Would be even nicer to see newer games. Anandtech reviews seem to be stuck in 2018, both for games and for apps, and that makes them a lot less relevant a read than they could be.
You exaggerate. The point of a benchmark suite can't really be to contain the specific workload you're going to put on the CPU (since that's extremely unlikely to be the case anyway), but to be representative of typical workloads, and I think the application selection here is quite adequate for that. In comparison, I find it much more important to have more comparison data in the Bench database. There may be a stronger case to be made for games, but I find even that slightly doubtful.
Not only that , but slightly older games are much more stable and have most of the performance ironed out. New games are getting patches and downloads all the time, which often affect perfomance. I want to see "E" versions I.e 35/45w
I haven't used AnandTech benchmarks for years. They don't use enough CPUs/GPUs, they never include enough results from the previous generations, which is the most important thing when considering upgrades and $ value.
Also, the "bench" tool does not include enough tests or hardware.
Yeah nothing annoys me more than Tech Site benchmarks that only compare the new stuff to hardware than came out 6 months before it. If I see say a new GPU tested I want to see how it compares to my RX480 (that a lot of us will be looking to upgrade this year) than just a 5700XT.
Eh, nothing annoys me more than Tech Site benchmarks that only compare the new stuff to other new stuff. If I have an existing GPU or CPU and I'm not sure if it's worth it for me to upgrade or stick with what I've got, I want to see how something new compares to my existing hardware so I can know whether it's worth upgrading or whether I might as well wait.
Just to make this crystal clear, the reason they HAVE to use older games is because all of the PAST data has been run using those games. Most review sites only get sample hardware for a week or less to run the tests then return it in the mail. You literally wouldn't have anything to compare the data to if you only ran tests on the latest and greatest games and benchmarks.
When I see people making this complaint I understand that they are new to computers and just want them to understand that there is a reason why benchmarks are limited. Most hardware review sites don't make any money, or if they do, it's enough to pay one or MAYBE two staff members (poorly.) Ad revenue is garbage due to add blockers on all your browsers, and legitimate sites that don't spam blickbaity rumors as news are shutting down. Just look what happened to Hardocp.com, one of the last true honest review sites.
The idea that hardware sites all have stockpiles of every system imaginable and the thousands of hours it would take to constantly setup and run all the new games and benchmarks is pretty comical.
They make plenty of money and they are paid well. Otherwise they would not be able to afford the fancy cars and the dinner parties. I have found that all writers on the internet are rich and have the best of everything. I want to one day be able to write for internet and get rich too.
Gamers Nexus is often not up to date either, which is the most important consideration in the context of his comment. Check Hardware Unboxed on Youtube, or Techspot for the latest info, and the most games tested.
Yep GN uses very old games. Even GTA V with a broken engine, and usually quite favor Intel and Nvidia, he used it since the game come out until today. Some turn based strategy game that I don't know anyone plays and so on.
I like the videos except they go on way too long, which is mainly due to all the charts. Would be better if he cut the videos by 10 minutes and create a webpage with the charts for those wanting a more in-depth review.
Haha yeah what I was thinking was that I will sometimes skim through whole articles (especially when repeated content) just to see the charts since they are the meat of the content here and show results of the work I’m not going to do myself. And for that person the charts put them to sleep. I’m curious what do they watch Gamers Nexus for then? Entertainment aspects I guess but odd choice.
I have a 3600X, not the 3600, and I can throw everything at it in 1440p. Once the perf patches came out for Fallen Order and the drivers for my RTX 2070, Fallen Order runs like butter. Shadow of the Tomb Raider never dipped below 90fps, and most of the time tops out my monitor's 144hz refresh rate, all running at 1440p.
I mean, you've got 1080p and 4K results already and as the resolution goes up the CPU is less important than the GPU. 1920x1080 vs 2560x1440 vs 3840x2160, the results are basically just going to be split down the middle.
It's interesting that in Australia, the Ryzen 7, instead of the 5, is the most popular. You would think that the VAT incentives the less expensive parts. Is electricity unusually cheap down under? Or is the 7 the best selling part because winter is coming to the southern hemisphere, and users needed upgrades from Preshott?
Could be that once you've saved up the silly amount of money needed for an upgrade there, stretching a little further to the 3700X just seems to make sense?
Yeah, the exchange rate is brutal right now so it makes sense to try to make your system last an extra year. I have two Ryzen 1700 systems and I'm hoping to hold onto them until DDR5 arrives.
Generally speaking, Amazon isn't really *the* go-to place for PC hardware shopping in Australia. We tend to rely more on established PC-centric retailers like PCCaseGear, Scorptec, Mwave, Centre Com, PLE and a few others depending on where in Australia you live. It's worth considering that Amazon has only been available as an AU website for around 2.5 years now, and depending on where you look, stock for certain products is often spottily available, way overpriced through third-party sellers only, or clearly international stock being sold as a "local" listing.
On one of those retailer sites (Scorptec in this case) that has the option to list products by popularity, of the AM4 processors, the Ryzen 5 3600 takes top spot, followed by the Ryzen 5 1600 AF, the Ryzen 7 3700X, and then the Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 5 2600. For their Intel processor listings, the Core i7-9700K is followed by two "value bundles" featuring the Core i5-9400 and Core i3-8100, then it's the Core i7-9700F and the Core i9-9900K. Unfortunately, they don't offer a combined view so we can't compare overall popularity.
I'm guessing here, but the 3300X has all its cores on a single CCX and if Digicortex is one of those benches that's highly dependent on latency that could explain why the 3300X is at the top of the list here.
I checked the previous 3300x article and it seems to be the same story there.
the main problem with mid/lower range CPU (review) like this Ryzen 3600/X and even i5/i3's is that their reviews are almost always focused on "Gaming" (for some reason everything budget oriented is just gaming) ... no one talks about AI workloads or MATLABs, Tensorflows,etc many people and developers dont want to shell out monies for 2080Ti and Ryzen 9 3950X or even TR's .... they have to make do with lower end or say "reasonable" CPU's ... and products like these Ryzen 5 that makes sensible choice in this segment ... a developer/learner on budget.
a lot of people would appreciate if there are some more pages dedicated to such development workflows (AI,Tensor,compile, etc) even for such mid range CPU's.
