The Best Value Gaming CPU: 13600K vs 12600K vs 7600X vs 5800X3D vs 5600X

MarcusNumb

Posts: 109   +181
Thanks for a good article.
It seems like the 5800x3d is an obvious choice for AM4 users who want to have a final upgrade. It is my case now cause I'm struggling between 5600x and 5800x3d to pair with my 3070ti for 1080p gaming. Right now in Spain, the 5600x costs 195euros and the 5800x3d is 410. I'll hold my gun and wait for a better deal then.
 

Kam7r

Posts: 169   +341
Rocking a 5600x +6700xt, gaming in 4K 60-100fps depend of the game ( with loseless scaling who let me use FSR on every games / Magpie on github do the same for free ) I'll go 5800x3D or 13600k / ryzen 7k with 1CCX so 7700x max when I'll upgrade, the amount of money I'll have at the time will determine which path I'll go, the Very Good thing, is : WE have many choices... competition is good
 

poshflamingos

Posts: 38   +98
I wish comparisons like this one included products further down the stack. I'm curious how a budget system with a 12100F, 12400F, and/or 5600, a sub $100 motherboard, and a $50 kit of DDR4-3200 CL16 would compare here, and how much performance exactly you're sacrificing going with those parts.
 

loki1944

Posts: 704   +524
I'm just impressed how little CPUs have advanced for game performance at or above 60FPS; I mean, once the first i7 came out it is still to this day capable of playing anything other than AC Origins due to DRM for that game. With the review today all I see is the CPU shown with the lowest FPS is still far more than enough for any pc gamer.
 

UdyrL

Posts: 56   +91
Thank you for the article. This is great information for conscious buyers.

Please correct this: "while the premium DDR5-6000 CL30 costs $25".
 

Ohnooze

Posts: 445   +827
Interesting article.

Last year I upgraded to a 12600K and at that time I found it to be the best option. But if I were buying now I think I would be looking at the 5800x3D.
Either way all of them are good options if you're running anything over 1080p imo.

 

takaozo

Posts: 520   +820
What is funny here is that the 5600x will be bottlenecked by any GPU over RTX3080. Who will pair a $180 CPU with a $2000 GPU?
 
Some good gaming information, but as stated the 13th gen has a lot of memory headroom above 6400c32 (fwl:10ns) and also is killing it in workload charts. Meanwhile the 5800x3d, although though an amazing performer, is a locked cpu. I can't wait to see AMD implement 3D cache into their 7000 series and hopefully unlocked.
DDR5 prices are finally dropping a lot! A much better budget DDR5 option over 5200c40-fwl15.4 would have been 5600c32-fwl11.4 @$160 and would have been useful in the intel line-ups as well.
As for DDR4 the charts show that 3600c14-fwl7.8 @$210+ isn't worth the high price. If you were extreme OC'n 4400c19-fwl8.6 is only $130. 3600c16-fwl8.9 @$115 is good memory and similar 4000c18-fwl9 is only $101. The budget sweet spot for DDR4 imo is 10ns fwl. 3200c16 or 3600c18 is as low as $70.
Thx for the article!
 

waclark

Posts: 799   +496
So conversely, if you're looking at performance beyond gaming, then the Core i5-13600K becomes the obvious choice thanks to vastly superior productivity performance.

I think this statement is what would push me to the 13600K. I've never built a machine just for gaming. I've always had some other work I do on the PC. I wouldn't give up good "productivity" performance for a few percentage points in gaming, especially when both of these CPUs are more than capable of handling plenty of games just fine. I might look at the AMD if I could save enough to bump up to a higher class of GPU, but that doesn't seem possible today. Maybe 3-6 months down the road when things start getting discounted more.
 

godrilla

Posts: 626   +339
Update even the i713700k fell to $379.99 and $20 off motherboard combo.

 

Nanochip

Posts: 118   +160
I get the reason for testing with the 4090, to as much as possible eliminate the CPU bottleneck, but if you’re having a discussion about budget CPUs that cost less than $400, most such users will not use a 4090.

I would think they’d want to pay $600 max for a GPU (just a guess), if not less. So for this discussion on which CPU to get in the $400 range, doesn’t it make sense to test with a sub-$600 GPU? Probably the results/scaling will be the same. But just a thought that the 4090 seems out of place in this discussion.
 

godrilla

Posts: 626   +339
I get the reason for testing with the 4090, to as much as possible eliminate the CPU bottleneck, but if you’re having a discussion about budget CPUs that cost less than $400, most such users will not use a 4090.

I would think they’d want to pay $600 max for a GPU (just a guess), if not less. So for this discussion on which CPU to get in the $400 range, doesn’t it make sense to test with a sub-$600 GPU? Probably the results/scaling will be the same. But just a thought that the 4090 seems out of place in this discussion.
true but wouldn't be be nice to know that your cpu purchase today can handle an upgrade to a better gpu down the line with 4090 like performance. Which one do you personally upgrade more frequently the cpu or gpu?
 

McMurdeR

Posts: 645   +895
Really useful article. I intend to do a full platform upgade in the coming weeks, so this has been pure gold for me. Thank you so much!
 

mbk34

Posts: 425   +337
It would be interesting to know what GPUs aren't a bottleneck to these CPU's? I can't picture anyone buying a 4090 to go with these CPUs but which ones would be appropriate?