AMD Ryzen 5 5600G Review: Cheapest Zen 3 CPU Yet

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,337   +2,615
5600g should become a hit but it remains to be seen if AMD can supply enough parts for it, which I seriously doubt at least during the rest of 2021.

And yes while I know a lot of gamers that obsess about tech reviews will point out how the 5600X it's still a lot better to play "competitive" at 1080p low detail and pushing 240hz while doing so, I still maintain that the number of people that build for it never surpasses the number of people that just like to talk about it, loudly and in turn, the number of people who actually have good enough reflexes to take advantage of anything past 120hz is just TINY vs the number of people that delude themselves into thinking it matters and spend a lot on it.

Buy anyway, the 5600G can put out the usual performance milestones: ultra detail 1080p at 60fps, high detail at 1440p and anything you want at 4k.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,321   +984
Again. "This APU is not good because we cannot figure any use for it"

Who cares? If this fits someone's bill perfectly, how much that person cares about how well it suits for others? Funny how people ask for more powerful APU's and when AMD releases then, they get poor scores.

Next time give lower score for high end CPU because "not everyone can afford it.
 

Nobina

Posts: 3,418   +3,530
Again. "This APU is not good because we cannot figure any use for it"

Who cares? If this fits someone's bill perfectly, how much that person cares about how well it suits for others? Funny how people ask for more powerful APU's and when AMD releases then, they get poor scores.

Next time give lower score for high end CPU because "not everyone can afford it.
Where do they say that?
 

Irata

Posts: 1,811   +3,049
So in summary, this is a pretty good home / work PC that you and / or the kids can use to comfortably play e-sports type / lighter games without the need to buy a graphics card. Plonk this on a cheap B520 board, use the included hsf and you're set.

Sounds good to me.
 

rmcrys

Posts: 80   +76
As a CPU, it is quite capable. As a gaming CPU with IG, it's kinda, eh.

What I'm wondering lately is why after decade of Intel HD graphics are the AMD APU getting
so heavily scrutinized in gaming?

Simple:
- Intel iGPUs and drivers were always mediocre, they improved almost nothing and only on the 10th Gen und newer are somewhat better (even mediocre)
- with Intel, people always knew that the GPUs were lame, so any video (outside Quicksync) or 3D work or lite gaming were impossible, that´s why Nvidia could sell some MX-GPUs (even so lame)
- AMD is known for CPU & GPUs, sadly AMD is fitting very old GPU tech (Vega) on 2021 APUs. When you buy an AMD-APU in 2021 you think "newest cpu & gpu tech" but it´s not.

So the results show how old the GPU is and could have been *much* better. At this point a cheap 10-11th Gen Intel + low-end NVIDIA are a much better choice than this APU. And what a lot are seeing, is that Intel iGPUs are *very* near AMD iGPUs, which doesn´t help sales or marketing!

Next year AMD will have RDNA graphics but also Intel will have much more experience und gpu-tech to show and that doesn´t look good for AMD...

PS: we talk about iGPUs from Intel/AMD but Apple M1 has an iGPU and gives you massive performance (1050 ti), so Intel/AMD have to learn a couple of things from Apple.
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 1,881   +1,488
As always with any APU the performance for me is not good enough to warrant using this thing to play games on. It’s a poor experience for modern gaming. However in the current climate where even entry level GPUs cost more than they should it might be worth it? Personally I’m not convinced, you can get an RX580 on eBay in the uk for £130. If you’re buying to play games you can get an i5 11400F for £144, add a £130 RX580 and for roughly the same price as one of these APUs you have a far better gaming machine.

Still I guess for people who don’t need the performance of a dedicated graphics card this could save them money over the 5600X. Or they can get a 11600K for £219.

It also should be worth noting that AMDs APU driver support is worse than its a Radeon support (yes, apparently that is possible). I have a owned a Ryzen 3500u laptop for 2 years and I think it’s had 3 driver updates in that time. Reviewers ought to mention this, you often won’t get day one fixes for games etc and for some reason on my APU page they didn’t add motherboard support for free sync so I don’t get that (your mobo needs hdmi 1.4b I believe). Also it won’t let me use relive for some reason. This is the same on my brothers Ryzen 2500u. Not got any other Ryzen APUs to compare it to.
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 1,881   +1,488
As a CPU, it is quite capable. As a gaming CPU with IG, it's kinda, eh.

What I'm wondering lately is why after decade of Intel HD graphics are the AMD APU getting
so heavily scrutinized in gaming?
I agree. Techspot started heavily reviewing gaming performance on APUs only after the 2200G came out. They didn’t really do much game testing before that. My belief is that they wanted to show a test of AMD beating Intel at something. That being said you do see OEMs selling these things in budget gaming PCs, it’s probably good consumer advice to let them know that if they buy an AMD APU for 1080p gaming it’s going to be a poor experience.

