The Ryzen 5 5500 certainly works well, but realistically if you're on a budget yet remain a performance-minded enthusiast, this CPU should be avoided even at $140.
AMD Ryzen 5 5500 Review: Yea or Nay?
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
Alfatawi Mendel
Posts: 213 +316
We're still waiting for the GTX1630 review, to see if can break the record for lowest Techspot score...Or is that reserved only for AMD parts?
Gonna wait for Zen4 to launch and hopefully bag a Zen3 upgrade for my Ryzen 5 3600 for not much and sell my 3600 for £80-100.
Thank you for this one. I've got a 2600 and am running a 6600 (low patience and it wasn't awfully priced at the time but yeah I should have waited) so this did help. My B450 is only 3.0 so I was considering going low since I'm not getting 4.0 performance on the card anyways. This tells me keep waiting until 5600[X] is at a better price.
Dsirius
Posts: 143 +250
Bad move naming a processor Ryzen 5500 when in fact is a previous gen architecture, also bad price.
BTW this practice is so common nowadays that I do not remember who did it first among Intel, AMD or Nvidia.
BTW this practice is so common nowadays that I do not remember who did it first among Intel, AMD or Nvidia.
Rocky4040
Posts: 80 +102
How is it bad naming when in fact it is a Zen 3 CPU but because it is basically a 5600G with the iGPU removed or disabled naming it anything 5000 series is spot on. It just to bad it only has the 16MB L3 cache since that is what is hurting it's performance so much & not because it is an older Zen 2 design.
Goes to show you though that Zen likes it's cache and the more you give it the faster they get. The 5800X3D is a prime example of that. Now I know it would have been costly for AMD to do this but I bet if they released Zen 3 with no less than 64MB of L3 cache that the performance would have been so much better and probably would have made them equal to Alder Lake at least in gaming and maybe common works loads as well.
It would have been great marketing too when AMD could say oh look our new 5900x & 5950x CPU's have a total of 128MB L3 cache and we are the first to do this on everyday desktop CPU's. Again it would not have been cost affective for AMD to add that much cache but it sure would have been even more of a attention getter and if they released them with 64MB per CCX and at the same prices they were released at.
People would have probably been complaining less about the prices this way. Then again some people will complain because they like to attention and are never satisfied no matter what lol.
Dsirius
Posts: 143 +250
Yes u r right sir, this processor has some feature of Zen 3 and some features of Zen2, like PCI 3. AMD could easily named it 4500X and nobody would have to criticize it. The same for 4600G and 4700G. But I understand AMD marketing decision.
Last edited:
takaozo
Posts: 116 +153
If you have to build a new PC today 5600x or 12400 is the thing to look at.
All depends on discounts and rest of parts prices.
All depends on discounts and rest of parts prices.
Except that, it isn't. Cezanne and Vermeer are both Zen 3, and in fact Cezanne's release came a few months after Vermeer. As other posters have pointed out, the performance hit is due primarily to cache reduction.
Dsirius
Posts: 143 +250
AMD only has the Ryzen 5 5500 name left for 6 core CPUs as anything lower should be called a Ryzen 3, e.g Ryzen 3 5400. However, Ryzen 3s are quad core CPUs, so AMD did not want to confuse the buyers.
The bottom line is that the 5500 is basically a failed 5600G that AMD has salvaged. Now we wait and see if retailers will start discounting it.
The bottom line is that the 5500 is basically a failed 5600G that AMD has salvaged. Now we wait and see if retailers will start discounting it.
Loadedaxe
Posts: 76 +113
No, they shat on the 1630 review as well.
OT, this $140 garbage is way overpriced, AMD should have dropped this as a $95 cpu as it cant even beat the i3 12100 @ $109
Not to mention, the R5 5600x is $174, so $34 more gets you a much better cpu. a 5600 non x can be had on ebay for $150
Lousy AMD product! Got a Ryzen 5600X last summer (lucky to finally get one at then-MSRP) and it's been working well since, but I truly now HATE AMD and would never again buy a CPU or GPU from them again. I am the disgruntled owner of a RX6700X GPU bought also last summer and was very lucky (if you can call it that) to get one finally on Amazon for over a grand!!! D*mn the miners, same to the bots and same to AMD a(gain). Got a working PC from last year but next time around it ;will likely be a Apple product 'cuz I really HATE AMD so much (and NVIDIA is the same). Just another old codger out there still building my PCs and trying to deal with Microsoft and Intel and AMD their crappy pricing, products and policies! OMHO.I Lowest level of Dante's hells is too good for them all.
You hate AMD? they've force intel to price i5's at less than $150, sorry but you should be thanking AMD, if it wasn't for them intel would be wanting $250 for a quad core i5 still.
Having found this CPU for 105 GBP it still has value when pairing with older GPUs, if you currently have a B450 board and an older gen low end Ryzen.
For example I just sold a Ryzen 3 3200G for 55GBP and spent an extra 50 on buying this CPU to pair it with a GTX 1060 6GB, for a super budget gaming PC.
Its not going to set the world on fire with performance, but I feel it still has a place for upgrades
and budget combos such as this.
For example I just sold a Ryzen 3 3200G for 55GBP and spent an extra 50 on buying this CPU to pair it with a GTX 1060 6GB, for a super budget gaming PC.
Its not going to set the world on fire with performance, but I feel it still has a place for upgrades
and budget combos such as this.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Australian hacker devises jailbreak to run Doom on John Deere combines- Dyson Parkes replied
-
US announces stricter export controls on advanced chip tech- psycros replied
