Ryzen 5 3600/3600X?

[bug]

What's up with the newly released Ryzen 5 CPUs?
They're the most interesting pair released and yet there's next to no review available. On the surface, the 3600X commands a $50 (+25%) premium over its sibling for a couple hundred MHz and a better cooler. Theoretically you can overclock the 3600 to 3600X levels, but the only review I saw dong that needed 1.4V for this feat. The 3600X also comes with higher configured TDP, so there may be real silicon differences here.

With everyone reviewing the 3700X and 3900X, I feel like AMD is trying hard to put the spotlight on those two SKUs (TPU has the 3600X, it was used in their motherboard reviews), which begs the question, why?

Are there additional resources on the 3600 and 3600X that I'm missing? TIA

 

[Bones]

Marketing.
Spotlight is on the higher models because they represent the top pieces and are the ones everyone would want first.

Nothing wrong with the 3600/3600X, it simply doesn't have as many cores or the same cache as the larger chips do. In fact I have a 3600X waiting for it's board to get here so I can finally set it up and see what it's got.
And I will find what it has.

 

[TheLostSwede]

AMD didn't seed samples for reviews. It's that simple.

Also, 1.4V seems to be the correct CPU Voltage for the 3000-series.

 

[bug]

Marketing.
Spotlight is on the higher models because they represent the top pieces and are the ones everyone would want first.

Nothing wrong with the 3600/3600X, it simply doesn't have as many cores or the same cache as the larger chips do. In fact I have a 3600X waiting for it's board to get here so I can finally set it up and see what it's got.
And I will find what it has.

Yeah, I figured it's marketing, but I just cannot understand why nobody pitted the 3600 and 3600X against each other. We all know they're both in the segment that actually sells. And I'm only asking because I'd like to buy one, but I don't know whether it's worth to fork out the extra $50.

AMD didn't seed samples for reviews. It's that simple.

What does that mean?
There's a 3600X right here: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-x570-taichi/8.html
You're telling me AMD sent these out, but told sites not to review them?

 

[biffzinker]

You're telling me AM sent these out, but told sites not to review them?

Might want to read the bottom of the page you linked too.

Thanks to ASRock for supplying the AMD Ryzen 3600X for this review!

Meaning @W1zzard doesn't have access to the 3600X for review since @Black Haru has it in Indiana.

 

[Bones]

Yeah, I figured it's marketing, but I just cannot understand why nobody pitted the 3600 and 3600X against each other. We all know they're both in the segment that actually sells. And I'm only asking because I'd like to buy one, but I don't know whether it's worth to fork out the extra $50.

What does that mean?
There's a 3600X right here: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-x570-taichi/8.html
You're telling me AMD sent these out, but told sites not to review them?

Actually there is a review somewhere that tested both and the results showed them being close, the X version having an edge but nothing outrageous. I'll have to find it again and post the linky once I do.

EDIT: Not the same vid I saw earlier but it does compare the two chips.

 

[bug]

Actually there is a review somewhere that tested both and the results showed them being close, the X version having an edge but nothing outrageous. I'll have to find it again and post the linky once I do.

I think it was gamernexus. But as I noted in my original post, it took 1.4V on the 3600

 

[newtekie1]

AMD didn't seed samples for reviews. It's that simple.

They also aren't that exciting. They're $50-75 more than the 2600/2600X for a couple hundred MHz bump in clock speed. Yeah, Zen2 is better than the Zen+ in the 2600/2600X but at the price premium their demanding it kills the excitement.

 

[Bones]

Shoudn't need 1.4v's just to run it - My 2700X only needs 1.21v's to run at stock and this is supposed to be the new gen chip.
1.4 is simply too much.

 

[bug]

Shoudn't need 1.4v's just to run it - My 2700X only needs 1.21v's to run at stock and this is supposed to be the new gen chip.
1.4 is simply too much.