Ian periodically tweets requests for scriptable benchmarks for those categories and for anyone with connections at commercial vendors in those spaces who can provide evaluation licenses for commercial products. He's gotten minimal uptake on the former and doesn't have time to learn enough about $industry to create a reasonable benchmark from scratch using their FOSS tools. On the commercial side, the various engineering software companies don't care about reviews from sites like this one and their PR contacts can't/won't give out licenses.
Because office tasks don't require any computation, and gaming is what's most mainstream that actually requires computation.
Scientific stuff like MATLAB, Folding@Home needs computation but if that's useful you'd just buy the higher end parts. Price diff between 3600x and 3700x (6 vs 8core) is $100, $200 vs $300 at retail prices. For someone working, $100 is nothing for improving your commercial or academic output. These are parts you use for 5+ years.
I agree a TR doesnt make sense if you can get the consumer version like a 3800x much cheaper.
Logged in to second this. I think a lot of students and professionals like me who do research on-the-side (and are on pretty tight Grants/allowances) would appreciate a MATLAB benchmark. This looks like a great option for a grad student workstation!
I think one MKL TF benchmark is enough, as you'd have to be crazy to buy a 3600 over a cheap GPU for AI training training. If money is that tight, you're probably not buying a new system and/or using Google Colab.
+1 for more compilation benchmarking. I'd like a Python benchmark too, if theres any demand for such a thing.
A lot of people don't have money to throw away at hardware, moreso now than ever before so we are going to make older equipment work for longer or buy less compute at a lower price. It's important to get hardware out of its comfort zone because these general purpose processors will be used in all sorts of ways beyond a narrow set of games and unzipping a huge archive file. After all, if you want to play games, buying as much GPU as you can afford and then feeding it enough power solves the problem for the most part. That answer has been the case for years so we really don't need more text and time spent on telling us that. Say it once for each new generation and then get to reviewing hardware more relevant to how people actually use their computers.
Plus most of us don't upgrade hardware as much as we used to. back in the day (single core days) I was upgrading my CPU every 6-8 months. Each upgrade pushed the graphics from 28FPS to 32FPS to 36FPS which made a difference. Now with modest setups pushing past 60FPS...why bother. I upgrade my CPU every 6 years or so now.
as i said in one of the replies below... maybe TF is not a good example ..but its not like it will be purely on a CPU for TF work, but some benchmark around it ...and similar other work/development related tasks.
Most of us have to depend on these gaming only benchmarks to guesstimate how good/bad a cpu will be for dev work. maybe a fewer core cpu might have been better with extra cache and extra clocks or vice versa ... but almost no reviews tell that kind of story for mid/low range CPU's.... having said that..i dont expect that kind of analysis from dual cores and such CPU ..but higherup there are a lot of CPU that can be made to do a lot of good job even beyond gaming (even if it needs to pair up with some GPU)
Anandtech spends a lot of time on gaming and on desktop PCs that are not representative of where and how people now accomplish compute tasks. They do spend a little time on mobile phones and that nets part of the market, but only at the pricey end of cellular handsets. Lower cost mobile for the masses and work-a-day PCs and laptops generally get a cursory acknowledgement once in a great while which is disappointing because there is a big chunk of the market that gets disregarded. IIRC, AT didn't even get around to reviewing the lower tiers of discrete GPUs in the past, effectively ignoring that chunk of the market until long after release and only if said lower end hardware happened to be in a system they ended up getting. They do not seem to actively seek out such components, sadly enough.
AI/tensorflow runs so much faster even on mid tier GPUs that trying to argue CPUs are relevant is completely out of touch. No academic in their right mind is looking for a bang-for-buck CPU to train models, it would be an absurd waste of time.
well ..games also run on GPU ...so why bother benchmarking CPU's with them? ... same reason why anyone would want to look at other workflows .. i said tensor flow as just one of the examples(maybe not the best example) ..but more of such "work" or "development" oriented benchmarks.
Or there should be proper support libraries for the integrated graphics to run tensor calculations. That would make GPU-less AI development machines a lot more cost effective. AMD and Intel are both working on this but it'll be hard to get around Nvidia's monopoly of AI computing. Free cloud compute services like colab have several problems and others are very cost prohibitive for students. And sometimes you just need to have a local system capable of loading and predicting. As a student, I think it would significantly lower the entry threshold if their cost effective laptops could run simple models and get output.
not all developers are paid by their companies or make money with what they develop ... some are hobbyists and some do it as their "side" activities and with their own money at home apart from what they do at work with big guns!.
Sandy was an absolute knockout. Most of the development thereafter was aimed at sticking similarly powerful CPUs in sleeker packages rather than increasing desktop performance, and while I feel like Intel deserve more credit for some things than they get (e.g. the leap in mobile power/performance that can from Haswell) they really shit the bed on 10nm and responding to Ryzen.
There's also the 3600X to consider. On launch, the price difference between 3600 and 3600X is USD50. That has now narrowed to USD15 as of 18 May on Amazon (USD189.99 vs USD204.99).
In the UK it's £152.00 vs. £184.24 (vs £260.98 for the 3700X). On the plus side, that makes the 3600 cheaper than the USA! You have to be careful who you're buying from, though - some sellers don't have good feedback.
On the general theme of "once in a while, a truly great CPU comes along and dominates the market", check out this beautiful trip down memory lane from Australia's Red Hill Consulting:
It's a long read, but for those of us who were building PCs back in the Socket 3 through Socket 7 era, it's a neverending stream of "Oh yeah I remember when that came out!" and "Whoah, those actually existed?" and "I think I still have one of those in the basement..."
