In order to wrap up our 6 core/12 thread CPU testing, we had to add the Ryzen 5 5600X to the mix. We're going dorsum to the data we recently collected for testing the Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 5 3600, all of information technology using the Radeon RX 6800 in a range of PC games at 1080p, 1440p and 4K resolutions.

In a manner this is an extension of the information you might have seen in our mean solar day-one CPU reviews. Take the Ryzen 5 5600X review, for example. In that review the intention was to compare CPU gaming performance and therefore we focused on CPU express testing by using a GeForce RTX 3090 at 1080p.

This is platonic for showing which CPUs are truly faster for gaming, at least in the current range of games we test with, though information technology'southward also mostly a skilful indicator of performance for the adjacent few years.

That said, information technology can be a little bit misleading if you lot're using that data equally a buying guide, especially when comparing CPUs in different price ranges. For case, if nosotros take the xi game average data from the 5600X review -- recorded at 1080p with an RTX 3090 -- that near entirely focuses on CPU intensive titles, nosotros see that on average the Core i9-10900K is 29% faster than the Ryzen 5 3600, and that'due south a massive difference.

Notwithstanding, if nosotros use a slightly slower GPU like the Radeon RX 6800, which is still a mighty fast production, and include many more games, quite a few of which aren't super CPU intensive, we find that at 1080p the 10900K is just 9% faster than the R5 3600. Moreover, if we test at a more realistic resolution for most gamers, at 1440p nosotros detect that the margin shrinks to but 4%.

And so while the Core i9-10900K is an awesome gaming processor, in reality it'south not that much more awesome than something similar the Ryzen 5 3600 every bit you lot're almost e'er going to exist GPU express. Of class, this will depend on the game and while we did see very petty difference between the two in titles such every bit Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Cyberpunk 2077, Dirt 5, Doom Eternal, F1 2022, Gears 5, Horizon Nil Dawn, Resident Evil 3 and more than, the Core i9 processor was 30% faster in Death Stranding. In this game the 6-cadre Zen 2 processor was all the same good for over 100 fps at all times nonetheless.

Point is, we've yet to find a game that tanks on a modern half dozen cadre/12 thread processor.

But how much do you demand to spend on a 6 core processor to receive an optimal gaming feel? We've seen how much faster the 5600X is than the 3600 in our review, 24% faster on boilerplate at 1080p with an RTX 3090, simply how much departure is there with a more reasonable GPU at a more realistic resolution? Today we're going to notice out just that.

We'll be looking at performance in xvi games at 1080p, 1440p and 4K using the Radeon RX 6800 and all systems will be configured with 32GB of DDR4-3200 CL14 retentiveness. Permit's now bound into the benchmark graphs…

Benchmarks

Starting with Godfall, we see that the 5600X is 17% faster than the 3600 at 1080p and merely slightly faster than the 10400F while it trailed the 10900K past an insignificant margin, at least when looking at the average frame rate. It was 9% slower when comparing the 1% depression performance.

However, once we increase the resolution to 1440p there's at present no difference in performance between the 5600X and the Intel processors.

The 5600X is still 12% faster than the 3600 which is a reasonable performance margin, though for many of you I'm sure it volition exist hard to justify the 50% price increase. Then every bit expected at 4K we're entirely GPU bound, so any of these CPUs will deliver the aforementioned gaming experience under these weather condition.

Lookout Dogs: Legion isn't a particularly CPU intensive game and here we're seeing that even at 1080p, the 3950X, 5600X and 10900K are all able to become the most from the RX 6800. The 5600X was eight% faster than the 3600 and 10400F, then a reasonable performance uplift, though by the time we hit 1440p the margins are neutralized.

Dirt 5 similar nearly car racing games isn't CPU intensive and even at 1080p we're seeing lilliputian difference betwixt the tested processors. The 5600X was six% faster than the 3600 to match the 10900K.

At 1440p and above we're looking at identical frame rates across the board.

Assassin's Creed Valhalla saw similar performance across all CPUs tested, the 1% low results were slightly lower with the 10400F, while the 5600X matched the 10900K.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider remains ane of the virtually CPU intensive titles we accept to test with and here we're looking at a 23% increase in 1% low performance from the 3600 to the 5600X. In other words, the 5600X manages to match the 10900K making information technology a chip puncher than the other 6-core processors.

Though it's worth noting that those margins evaporate entirely at 1440p, so those of you playing this game at 1440p with an RX 6800 or similarly speedy GPU, will meet little to no performance increase when upgrading your CPU from the 3600 to the 5600X or any Zen 3 processor for that matter.

Upon release Cyberpunk 2077 was extremely CPU demanding and came close to making out processors such as the Ryzen 5 3600. All the same, several optimization patches later on and now it runs very comfortably on the 6-core Zen two processor, forth with the Intel Core i5-10400F. In fact, the 5600X and 10400F delivered the same level of performance which is substantially what you'll see from the 10900K likewise.

The 5600X is seen matching the 10900K in Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege, pushing out 453 fps at 1080p, making information technology a fraction faster than the 3950X and seven% faster than the 3600. Though once once more we achieve 1440p to realize there's nothing separating any of the processors tested. We're talking about a ~ii% difference variation in the results.

Wolfenstein: Youngblood isn't terribly CPU demanding though we do run into the 10400F drop off a little, probable a result of its 4.3 GHz frequency cap. The 5600X nudged ahead of the 10900K by a two% margin, though that'south insignificant and then is the nine% margin information technology beat the R5 3600 past, we're talking about 309 fps vs. 337 fps.

Like Dirt five, F1 2022 also isn't very CPU intensive and volition play just fine using a decent quad-cadre processor, therefore the 3600, 10400F and 5600X had no trouble delivering highly playable performance, pushing the RX 6800 to over 200 fps at 1080p.

Non much to meet in Horizon Nix Dawn either, the 5600X was merely 5% faster than the 3600 at 1080p and 3% slower than the 10900K when testing at 1080p.

The 5600X remained 3% slower than the 10900K at 1440p and 7% faster than the 3600, merely we're talking about the deviation between 106 fps and 113 fps. Hard to say if you'll be able to detect that difference, especially with nearly identical i% low functioning.

Cerise Expressionless Redemption two is a game nearly consider to be reasonably CPU intensive, but provided you lot accept a modern six-core/12-thread processor, you lot'll practise just fine, even with a high-terminate GPU such every bit the RX 6800.

At 1080p the 5600X nudged ahead of the 10900K by a few frames and that meant it was up to 11% faster than the R5 3600, though the Zen 2 processor provided smooth gameplay regardless. At 1440p resolution we're looking at similar performance for all v tested configurations.

Yet another game that isn't likewise demanding on the CPU, provided yous have something relatively modern, is Resident Evil 3. Not as well much point talking well-nigh these results other than to say all five tested configurations delivered similar numbers at all resolutions.

Doom Eternal will play at crazy high frame rates with any modernistic Ryzen or Core processor. For case, the R5 3600 was expert for 333 fps at 1080p, while the R5 5600X pushed out 363 fps nudging it just ahead of the 10900K.

Now here is a game that can use more than half dozen cores, but that does non mean it requires more than that, as shown past the 5600X which matches the 10900K even providing an additional 2-three fps at well over 150 fps.

This game is a perfect example of why core count isn't everything, despite the fact that this game will scale right up to 12 cores, this only becomes of benefit if the cores are somewhat wearisome. In the case of the 5600X, which has 6 very fast cores, it'south able to vanquish its predecessor, the R5 3600, by a whopping 32% at 1080p. It's too able to match the 10900K despite packing 40% fewer cores.

All this becomes somewhat redundant at 1440p though as we start to become primarily GPU bound. Here the 5600X is merely 5% faster than the 3600 when comparing the boilerplate frame rate, though it is 12% faster for the 1% depression performance.

