Friendly Fire: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X CPU Review & Benchmarks vs. 5600X & 5900X
Video Statistics and Information
No captions available for this video.
Channel: Gamers Nexus
Views: 588,778
Rating: 4.9214754 out of 5
Keywords: gamersnexus, gamers nexus, computer hardware, amd r7 5800x review, amd 5800x review, amd r7 5800x benchmarks, amd ryzen 7 5800x benchmarks, amd ryzen 7 5800x review, amd r7 5800x vs r5 5600x, amd r7 5800x vs r9 5900x, amd r9 5950x review, amd r7 5800x vs intel i9 10900k, amd r7 5800x vs intel i7 10700k
Id: 6x2BYNimNOU
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 20min 21sec (1221 seconds)
Published: Fri Nov 06 2020
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.
Remember when people said that getting the 6700k over the 6600k for gaming was dumb because the extra threads were useless?
Well, only one of these CPUs is viable for gaming today. I have zero regrets about getting the 6700k back then. Sure, the extra 4 threads were just "a nice but unnecesary thing" at the moment of purchase. But they quickly became more and more relevant as time went by.
Not everyone upgrades their CPU every 2 years. Not everyone who can stretch their CPU budget to $450 can stretch it by another $100.
Not discrediting Steve here, he obviously knows what he's talking about. However, he's on the mindset that future proofing is completely useless, and that mindset only works if you upgrade your CPU frequently. That's not realistic for a lot of people.
So, sure, the 5900X is better value, if you can afford it, you should get it. But if you can afford a 5800X but not at 5900X there's absolutely nothing wrong with you getting the 5800X. If you are already planning on upgrading your CPU+mobo+RAM combo in 2 years or so, sure, the 5600X is simply a smarter choice. But if you plan to keep it for a long time, I see nothing wrong with the 5800X.
Yes, I got the 5800X. I could cancel it right now and get a 5600X instead, but I choose not to. And no, this comment isn't about validating my purchase. I really don't care about that. But I don't like how blunt this video is and how it could potentially scare people who have a 5800X ordered, as if it was some terrible CPU that no one should ever buy.
Can you afford the 5900X? Get it.
If not, do you care about the future proofing, multitasking benefits, and non-gaming benefits of the extra 4 threads? Get the 5800X.
If not, get the 5600X.
(of course, there's also the choice of simply waiting for the inevitable 5700X. But this is all assuming that you want a CPU now)
Was kinda expecting that. Steve never liked the 8 Core SKUs.
Still super happy with my 5800X purchase but the price should have been 25-50€ lower.
To all the people who bought a 5800x: don't worry, you bought a great CPU. It's a single-CCD 8-core processor which means you won't have problems with CCD interconnect like on 3900x/3950x. It's binned better than 5600x.
The only thing bad about this CPU is that you paid $50 sucker's markup for it. Which might be a bit annoying, but won't matter much long-term. You'll still have a great CPU for a few generations ahead.
im still happy i bought a 5800x, I do some Lightroom and some photoshop, some streaming occasionally, so a 5900x is overkill for me, but wanted a few more cores then what the 5600x has to offer.
I see the argument that this is the worst value CPU from the entire lineup, but I still got it for a few reasons:
Outside of the US, when you factor in VAT + other import taxes, the prices are well over the MSRP, and the more expensive the product, the higher the difference from the MSRP. In my country for example, it's an extra 133.48$ for the 5900x, and an extra 91.80$ for the 5800x. So it's 683.48$ vs 541.8$ - an 141.68$ towards the 5900x, not 100$. We're basically paying for a 5900x here when we're buying a 5800x. The point I'm trying to make is that value isn't as clear cut as it is in the US.
Even if the performance is pretty much identical to the 5600x, no one tested how much of an impact other apps have on your performance. I play most stuff fullscreen borderless, while having discord/chrome/other shit opened on my secondary monitor. Does that have an impact? Probably not a lot, but there's a chance games will require more cores as time goes on and we might see another 7700k situation. A 6 core CPU might struggle playing games while there's other stuff in the background. Or we might see a fx 8350 situation, and by the time the number of cores will be relevant, the single core performance of the 5600x will be outdated - in which case, the 5600x would've been the better choice. It's impossible to predict and futureproof, but things tend to change faster now, so I'm betting on the two extra cores of the 5800x.
The pricing of the 5800x and 5900x is an oldschool strategy used by fastfood chains. They want you to buy the 5900x, even if you get 0 use out of it. Yes, the 5900x offers more value, but that value is completely lost if all you want to do is game. Also, in low res benchmarks, the 5800x did have an advantage over the other CPUs, so it's very likely than in 1-2 years, with better GPUs, we'll see a more consistent performance from the 5800x at 1080p.
Or all of this is cope and I'm trying to justify my purchase /s
Edit: Basically I feel like Steve wasn't as nuanced as he could've been when talking about the 5800x. He is firmly in the camp that future proofing is useless, but I think this warrants a proper discussion since we've seen real life examples when it worked and when it completely failed.
Nah, the 5800X is the obvious and only choice for me. 6 cores isn’t enough for 2020 but I don’t need 12 either.
And I find some beauty in the single chiplet design. Similar to how an RX-7 1.3L making 250hp is more exciting than say a V6 3.5L making 300hp. And I simply don’t need a 500hp VR38DETT, although I’m sure it would be fun too.
I purchased the 5800x because
1.) I don’t only game and have many programs running at once and could use more than 6 cores. But not enough to justify an additional 4 cores for the 5900x ($100 for something I won’t use). Also, future games and programs could use more than 6 cores which is better for me as I upgrade around every 5-7 years.
2.) Comes with a free game I was already planning on buying ($60 value technically drops the CPU cost to $390 and already have an AIO)
3.) This CPU in theory should hold a higher boost clock for longer and could OC better than the fused down chiplets in the 5600x and 5900x (in theory)
4.) It was actually available for purchase.
5.) It is still amazing performance and it not having the “best value” doesn’t make it a bad CPU purchase.
Personally I think Steve is wrong about the 5800x. In my humble opinion, I believe the 5800x is priced competitively if you compare it to the current pricing of Intel's 10900K or 10900KF. To me, it's priced to compel someone who was on the fence about buying Intel's 10900K or 10900KF to go with AMD's 5800x instead as it's approximately the same price of those CPUs (the 10900K and 10900KF can be had for anywhere from $480-520), but isn't overpriced compared to those CPUs like the 5900x or 5950x are.
This is the situation I am in. I want to upgrade my pc and was eyeing either a 10900K or 10900KF... but now I see for the exact same price I can get the 5800x which out performs those CPUs.
Overall, it's almost as good of a performance as the 5900x for less money and better performing overall than the 5600x, for 10900K money.
I upgraded from a 3600 to a 5800x, still happy with my purchase as I am sure this cpu will last me a good 5 to 6 years of top tier to solid performance