"once in a while, a truly great CPU" The 300 (but really, 450) MHz Celeron C300 II was such a processor. It was a kludge (desperate to compete with AMD, Intel rushed out a chip that was essentially a P-II but much cheaper). It ended up being an amazing value and with a few hacks even become the introduction to SMP for many.
$200 is the prime price for people building a fairly powerful computer, but with a budget. 3600 pairs well with pretty much any video card for gaming and is pretty powerful for anything else. Intel competition at this price point is weak, at least until Apollo Lake. 3600 is a obvious recommendation.
Right! What would be the point of that?...;) Intel isn't yet equal to AMD in architecture--still needs a bunch of vulnerability mitigation, and is still cranking out 14nm like there's no tomorrow...;) Intel's "high end" is in great demand, says Ian. Hmmm...I'll bet AMD's high end is even under higher demand--since Intel has very little if anything that can catch it. Zen 3 is going to fire another shot across Intel's bow...! Good times!
Yeah, but how many desktop CPUs are getting sold directly to consumers versus the numbers going into more portable form factors or to OEMs for mass market Optiplexes and ProDesks? Those admittedly yawn-fest systems are where the volume sales are landing, not here with Gamer Billy's RGB LED-sled full ATX tower where though there are higher margins on a per-unit basis, the numbers just aren't significant.
Yeah, I’m not sure why they have a delusional disclaimer saying folks don’t use XML. Last time I checked this was a site for enthusiasts. Would really like them to test at stock and with a reasonable upgrade stick. A wider suite of benchmarks would be nice too.
While the 3600 is currently the best selling desktop CPU on Amazon and it is great to see a competitive CPU landscape right now, occupying that number 1 slot is not representative of the wider PC market as a whole. A vanishingly small number of people elect to operate a desktop PC of any sort these days and of those people the majority do not build their own systems from individual components. Most of the world uses a mobile phone or a laptop to accomplish day-to-day compute tasks and get whatever CPU happens to be included in that system. I'm happy to see 4000-series APUs becoming more available so there is competition FINALLY in the price segments that see large sales volumes. It would be great if Anandtech could get hands on more practical and common hardware that the average person puts to use so the next time I go out to grab a sub-$500 laptop, I know if the cooling is sufficient or if it has dual channel memory. Maybe find out if there is something quirky about the touchpad. I have to drop in at notebookcheck.net most of the time for information that is relevant to me and their reviews are not usually as complete at AT, but AT appears to be very much out of the mobile hardware review business except for halo gamer hardware that relevant to a pretty small audience.
Maybe it's just the difference in English, but why title the article "Why is the 3600 AMZN's best-selling CPU?" Almost sounds like Ian doesn't think it should be--but then the article itself corrects that misapprehension. Probably a better title would have been, "Here's why the 3600 is AMZN's best-selling CPU." Small change comment--nit picking, for sure...;) IMO, articles should never be titled as questions--a good article should inform, instead of leave unanswered questions. I was always taught that titling with questions instead of statements was second rate. A good article should include the answers--so instead of asking a question you let the reader know, "Herein lies the answer," etc.
I got a 3600 recently, and it works fine on my Gigabyte GA-AB350-Gaming 3, a B350 board from mid-2017. It does occasionally peak up to about 4.15GHz as far as I can tell from Ryzen Master, which is in no doubt helped by reusing my 1600's v1 Spire, along with MX-4 paste, in place of the packaged Stealth. Folding can still push temperatures up pretty high, especially if handling CPU and GPU work orders at the same time; partly thanks to having a Sapphire Nitro+ RX 590, CPU temperatures were spiking to the low 90s Celsius, but a combination of two new Corsair ML120 case fans (twice as effective as the Aerocool intake fan/ancient Akasa exhaust fan combo I had before) plus some slightly tweaked fan profiles knocked this down nearly ten degrees, along with boosting CPU folding speed a little. It's a great CPU, though I wish I had more than an RX 590 to go along with it.
Thanks Ian! While this is not important for many (most?) readers here, I would like to see AMD or anyone else putting a more basic GPU (under $ 50 retail) out that has HDMI 2.0a or better, display port out, and that has ASICs for x264/265 and VP9 decoding; AV1 would be a plus. This could be a PCIe dGPU or something directly soldered into a MB. Am I the only one who's find that interesting? I don't like to always have to plug a high-powered dGPU into each build that has more than just an entry level CPU, so this would help.
You'll likely be waiting a while. You'd need to wait for the next generation of GPUs with new display controllers and video decoders. There's a rumour that Nvidia will be producing an Ampere "MX550" for mobile, which could mean a dGPU based on the same chip being released for ~$100. Give that a couple more years to drop in price and, well, by then you'll probably want new standards. :D
I come here for a clearer perspective more than benchmarks, but the timing of this article is weird, especially since 10th Gen's at the door. I get the market or Atleast pc builder cause and effect but market just got blown out of proportions with options, what actually transfers to general populace is not clear until OEM's embrace the reality like nividia
Anandtech knows very well that Intel TDP is not the same as AMD TDP. Please stop falling into the noob-journo trap of simply repeating the Intel BS just because it's official BS.
Absolutely right, but also in fairness, Intel's sole enhancement for the 10 series appears to be enabling higher clock speeds - and they're made on the same process with the same architecture as the 9 series, which inevitably means more power will be required to reach those higher clocks.
So, it's likely to be either a CPU with similar real power use to the AMD processor that never really hits its rated turbo clocks, or a CPU that does hit its rated turbo and never drops below ~100W under sustained load. It's likely to be power and speed competitive on an either/or basis, but not both at the same time.
This is true that its going above its TDP to provide the boost speed. However this is a practice that Intel has practiced since its Kaby Lake/ Coffee Lake series. Unfortunately, they are the worst violator when it comes to exceeding the supposed TDP when you consider how much power it is pulling to sustain its boost (PL2) speed. If you consider the boost speed of the Comet Lake, even the supposed 65W i5 10xxx series is not going to keep to 65W given the boost speed of up to 4.8Ghz, though nothing is mentioned about the all core turbo, but should be somewhere close, i.e. 4.2 to 4.6Ghz is my guess.
