Ryzen 5 vs Core i5: A detailed comparison
There are a lot of factors to consider when choosing a processor for your next computer build or upgrade. But don’t let the number of options overwhelm you – we’re here to help.
In this article, we will compare two popular processors: the Ryzen 5 and the Core i5. We will look at their features, their performance, and their price. By the end of this article, you should have a good idea of which processor is right for you.
The Ryzen 5 is a great choice for those who want a powerful processor without breaking the bank. It offers excellent value for money and is a great option for gamers and power users alike.
The Core i5 is a more expensive option, but it offers slightly better performance and is a good choice for those who need the absolute best.
So, which one should you choose? Let’s find out.
Ryzen 5 vs Core i5: Features
When choosing a CPU, there are many factors to consider. However, two of the most important considerations are price and performance. In the budget-friendly category, the Ryzen 5 and the Core i5 are two popular options.
Both CPUs offer good performance for the price, but there are some important differences to be aware of. The Ryen 5 is a 6-core/12-thread CPU that runs at a base clock of 3.6 GHz.
It also has a turbo boost of up to 4 GHz. The Core i5, on the other hand, is a 4-core/8-thread CPU with a base clock of 3 GHz and a turbo boost of up to 3.9 GHz.
So, if you’re looking for more cores and threads, the Ryzen 5 is the better option. However, if you’re looking for slightly higher clock speeds, the Core i5 might be a better choice. Ultimately, the best CPU for you will depend on your specific needs and budget.
Ryzen 5 vs Core i5: Clock Speed
When it comes to raw clock speed, the Core i5 tends to have a slight advantage. However, the Ryzen 5 processor features more cores and threads, meaning it can handle more demanding tasks. In terms of graphics processing, the two CPUs are fairly evenly matched.
Ryzen 5 vs Core i5: Power Consumption
However, the Ryzen 5 does have an edge when it comes to power consumption, as it is more energy efficient.
When it comes to power to watt consumption, there is a clear winner: the Core i5. Under load, the Core i5 uses about half the power for a similar performance to the Ryzen 5. This is due to several factors, including the efficiency of Intel’s 14nm process and the lower TDP of the i5.
As a result, the Core i5 will put less strain on your power supply, and it will generate less heat, which is important for both gaming and productivity applications.
However, it’s important to note that the power consumption of a CPU is only one part of the equation. If you’re planning on building a high-end gaming rig, you’ll also need to factor in the power consumption of your other components, such as your GPU and storage.
As a result, while the Core i5 is more power-efficient than the Ryzen 5, your final build may not be significantly different in terms of power consumption.
CPU power consumption has been a hot topic lately with the release of AMD’s new Ryzen processors. The consensus is that the Core i5-7600K is more power efficient than the Ryzen 5 1600X, but let’s take a closer look at the data to see if that’s the case.
When we compare the two CPUs under identical conditions, we can see that the Core i5-7600K draws about 95 watts of power while the Ryzen 5 1600X draws around 105 watts. So while the Core i5-7600K is more power efficient, the difference is only about 10 watts.
In terms of real-world performance, this difference is negligible. Both CPUs are more than capable of handling any task you throw at them, so it comes down to personal preference.
Ryzen 5 vs Core i5: Performance
The Ryzen 5 and Core i5 processors both offer excellent performance and power efficiency. However, some key differences between these two types of processors should be considered when making a purchase.
The Ryzen 5 offers more cores and threads than the Core i5, making it better suited for demanding tasks such as video editing and 3D rendering.
Additionally, the Ryzen 5 has a higher base clock speed, meaning it can complete tasks faster than the Core i5. However, the Core i5 uses less power than the Ryzen 5, making it a more efficient choice for everyday use.
Ultimately, both processors offer great performance, but the Ryzen 5 is better suited for demanding tasks while the Core i5 is more efficient for everyday use.
Ryzen 5 vs Core i5: Value for money
Ryzen 5 CPUs offer a good mix of performance and features for the price. They offer excellent multi-threaded performance, meaning they’re great for productivity tasks like video editing and 3D rendering.
They also come with a capable integrated graphics processor, making them a good choice for light gaming or streaming. In terms of value, Ryzen 5 CPUs offer the best bang for your buck.
Core i5 CPUs are slightly more expensive than Ryzen 5 CPUs, but they offer slightly better single-threaded performance. This makes them a better choice for gamers or anyone who needs a CPU that can handle demanding tasks without breaking a sweat.
However, they don’t come with an integrated graphics processor, so you’ll need to pair them with a dedicated graphics card if you want to game or stream. Overall, Core i5 CPUs offer slightly better performance than Ryzen 5 CPUs, but they’re not quite as good value for money.