Also the new steam deck has an rdna2 vega 8 part (one more cu than this APU). It will run at 800p so could potentially run some AAA stuff at 30+ FPS. But then techspot didn’t test 800p..
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,321   +984
Simple:
- Intel iGPUs and drivers were always mediocre, they improved almost nothing and only on the 10th Gen und newer are somewhat better (even mediocre)
- with Intel, people always knew that the GPUs were lame, so any video (outside Quicksync) or 3D work or lite gaming were impossible, that´s why Nvidia could sell some MX-GPUs (even so lame)
Next year AMD will have RDNA graphics but also Intel will have much more experience und gpu-tech to show and that doesn´t look good for AMD...

PS: we talk about iGPUs from Intel/AMD but Apple M1 has an iGPU and gives you massive performance (1050 ti), so Intel/AMD have to learn a couple of things from Apple.
Intel GPU comes and crushes competition, heard that around 23 years ago (i740).

What Intel and AMD should learn from Apple? Making SOC that does not allow to add more RAM? Sounds "great".

FYI, integrated memory is reason why M1 IGP is so fast.
 

ZackL04

Posts: 746   +571
Steve,

I feel your kinda dogging this APU hard when you say its AAA gaming experience isnt enough to enjoy the title.

Remember a lot of people are still playing on 1st generation Xbox Ones and I feel this little guy does just as well if not better in some respects due to its CPU. GTA V would be the first example where I think this guy would excel. Also, a lot of Xbox one games render at 720-900p, so 30fps at 1080p with an overclock in Valhalla is pretty impressive to me.

Anyway, even though its a nice 6/12 APU, I think the real value is still the old 3400G if you can get one for its $150 retail.
 

BSim500

Posts: 869   +2,018
The most interesting new APU (5300G) is the one AMD refuses to sell. During the last GPU shortage the 2200G / 2400G / 3200G / 3400G were priced low enough (down to £72 / £114 in the UK) that they made sense vs i3's & i5's as direct competition, made sense for budget (and non AAA) gaming and were also cheap enough to make sense as "placeholders" (if you already owned a decent CPU but your GPU suddenly died and couldn't be easily replaced due to the shortage). But if you're going to spend £200-£300 on a new CPU, you might as well just buy a more balanced CPU + proper GPU to go with it, as spending 3-4x the money vs what the 3200G were selling for (for "between GT1030 and GTX1050" levels of performance) stops making sense for "budget" gaming vs either picking up a 2nd hand 3200G / 3400G on Ebay (for non AAA's) or buying a cheap CPU (3100 or i3-10100F) + RX 570 / GTX 1650 Super for double the frame-rates...
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 3,868   +1,917
Simply put, the cache was nerfed to make room for the graphics that ended up hurting overall performance. It also hurts AMD, because Intel doesn't have that problem which helps them IMMENSELY with OEM's, because most people using integrated graphics aren't interested in class leading graphics. They are looking for "good enough" or "acceptable". The CPU is going to be more important than the graphics 9 times out of 10 with APU/IGP's, so when you're pairing an ok CPU with a little more ok than than the other guys' graphics, you're nerfing the most important part for little gain. AMD bought ATi for this. Fusion. And it's still not going well for them IMO.

Because of the neutered cache alone, I personally would not recommend an APU to anyone that plans to get a dGPU in the future.



I am not sure if this is allowed, but I was selected to participate in early access beta for Back 4 Blood and got 3 keys to share.
Starts at 12PM PST today!

These are legal keys from the developers/publisher:
Use this link to redeem your Back 4 Blood code https://www.back4blood.com/?WBGHCode=GCR8PDNDX
Use this link to redeem your Back 4 Blood code https://www.back4blood.com/?WBGHCode=GCR6N9FW8
Use this link to redeem your Back 4 Blood code https://www.back4blood.com/?WBGHCode=GCRVWT4QJ
 
Last edited:

erickmendes

Posts: 628   +280
Interesting CPU... But down here on Brasil where GPUs are selling for inflated prices retailers are asking a higher price for 5600g... even more then the 5600x... It's totally nonsense...

The 5600x is right now at US$330,00 (R$1700,00), while 5600G is going for US$390,00 (R$1700,00). I can get a entry level discrete GPU for that US$60 diff and get a better CPU.