I assume no one has mentioned the typo since it is still there.
"Competition
With six cores and twelve threads, the comparative Intel options vary between something like the Core i7-9600KF with six cores and no hyperthreading..."
@Ian Cutress There appears to be a mistake in the AI Benchmark results, the Ryzen 5 3600 Combined result is less than the sum of its Inference and Training results.
Disappointed to see the continual cpu reviews using a GTX 1080 as the gpu. We would be better able to evaluate cpu performance if a 2080 ti was used given it is cpu bottlenecked at 1080p on some games. Hard to believe one of the biggest tech sites is using such under powered hardware.
It is interesting for the average $ 150- 200 CPU buyer since they most likely won‘t have anything close to a 2080ti in their PC.
Personally, I also think all reviews should be done using the stock heatsink or alternatively add the aftermarket HSF‘s price to the CPU cost, at least in the low to mid range.
How does that better help you evaluate the performance? All it does is tell you what you'd see if you spend $1200 on a GPU and then restrict yourself to last decade's favourite resolution. The differences you observe in that state don't translate to meaningful performance difference in practice.
Ian makes an important point imo - the 3600 has been the cheapest foot in the door for zen2. It happens to also be a very muscular 6 core.
Folks are starting to get that its about balance, & the whole am4 zen ecosystem leaves Intel for dead.
A little mentioned thing, is intel must run NVME drives thru the chipset - yuk... thats not the same at all - its wasting a lot of what u paid for that boon of a resource.
Performance vs price is certainly the key reason for people to get the Ryzen 5 3600. At least for myself, I tend to get mid tier CPUs as I don't like to spend too much on a hardware. Historically, I would get Intel i5 consistently due to it price vs performance. I feel most people will be on this same boat where we look for best performance to price. In the case of AMD Ryzen 5 3600, it's got an outstanding value since it performs better than an Intel chip at the same price, and you can further overclock it to push performance. Intel chips at this price point means an OC locked chip.
So basically, as expected, the Ryzen 3 3300X is the 5 3600's equal on anything that's not embarrassingly parallel, but the 5 3600 is far superior on things like encoding, decoding, and compression that parallelize easily.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
114 Comments
Back to Article
Sonik7x - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Would be nice to see 1440p benchmarks across all games, also would be nice to see a comparison against an i7-5930K running which is also a 6c/12T CPUET - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Would be even nicer to see newer games. Anandtech reviews seem to be stuck in 2018, both for games and for apps, and that makes them a lot less relevant a read than they could be.Dolda2000 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
You exaggerate. The point of a benchmark suite can't really be to contain the specific workload you're going to put on the CPU (since that's extremely unlikely to be the case anyway), but to be representative of typical workloads, and I think the application selection here is quite adequate for that. In comparison, I find it much more important to have more comparison data in the Bench database. There may be a stronger case to be made for games, but I find even that slightly doubtful.MASSAMKULABOX - Saturday, May 23, 2020 - link
Not only that , but slightly older games are much more stable and have most of the performance ironed out. New games are getting patches and downloads all the time, which often affect perfomance. I want to see "E" versions I.e 35/45wThreeDee912 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
They already mentioned in the 3300X review they'll be going back and adding in new games like Borderlands 3 and Gears Tactics: https://www.anandtech.com/show/15774/the-amd-ryzen...flyingpants265 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I haven't used AnandTech benchmarks for years. They don't use enough CPUs/GPUs, they never include enough results from the previous generations, which is the most important thing when considering upgrades and $ value.Also, the "bench" tool does not include enough tests or hardware.
jabber - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Yeah nothing annoys me more than Tech Site benchmarks that only compare the new stuff to hardware than came out 6 months before it. If I see say a new GPU tested I want to see how it compares to my RX480 (that a lot of us will be looking to upgrade this year) than just a 5700XT.johnthacker - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Eh, nothing annoys me more than Tech Site benchmarks that only compare the new stuff to other new stuff. If I have an existing GPU or CPU and I'm not sure if it's worth it for me to upgrade or stick with what I've got, I want to see how something new compares to my existing hardware so I can know whether it's worth upgrading or whether I might as well wait.Pewzor - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I mean Gamer's Nexus uses old games as well.Crazyeyeskillah - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Just to make this crystal clear, the reason they HAVE to use older games is because all of the PAST data has been run using those games. Most review sites only get sample hardware for a week or less to run the tests then return it in the mail. You literally wouldn't have anything to compare the data to if you only ran tests on the latest and greatest games and benchmarks.When I see people making this complaint I understand that they are new to computers and just want them to understand that there is a reason why benchmarks are limited. Most hardware review sites don't make any money, or if they do, it's enough to pay one or MAYBE two staff members (poorly.) Ad revenue is garbage due to add blockers on all your browsers, and legitimate sites that don't spam blickbaity rumors as news are shutting down. Just look what happened to Hardocp.com, one of the last true honest review sites.
The idea that hardware sites all have stockpiles of every system imaginable and the thousands of hours it would take to constantly setup and run all the new games and benchmarks is pretty comical.
justareader - Friday, May 22, 2020 - link
They make plenty of money and they are paid well. Otherwise they would not be able to afford the fancy cars and the dinner parties. I have found that all writers on the internet are rich and have the best of everything. I want to one day be able to write for internet and get rich too.Kaihekoa - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I recommend gamers nexus for this kind of data and game-specific benches. Anandtech is outdated in many regards.Alistair - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Gamers Nexus is often not up to date either, which is the most important consideration in the context of his comment. Check Hardware Unboxed on Youtube, or Techspot for the latest info, and the most games tested.Pewzor - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Yep GN uses very old games. Even GTA V with a broken engine, and usually quite favor Intel and Nvidia, he used it since the game come out until today. Some turn based strategy game that I don't know anyone plays and so on.HideOut - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I honestly cant watch gamers nexus. He puts me to sleep with his non stop charts...[email protected] - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
I like the videos except they go on way too long, which is mainly due to all the charts. Would be better if he cut the videos by 10 minutes and create a webpage with the charts for those wanting a more in-depth review.0ldman79 - Wednesday, June 24, 2020 - link
They have a website.It has those charts.