When it comes to the mid-range market, it can be difficult to decide which platform offers the best value for money. In this article, we’ll be comparing the AMD Ryzen 5 3600X and the Intel Core i5-9600K, two of the most popular CPUs in this price range.
When it comes to raw performance, the Ryzen 5 3600X is the clear winner. It offers more cores and threads than the i5-9600K, as well as a higher base clock speed. As a result, it’s more capable of handling demanding tasks such as video editing and 3D rendering.
Furthermore, the addition of on-chip PCIe 4.0 support also gives it an advantage in terms of future-proofing. In contrast, the i5-9600K doesn’t offer anything particularly special. It’s a perfectly capable CPU, but it doesn’t have any features that make it stand out from the competition.
When it comes to price, the i5-9600K is slightly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 3600X. However, given the significant performance advantage offered by the Ryzen 5 3600X, it’s still the better value for money option.
Conclusion of our case study
The AMD Ryzen 5 3600X is the better choice for most people. It offers more cores, higher clock speeds, and on-chip PCIe 4.0 support. As a result, it’s more capable of handling demanding tasks and is better future-proofed. It’s also a great value for money option, offering significantly more performance than the cheaper Intel Core i5-9600K.
Would you like to see the difference between Intel and AMD’s fastest CPU? Take a look at our post which compares the Ryzen 7 vs Core i7
Most reliable Ryzen 5 PCs available in the market
We regularly test and supply these to our clients. They are guaranteed to last for at least 8 years or more.
Desktop PC (Assembled)
AMD Ryzen 5 5600G 6-Core Cezanne 6-Core 3.9 GHz with AMD Radeon Graphics with Liquid Cooler 8GB DDR4 500GB SSD Windows 10, Black
Purchase at Amazon
Desktop PC (Branded)
AMD 6-Core Ryzen 5 5600G Processor, AMD Radeon RX5500, 8GB RAM, 256GB PCIe NVMe SSD, Win 10 Home
Purchase at Amazon
AMD Ryzen 5 5500U 6 core CPU, 16GB RAM, 512GB PCIe NVMe SSD, AMD Radeon Graphics
Purchase at Amazon
Most reliable Intel Core i5 PCs available in the market
Desktop PC (Branded)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, 11th Gen Intel Core i5-11400F Processor, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD, Windows 11, Wi-Fi 5 & Bluetooth 4.2
Purchase at Amazon
11th Gen Intel Core i5-1135G7 Processor, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD Storage, 15.6” Full HD IPS Display, Windows 10 Home, HP Fast Charge
Purchase at Amazon
For PC builders
AMD Ryzen 5 5500
12-Thread Unlocked Desktop Processor with Wraith Stealth Cooler
Hurry! Special Promo!
Purchase for 38% off at Amazon
Core i5 11400
Desktop Processor 6 Cores up to 4. 4 GHz LGA1200 (Intel® 500 Series & Select 400 Series Chipset) 65W
Purchase for 8% off at Amazon
AMD Ryzen 5 7600X vs. Intel Core i5-13600K
Time for a massive benchmark comparison between the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X and Intel Core i5-13600K, we’ll be covering 54 games across three resolutions using the GeForce RTX 4090, so that’s quite a bit of data to go over.
When we reviewed these CPUs we checked them out in about a dozen games, comparing various memory and motherboard configurations to work out which offered the most value. In the end, they were very close to each other. The 13600K showed to have the advantage of stronger productivity performance, while the 7600X is more power efficient and is supported by a superior platform that should offer a significantly better upgrade path.
You can make solid arguments for going either way, but today’s big benchmark comparison is more about gaming and we hope that it will make the choice easier if that’s your use case.
Let’s quickly go over the test system specs and then we can jump into the benchmarks. The Ryzen 5 7600X was tested on the MSI MEG X670E Ace motherboard with 32GB of DDR5-6000 CL30 single rank memory, while the Core i5-13600K was tested on the MSI Z790 Tomahawk using 32GB of DDR5-6400 CL32 single rank memory.
Please note the DDR5-6400 memory used on the Intel platform doesn’t work on AM5 as it doesn’t offer EXPO support and loading XMP fails to boot. So the memory has to be manually configured and that’s not something most users will be willing to do. Also, to run at 6400 speeds, a Fabric frequency of 2133 MHz is required and only the best silicon will achieve this frequency while maintaining stability.
So realistically DDR5-6000 is the limit for Ryzen 7000 series processors, while 13th-gen Intel CPUs can go beyond DDR5-6400 with ease. So it’s not unfair to test Intel CPUs with higher clocked memory, as they support such memory whereas Zen 4 CPUs typically don’t.
