Intel Core i5-11600K vs. AMD Ryzen 5 5600 vs. Core i5-10600K

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 520   +992
Look at how miraculously, Intel can now offer such a CPU for that price.

They are only doing this now because AMD is kicking their arrogant and corrupt @sses.

If not, that CPU would easily cost us over US$700!

That's why I refuse to give them any money and hope that they die.
 
Last edited:

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,452   +3,603
I agree with the closing remark, just get a 10600k. Realistically nobody is going to pair this with a 3090 or even 3080.
Look at how miraculous, Intel can now offer such a CPU for that price.

They are only doing this now because AMD is kicking their arrogant and corrupt @sses.

If not, that CPU would easily cost us over US$700!

That's why I refuse to give them money and hope that they die.
Woah, better contain that edge there bud. I suppose you’d rather pay amd $700 for that 6core? Youngins don’t remember this, but amd once sold $1000 single core processors that were single diver percentages faster. Shocking I know.
 

envirovore

Posts: 193   +459
TechSpot Elite
After that SiSoft Sandra slide:
"Intel’s 10th gen Core series was particularly weak for AES-256 encryption, but here we’re looking at a huge 57% performance uplift for the 11900K, placing it 6% ahead of the 5600X. An incredible performance uplift and this is the first benchmark we’ve seen where Intel now beats AMD."

Shouldn't that read 11600K, or have I just not had enough coffee yet?

/there's never enough coffee
 

Soaptrail

Posts: 37   +43
I agree with the closing remark, just get a 10600k. Realistically nobody is going to pair this with a 3090 or even 3080.

Woah, better contain that edge there bud. I suppose you’d rather pay amd $700 for that 6core? Youngins don’t remember this, but amd once sold $1000 single core processors that were single diver percentages faster. Shocking I know.

AMD may have overcharged for the lastest and greatest, is that what you are refering to? I could be wrong but I do not remember AMD charging more than Intel in the last 22 years. I do remember the race to 1GHz though.
 

neeyik

Posts: 1,877   +2,191
Staff member
The different in cost will be made up rather easily in the cost to run the Intel over the AMD, no thanks I would take the AMD 5600X.
So let's say you have the same setups as Steve is using in the testing, and you run the same power test all the time. The difference between the two systems is 64 watts, so a full day of non-stop Blender benchmarking equates to 1.536 kWh. The average US cost per kWh of electricity is $0.1269 and with the current difference in CPU prices being around $95, that would take 487.4 days of non-stop Blender benchmarking to cover that amount.

While there's obviously considerable variance in kWh cost by state, how many people are going to be purchasing a Ryzen 5 5600X with the sole purpose of benchmarking Blender 24/7 or any high power consumption operation continuously for day after day?
 

Makste

Posts: 140   +95
1st: Thanks for the endeavor, and also for highlighting the reviewed part in your graphs.
2nd: Make it so that we can repost your graphs in our comments too.

My conclusion: If we extrapolated the power consumption of this 6 core part (221watts) in blender open data and at the same frequency as your power consumption graph shows, to a Rocket Lake 8 core part, we'd get roughly 294 watts and yet for a 6 core part consuming more power than an 8 core Ryzen 5800X (217 watts) is already unimpressive.
 

nnguy2

Posts: 276   +528
So let's say you have the same setups as Steve is using in the testing, and you run the same power test all the time. The difference between the two systems is 64 watts, so a full day of non-stop Blender benchmarking equates to 1.536 kWh. The average US cost per kWh of electricity is $0.1269 and with the current difference in CPU prices being around $95, that would take 487.4 days of non-stop Blender benchmarking to cover that amount.

While there's obviously considerable variance in kWh cost by state, how many people are going to be purchasing a Ryzen 5 5600X with the sole purpose of benchmarking Blender 24/7 or any high power consumption operation continuously for day after day?

But thats same recycled argument why nvidia is a better buy because of their efficiency.
 

enemys

Posts: 244   +255
TechSpot Elite
With current Intel CPUs binned so close to silicon limits, I fail to see any value in unlocked K models. They are so power-hungry and high-clocked out of the box that you won't get more than mere few percent gains from overclocking. Meanwhile, locked models are substantially cheaper and paired with a high power limit motherboard (which currently means "almost any motherboard") they should perform extremely close to those K CPUs.