There you go:

But yes, that's why I was asking, a sample size of 1 isn't much to go by.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Yeah, I figured it's marketing, but I just cannot understand why nobody pitted the 3600 and 3600X against each other. We all know they're both in the segment that actually sells. And I'm only asking because I'd like to buy one, but I don't know whether it's worth to fork out the extra $50.

What does that mean?
There's a 3600X right here: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-x570-taichi/8.html
You're telling me AMD sent these out, but told sites not to review them?

No, I'm telling you, AMD didn't send them out, TPU got them from the board makers, since they weren't given any by AMD.
They also bought some additional parts, as pointed out by @W1zzard in another thread, so reviews are most likely coming.

 

[bug]

No, I'm telling you, AMD didn't send them out, TPU went out and bought them, since they weren't given any.

No worries, it has been settled above

 

[TheLostSwede]

Shoudn't need 1.4v's just to run it - My 2700X only needs 1.21v's to run at stock and this is supposed to be the new gen chip.
1.4 is simply too much.

As I pointed out above, 1.4V or around there, seems to be the new normal. I have not touched any Voltage settings in the UEFI.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

There you go:

But yes, that's why I was asking, a sample size of 1 isn't much to go by.

Gamersnexus basically said it was a waste of money. 25% more money for 1-3% performance doesn't typically make sense. The X chips have almost always been for people who don't want to overclock. You could get lucky or unlucky with either chip when it comes to the silicon lottery.

 

[bug]

Gamersnexus basically said it was a waste of money. 25% more money for 1-3% performance doesn't typically make sense. The X chips have almost always been for people who don't want to overclock. You could get lucky or unlucky with either chip when it comes to the silicon lottery.

Yes, but he didn't overclock the 3600X so we'd have an apples-to-apples. He also didn't discuss the difference in bundled coolers, he assumed whoever buys these is going to discard the stock coolers and go for aftermarket. Which is what I've done for years, but the Wraiths are supposed to be pretty capable.

 

[Sithaer]

Gamersnexus basically said it was a waste of money. 25% more money for 1-3% performance doesn't typically make sense. The X chips have almost always been for people who don't want to overclock. You could get lucky or unlucky with either chip when it comes to the silicon lottery.

Pretty much,I have the 1600x cause I'm really not into OCing anything 'not that I can't I just don't like to'.

That and because the price diff was so minimal it was not worth going for the 1600,at some point the X was even cheaper and since I wanted to use an aftermarket cooler anyway the cooler coming with the 1600 was pointless.

In this actual case I would just get the 3600 tho,X is way overpriced for that minimal difference.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Yes, but he didn't overclock the 3600X so we'd have an apples-to-apples. He also didn't discuss the difference in bundled coolers, he assumed whoever buys these is going to discard the stock coolers and go for aftermarket. Which is what I've done for years, but the Wraiths are supposed to be pretty capable.

Both coolers suck... A $20 cooler off Amazon would beat either... the wraith prism the best cooler they include with their CPU is worse than a hyper 212. You would still be much better off buying the 3600 and spending $50 on a cooler than using the stock 3600x cooler in that scenario.. none of these 3rd gen ryzen CPUs overclock very well 4.3ghz seems to be nearly a hard limit with the 3900x doing 4.4 with hyperthreading disabled. So far in every review I've read the X chips actually lose performance with manual OC in some scenarios and the gains are not worth the heat increase.

 

[Bones]

As I pointed out above, 1.4V or around there, seems to be the new normal. I have not touched any Voltage settings in the UEFI.

I will be testing mine and see how it does. Since you didn't touch any settings it's probrably using the default voltage spec'ed by AMD which is...... Too high.
AMD tends to do that, they had the FX-9590 for example set at default for 1.5v's but the chip didn't need nearly that much to run at default (4.7GHz) speeds.

I always set my stuff manually without the offset voltage BS.
What I decide to give it is what it runs, if it runs at all.