The graphics card of choice is the new GeForce RTX 4090 and we’re using Windows 11 and resizable bar enabled for both configurations. As we’ve mentioned, 54 games were tested, though we’ve also had to drop a few popular titles as they’re no longer useful or practical for testing high-end hardware, mostly due to in-game frame caps.
Such games include God of War, Control, and Star Wars Jedi Fallen Order, all of which were maxed out even at 1440p at the game’s frame limit. We also had to ditch Microsoft Flight Simulator as we’ve been unable to log into our copy of the game for weeks due to a server detection error (basically the Microsoft Store is rubbish and it makes testing games there very difficult, if not impossible). With that out of the way, let’s get into the results…
Starting with Fortnite we find similar performance between these two CPUs, interestingly though, the 13600K offered slightly higher 1% lows, around a 5% improvement, while the 7600X pushed the average frame rate up to 5% higher.
The most significant margin was seen at 4K where the 13600K produced 8% higher 1% lows. Overall not a big difference and both managed to push high frame rates in our Team Rumble late match benchmark.
Let’s jump into what’s probably the most confusing benchmark of this series, Battlefield V. Oddly with the 200 fps frame cap removed from both configurations, the 1% lows were fairly similar, but the average frame rate wasn’t as the 7600X was 36% faster at 1080p and 56% faster at 1440p, and even more shocking we still saw a 50% margin at 4K. It looks as though we’re testing two different games here, but after multiple re-tests we ended up with the same results.
We’re not sure what’s holding the 13600K back here, in both instances we set the frame limit to 900 fps, and triple checked the quality settings, needless to say everything was correct. It’s possible this is an E-core bug, but we’ll have to spend some more time looking into it.
Suggesting what we saw in Battlefield V was a bug indeed is the much newer Battlefield 2042 where the 13600K performed very well, outpacing the 7600X at both 1080p and 1440p.
Here we see that 1% lows are up to 16% greater with the Intel processor with a 7% boost to the average frame rate. By the time we reach the 4K resolution the game is GPU limited, so given we’re only using the medium quality settings here for that competitive advantage, it’s fair to say both processors are more than fast enough here and will almost always result in GPU limited performance.
Horizon Zero Dawn seems to prefer the Ryzen processor but unlike Battlefield V, we don’t believe this is a bug, as we’ve seen this behavior with AMD and Intel CPUs for some time.
In this example, the 7600X delivered up to 21% greater 1% lows and 29% higher average frame rates, both seen at 1440p. Despite that the 13600K did deliver stronger 1% lows at 4K, though the average frame rate was slightly lower, so overall performance was much the same due to a GPU bottleneck.
Rainbow Six Siege also liked the 7600X for driving big frame rates, hitting 722 fps at 1080p opposed to 626 fps for the 13600K. I’m not sure that margin really matters, but 1% lows were almost 20% higher with the AMD processor.
Similar performance trends were seen at 1440p and then at 4K the game becomes heavily GPU bound, so frame rates here are basically equalized.
Moving on to Halo Infinite, the 13600K nudged ahead at 1080p by a 16% margin, hitting 213 fps, though 1% lows were only improved by 6%. Then at 1440p the Intel processor lead is reduced to 7% and then at 4K the 7600X was repeatedly a few frames faster which is odd, but this behavior was witnessed in a number of games.
Doom Eternal performance was much the same using either CPU and this is particularly true when focusing on 1% lows. Average frame rate performance was up to 5% stronger with the 13600K, but we doubt many will notice the difference between 564 fps and 595 fps.
We know a lot of you have complained about performance in Gotham Knights, but we didn’t know it was this bad. Armed with an RTX 4090 we couldn’t even hit 120 fps at 1080p, in fact we saw the same performance limitation at all three tested resolutions.
In short, performance sucked in this title, but the 13600K was up to 8% faster.
Forza Horizon 5 isn’t too CPU demanding, but it’s a 54 game benchmark, so we’ve included it and thought we might take a look at the data, as these results or rather margins are fairly typical of what you’ll see in most games. So that is to say basically identical performance between these two CPUs.
Using the Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II multiplayer benchmark we find that the 13600K is up to 12% faster, seen when comparing 1% lows at 1080p, though there’s just a 6% margin seen when comparing the average frame rate.
Those margins are significantly reduced at 1440p and then eliminated at 4K, so while the Core i5 was technically the superior performer, for the most part the margins were insignificant.
Then for the single player campaign using the ultra quality settings we see that CPU performance is virtually identical as the game is now primarily GPU limited, showing similar results to what we saw in Forza Horizon 5.
Red Dead Redemption 2 is a visually impressive single player game, though this one can be quite CPU demanding. The 7600X came out on top, delivering 6% stronger performance, but those are hardly margins to write home about, especially given we often declare margins of 5% or less to be a draw.
The last game we’re going to look at the data for is PUBG and we were surprised to find the 7600X delivering stronger performance, though 1% lows were virtually identical.
Still, when looking at average frame rates we see that the 7600X wins by up to a 13% margin, which is at least noteworthy.
Based on the tests above, the 7600X and 13600K appear very similar in terms of gaming performance, but we have only looked at a dozen games or so games out of the 54 titles tested, so let’s jump into the comparison graphs for the full breakdown…
In our day-one review data, which is based on a 12 game sample, we had the 7600X leading the 13600K by a 3% margin. With that testing expanded to 54 games, the 7600X is 5% faster. If we remove the potentially bugged Battlefield V data (issue with the E-cores?), the 7600X was just 4% faster. Either way as we noted before, we always deem margins of 5% or less to be insignificant, or in other words a tie.
Despite using the fastest gaming GPU we can buy at a low resolution, performance overall is much the same as both the 7600X and 13600K are very fast gaming CPUs. We’re talking about single-digit margins in 70+% of the games tested.
As you’d expect, the margins come down a little at 1440p and again Battlefield V is the only outlier. On average the 7600X was just 3% faster as seen in our day-one review if we remove the Battlefield V result.
Finally at 4K resolution, the 7600X was just 1% faster if we remove Battlefield V. For a little over half the games tested, the margin was 1% or less, and this data is going to be fairly representative for those of you running an RTX 3080 or slower at 1440p, though that may not necessarily apply to esports titles using low quality settings.
Here’s an interesting look at total system power consumption when gaming, of course, with the RTX 4090. Across the six games we looked at here, on average the 13600K consumed 14% more power than the 7600X, which doesn’t sound like much and in the grand scheme of things probably isn’t.
But in many instances we’re talking about 60 watts or more with the bigger margins of almost 120 watts which frankly is an absurd difference. Based on this, the Ryzen 5 processor will be easier to cool, though we’re not sure how relevant that is as most will strap a decent cooler on either processor anyway.
Still, even if you plan on undervolting or tuning the power usage of these processors, the 7600X is starting from a better position.
What We Learned
That was our detailed look at the gaming performance of the Ryzen 5 7600X and Core i5-13600K. Both are exceptionally capable gaming CPUs, both deliver a top-tier experience and both are worth purchasing.
The advantage of the Core i5-13600K is its superior productivity performance as it can often put those E-cores to good use, offering substantial gains over the 7600X. Also, for those of you who like to tinker with their hardware and dabble in overclocking and memory tuning, expert overclocker Buildzoid claims that the 13600K is a better choice, offering more headroom and a greater degree of memory tuning.
There’s also a wider range of sub-$200 motherboards on offer, thanks to support for 600-series boards, and backwards compatibility with DDR4 means you can carry over old memory or purchase from the vast pool of already available DDR4 memory.
CPU-bound DDR4 performance will generally be slower than that of DDR5, so if you’re building an entirely new PC or executing an entire platform upgrade, we do recommend jumping to DDR5 now.
The advantage of the Ryzen 5 7600X is that it’s the more efficient processor, consuming less power which in theory should make it easier to cool, though we don’t believe cooling to be a major consideration here. The real advantage for the Ryzen 5 part is the AM5 platform which will support at least two more generations of processors, offering a broad upgrade path for those investing now.
Ultimately, there’s no right or wrong option either way you go, by default they’re both excellent products, and you need to toss up between stronger productivity performance and platform longevity.
Beyond that, our only advice is that if you can wait, do so, at least until early 2023. Normally we see some interesting announcements come out of CES and we’re expecting AMD will be looking to breathe some life into AM5 sales, which could mean 3D V-Cache models, improved AM5 motherboard pricing or more affordable non-X versions.
Case in point, while we were preparing this article to go live, AMD has apparently cut Zen 4 pricing across the board which is rather unexpected (or not?, see our article: AMD Ryzen 7000 is off to a slow start, Zen 4 sales are not good). It’s yet unclear if these are permanent drops or just holiday deals but the Ryzen 5 7600X is now selling for $249, down from the original $299 launch price just weeks ago.
It’s possible that pricing on Intel’s side will become more competitive as well, and of course, DDR5 pricing is relevant there, too. So sitting on the sidelines to watch how all this plays out might be the best strategy in the short term. And of course, we’ll have many more benchmarks over the coming weeks and months.
- Intel Core i5-13600K on Amazon
- Intel Core i7-13700K on Amazon
- Intel Core i9-13900K on Amazon
- AMD Ryzen 5 7600X on Amazon
- AMD Ryzen 7 7700X on Amazon
- AMD Ryzen 9 7950X on Amazon
- AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D on Amazon
Comparison AMD Ryzen 5 3500 vs Intel Core i5-10400F which is better?
Architecture code name
|Zen 2||Comet Lake|
A large number of cores improves performance in multi-threaded applications.
More threads help the cores process information more efficiently. Real performance will be noticeable in very specific tasks (video editing, databases).
6 (100%) better than
-7 nm (-50%) better than
Faster clocked processors perform more calculations per second and thus provide better performance. nine0011
|3.6GHz|| 4.3 GHz
At 0.7 GHz (19.4%) better than
Support 64 bit
Max. number of processors per configuration
|AMD Ryzen 5||no data|
Value for money
The sum of all the advantages of the device divided by its price. The more%, the better the quality per unit price in comparison with all analogues. nine0011
Intel Trusted Execution Technology for hardware-based malware protection. For each protected program, the processor allocates its own isolated section of RAM.
Level 1 Cache
The fastest level of cache that works directly with the core. The larger the cache, the better the performance. nine0011
|384 Kb||64K (per core)|
Level 2 cache
|3 Mb||256K (per core)|
Level 3 cache
|16 Mb||12 MB (total)|
Maximum case temperature (TCase)
Power Demand (TDP)
Calculated thermal power shows the average heat dissipation in load operation,
|Technologies and additional instructions|
Technology from Intel that speeds up the AES encryption process.
The presence of AVX commands improves performance in floating point and processor-intensive operations
Intel virtualization technology allows you to forward devices on the PCI bus to the guest operating system so that it can work with them using its standard tools. nine0011
AMD Ryzen 5 5500 vs. Ryzen 5 5600X/3600, Core i5-11400/10400 and Core i3-12100F: People’s Six Core? GECID.com.
> AMD Ryzen 5 5500
For a long time, AMD dominated the new processor market and produced only models with an MSRP above $200-300. Do you want cheaper? Rake out the stocks of past series and all the leftovers. And now, against the backdrop of Intel’s success, the Reds began to fuss — they finally rolled out a new affordable 5000-series processor — AMD Ryzen 5 5500.
In this article you will learn:
And let’s start with the fact that we’ll figure it out: how did AMD come into being?
Why is the AMD Ryzen 5 5500 a milestone? Recall that when the line of Ryzen 5000 processors appeared at the end of 2020, the most affordable in it was the Ryzen 5 5600X with a rather arrogant custom price tag of $300. Intel couldn’t really oppose anything, there was a shortage of chips on the market, so they took the Ryzen 5000 anyway. And whoever wanted cheaper — pick up Ryzen 3000, 2000, and to be honest — the first thousandths of Zen also left normally. And everything suited everyone. nine0011
But it turned out to be really worthy competitors of Intel Alder Lake-S, for example, the same Core i3-12100 and Core i5-12400 with prices from $100-160 AMD started to stir.
We need to give the people modern 6 cores with 12 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture and at a normal price — $159. And in order not to be very bold — keep half the L3 cache than the older ones — only 16 MB. This is how the Ryzen 5500 was conceived.
For tests, this processor was carefully given to us by the CompX store. If anything, the guys on the site have a huge selection of components for assembling such PCs and more. In total, more than 30 thousand products. There are both new and used hardware with a more pleasant price tag. And what if you don’t have the experience to go through and put it all together — there are geek consultants who watch our videos and wind up views for us, that is, they are well versed in these PC issues. Plus, there is fast and affordable delivery or pickup — now there are 6 stores in major cities of Ukraine. nine0011
So, the hero of this review was not born alone — it turned out to be the Ryzen 5 5600. Everything is simple with him. We can say that this is a slightly slowed down well-known Ryzen 5 5600X.
But the Ryzen 5 5500, on the other hand, is full of surprises that you won’t see in the filters of online stores. Therefore, it is worth telling the TOP 5 facts about this processor.
TOP 5 facts about Ryzen 5 5500:
Radeon RX 6500XT. nine0011
2. Structurally, the Ryzen 55500 does not resemble the older chips of its line. They have two chiplets under the lid, while the Ryzen 5 5500 has a monolithic crystal. This chip, among other things, has cores and two controllers — PCI Express and memory. So the budget employee is very similar to the mobile and desktop APUs of the Ryzen 5000G series.
3. The third fact follows from the second fact — the Ryzen 5 5500 has an integrated video core, but it was turned off. AMD probably created a novelty from discarded models with non-working graphics. Without residual production! nine0011
4. The maximum power consumption of the Ryzen 5 5500 is declared at 88 W, but in real life it does not rise above 65 W even in a strong synthetic load on all streams. In games, even less — about 40-60 watts at an operating frequency of 4.2 GHz. This is great, especially when you’re building a compact system.
5. Well, the 5th fact — the Ryzen 5 5500 memory controller works without a divider, like older CPUs, so in theory, overclocking RAM can give a significant performance boost. Especially against the background of the reduced L3 cache. We will definitely check this! nine0011
Selection of CPU competitors
Now let’s move on to the competitors that we have selected for Ryzen 55500 .
The closest in price is Ryzen 5 3600 . It also has 6 cores in 12 threads, but on the older Zen 2 architecture. In some stores, the new Ryzen is a little cheaper, in others — on the contrary. But on average they are «equal».
The next competitor would be nice to take a new one too Ryzen 5 5600 but we didn’t have it on hand. Therefore, they chose the more expensive Ryzen 5 5600X. This will be an option for understanding — what we get if we overpay — in particular, for a higher frequency, a larger cache and support for PCI Express 4.0.
There are three opponents from the «blue» side. The first is a fresh, brand new, recently tested Core i3-12100F . Despite the fact that it has little L3 cache at all and only 4 cores in 8 threads, it will most likely give heat to the new Ryzen. And its full version costs about the same. In a word — a good and fast chip with support for new memory and even PCI Express 5. 0. Suddenly it becomes relevant. nine0011
Intel Core i5-10400 is slightly cheaper than today’s hero, especially if you look at the F-version, which is without a video core. We basically have the same 6 cores with multithreading technology and support for PCI Express 3.0, but with an older 14 nm process technology and architecture.
And finally, Intel Core i5-11400 . This processor, on the contrary, is more expensive than the video hero, even in the “non-video card” F-version. Unlike the new Ryzen 5, it cannot offer anything special, except for PCI Express 4.0 support for maximum disclosure of discrete video cards. In the rest — everything will be decided by pure power. nine0011
Under what conditions did you test?
To understand the conditions in which the processors struggled, let’s quickly get acquainted with the test system.
First of all — motherboards, there were 4 of them:
- Core i3 -12100F | LGA 1700 | ASUS PRIME Z690-P D4
- Core i5-10400 | LGA 1200 | ASUS TUF Z490-PLUS (WI-FI)
- Core i5-11400 | LGA 1200 | ASUS ROG Strix Z590 Gaming WiFi
- Ryzen 5 5500 / Ryzen 5 3600 / Ryzen 5 5600X | Socket AM4 ASUS ROG Strix B550 Gaming (Wi-Fi)
The dual-fan shoulders of the Cooler Master MasterLiquid PL240 FLUX liquid cooling system took care of processor temperatures. Its blades work comfortably even at maximum speed and pleases the eye with RGB lighting, including a water block.
Our RAM is almost «popular» — two strips PATRIOT VIPER Steel DDR4-3600 . It has stylish radiators and timings that are quite acceptable for such a frequency — 18-22-22-42. nine0011
So that the video card does not hold the processors, they took a real mountain of muscles — Palit GeForce RTX 3080 Ti GameRock OC .
In order for all tests and games to load as quickly as possible, we uploaded this stuff to the M.2 PCIe SSD PATRIOT P300 , 1TB.
Its speeds are excellent — almost 2500 MB / s for writing and reading due to the PCIe 3.0 interface with 4 lines.
Since we have a powerful video card and in general, in order for the system to work quietly, we always take excellent food with a margin. This time — Seasonic Prime PX-850 . It is easy to assemble systems with it thanks to the full modularity of cables. And the selected components will always be supplied with a stable power supply — the voltage deviation of the main lines is slightly more than half a percent.
All systems worked in a small but well ventilated case be quiet! PURE BASE 500 DX Black . The meshes on the top and front are large enough for the three bundled fans to breathe perfectly. nine0011
But summer is in the yard,
and RTX is in the house,
, so they took and added
be quiet! LIGHT WINGS 140mm PWM Triple Pack .
Compare Ryzen 5 5500 with 5 competitors:
- Core i3-12100F
- Core i5-10400
- Core i5-11400
- Ryzen 5 5600X
- Ryzen 5 3600
First, let’s warm up in synthetic tests, consider working tasks. nine0011
The AIDA64 benchmark has become indicative. See how the Ryzen 5 5500 beat other Ryzens in memory write speed. Here is an obvious demonstration of a different architecture and the presence of a memory controller along with the cores. Advantage — 87%! Not twice. It even outperformed Intel, which is historically OK with this indicator.