You know you can grab the progress slider and fast forward, right?
flyingpants265 - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Jesus... Stay in school, kids.Spunjji - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Amazing how many people are prepared to tell on their own lack of attention span.mikato - Sunday, May 24, 2020 - link
Haha yeah what I was thinking was that I will sometimes skim through whole articles (especially when repeated content) just to see the charts since they are the meat of the content here and show results of the work I’m not going to do myself. And for that person the charts put them to sleep. I’m curious what do they watch Gamers Nexus for then? Entertainment aspects I guess but odd choice.jabber - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
I just wish he's cut that damn awful hair, put it in a ponytail or use some conditioner on it at least. The constant hair tucking....aarrghghhhhhhhhhhburnte - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I have a 3600X, not the 3600, and I can throw everything at it in 1440p. Once the perf patches came out for Fallen Order and the drivers for my RTX 2070, Fallen Order runs like butter. Shadow of the Tomb Raider never dipped below 90fps, and most of the time tops out my monitor's 144hz refresh rate, all running at 1440p.evilspoons - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I mean, you've got 1080p and 4K results already and as the resolution goes up the CPU is less important than the GPU. 1920x1080 vs 2560x1440 vs 3840x2160, the results are basically just going to be split down the middle.PeterCollier - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
It's interesting that in Australia, the Ryzen 7, instead of the 5, is the most popular. You would think that the VAT incentives the less expensive parts. Is electricity unusually cheap down under? Or is the 7 the best selling part because winter is coming to the southern hemisphere, and users needed upgrades from Preshott?Spunjji - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Could be that once you've saved up the silly amount of money needed for an upgrade there, stretching a little further to the 3700X just seems to make sense?PixyMisa - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Yeah, the exchange rate is brutal right now so it makes sense to try to make your system last an extra year. I have two Ryzen 1700 systems and I'm hoping to hold onto them until DDR5 arrives.tmr3 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Generally speaking, Amazon isn't really *the* go-to place for PC hardware shopping in Australia. We tend to rely more on established PC-centric retailers like PCCaseGear, Scorptec, Mwave, Centre Com, PLE and a few others depending on where in Australia you live. It's worth considering that Amazon has only been available as an AU website for around 2.5 years now, and depending on where you look, stock for certain products is often spottily available, way overpriced through third-party sellers only, or clearly international stock being sold as a "local" listing.On one of those retailer sites (Scorptec in this case) that has the option to list products by popularity, of the AM4 processors, the Ryzen 5 3600 takes top spot, followed by the Ryzen 5 1600 AF, the Ryzen 7 3700X, and then the Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 5 2600. For their Intel processor listings, the Core i7-9700K is followed by two "value bundles" featuring the Core i5-9400 and Core i3-8100, then it's the Core i7-9700F and the Core i9-9900K. Unfortunately, they don't offer a combined view so we can't compare overall popularity.
Gigaplex - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Australian winter isn't that cold. I think the Amazon ranking is skewed because we generally shop elsewhere.boozed - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Heard of the Core i9?ingwe - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Wow these are good results for AMD. Looks like this might have to be my next build.vortmax2 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Anyone know why the 3300X is at the top of the Digicortex 1.20 bench?gouthamravee - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I'm guessing here, but the 3300X has all its cores on a single CCX and if Digicortex is one of those benches that's highly dependent on latency that could explain why the 3300X is at the top of the list here.I checked the previous 3300x article and it seems to be the same story there.
wolfesteinabhi - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Thanks for a great Article Ian and AT.the main problem with mid/lower range CPU (review) like this Ryzen 3600/X and even i5/i3's is that their reviews are almost always focused on "Gaming" (for some reason everything budget oriented is just gaming) ... no one talks about AI workloads or MATLABs, Tensorflows,etc many people and developers dont want to shell out monies for 2080Ti and Ryzen 9 3950X or even TR's .... they have to make do with lower end or say "reasonable" CPU's ... and products like these Ryzen 5 that makes sensible choice in this segment ... a developer/learner on budget.
a lot of people would appreciate if there are some more pages dedicated to such development workflows (AI,Tensor,compile, etc) even for such mid range CPU's.
DanNeely - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Ian periodically tweets requests for scriptable benchmarks for those categories and for anyone with connections at commercial vendors in those spaces who can provide evaluation licenses for commercial products. He's gotten minimal uptake on the former and doesn't have time to learn enough about $industry to create a reasonable benchmark from scratch using their FOSS tools. On the commercial side, the various engineering software companies don't care about reviews from sites like this one and their PR contacts can't/won't give out licenses.webdoctors - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Because office tasks don't require any computation, and gaming is what's most mainstream that actually requires computation.Scientific stuff like MATLAB, Folding@Home needs computation but if that's useful you'd just buy the higher end parts. Price diff between 3600x and 3700x (6 vs 8core) is $100, $200 vs $300 at retail prices. For someone working, $100 is nothing for improving your commercial or academic output. These are parts you use for 5+ years.
I agree a TR doesnt make sense if you can get the consumer version like a 3800x much cheaper.
Impetuous - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Logged in to second this. I think a lot of students and professionals like me who do research on-the-side (and are on pretty tight Grants/allowances) would appreciate a MATLAB benchmark. This looks like a great option for a grad student workstation!brucethemoose - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I think one MKL TF benchmark is enough, as you'd have to be crazy to buy a 3600 over a cheap GPU for AI training training. If money is that tight, you're probably not buying a new system and/or using Google Colab.+1 for more compilation benchmarking. I'd like a Python benchmark too, if theres any demand for such a thing.
