AMD Ryzen 9 5900X Review: i9-10900K Versus

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,800   +2,155
TechSpot Elite
I cant wait for my 5900X to arrive. Will be pairing it with a Aorus B550 master. Looking forward to memory scaling article.
Well, Hilbert Hagedoorn over at Guru3D said that performance will scale up to 4000MHz but the best bang-for-the-buck is 3600MHz because the gains above that become very modest, like, not worth paying more for.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,800   +2,155
TechSpot Elite
I am actually very curious to see how Navi 21 performs on Intel and AMD without the direct memory access feature and then compare that to how Ampere performs on Intel vs AMD. I‘m really curious if the performance delta is the same.
Well, the original performance chart in the AMD presentation for the RX 6800 XT didn't have SAM or Rage enabled so it should give you some idea. Lately, AMD hasn't been over-promising and under-delivering, they've been under-promising and over-delivering. They claimed a 50% increase in performance-per-watt for RDNA2 vis a vis RDNA1 and they exceeded that. They claimed a 19% increase in IPC for Zen 3 vis a vis Zen 2 and they also exceeded that.

I don't think that we're going to see any real discrepancies between their launch graphs and independent benchmarking. The only thing that might be different is games that weren't featured in AMD's presentation.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,800   +2,155
TechSpot Elite
Wow! This chip really makes me excited for the X470 and B450 chipsets to get the new BIOS. It would be a massive upgrade to drop into a slightly older, but still high end motherboard.

I'm still considering going with a 3900X / XT when the sales hit though. There will be mad deals on the last generation to be had. I work in an enterprise environment and we often apply the n-1 strategy to both patching and hardware.
That's exactly how I felt when I dropped my R5-3600X into my ASRock X370 Killer SLI board. I didn't have to spend a good amount of money on a motherboard. That made the R5-3600X a much better deal for me than the 5000-series.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,800   +2,155
TechSpot Elite
Yes, the above features made the point for the 5900X. And even if Intel decided to reduce it's price, it's only fitting that it's lower cores now demand it, in the face of 5900X. Either way, Intel's fate is sealed.

And I don't think Rocket Lake going to be any different soon. They got away with their overpricing for far too long. It's time they stop and have an insight.
I'm sorry, did you just say that Intel had to have "insight"? If they were capable of that, we never would have reached the point that we're at now.

They might be capable of it, but their earnings are still very high and I won't be holding my breath on that. :laughing:
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,800   +2,155
TechSpot Elite
The 5900x looks very tempting. Might have to sell my 9700k setup, they're still going for good money on ebay.


You really should take off your rose-colored glasses and put down the kool-aid. When AMD was ahead, we were gifted with the FX-57, a $1031 processor, in 2005! Lower end models were still pushing $400-500 at the same time.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1722

I dont know why so many people think AMD is a charity and is going to willingly destroy their own margins forever. They have a consistent lead over intel and intel, even if they can get rocket lake out next year, will still be suffering from 14nm power usage and lower core counts. AMD exists to make money first and foremost, and with them taking the gaming crown and the photoship crown, intel has nothing they dominate outside a handful of games, and witht he next gen consoles rocking zen cores even that may be short lived. AMD is going to raise the price to cover their future R+D orders, they've been running on shoestring budgets for over 15 years now.
I couldn't agree more. There's also the point that even with the price bump, the Ryzen 5000-series CPUs are STILL far better values than their Intel equivalents counterparts so people should quit their whining. I remember when people were happy to shell out $289 for the i5-2500K back in 2011 because it was the "best CPU for gaming" available at the time. Now, almost a decade later, people are whining because the "best CPU for gaming" is $10 more than that?

Give me a break. These people whining about prices are just Inel fanboys looking for ANY reason to say something bad about AMD because I never heard them crying about the Intel pricing structure method of ripping them off. You are 100% correct and I wish that more people would point this out.
 
Last edited:

Irata

Posts: 1,743   +2,919
Well, the original performance chart in the AMD presentation for the RX 6800 XT didn't have SAM or Rage enabled so it should give you some idea. Lately, AMD hasn't been over-promising and under-delivering, they've been under-promising and over-delivering. They claimed a 50% increase in performance-per-watt for RDNA2 vis a vis RDNA1 and they exceeded that. They claimed a 19% increase in IPC for Zen 3 vis a vis Zen 2 and they also exceeded that.

