AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT CPU Review & Benchmarks: 100 for 2 Letters (vs. 3600, 3700X, More)
video description
Date: 2020-07-07
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
nathanfay1988
I know there's SO much talk about Intel's doom against AMD, but when I look at these benchmarks and see >15%, even >20% higher performance of the Intel chips at the higher end of the stack (as a gamer I usually buy near the top of the stack, though I'm patiently waiting b/c my 6700k has been staying strong 4.6) I can't help but wonder when the AMD takeover will happen. It's pretty incredible what Intel continues to achieve at 14nm. When will AMD's smaller node start yielding 5+ GHz chips?
I would absolutely love more cores than I currently have, I'm just curious what it will take for AMD to make that final flip that Intel will need years to recover from.
reply
I know there's SO much talk about Intel's doom against AMD, but when I look at these benchmarks and see >15%, even >20% higher performance of the Intel chips at the higher end of the stack (as a gamer I usually buy near the top of the stack, though I'm patiently waiting b/c my 6700k has been staying strong 4.6) I can't help but wonder when the AMD takeover will happen. It's pretty incredible what Intel continues to achieve at 14nm. When will AMD's smaller node start yielding 5+ GHz chips?
I would absolutely love more cores than I currently have, I'm just curious what it will take for AMD to make that final flip that Intel will need years to recover from.
reply
Tryhardtechy
this is very revealing, before the 3000 series launched i speculated 4.4Ghz would be achievable with more a less normal voltages with 4.6Ghz being the high end of the OC scale. the 3000XT series brings that to life and while the clock speed and voltage required to make it happen are impressive the actual performance of the 4.6Ghz OC is very disappointing. i'm looking forward to the memory tuning benchmarks with the OC to see if Infinity Fabric is indeed the bottleneck holding back these impressive core clock gains.
reply
this is very revealing, before the 3000 series launched i speculated 4.4Ghz would be achievable with more a less normal voltages with 4.6Ghz being the high end of the OC scale. the 3000XT series brings that to life and while the clock speed and voltage required to make it happen are impressive the actual performance of the 4.6Ghz OC is very disappointing. i'm looking forward to the memory tuning benchmarks with the OC to see if Infinity Fabric is indeed the bottleneck holding back these impressive core clock gains.
reply
justjoeblow420
Say I know some how I ended up with a high quality 3600 when I did my new machine a little over a month ago it likes to purr along at nearly 3.8-3.9 Ghz in heavy all core workloads, and this is with the stock cooler. Just how it's behaved for me out of the box with only XMP being the sole tweak done to the BIOS on my B450 motherboard. Now that I think about it I don't think I've ever seen ti run at base clock yet.
reply
Say I know some how I ended up with a high quality 3600 when I did my new machine a little over a month ago it likes to purr along at nearly 3.8-3.9 Ghz in heavy all core workloads, and this is with the stock cooler. Just how it's behaved for me out of the box with only XMP being the sole tweak done to the BIOS on my B450 motherboard. Now that I think about it I don't think I've ever seen ti run at base clock yet.
reply
cracklingice
IMO the XT skus are just because AMD was getting far more 3950X binned chiplets than they could sell as 3950X CPUs so they take the primo chiplet that makes the 3950X the 4.7GHZ boost on the box and sell that as the 3800XT. Then the secondary chiplet that they throw in to make the 3950X 16 cores gets one die fuzed off and sold as 3600XT and 3900XT with slightly lower boost clocks.
reply
IMO the XT skus are just because AMD was getting far more 3950X binned chiplets than they could sell as 3950X CPUs so they take the primo chiplet that makes the 3950X the 4.7GHZ boost on the box and sell that as the 3800XT. Then the secondary chiplet that they throw in to make the 3950X 16 cores gets one die fuzed off and sold as 3600XT and 3900XT with slightly lower boost clocks.
reply
HydroKyle240
What should I look for specifically to know that my PC is properly utilizing my RAM at 3800mhz with my 3800x? I know you stated you stated you had a hard time achieving 1900 for infinity fab, and can only be done on every 1 out of 10 chips or something. I m new to diving deep into overclocking, but I really think I ve done awesome with my pc OC, to include super tight ram timings.
reply
What should I look for specifically to know that my PC is properly utilizing my RAM at 3800mhz with my 3800x? I know you stated you stated you had a hard time achieving 1900 for infinity fab, and can only be done on every 1 out of 10 chips or something. I m new to diving deep into overclocking, but I really think I ve done awesome with my pc OC, to include super tight ram timings.
reply
shane
G'day Steve,
it seems here in Sydney Australia our R5 Family (although way more expensive) pricing is more realistic with the R5 3600 299AUD, the R5 3600X 369AUD & R5 3600XT 409AUD,
As we Know 'X' is the most expensive letter so costs 70AUD compared to the 'T' costing 40AUD,
Americans seem to be getting a Discount on your 'X' or Overcharged for your 'T' with Both 50
reply
G'day Steve,
it seems here in Sydney Australia our R5 Family (although way more expensive) pricing is more realistic with the R5 3600 299AUD, the R5 3600X 369AUD & R5 3600XT 409AUD,
As we Know 'X' is the most expensive letter so costs 70AUD compared to the 'T' costing 40AUD,
Americans seem to be getting a Discount on your 'X' or Overcharged for your 'T' with Both 50
reply
Valter
Your opinions please (no fanboyism). Did AMD shoot themselves in the foot with this release? Before you could say that AMD wasn't so fast at games BUT they were good at games (where it matters) and great at production software. Now they are just expensive? And against the 10600 loses in gaming? So, what is it for (besides overclocking '''fun'')?
reply
Your opinions please (no fanboyism). Did AMD shoot themselves in the foot with this release? Before you could say that AMD wasn't so fast at games BUT they were good at games (where it matters) and great at production software. Now they are just expensive? And against the 10600 loses in gaming? So, what is it for (besides overclocking '''fun'')?
reply
Alessandro
Gamers Nexus Hello, I would love to also see the cores usage on these banchmark in order to understand if the lower FPS values are related to Single or less core frequency than the full workload being too much for it to handle... just an AVG of the CPU usage under its name would be enough for me.
Thanks and keep up with your great work
reply
Gamers Nexus Hello, I would love to also see the cores usage on these banchmark in order to understand if the lower FPS values are related to Single or less core frequency than the full workload being too much for it to handle... just an AVG of the CPU usage under its name would be enough for me.
Thanks and keep up with your great work
reply
Ruben
What I would like to see done is some of these benchmarks with games set to low graphics. That way we can actually see how CPU's bottleneck when playing games at competitive FPS, instead of GPU bound FPS. Not all use-cases require games to extract the best visuals out of the GPU, but rather require solid frame pacing across an entire session.
reply
What I would like to see done is some of these benchmarks with games set to low graphics. That way we can actually see how CPU's bottleneck when playing games at competitive FPS, instead of GPU bound FPS. Not all use-cases require games to extract the best visuals out of the GPU, but rather require solid frame pacing across an entire session.
reply
KilluaXIII
don't understand why people are losing their shit about the pricing. amd is now charging for peak performance as much as intel does
i mean, with some binned intel cpus you pay more than a hundred bucks for each 2% increase
except amd consumption is lower and required cooling/power supply is cheaper
reply
don't understand why people are losing their shit about the pricing. amd is now charging for peak performance as much as intel does
i mean, with some binned intel cpus you pay more than a hundred bucks for each 2% increase
except amd consumption is lower and required cooling/power supply is cheaper
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