Perhaps when it's market price down here in Brasil settle it will become a real option.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,321   +984
Simply put, the cache was nerfed to make room for the graphics that ended up hurting overall performance. It also hurts AMD, because Intel doesn't have that problem which helps them IMMENSELY with OEM's, because most people using integrated graphics aren't interested in class leading graphics. They are looking for "good enough" or "acceptable". The CPU is going to be more important than the graphics 9 times out of 10 with APU/IGP's, so when you're pairing an ok CPU with a little more ok than than the other guys' graphics, you're nerfing the most important part for little gain. AMD bought ATi for this. Fusion. And it's still not going well for them IMO.
Cache was cut just to make chip bit smaller. Intel puts crappy IGP on most CPU's, that goes waste many times. When AMD puts IGP, you can trust it's at least acceptable. Or buy totally without it.

To be honest, people that are not interested in graphics more than IGP can offer, also are not interested if CPU is few percent slower or faster.
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 1,881   +1,488
Interesting CPU... But down here on Brasil where GPUs are selling for inflated prices retailers are asking a higher price for 5600g... even more then the 5600x... It's totally nonsense...

The 5600x is right now at US$330,00 (R$1700,00), while 5600G is going for US$390,00 (R$1700,00). I can get a entry level discrete GPU for that US$60 diff and get a better CPU.

Perhaps when it's market price down here in Brasil settle it will become a real option.
Thats cheaper than the U.K. standard price. But then again we add 20% to all our purchases because I think our government hates joy.
 

cheapcomputers

Posts: 6   +5
Thanks for the review Steve, nice work.

He seemed to cover everything except power efficiency. I use a 2400G and it does well with old games. What I like best is that my entire computer, modem, and 43" 4K TV draw little more than 100 watts total while gaming. It's powerful stuff considering it uses little more than old incandescent light bulbs.

Everything I read makes me think I'll never upgrade the 2400G unless I buy used parts and very low prices.

For niche cases the 5600G can be a great choice. I don't play new games or use my computer for work so the 6 cores mean little to me. I guess with the 8 core CCXs we may never see 4 core APUs again. It's nice to see the yields must be good.

I wonder why there's such a big difference between the 2600 and 3400G. Is it the difference between L3 cache or is it core count?

Steve seems to like the 10400 for cheap gaming like I do. Those were available to me at one point for $100. At that time if I wanted to build a cheap gaming computer I would have used that cpu. I wonder how a 10400 with my old GTX 750ti would compare to the AMD apus.

It's a shame how poorly the 11 gen igpus are performing. I thought they were going to be closer to AMD's igpu.

Thanks again Steve. I think you did some excellent comparisons.
 

Alfatawi Mendel

Posts: 153   +241
Sad to see Techspot recommending second-hand purchases. Why restrict that scenario to dGPU's? Why not start to recommend second-hand CPU's too, as a means to an end?
In fact why bother reviewing new kit, as second-hand stuff is cheaper, but with possible limited life-span etc.
And no..."Most of us" don't buy second-hand 3gb 1030's to play games.
A rabbit hole too far Techspot.
 

amghwk

Posts: 1,097   +1,013
Despite discouraging opening remarks of the 5700G in this article, it is putting up a very good fight, seeing from the graphs.
 

Mr Majestyk

Posts: 928   +821
Not sure why you waste time on iGPU games tests. Even in 2021 it's still a sad joke how bad these iGPUs perform. I can only hope Phoenix with RDNA2 iGPU is at least 200% faster, because that is what it'll take to be of much use. Of course for normal non-gaming use it might not matter, but if you are say using Photoshop a lot of the newer AI plugins use the GPU for acceleration and are 10x faster than the CPU. A strong iGPU is much needed IMO. I don't want a discrete GPU in a laptop for example, I don't game on them, but a very strong iGPU for photo/video processing, etc is very desirable.
 

Daniele 00

Posts: 135   +111
"game cpu advertisment a part"... I was looking for a cheap cpu with integrated gpu to build a pc for my dad.... you know... watch videos, play sudoku time to time etc. 5600g sounds interesting but still too expensive
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 1,881   +1,488
Not sure why you waste time on iGPU games tests. Even in 2021 it's still a sad joke how bad these iGPUs perform. I can only hope Phoenix with RDNA2 iGPU is at least 200% faster, because that is what it'll take to be of much use. Of course for normal non-gaming use it might not matter, but if you are say using Photoshop a lot of the newer AI plugins use the GPU for acceleration and are 10x faster than the CPU. A strong iGPU is much needed IMO. I don't want a discrete GPU in a laptop for example, I don't game on them, but a very strong iGPU for photo/video processing, etc is very desirable.
In premier pro Vega can’t be used to hardware accelerate encoding but Intel can with quick sync. This is often the case, the Intel iGPU is a lot weaker but it does support more software out there. Reviewers should cover this and focus less on gaming as I agree with you that people don’t buy these things for aaa gaming.