PeachNCream - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
A lot of people don't have money to throw away at hardware, moreso now than ever before so we are going to make older equipment work for longer or buy less compute at a lower price. It's important to get hardware out of its comfort zone because these general purpose processors will be used in all sorts of ways beyond a narrow set of games and unzipping a huge archive file. After all, if you want to play games, buying as much GPU as you can afford and then feeding it enough power solves the problem for the most part. That answer has been the case for years so we really don't need more text and time spent on telling us that. Say it once for each new generation and then get to reviewing hardware more relevant to how people actually use their computers.jabber - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Plus most of us don't upgrade hardware as much as we used to. back in the day (single core days) I was upgrading my CPU every 6-8 months. Each upgrade pushed the graphics from 28FPS to 32FPS to 36FPS which made a difference. Now with modest setups pushing past 60FPS...why bother. I upgrade my CPU every 6 years or so now.wolfesteinabhi - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
as i said in one of the replies below... maybe TF is not a good example ..but its not like it will be purely on a CPU for TF work, but some benchmark around it ...and similar other work/development related tasks.Most of us have to depend on these gaming only benchmarks to guesstimate how good/bad a cpu will be for dev work. maybe a fewer core cpu might have been better with extra cache and extra clocks or vice versa ... but almost no reviews tell that kind of story for mid/low range CPU's.... having said that..i dont expect that kind of analysis from dual cores and such CPU ..but higherup there are a lot of CPU that can be made to do a lot of good job even beyond gaming (even if it needs to pair up with some GPU)
PeachNCream - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Anandtech spends a lot of time on gaming and on desktop PCs that are not representative of where and how people now accomplish compute tasks. They do spend a little time on mobile phones and that nets part of the market, but only at the pricey end of cellular handsets. Lower cost mobile for the masses and work-a-day PCs and laptops generally get a cursory acknowledgement once in a great while which is disappointing because there is a big chunk of the market that gets disregarded. IIRC, AT didn't even get around to reviewing the lower tiers of discrete GPUs in the past, effectively ignoring that chunk of the market until long after release and only if said lower end hardware happened to be in a system they ended up getting. They do not seem to actively seek out such components, sadly enough.whatthe123 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
AI/tensorflow runs so much faster even on mid tier GPUs that trying to argue CPUs are relevant is completely out of touch. No academic in their right mind is looking for a bang-for-buck CPU to train models, it would be an absurd waste of time.wolfesteinabhi - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
well ..games also run on GPU ...so why bother benchmarking CPU's with them? ... same reason why anyone would want to look at other workflows .. i said tensor flow as just one of the examples(maybe not the best example) ..but more of such "work" or "development" oriented benchmarks.pashhtk27 - Thursday, May 21, 2020 - link
Or there should be proper support libraries for the integrated graphics to run tensor calculations. That would make GPU-less AI development machines a lot more cost effective. AMD and Intel are both working on this but it'll be hard to get around Nvidia's monopoly of AI computing. Free cloud compute services like colab have several problems and others are very cost prohibitive for students. And sometimes you just need to have a local system capable of loading and predicting. As a student, I think it would significantly lower the entry threshold if their cost effective laptops could run simple models and get output.We can talk about AI benchmarks then.
Gigaplex - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
As a developer I just use whatever my company gives me. I wouldn't be shopping for consumer CPUs for work purposes.wolfesteinabhi - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
not all developers are paid by their companies or make money with what they develop ... some are hobbyists and some do it as their "side" activities and with their own money at home apart from what they do at work with big guns!.mikato - Sunday, May 24, 2020 - link
As a developer, I built my own new computer at work and got to pick everything within budget.Achaios - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
"Every so often there comes a processor that captures the market. "This used to be Sandy Bridge I5-2500K, all time best seller.
Oh, how the Mighty Chipzilla has fallen.
mikelward - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
My current PC is a 2500K. My next one will be a 3600.Spunjji - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Sandy was an absolute knockout. Most of the development thereafter was aimed at sticking similarly powerful CPUs in sleeker packages rather than increasing desktop performance, and while I feel like Intel deserve more credit for some things than they get (e.g. the leap in mobile power/performance that can from Haswell) they really shit the bed on 10nm and responding to Ryzen.Xex360 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Aren't the "10th"gen CPUs launching 20/05?Mobile-Dom - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
ooft, thats a slaughterBedfordTim - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
You are right. The 3300X is a clear winner.Koenig168 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
There's also the 3600X to consider. On launch, the price difference between 3600 and 3600X is USD50. That has now narrowed to USD15 as of 18 May on Amazon (USD189.99 vs USD204.99).crimson117 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
$50 was way too much, but $15 for slightly more MHz and a better cooler is a fantastic deal.Spunjji - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
That's nuts!GreenReaper - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
In the UK it's £152.00 vs. £184.24 (vs £260.98 for the 3700X).On the plus side, that makes the 3600 cheaper than the USA!
You have to be careful who you're buying from, though - some sellers don't have good feedback.
flyingpants265 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
The 3600 is $172.myself248 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
On the general theme of "once in a while, a truly great CPU comes along and dominates the market", check out this beautiful trip down memory lane from Australia's Red Hill Consulting:https://www.redhill.net.au/iu.html
It's a long read, but for those of us who were building PCs back in the Socket 3 through Socket 7 era, it's a neverending stream of "Oh yeah I remember when that came out!" and "Whoah, those actually existed?" and "I think I still have one of those in the basement..."