I'm running AMD anyway, but if I were to buy Intel, I'd probably go for a locked i7 or i5. Those are cheaper, though, so it's understandable that Intel sent the reviewers those higher revenue K models first.
 

neeyik

Posts: 1,877   +2,191
Staff member
My conclusion: If we extrapolated the power consumption of this 6 core part (221watts) in blender open data and at the same frequency as your power consumption graph shows, to a Rocket Lake 8 core part, we'd get roughly 294 watts and yet consuming more power than an 8 core Ryzen 5800X (217 watts), is already unimpressive.
Increasing the core count of a CPU by 33% doesn't automatically result in the entire PC using 33% more power under a heavy load. A lot depends on what PL2 setting the motherboard manufacturer has gone with - in the case of the 11700K and 11900K it could be considerably higher than the 11600K's. This was very much the case in Anandtech's testing, where the 11600K peaked at 150W (CPU package value) in a full AVX2 workout and the 11900K reached 241W in the same test.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,448   +2,335
I agree with the closing remark, just get a 10600k. Realistically nobody is going to pair this with a 3090 or even 3080.

Woah, better contain that edge there bud. I suppose you’d rather pay amd $700 for that 6core? Youngins don’t remember this, but amd once sold $1000 single core processors that were single diver percentages faster. Shocking I know.
You mean the original Athlon 950 Mhz / 1 Ghz ? If I remember correctly, the 1 Ghz Pentium III from Intel cost $990. Not sure how much they charged for their 1.13 Ghz model but since that one had to be recalled it does not matter.

Wasn‘t that around the time that Intel heavily engaged in anti competitive practices that they were fined for in several countries ?

Some of us old ones might not remember this....because...reasons.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,448   +2,335
Thanks for the review.

Quick question / suggestion: Storage benchmarks would be interesting. I‘d like to see how well Intel‘s PCIe 4 implementation works and if there is any merit to Intel‘s claims of RKL being quite a bit faster than Ryzen 5000.
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 520   +992
how many people are going to be purchasing a Ryzen 5 5600X with the sole purpose of benchmarking Blender 24/7
I'm going to be honest, reading people's posts online, it looks like that is what 99% of the posters do!

But instead of only Blender, its for all types of benchmarks.

Those people are simply either insane (if they really do this 24/7) or simply are wannabe trolls.
 
Ryzen 5 5600x is widely available at Microcenter at MSRP (300$) which is a terrible value compared to the i7 10700K that goes for 250$.
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 520   +992
You mean the original Athlon 950 Mhz / 1 Ghz ? If I remember correctly, the 1 Ghz Pentium III from Intel cost $990. Not sure how much they charged for their 1.13 Ghz model but since that one had to be recalled it does not matter.
The Athlon 1.1 ghz was launched at 719 US$, it's was almost $250 cheaper than the best offer for a Pentium III 1 GHz at US$ 962.
Wasn‘t that around the time that Intel heavily engaged in anti competitive practices that they were fined for in several countries ?
Indeed it was!
My main reason why I dont buy anything from them and Dell, since Dell was the one that really embraced this bribery.
Hell, I would say that they are still doing that.
At my company, I have been moving everything to Lenovo and AMD.
Some of us old ones might not remember this....because...reasons.
Some do because they need to worship brands/corporations and will gladly and conveniently ignore the BS done by those companies.
 
Last edited:

Pastuch

Posts: 68   +73
I agree with the closing remark, just get a 10600k. Realistically nobody is going to pair this with a 3090 or even 3080.

Woah, better contain that edge there bud. I suppose you’d rather pay amd $700 for that 6core? Youngins don’t remember this, but amd once sold $1000 single core processors that were single diver percentages faster. Shocking I know.

Why on earth do people say things like this. My 5600x is driving a 3080 just fine thanks
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 3,353   +1,511
I was not expecting to hear that last gen Intel would be the better buy over current gen AMD.

We're in the twilight zone!