting for the Ryzen 5000 series but now I'm hesitating whether to upgrade from my 3700X. A performance uplift is great but the cost of the upgrade is not palatable at all. There's no way I will be able to sell my 3700X for $330 I bought it for. At most I'll get $200 for it on the secondary market. Paying $250 to get 20% more performance? I don't know.
Not sure why everyone feels the need to be on a yearly upgrade cycle. Your 3700X either makes you happy or it doesn't. Why even think about the upgrade unless you need or could benefit from more. You could easily wait a year on the 3700X and grab the following Zen 4 CPU that seems to be likely on DDR5 as well. Zen 3 is a an upgrade over Zen 2 no doubt but it is notably an upgrade for Zen and Zen+ users. Someone on early zen would be seeing significant upgrade.
Posted on Reply
#146
R0H1T
londiste
Rocket Lake, Q1 2021.
If the rumors are true (expecially the Willow Cove backport part), it actually might be a worthy upgrade for people who do not need 12 or 16 cores.
It's not going to be the same IPC increase, that you saw on 10nm, if the same rumors are true of course. Intel will still be relying on their 14nm clock speed advantage to get outright wins.

Efficiency does take a tumble so in the end zen3 will likely be doing better overall perf & certainly much better perf/W even at stock.
Posted on Reply
#147
Shatun_Bear
Darmok N Jalad
It’s a shame they couldn’t hit the 5.0ghz barrier. You know the engineers probably wanted to get there in the worst way. I’m guessing these will behave like 3000 series, where they will reach max clocks better on their own boosting algorithm and there won’t be any overclocking. It’s not a bad showing by any means—the design changes and IPC uplift are something to be proud of, and the power consumption sounds like it’s going to be so much better. And all this on the same 7nm node. I know these aren’t reviews, but I’d be surprised if the benchmarks they posted couldn’t be reproduced. Just makes me wonder what GPU they were using. :)
Threadripper 5000 will obviously come with a 5Ghz boost clock if the 5950X is 4.9Ghz already.

That, or a 5950XT in 6 months if you dont fancy TR.
dicktracy
All of a sudden, gaming matters again for AMD fans. LOL
I think the point is, Ryzen CPUs now beat Intel's equivalents in every single metric you can imagine, aside from AVX workloads

In some metrics - efficiency - AMD is so far ahead you could say with a straight face: they're two generations ahead of Intel.
HD64G
AMD has cornered down Intel as hard as ever. Has the best CPUs in both vfm (Zen2) and absolute performance (Zen3). Absolute market dominance for desktop. The same for mobile and server is a matter of time now.
Yes, Ryzen 4000U on mobile also completely dominates Intel's best in performance per watt and price.
Posted on Reply
#148
sergionography
Mysteoa
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.
This is why I said rtx3000 vs rtx2000. Cards that have the same features should be compared accordingly. Also it's for scientific purposes. I'm curious as to how much ray tracing improved and how it effects frame rates. How much ray tracing harware is required before it works parallel to rasterization without effecting performance
Posted on Reply
#149
JrRacinFan
Served 5k and counting ...
All I know is im grabbing my popcorn and sitting it out and waiting to see if any XT versions of Zen 3 show their face.
Posted on Reply
#150
Zach_01
JrRacinFan
All I know is im grabbing my popcorn and sitting it out and waiting to see if any XT versions of Zen 3 show their face.
I hope you have a silo of corn stored because even if this is in AMD's plans it wont come any time soon, especially now that they "have" the competition in 99.9% of cases with Intel trying to straight out 10nm.
Maybe in a year... If there is something else ZEN3 related I would expect that it would be lower/mid range SKUs. And that is related directly to present 7nm node yields and seems to be much better than last year's.

I could almost say that 7nm yields are so good now that all 4 ZEN3 SKUs are already the "XT"s. AMD is playing all for all this round. Both CPU and GPU devisions.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment