Gadgetory

today we're reviewing and these risin 530 600 X the $50 more expensive counterpart to the r5 3600 that we already gave a high review the 3600 x like the previous 2600 X or 1600 X counterparts and the previous generations is functionally just a higher clocked 3600 out of the box without the need to do anything to reach those clocks and that's about all it is there's no difference in core count there's no difference in cash there's no difference in anything except for the frequencies out of the box and it's an extra 50 bucks so what we're looking at today is is it worth actually paying 25 percent more for the amount of performance you gain we'll be looking at a more limited set of benchmarks for this one because it's pretty straightforward before that this video is brought to you by coursers hydro x water coin series of course our strength is bringing water cooling to the masses and it has built out cooling solutions with industry leaders to help newcomers get into open-loop cooling of course hair has fittings adaptors GP water blocked CPU water blocks pump has combos and radiators all available in the hydro X line as you can see in our footage these kits can be used to build the beautiful open loop systems learn more at the link in the description below so if we're going over the benchmark charts in a bit we won't be rehashing the same thing we did in the 3600 you we're not going to be comparing the 3600 x versus all the competing intel parts all the old gen am deep parts the numbers will be on the chart but not gonna read through it if you want to see that comparison check the 3600 view it's the same thing for this one all we're doing is looking at the 3600 x versus the 3600 and if it's worth it that's really all we care about for this one separately we're not going to show every single game and every single production workload because the story is more or less told within just a couple of the charts so no need to go through 30 minutes of the same numbers and overclocking we were able to get the 3600 X to the same frequency as every other Rison chip we've worked with so far which is 4.3 gigahertz all core we could not overclock it manually past that point and as far as the question of PBO that's in a separate video of ours if it's not up already it will be shortly so yeah 4.3 gigahertz if you're at 4.3 all core of 3600 X it's gonna be the same as 4.3 all core in the 3600 just like the 1700 acts the same clocks as an overclocked 1700 would give you the same results so those numbers will not be in the chart because you can just look at the 3600 at 4.3 and that's what it is higher performance is seen largely in the scenarios where it is seen because of the higher single core frequency so that's the biggest deal here so when you do see a higher performance it's typically because the boosting frequency with a single or single core dual thread scenario is going to be higher with the XQ then with the not XQ it's just a question of again does it matter is it worth it so let's get into the numbers this will be a pretty easy one today will go through games a couple of them a couple of production workloads and then power Assassin's Creed origins is an interesting demonstration as it shows performance scaling with both frequency and cores for the r5 3600 X the result ends up being 118 FPS average which pushes beyond the 4.3 gigahertz all core 3600 OC of 116 FPS average and this we think is because of the dual threat boost of the 3600 X being 4.4 gigahertz whereas the 3600 OC was locked to 4.3 gigahertz all core and will never hit 4.4 that extra 100 megahertz on two threads helps in some scenarios like this one scaling versus the 3600 stock result is 3.1 percent higher we clocked the 3600 x2 4.3 gigahertz all core but it's literally the same as the r5 3600 once you overclock them to the same settings so there's no point in going through all the retesting again the 1440p result shows the same thing the 3600 X scales better with its limited thread boosting than the 3600 OC unsurprisingly that's how we can move on to the next game f1 2018 is next and likes frequency and IPC for this one the r5 3600 x stock CPU ends up at 1% ahead of the 3600 CPU the 3600 at 4.3 gigahertz lands at 231 FPS average or 0.5% ahead of the 3600 x stock with an error predictably 1440p has all tests within error margins of one another we are not able to determine a difference of this test and they are all functionally equal civilization 6 provides a look at turn time processing on average in the seconds rather than FPS the r5 3600 Acts completes the average turn in 35 seconds with a 3600 completing the average turn in 36 seconds civilization is more frequency dependence than other games again clearly illustrated by the 9900 K 5.1 gigahertz result exactly matching the 9700 K 5.1 results and so the 3600 acts benefits from a 2.8 percent time requirement reduction in exchange for the 25% higher cost the all core OC is close but not quite there GTA 5 has the 3600 acts at 106.8 FPS average or tied with the 4.3 gigahertz all core OC 3600 results of 106 FPS average we normally round to the nearest whole number for these but when the difference is what it is here might as well read it out the r5 3600 stock CPU finishes with a 104.3 FPS average again there's no real benefit here although differences are measurable they are indistinguishable to the end user they are not perceptible all the but you can measure them with software so this couldn't be nearly gone with an all core OC once again and even that is not particularly worth it 1440p results are the same again with barely any difference between the 3600 SKU CPUs we are at 103.5 FPS average at the low end and 106 point 2 FPS average at the high end ignoring the 3600 smt off result of 108 point 2 FPS average the 3600 to 3600 x gain is 2.6 percent in exchange for 25% more money shadow of the Tomb Raider is among our last two games the 3600 acts ends up at 140 FPS average which places it as tied with the 3600 all core OC of 139 FPS average and imperceptibly ahead of the r5 3600 stock CPU gaining just 1.7 percent hitman 2 with dx12 tested the 3600 acts at 117 FPS average lowers within reasonable run to run variants of the others this results positions the r5 3600 as 1.7 percent the head of the 3600 stock CPU are particularly impressive and tied with the r5 3600 4.3 gigahertz all core OC 1440p key the scaling and positioning just with everything slightly lower the r5 3,600 X ends up at 115 8.6 FPS average with the 3600 at 114 FPS average the overclocked is functionally tied with the 3600 X once again moving on to a couple of the production tests because frankly it's it's really not worth showing all of them at all well just show three here a 7-zip is next for this one we test compression and decompression these results like almost all the others are an average of averages so we're looking at a lot of data points for each benchmark and we're averaging the average his which gives us a pretty accurate number the test is measured in millions of instructions per second which will abbreviate as