In CineBench R23, the brand new Ryzen 5 5500 performed superbly, both among its own and among others … that is, Intel. It is 12-13% ahead of the old Ryzen 5 3600 and can be said to be on an equal footing with the more expensive Ryzen 5 5600X. He also made conditionally old Core i5s: Core i5-10400 — by 24-36%, and Core i5-11400 — by 13%. The only one who gave a sharp rebuff to the hero of the video is the Core i3-12100F. Its single-threaded performance is 20% better. But Ryzen has more cores and threads, so it outperforms Core i3 by 30% in multi-threading. nine0011
In the comprehensive PCMark 10 test, the Ryzen 5 5500 also overtakes most of its direct competitors in the final scores: the venerable Ryzen 5 3600 by 10%, and the old Core i5 by 13% and 2%, respectively. Well, only Ryzen 5 5600X and Core i3-12100F lose – both by 4%. Given the twofold difference in price between the processors that won this test, this is more of a complement to the new Intel, well done.
In general, in synthetics, the conclusions are as follows. On average across all benchmarks and tests, the Ryzen 5 5500 is the best! Real:
- Core i5-10400 — inferior by 20%;
- Core i5-11400 — slower than homeopathic 3.5%;
- Core i3-12100F — lagged behind by 12%, although given that it is the only 4-core 8-thread CPU here, Intel is also great;
- old Ryzen 5 3600 — bypasses by 13%;
- but only Ryzen 5 5600X loses, and then only by some 3%.
How this difference relates to the price of processors, let’s calculate at the end. And now — we supplement the picture with gaming benchmarks. Can the Ryzen 5 5500 keep the bar high? nine0011
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla run at Ultra settings and half render. In this benchmark, the novelty performed with restraint — we can say at the level of the younger Intel i3-12100F and Core i5-10400. Other competitors overtook it — the old Ryzen 5 3600 by 14% in very rare events, and the more powerful Ryzen 5 5600X — by 17-29%. The last one, the leader in this test, has the smallest drawdowns among all the participants.
Very CPU intensive again Total War Saga: Troy. Here, the Ryzen 5500 took a deep breath and outperformed all but the leader of this test, the Ryzen 5 5600X. But against its background, the novelty is also well done. Only 6-8% separates it from the first place. nine0011
Cyberpunk 2077 — with ultra-graphics, ultra-beams and ultra-performance DLSS technology to maximize the load on processors. With these settings, the hero of the video takes 4th place. It is separated from the first occupied Ryzen 5 5600X by 11-21% in terms of average frequency and very rare events. The gap with the rest of the participants is noticeably smaller.
Again, we summarize the averages of all benchmarks. This time we will try a curious way of determining the winners. nine0011
Since everyone set a good bar in terms of average frequency, let’s calculate how many processors have accumulated fps in total in terms of very rare events. Here’s what our leaderboard looks like.
Total FPS at 0.1% Low in 5 tests:
- Ryzen 5 5600X — 270 fps
- Core i5-11400 — 255 fps
- Ryzen 5 5500 — 235 fps
- Core i3-12100F — 227 fps
- Core i5-10400 — 226 fps
- Ryzen 5 3600 — 224 fps
In total, the hero of the test receives an honorary bronze. Once again, the Core i3-12100F should be praised. The only test where it lagged far behind was Total War Saga: Troy, while in others it performed slightly worse than its 6-core counterparts. It would seem that everything is clear, but the final conclusions are still far away!
Overclock Ryzen 5 5500
Why so far, you ask? Because acceleration is next! We got the most stable result when choosing the x45 multiplier and fixing the voltages at around 1. 35 V. This allowed us to rise from the maximum 4.2 GHz to 4.5 GHz. To be frank, the result is not very good. But on the other hand, it’s almost free. nine0011
At least running the AIDA64 stress test didn’t reveal any hidden charges — temperature, fan speed — stayed the same. Is that the power consumption has risen a little. What performance gain do we get? Somewhere it is less, somewhere more.
For example, in synthetics, the speed of packing and unpacking archives in 7-ZIP accelerated by 4-6%.
7% better single core performance in CineBench R23 and 9% more efficiency when all together. nine0011
Yes, and other, conditionally, work tasks give about the same increase. On average, for all benchmarks, it is 4%.
But in games, even adding just 300 MHz can significantly improve gameplay.
In Assassin’s Creed Valhalla at Ultra settings and 50% overclocked Ryzen 5 5500 rendering showed an 18% improvement in very rare events. It was 51, and now it’s 60 fps. At the same time, the average fps did not change much, by only 2 points.
Total War Saga: Troy is more demanding on the CPU, especially with the extreme grass quality and army size. So, in relative terms, it seems to be good too — plus 11% in terms of 0.1% Low. But in fact, it’s only 1 fps — it was 27, but now it’s 28.
How does the RAM frequency affect the performance of the Ryzen 5 5500?
While this isn’t the end of the story, perhaps overclocking the memory will work wonders to make up for the minimal L3 cache. Now let’s run it.
Attention, important moment! In this section, we returned the processor frequency to stock, that is, 4.2 GHz, in order to evaluate the memory.