Lord of the Bored - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Aww, heck yeah! More 486es and K6-2s and Athlons than you can shake a stick at!Meteor2 - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
What a great site, thank you for posting it!tommythorn - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Typo: ">>Unfortuantely<< AMD has stated ...""once in a while, a truly great CPU" The 300 (but really, 450) MHz Celeron C300 II was such a processor. It was a kludge (desperate to compete with AMD, Intel rushed out a chip that was essentially a P-II but much cheaper). It ended up being an amazing value and with a few hacks even become the introduction to SMP for many.
catavalon21 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I remember it well. Crazy to get a 50% overclock, but almost everyone's 300A would hit, and keep, 450.MDD1963 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
The famous Celeron 300A@464 MHz for $79 was quite popular, and, gamed as well as the $450 PII-450...Spunjji - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Funny how Intel's best price/performance moments tend to be knee-jerk responses to AMD :DToTTenTranz - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Does the USB-C Hub support AVX2?1_rick - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I'm not sure. Do the chickens have large talons?mikato - Sunday, May 24, 2020 - link
Really, is that the only USB hub on sale in Australia to rank that high?yeeeeman - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Cheap price and good performance. That is why.Flunk - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
$200 is the prime price for people building a fairly powerful computer, but with a budget. 3600 pairs well with pretty much any video card for gaming and is pretty powerful for anything else. Intel competition at this price point is weak, at least until Apollo Lake. 3600 is a obvious recommendation.edzieba - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
The "faster ram" columns always get a good laugh: anyone here running their DIMMs and /not/ using the XMP profiles?WaltC - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Right! What would be the point of that?...;) Intel isn't yet equal to AMD in architecture--still needs a bunch of vulnerability mitigation, and is still cranking out 14nm like there's no tomorrow...;) Intel's "high end" is in great demand, says Ian. Hmmm...I'll bet AMD's high end is even under higher demand--since Intel has very little if anything that can catch it. Zen 3 is going to fire another shot across Intel's bow...! Good times!PeachNCream - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Yeah, but how many desktop CPUs are getting sold directly to consumers versus the numbers going into more portable form factors or to OEMs for mass market Optiplexes and ProDesks? Those admittedly yawn-fest systems are where the volume sales are landing, not here with Gamer Billy's RGB LED-sled full ATX tower where though there are higher margins on a per-unit basis, the numbers just aren't significant.Icehawk - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Yeah, I’m not sure why they have a delusional disclaimer saying folks don’t use XML. Last time I checked this was a site for enthusiasts. Would really like them to test at stock and with a reasonable upgrade stick. A wider suite of benchmarks would be nice too.PeachNCream - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
While the 3600 is currently the best selling desktop CPU on Amazon and it is great to see a competitive CPU landscape right now, occupying that number 1 slot is not representative of the wider PC market as a whole. A vanishingly small number of people elect to operate a desktop PC of any sort these days and of those people the majority do not build their own systems from individual components. Most of the world uses a mobile phone or a laptop to accomplish day-to-day compute tasks and get whatever CPU happens to be included in that system. I'm happy to see 4000-series APUs becoming more available so there is competition FINALLY in the price segments that see large sales volumes. It would be great if Anandtech could get hands on more practical and common hardware that the average person puts to use so the next time I go out to grab a sub-$500 laptop, I know if the cooling is sufficient or if it has dual channel memory. Maybe find out if there is something quirky about the touchpad. I have to drop in at notebookcheck.net most of the time for information that is relevant to me and their reviews are not usually as complete at AT, but AT appears to be very much out of the mobile hardware review business except for halo gamer hardware that relevant to a pretty small audience.WaltC - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Maybe it's just the difference in English, but why title the article "Why is the 3600 AMZN's best-selling CPU?" Almost sounds like Ian doesn't think it should be--but then the article itself corrects that misapprehension. Probably a better title would have been, "Here's why the 3600 is AMZN's best-selling CPU." Small change comment--nit picking, for sure...;) IMO, articles should never be titled as questions--a good article should inform, instead of leave unanswered questions. I was always taught that titling with questions instead of statements was second rate. A good article should include the answers--so instead of asking a question you let the reader know, "Herein lies the answer," etc.GreenReaper - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
It doesn't meet the expectation that any news piece titled with a question can be answered "no", either!Icehawk - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
One title is click bait, one is not. This is the world we live inflyingpants265 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Hello. 3600 is still too expensive. $290 CAD when I paid only $100 CAD for my used 2600. So for me to upgrade, I'd be paying an extra $200.1_rick - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Comparing used prices to new isn't very useful.flyingpants265 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Haha, I knew somebody would would be slow enough to say that.Spunjji - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Why are so many people who make terrible points under the impression that it's their critics who are slow?dromoxen - Thursday, May 28, 2020 - link
perhaps the slow one is the Flying trousers .. You have already paid out 100 so to upgrade you would need to spend an extra 290 cadshabby - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I paid 10k for a used corvette, who in their right mind would pay 60k for a new one...flyingpants265 - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I guess nobody, if the only advantage is a 15% performance increase. Thanks for proving my point!Spunjji - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
😴lmcd - Wednesday, May 27, 2020 - link
Someone had to buy the original for there to be a used oneIf no one buys the original, there will be no used ones for you to buy
dudedud - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Why does the ryzen 3 3300X scores so high in DigiCortex even with half the cores of the 3700X?Or is a typo?
GreenReaper - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Probably because the interaction between the cores matters, and the 3700X has cores on two separate complexes.silverblue - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I got a 3600 recently, and it works fine on my Gigabyte GA-AB350-Gaming 3, a B350 board from mid-2017. It does occasionally peak up to about 4.15GHz as far as I can tell from Ryzen Master, which is in no doubt helped by reusing my 1600's v1 Spire, along with MX-4 paste, in place of the packaged Stealth. Folding can still push temperatures up pretty high, especially if handling CPU and GPU work orders at the same time; partly thanks to having a Sapphire Nitro+ RX 590, CPU temperatures were spiking to the low 90s Celsius, but a combination of two new Corsair ML120 case fans (twice as effective as the Aerocool intake fan/ancient Akasa exhaust fan combo I had before) plus some slightly tweaked fan profiles knocked this down nearly ten degrees, along with boosting CPU folding speed a little. It's a great CPU, though I wish I had more than an RX 590 to go along with it.eastcoast_pete - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
Thanks Ian!While this is not important for many (most?) readers here, I would like to see AMD or anyone else putting a more basic GPU (under $ 50 retail) out that has HDMI 2.0a or better, display port out, and that has ASICs for x264/265 and VP9 decoding; AV1 would be a plus. This could be a PCIe dGPU or something directly soldered into a MB. Am I the only one who's find that interesting? I don't like to always have to plug a high-powered dGPU into each build that has more than just an entry level CPU, so this would help.