 

[Ferrum Master]

As I pointed out above, 1.4V or around there, seems to be the new normal. I have not touched any Voltage settings in the UEFI.

Buahah

 

[TheLostSwede]

Buahah

View attachment 126895

I was running Prime 95 at time...

 

[newtekie1]

Yes, but he didn't overclock the 3600X so we'd have an apples-to-apples. He also didn't discuss the difference in bundled coolers, he assumed whoever buys these is going to discard the stock coolers and go for aftermarket. Which is what I've done for years, but the Wraiths are supposed to be pretty capable.

Watch the video again. He said he overclocked the 3600X to 4.3GHz and couldn't get any higher manually, which is the same frequency he was able to get the 3600 to. He didn't include the 3600X@4.3GHz in the results because it would be pointless and identical to the 3600@4.3GHz results.

I will be testing mine and see how it does. Since you didn't touch any settings it's probrably using the default voltage spec'ed by AMD which is...... Too high.

I'm pretty sure they need the high voltages to get the high PBO clocks.

 

[Bones]

Watch the video again. He said he overclocked the 3600X to 4.3GHz and couldn't get any higher manually, which is the same frequency he was able to get the 3600 to. He didn't include the 3600X@4.3GHz in the results because it would be pointless and identical to the 3600@4.3GHz results.



I'm pretty sure they need the high voltages to get the high PBO clocks.

Maybe, maybe not - Time will tell once the real testing begins.

I just finished setting it up (Stuff finally came in) and did a quickie test to be sure all was working.
Default is indeed 1.4v's or even a tad over but I then set it manually to just 1.23v's - Board booted and seemed OK with it plus temps were much lower too.

Next up is to get it going with an OS to see how it does and if it's capable of running in an OS with the voltage I set for it - From the looks of it so far it should.

 

[P4-630]

Ryzen 5 3600/3600x review:

AMD Ryzen 5 3600 & 3600X review: bom onder de Core i5's!

Inmiddels hebben we ook de AMD Ryzen 5 3600 en Ryzen 5 3600X kunnen testen; in deze review vind je alle benchmarks en lees je of de Ryzen 5 3600 net zo'...

nl.hardware.info

 

[Bones]

So far, so good - No excessive voltage required at all.

Bones`s SuperPi - 1M score: 9sec 157ms with a Ryzen 5 3600X

The Ryzen 5 3600X @ 4458MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the SuperPi - 1M benchmark. Bonesranks #null worldwide and #20 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.

hwbot.org

Bones`s SuperPi - 32M score: 8min 9sec 919ms with a Ryzen 5 3600X

The Ryzen 5 3600X @ 4406MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the SuperPi - 32M benchmark. Bonesranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.

hwbot.org

Bones`s Cinebench - R15 score: 1633 cb with a Ryzen 5 3600X

The Ryzen 5 3600X @ 4157MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the Cinebench - R15 benchmark. Bonesranks #942 worldwide and #53 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.

hwbot.org

Bones`s HWBOT x265 Benchmark - 4k score: 12.08 fps with a Ryzen 5 3600X

The Ryzen 5 3600X @ 4157MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the HWBOT x265 Benchmark - 4k benchmark. Bonesranks #410 worldwide and #19 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.

hwbot.org

Next thing is to get a waterblock so I can let run a little harder - Air just doesn't cut it so well.

 

[bug]

Ryzen 5 3600/3600x review:

AMD Ryzen 5 3600 & 3600X review: bom onder de Core i5's!

Inmiddels hebben we ook de AMD Ryzen 5 3600 en Ryzen 5 3600X kunnen testen; in deze review vind je alle benchmarks en lees je of de Ryzen 5 3600 net zo'...

nl.hardware.info

Hm, basically you can't tell them apart (and another 3600 that needs 1.4V to overclock). They look rather bad in gaming next to the 9600k though - look at the 99th percentile.