As a result, we were able to start the system and pass all the tests at the speed of «RAM» 4733 MHz. Why did you have to manually fix the timings and the supply voltage of the modules at around 1.45 V.
We don’t stay long on synthetics. Only one of our 4 benchmarks felt an improvement. Obviously, this is working with memory in AIDA64 — plus 20-22% to all indicators, except for latency. RAM access time increased by 14%. nine0011
What’s interesting in Assassin’s Creed Valhalla, very rare events have improved in the same way as when overclocking cores — plus 17% frame rate. Other indicators reacted more modestly — 4-7% bonus.
But Total War Saga: Troy experienced no difference — on the verge of statistical error.
In general, the bottom line is that you should not count on overclocking the Ryzen 5 5500. It is quite productive at its frequency, so the vast majority of users are better off staying at it. The same applies to memory — even with a noticeable overclock, the increase in performance will not amaze you. nine0011
How does the Ryzen 5 5500 handle tough games?
It’s time to let the budget «rock» show its abilities in real conditions — we throw it in 8 tough games in Full HD resolution.
Battlefield 2042 launched in 128 player mode. Graphics on «Ultra», no ray tracing. If you want to understand in detail, then you can pay attention to minor twitches from time to time. But it’s like a mosquito on the windshield of a Camaro at 82 fps on average. That is, it is not noticeable at all. Management is smooth and comfortable. nine0011
If the video card allows, with the Ryzen 5 5500 you can safely twist the maximum graphics in CD: Warzone. This game often indulges, it does not always start normally from the first match. And here everything is perfect right from the doorstep — an average of 118 fps and no questions, even if you want to find fault.
But Dying Light 2 did not fly as beautifully as the previous ones — only on high graphics. And there are questions about the video. Even after the 6th run in the same location, noticeable stuttering occurs, which is also visible in the very rare events at the 10 fps level. What they just didn’t try — different settings, life hacks. There is a suspicion that the latest update of the game is to blame. If this moment with subfreezes is taken out of brackets, then everything else is OK — an average of 123 fps, obedient control and most of the time a smooth video sequence. nine0011
Far Cry 6 launched with Ultra graphics and beams turned off. For some reason, this time the monitoring program did not make friends with the game. Therefore, the real fps is 15-20% higher than what you see on the screen now. Although, friends, even yes, we have an average of 85 fps and quite comfortable gameplay. Unless sometimes there can be light, insignificant, twitches.
In total, all 8 heavy games Ryzen 5 5500 pulled perfectly. With a powerful graphics card, he provided an average frequency of 80 fps and above. At the same time, in some projects, we fixed small and rare twitches, and monitoring did not always display the real frame rate. Which by the way was repeated in Halo. But for the average user, these are all not interesting little things. Therefore, for the vast majority of heavy games on the maximum graphics, the Ryzen 5 5500 fits perfectly. nine0011
Well, we have enough data, it’s time to compare them with the price of processors and answer the main question: «Ryzen 5 5500 — the best budget employee in early summer 2022?»
Dear friends, we have also updated our approach to conclusions. This time we are displaying Hotline.ua price analytics for processors and motherboards for them. It is clear that the price tags change almost every hour, but the gradation between participants is often maintained by sellers.
Prices for processors in Hotline at the end of June 2022:
- Ryzen 5 5600X from 7 044 UAH
- Core i5-11400F from 4 636 UAH
- Ryzen 5 5500 from 4 500 UAH
- Ryzen 5 3600 from 4 125 UAH
- Intel Core i5-10400F from 3 985 UAH
- Core i3-12100F from 3 702 UAH
- LGA1700 | i3-12100F | from 2560 UAH
- LGA1200 | i5-10400F | i5-11400F | from 1300 UAH
- Socket AM4 | All Ryzen | from 1300 UAH
Please note that the prices for Core i5 were taken for models with the F index. They are the same in terms of power, only cheaper due to the lack of a video core. When assembling a system with a discrete graphics card, it makes sense to buy them. So, considering all the synthetic and gaming tests, the new AMD Ryzen 5 5500 is really one of the best right now. in 8 threads, even if they are so cool, in the future, the 12-thread Ryzen 5 5500 is still better.
And if you want to take a video card with a noticeable dependence on the speed of the interface to it and are worried that you will not have enough PCIe 3.0, then you should consider building on the Core i5-11400F.
In work tasks, it is only slightly worse than our review hero, but in games it looks better. On average by 6-12% for very rare events and average fps.
The comparison with the Core i5-10400 also ended in favor of the Ryzen 5 5500. It is 20% better on average in synthetics and 3-9% in games. Plus new architecture. The graphics card interface both support version 3.