Spunjji - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
You'll likely be waiting a while. You'd need to wait for the next generation of GPUs with new display controllers and video decoders. There's a rumour that Nvidia will be producing an Ampere "MX550" for mobile, which could mean a dGPU based on the same chip being released for ~$100. Give that a couple more years to drop in price and, well, by then you'll probably want new standards. :DPgndu - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I come here for a clearer perspective more than benchmarks, but the timing of this article is weird, especially since 10th Gen's at the door. I get the market or Atleast pc builder cause and effect but market just got blown out of proportions with options, what actually transfers to general populace is not clear until OEM's embrace the reality like nividiaArbie - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
"The Core i5-10500 ... is 65 W, the same as AMD".Anandtech knows very well that Intel TDP is not the same as AMD TDP. Please stop falling into the noob-journo trap of simply repeating the Intel BS just because it's official BS.
GreenReaper - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
In fairness, TMD is also turboing to 88W, with cores plus uncore measured as taking significantly more than 65W.Spunjji - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Absolutely right, but also in fairness, Intel's sole enhancement for the 10 series appears to be enabling higher clock speeds - and they're made on the same process with the same architecture as the 9 series, which inevitably means more power will be required to reach those higher clocks.So, it's likely to be either a CPU with similar real power use to the AMD processor that never really hits its rated turbo clocks, or a CPU that does hit its rated turbo and never drops below ~100W under sustained load. It's likely to be power and speed competitive on an either/or basis, but not both at the same time.
watzupken - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
This is true that its going above its TDP to provide the boost speed. However this is a practice that Intel has practiced since its Kaby Lake/ Coffee Lake series. Unfortunately, they are the worst violator when it comes to exceeding the supposed TDP when you consider how much power it is pulling to sustain its boost (PL2) speed. If you consider the boost speed of the Comet Lake, even the supposed 65W i5 10xxx series is not going to keep to 65W given the boost speed of up to 4.8Ghz, though nothing is mentioned about the all core turbo, but should be somewhere close, i.e. 4.2 to 4.6Ghz is my guess.lakedude - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link
I assume no one has mentioned the typo since it is still there."Competition
With six cores and twelve threads, the comparative Intel options vary between something like the Core i7-9600KF with six cores and no hyperthreading..."
Gotta be i5, right?
Kalelovil - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
@Ian CutressThere appears to be a mistake in the AI Benchmark results, the Ryzen 5 3600 Combined result is less than the sum of its Inference and Training results.
xSneak - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Disappointed to see the continual cpu reviews using a GTX 1080 as the gpu. We would be better able to evaluate cpu performance if a 2080 ti was used given it is cpu bottlenecked at 1080p on some games. Hard to believe one of the biggest tech sites is using such under powered hardware.steve wilson - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
They do it to make it a fair test. You can easily compare results of other CPU's if you are using the same hardware in the rest of the PC.Meteor2 - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
I was almost that person asking that question; thank you for pointing out a good answer.Irata - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
It is interesting for the average $ 150- 200 CPU buyer since they most likely won‘t have anything close to a 2080ti in their PC.Personally, I also think all reviews should be done using the stock heatsink or alternatively add the aftermarket HSF‘s price to the CPU cost, at least in the low to mid range.
Spunjji - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
How does that better help you evaluate the performance? All it does is tell you what you'd see if you spend $1200 on a GPU and then restrict yourself to last decade's favourite resolution. The differences you observe in that state don't translate to meaningful performance difference in practice.TheJian - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Scanned page titles, no OCing, crap benchmarks....Moving along.Spunjji - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
We already know that there's not really any point in overclocking Ryzen. Why waste the time on repeating that?msroadkill612 - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Ian makes an important point imo - the 3600 has been the cheapest foot in the door for zen2. It happens to also be a very muscular 6 core.Folks are starting to get that its about balance, & the whole am4 zen ecosystem leaves Intel for dead.
A little mentioned thing, is intel must run NVME drives thru the chipset - yuk... thats not the same at all - its wasting a lot of what u paid for that boon of a resource.
watzupken - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
Performance vs price is certainly the key reason for people to get the Ryzen 5 3600. At least for myself, I tend to get mid tier CPUs as I don't like to spend too much on a hardware. Historically, I would get Intel i5 consistently due to it price vs performance. I feel most people will be on this same boat where we look for best performance to price. In the case of AMD Ryzen 5 3600, it's got an outstanding value since it performs better than an Intel chip at the same price, and you can further overclock it to push performance. Intel chips at this price point means an OC locked chip.johnthacker - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
So basically, as expected, the Ryzen 3 3300X is the 5 3600's equal on anything that's not embarrassingly parallel, but the 5 3600 is far superior on things like encoding, decoding, and compression that parallelize easily.Oxford Guy - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link
"AMD Ryzen 5 3600 Review: Why Is This Amazon's Best Selling CPU?"Lame headline. How about this:
"Stomped: AMD Ryzen 5 3600 Has No Intel Competition In Its Price Bracket"
My headline is more to the point.
Walkeer - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Why use 3200MHz DRAM when 3600 is known to perform best with 3600? I think it was proven here on this server: https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen...MrMaestro - Thursday, May 21, 2020 - link
A modern day Q6600: the people’s chip!asgehrj - Thursday, May 21, 2020 - link
Very interesting article.But I think you should update the motherboard part regarding the new situation of upgrade abilities.
markbrownjoh - Thursday, November 25, 2021 - link
Hello, I'm here to ask if what's the difference between Ryzen 5 3600 and 5 3600X? I need to buy one but I couldn't decide yet.