MIPS the r5 3600 x lands at 56,000 595 myths for compression which expectedly ties it with the 3600 overclock and as the two with an error of one another first of the stock 3600 the improvement is the same as the 4.3 gigahertz all core 3600 it's 2.5 percent uplift as the maximum we gain meaning that $50 it gets you 2.5 percent over baseline making this a hard argument over aim these cheaper option even ignoring the overclocking decompression is next for this chart the 3600 acts ends up at 72,000 maps allowing the 4.3 gigahertz all core 3600 elite of 70 4600 MIT's or a 3.4 percent increase in performance thanks to the fixed all core frequency versus the r5 3600 CPU the 3600 ex sees an increase of just 3% Adobe Photoshop is next as we mentioned in the 3600 review this is a heavily frequency bound workload which means that the rise in CPU is in general fall below Intel's for our comparison today the 3600 acts ends up at 966 points where higher is better as a calculation of transform warp filter and other effects the r5 3600 stock CPU ends up at 950 seven points the improvement over stock is 0.9 percent with a 3600 at 4.3 gigahertz allowing an additional jaunt of 1.3 percent over the 3600 X in this scenario just going with the 3600 makes the most sense the array is a render made by Kaos group a lot of the workstation users in our have asked us to benchmark this one lately so here's what we came up with for CPU performance 3,600 X finishes the round around the CPU one point for three minutes which is 0.02 minutes or one point two seconds ahead of the r5 3600 stock CPU the Delta is hardly even measurable it's actually it's it's right on the edge of where the our data accuracy cuts off the decimal point stop after the hundredths for this test so measurable certainly not perceptible and measurable only with a lot of test passes so no difference once again power consumption has measured at the 12 volt rails is up next in blender this has the r5 3600 X at roughly 80 Watts about equal with the r5 3600 in the same workload the overclocked to 4.3 gigahertz on the 3600 pushes it to 90 watts which is because we've had to increase the voltage significantly to hold stability in this test as a reminder we test the Intel CPU properly by disabling MCE and allowing turbo boost limits to exist as spec defines and exiting spec would allow higher power consumption obviously so you would see higher numbers here if you enable the MCE on say an asu sport there's no meaningful change in power consumed in this test for the 3600 versus the 3600 acts when both are stock for gaming power consumption the r5 3600 acts ends up consuming about the same power as the 3600 lining at 55 watts for this workload overclocking doesn't blow out the consumption here as we're altima tolima today what the application demands which is comparatively little when looking at blender previously over all them there's a 25% increase in price between the 3600 and the 3600 acts and the performance increases don't even come close to matching that CPU is at the high end of the line can get away with price bumps like that because customers spending $400 plus on a CPU want to have the biggest numbers the most core is the highest frequency no matter what the 3600 acts is towards the last expensive end of the Rison 3000 stack so it has to justify every dollar it costs over the next CPU down or in this case the next CPU up as well and again as a reminder like b7 the 3600 review some of a.m. these biggest competition this generation is its previa half step generation 2000 series processors are on pretty sharp sales right now the 2600 X we've seen around $160 give or take which is a really good deal for a processor that we were pretty happy with the 2600 is even cheaper you want to follow the same advice as in this review you could even step down to a 2600 around $140 these days overclock it's a 4.0 or 4.1 and you'd effectively have a 2600 X that said obviously there's a performance increase with a 3000 series so it just kind of depends on how much money you're willing to spend and where you need to pinch pennies and that's entirely up to your situation but for the 3600 X we come to the same conclusion we've come to often in the past which is you're really only buying this thing if actually it's even harder to justify than the previous ones with the previous generations like the 1600 we could say look there's a pretty big jump in performance if you overclock it it's easy to overclock just throw in all core OC on there 3.9 gigahertz way before and you have a really damn good processor that can beat the stock 1600 X but that was a different time now with overclocking where it is with rising 3,000 more or less being pushed to the max even that angle is difficult where you're within a couple percentage points like 3 max on average anyway between the 3600 to the 3600 X both stock so a 3% performance gain sort of at the best is just not really worth it and not worth $50 so for almost everyone we would say 3,600 over the 3600 X if you really want the 3600 X it's probably because you care enough about that couple percent that you're willing to pay $50 for it to get a higher single core boost frequency because that's what you're getting with it in terms of out of the box back in terms of overclocking if your intent is to buy a rise in CPU throw an all core OC on there and never touch it again it doesn't matter what you buy technically the 3600 and the 3600 X overclocked to the same value will produce the same numbers but we don't know if the 3600 ax might be bend a little bit better so maybe there's some silicon lottery gambling in there if you buy the 3600 and so the 3600 X we're not sure we don't have a sample size of hundreds to check but that would be the only real consideration is silicon Bening for overclocking quality and with these chips when you're fighting between four point two and four point three it's sort of stops mattering especially since the stock 3600 axis and outperform and all core ocf four point three in cases where a single single core dual thread scenarios would matter so that'll be the review of short version not worth it we still really like the r5 3600 and think that's a fantastic processor at the price Intel's got some competition towards the higher end of the stack the 9600 K is not really in in our consideration for the most part at this level I won't go over all the reasons why again in this one if you want to see it just watch the r5 3600 review or if you're lazy you could skip to the end of it we typically don't recommend that though because you'll miss all the context and then for an D competition versus itself the 2000 series like the 2,700 2,700 X those are going to be similarly priced these days so if you need the extra cores and you can sacrifice some of the frequency that might be a consideration as well thank you for watching that's for this one subscribe for you get a stir that gamers Nexus dotnet to help us out directly by buying something like a tool kit or a mod bat or go to patreon.com/scishow miss Nexus I'll see you all next time