The NPC-heavy Hitman ii is another game that can benefit from having more than vi cores when comparing CPUs of the same serial, take the 3600 and 3950X for example, where the xvi-cadre part is 27% faster. Even so, if we supercharge the cores, similar what AMD'due south done with the 5600X, then 6-core parts can be but as fast as xvi-core models of the previous generation, slightly faster fifty-fifty equally seen here.

The Ryzen 5 5600X was still seven% slower than the 10900K at 1080p, though that margin is reduced to goose egg at 1440p and in that scenario the Zen three role is but 9% faster than the Zen ii version.

Finally we have War Thunder which is not very demanding on the CPU. The Core i5-10400F is seen abaft the other processors by a small margin and this is likely down to the small L3 cache capacity and the lower clock frequency. The 3 Ryzen processors delivered the same level of functioning which is comparable to the 10900K.

Functioning Summary

Nosotros take to admit that for the most part the results were kind of boring. The 5600X is typically on par with the other processors tested at 1440p while it mostly matched or came in just behind the 10900K at 1080p. That said, let'south movement on to check out our 16 game average data.

With more games than our day-one review of the Ryzen 5 5600X and quite a few of those games not existence overly CPU demanding, which is truthful for almost video games, the 5600X is able to roughly match the 10900K at all three tested resolutions.

It's also only slightly faster than the Ryzen 9 3950X and at 1080p about 12% faster than the Ryzen 5 3600, though that margin shrinks to a mere 4% at 1440p and most goose egg at 4K.

What Nosotros Learned

While not the most exciting information set you'll ever run across, information technology does highlight a few things.

First, for the most part a 6 cadre/12 thread CPU is still all y'all demand when purely gaming. If you're streaming on the same PC or doing anything extra, then the upgrade to eight, 12 or more cores might exist called for, merely typically when merely gaming all you lot need is 6 cores.

We're also gaming with a Radeon RX 6800, which is by no means a slow GPU. Even at 1080p the margins between the Ryzen 5 3600 and Core i9-10990K were modest, with virtually nothing separating the newer 5600X and 10900K. Y'all could debate there's absolutely no reason to go across eight cores for gaming, once again, unless you're putting actress piece of work on your CPU like streaming.

This is why we've often advocated for gamers to relieve as much as possible on their CPU, either saving the coin for a future upgrade or investing it in a meliorate GPU. Take the Ryzen five 5600X vs. Ryzen vii 5800X comparison for case. The 8-cadre processor costs $150 more, and then a fifty% premium for 33% more cores. Yet the biggest margin we've been able to discover in any game was eight% in Expiry Stranding at 1080p, with an RTX 3090... just 8%.

So in our opinion it's not worth spending the extra coin when you lot're building a gaming machine. Those $150 tin can go towards a time to come upgrade that volition net you lot significantly more than operation in a few years' time, or on the GPU front yous could jump up from something similar the upcoming RTX 3060 to an RTX 3070, an upgrade that'south likely to net y'all ~30% more performance in all of your favorite games.

Ultimately, nosotros'd abet skipping the 5600X in favor of the Core i5-10400F or Ryzen 5 3600 equally both will deliver a like experience with an RTX 3070 or RX 6800, and they'll save y'all another $100 when compared to the 5600X. Moreover, under realistic gaming conditions the 5600X won't be anywhere near 50% faster, so it'due south hard to recommend you coughing up the actress dough for what's probable going to exist a very pocket-size performance improvement.

What this means is that there are no new great value CPU offerings for gamers, at least not ones that tin can replace the previous generation's which were excellent overall and remain so. We guess that's why nosotros oasis't been well-nigh as excited about Zen three as we were with Zen 2. Unless you lot desire to spend big on a Ryzen 9 5900X or 5950X, Zen iii has little to offering you lot and with AMD unable to produce not-X variants due to 7nm supply bug, we don't see this changing anytime soon.

Shopping Shortcuts:
  • AMD Ryzen v 3600 on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 5 5600X on Amazon
  • Intel Core i5-10400F on Amazon
  • AMD Radeon RX 6800 on Amazon
  • Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 on Amazon
  • Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 on Amazon