I don't think that we're going to see any real discrepancies between their launch graphs and independent benchmarking. The only thing that might be different is games that weren't featured in AMD's presentation.
Should have been more clear - I am interested in seeing how well both nVidia‘s and AMD‘s drivers are optimized for / work with Ryzen and Core CPU.
 

grvalderrama

Posts: 286   +132
Although this is no surprise, what a comeback from AMD! And I'm even more impressed how Lisa Su had the vision, the knowledge, the temple and the means to achive such an endeavoring task, one of this century's greatest professionals indeed.
 
Going to buy
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X,
Gigabyte B550 AORUS PRO AC,
Noctua NH-D15 Dual 140m Fans,
G.skill Trident Z RGB Series 16GB (2x8GB) 4000 MHz DDR4 Memory F4-4000C18D-16GTZRB

is corsair CV550 watt ok with the above spec ? & I have Quadro K2000D graphic card
is this specification ok ? & which ram to get please help a little & thanks for reading & replying :)
 

Strawman

Posts: 362   +214
I couldn't agree more. There's also the point that even with the price bump, the Ryzen 5000-series CPUs are STILL far better values than their Intel equivalents counterparts so people should quit their whining. I remember when people were happy to shell out $289 for the i5-2500K back in 2011 because it was the "best CPU for gaming" available at the time. Now, almost a decade later, people are whining because the "best CPU for gaming" is $10 more than that?

Give me a break. These people whining about prices are just Inel fanboys looking for ANY reason to say something bad about AMD because I never heard them crying about the Intel pricing structure method of ripping them off. You are 100% correct and I wish that more people would point this out.
That's factually wrong. The graph proves otherwise, the new cpu's; from AMD are not value for money for gaming.
 

mbk34

Posts: 203   +132
is this specification ok ?
OK for what? if you're building it for gaming then you really need a better GPU to go with the 5900X - something like the RTX 3070. If it was me though, I'd wait another month to see the reviews of the 6000 series GPUs. I'd also go for a more powerful PSU as 550 watts is a little meagre for a powerful gaming build. You don't mention storage in your list but you should make sure you use SSD rather than HDD.
 
OK for what? if you're building it for gaming then you really need a better GPU to go with the 5900X - something like the RTX 3070. If it was me though, I'd wait another month to see the reviews of the 6000 series GPUs. I'd also go for a more powerful PSU as 550 watts is a little meagre for a powerful gaming build. You don't mention storage in your list but you should make sure you use SSD rather than HDD.
I have 5 hdd , no ssd its expensive here all taxes & not gaming its for 3d modeling & vray rendering mostly & quadro is ok for me I had i7 5930k with x99 deluxe mobo & that is dead & I had bought this psu 550 recently so using that would save some money & thanks for replying & what about ram 4000mhz or 3600 mhz with latency of which no. ?
 

kmo911

Posts: 306   +34
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/35109411

Hanging on to a needle. pcie 1.0 speed og agp speed on new x570 would hit enormous fps inside games and programs.

Gtx 1080 ti FE burning its last fuel. so going for a rtx 3070 twin E would not improve a pcie 3.0 only.

That I must have a pcie 4.0 MB to use.
Im ussing FOLDER@Home tools to help up with co-2 19 cancer aids and so on.

SPAM warrning ?
Just download down and use. if the x5xxx can run benchmark faster give it a test THEn. just dont nag about it to other then FRIEN ds.

And we are waiting for pcie 5.0 ddr5 lga 1700 that who will run doubble of pcie 4.0 gpu ssd nvme and other NIce Stuff.

2021-2024. 8k will be new like 1080p was new Y 4k many years ago 2003-2009

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-10900-vs-AMD-Ryzen-9-5900X/m1169242vs4087 o.c its faster. but i9-10xxx wil go for 11 th 12 th soon.

lga 1200 no pcie 4.0. lga 1700 full pcie 4.0 nvme ssd speed and so on. ill wait for lga 1700 and maybe pcie 5.0 x670 MB ddr5 on both intel amd with full nvidia amd intel pcie x.x speed.


amd intel has always been doing this up and downs. telling im the the best and then falling down when nxt gen takes over. this was in old days too.


im still on x299 intel mb. but the cores to upgrade costs more then 10x amd motherboards x570 with low-high gpu rx 6000 rtx 30xx

you could go for low but then loosing many fps boosting points.

many games like doom 2016 E can run as low as 320x200 som that makes many low end systme buildt 20xx can run nice and high fps.
if games could adopt after pcie 1.0-5.0 and death stranding does not like 2gb-4gb pcs. it would not simply run or crash out.

18+ link warrning
low fps can COme.



trying to run on lov 1gb-3gb wont run it. 4-16 gb run extreme ultra. latest gpu driver and intel chipset laptop desktop (arm) mac bootcamp 1
 
Last edited:

Dimitrios

Posts: 919   +716
The 5900x looks very tempting. Might have to sell my 9700k setup, they're still going for good money on ebay.


You really should take off your rose-colored glasses and put down the kool-aid. When AMD was ahead, we were gifted with the FX-57, a $1031 processor, in 2005! Lower end models were still pushing $400-500 at the same time.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1722

I dont know why so many people think AMD is a charity and is going to willingly destroy their own margins forever. They have a consistent lead over intel and intel, even if they can get rocket lake out next year, will still be suffering from 14nm power usage and lower core counts. AMD exists to make money first and foremost, and with them taking the gaming crown and the photoship crown, intel has nothing they dominate outside a handful of games, and witht he next gen consoles rocking zen cores even that may be short lived. AMD is going to raise the price to cover their future R+D orders, they've been running on shoestring budgets for over 15 years now.

Well said.
 
Is corsair CV550 watt ok with this config ?

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X,
Gigabyte B550 AORUS PRO AC,
Noctua NH-D15 Dual 140m Fans,
G.skill Trident Z RGB Series 16GB (2x8GB) 4000 MHz DDR4 Memory F4-4000C18D-16GTZRB


& I have Quadro K2000D graphic card, 5 hdd of 7200 rpm, 4 fan from old pc. & no gaming only for rendering & 3d purpose & thanks for reading 🙏 :)
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,800   +2,155
TechSpot Elite
Is corsair CV550 watt ok with this config ?

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X,
Gigabyte B550 AORUS PRO AC,
Noctua NH-D15 Dual 140m Fans,
G.skill Trident Z RGB Series 16GB (2x8GB) 4000 MHz DDR4 Memory F4-4000C18D-16GTZRB


& I have Quadro K2000D graphic card, 5 hdd of 7200 rpm, 4 fan from old pc. & no gaming only for rendering & 3d purpose & thanks for reading 🙏 :)
I think that should be fine. The Quadro K2000D only has a tdp of 51W with a single power connector. The video card is usually the most power-hungry part of a PC but not in this case.
 

antiproduct

Posts: 199   +233
Seem to be missing the temperature graph in this article. Temp is mentioned and talked about, but no comparison image. Perhaps it was accidentally left out?
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,800   +2,155
TechSpot Elite
I have 5 hdd , no ssd its expensive here all taxes & not gaming its for 3d modeling & vray rendering mostly & quadro is ok for me I had i7 5930k with x99 deluxe mobo & that is dead & I had bought this psu 550 recently so using that would save some money & thanks for replying & what about ram 4000mhz or 3600 mhz with latency of which no. ?
Well, the thing is... no matter how fast your CPU is, your hard drives are going to be ma
thanks for replying
I'm always glad to help when I can. 👍
 
It's interesting how the benchmark for Watch Dogs: Legion on Ultra Settings @1080p shows i7-7700K and RTX 3090 running at 85 FPS on average and dipping to 58 FPS 1% of the time. I have exactly the same processor and exactly the same graphics card. Not only that, I have 7700K overclocked (I assume the stock configuration was used in these tests) and in real scenario (not using the in-game benchmark tool), my average FPS is around 45 and it dips to low 30s pretty often. Even on Medium Settings it doesn't average at, say, 60 FPS. This makes me doubt the rest of the benchmarks presented...