If you have not heard in regards to the Ryzen 5 3500X till now it is probably as a result of this CPU is generally being offered and marketed to OEMs and system integrators, relying on the place you’re situated. Initially it was reported as an OEM-only half for the Chinese market, however then appeared in different areas similar to India. Turns out you’ll be able to just about purchase the 3500X wherever, although the situations will differ from one area to a different.
In China it seems to be promoting as a daily retail product that is available in a field with cooler and all. In Australia, you’ll be able to solely buy the 3500X in a pre-built PC. Which nonetheless begs the query, how properly does it perfom and what’s modified from the R5 3600?
We’ve heard by means of channels that with a view to purchase the 3500X from AMD to make use of as a system integrator, there are fairly a number of hoops to leap by means of. You need to allow them to know your plans, what sort of system you propose to construct, and the amount you count on to maneuver. We’ve additionally heard they’re solely being offered in giant volumes, so 1,000+ chips.
Anyway, the Ryzen 5 3500X has been obtainable for buy at AliExpress for over a month and the second they have been listed we snapped one up for what amounted to $157 delivered. It’s been sitting on our desk for a number of weeks now, so we thought we higher check this factor out or it was simply by no means going to occur.
Let’s rapidly go over the specs of the 3500X…
Like the 3600, it packs half a dozen Zen 2 cores that come clocked at 3.6 GHz for the bottom. Depending on the workload they’ll clock as excessive as 4.1 GHz out of the field, simply 100 MHz decrease than that of the 3600. The key distinction is the dearth of SMT (simultaneous multithreading) help for the 3500X, the place the R5 3600 packs 6-cores / 12-threads, the 3500X options simply 6 threads, very similar to the Core i5-9400F.
Is dropping SMT help for a ~30% low cost from the R5 3600 value it? (in Australia, once more, this may differ in your location). For US-based consumers it’s only a 20% low cost, so we doubt that shall be well worth the financial savings, in any case we are going to know shortly. For testing we have now the standard battery of gaming and productiveness benchmarks.
All CPUs have been examined with 16GB of DDR4-3200 CL14 reminiscence and a RTX 2080 Ti to scale back any potential GPU bottleneck. All the newest Windows 10 patches, video games, drivers and BIOS updates obtainable on the time of testing have been put in. Let’s get into the outcomes.
First up we have now the Cinebench R20 multi-core outcomes and right here the 3500X doesn’t look nice. Yes, it’s nonetheless sooner than the Core i5-9400F, however it’s slower than even the first-gen Ryzen 5 1600X. It is 6% slower than the R5 2600 and a whopping 27% slower than the R5 3600.
Naturally, for these working desirous to run core-heavy functions, the 3500X won’t be the very best match.
The benefit the Ryzen 5 3500X has over the equally priced first and second-gen Ryzen elements (1600 and 2600 are 6-core/12-thread processors) is the improved single core efficiency supplied by these Zen 2 cores.
Thus in single-core Cinebench it’s principally on par with the Core i7-8700Okay, making it 25% sooner than the R5 2600 and even 9% sooner than the Core i5-9400F.
AMD’s SMT implementation for first and second-gen Ryzen wasn’t significantly helpful for compression and consequently the 3500X is ready to match the 1600 and 2600 collection processors. That mentioned, it’s 22% slower than the R5 3600, so a pretty big drop in efficiency there.
AMD’s SMT has all the time labored very properly for decompression work, so the 3500X will get blown away as it may solely compete with the Intel Core i5 processors on this check. This time it was 36% slower than the 3600 and 25% slower than the 2600.
As we noticed when testing with Cinebench, for these on the lookout for a funds productiveness processor, the 3500X isn’t it. In V-ray benchmark we see that the 3500X was 6% slower than the outdated Ryzen 5 1600 and nearly 20% slower than the R5 2600.
Things look even worse when working the Corona benchmark, a lot worse in truth. Here the 3500X is just capable of match the Core i5-9400F, which suggests it’s 27% slower than the R5 1600 and 43% slower than the R5 2600. When in comparison with the R5 3600 we’re speaking a couple of 60% improve in render time, so creators on a funds are a lot better off with a Ryzen 2600 or related.
We discover a related story when testing with Blender, the 3500X took 14% longer to finish the workload than a primary technology Ryzen 5 1600, that means it was a lot slower than the R5 2600 and R5 3600.
The removing of SMT help means the 3500X loses fairly a little bit of its energy effectivity. For instance, the place it was 14% slower than the first-gen R5 1600, whole system draw is simply 10% decrease, That determine consists of all system elements, however nonetheless you’d count on the newer 7nm half to honest a lot better. Yet once more, energy consumption is hardly a priority right here as 141-watt whole system load for a core-heavy workload is nothing.
Time for some recreation benchmarks and we’ll begin issues off with Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey at 1080p utilizing the very prime quality settings. As a reminder, we’re utilizing a high-end RTX 2080 Ti for testing.
Here the 3500X is similar to the Core i5-9400F together with the primary and second-gen Ryzen 5 elements. That’s to say efficiency is nice, however we get the sensation it gained’t be lengthy earlier than 6-thread processors such because the 3500X and 9400F go the best way of the Core i5-7600Okay.
ACO does turn into a bit of extra GPU sure at 1440p and this helps the 3500X out because it’s not capable of match the Ryzen 5 2600X, and actually ship related efficiency to the R5 3600. Performance from the mid-range to prime finish is fairly related below these extra GPU restricted check situations.
Battlefield V is an instance the place 6 threads and even eight threads have gotten inadequate. Here the 3500X delivered the same stage of efficiency to a Core i7-7700Okay and Core i5-9400F, and though the typical body charge appears fairly good it’s the 1% low efficiency that suffers.
Granted the sport continues to be very playable and considerably higher than the quad-core 7600Okay, however you will note noticeably bigger body dips when in comparison with the 12-threaded and higher CPUs.
The 1% low efficiency was improved by 11% with the R5 1600 and 14% for the R5 2600. However, it’s the R5 3600 that actually steps issues up, boosting 1% low efficiency by nearly 30%.
The state of affairs doesn’t change at 1440p, relatively issues simply worsen for the 6-core processor. Here the 3500X nonetheless suffers a giant dip in 1% low efficiency and consequently the R5 1600 was 25% sooner, so not an excellent consequence for the reasonably priced Third-gen Ryzen processor.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider isn’t fairly as CPU demanding as the primary two titles, and consequently the 3500X performs fairly properly. It’s solely capable of match the 2600X and 9400F, however total fairly an excellent consequence.
The margins are related at 1440p, the 3500X does slip barely behind the 2600X and 9400F, however once more total efficiency was first rate.
The Ryzen 5 3500X additionally struggles a bit in The Division 2, delivering poor 1% low efficiency when in comparison with even the first-gen Ryzen 5 1600. Again we see that the typical body charge efficiency is sort of good, however it’s the 1% low efficiency that it’s best to deal with right here.
Even at 1440p the 3500X falls behind the R5 1600, albeit by only some frames, however you wouldn’t count on a 6-core Zen 2 processors to fall wanting a first-gen half.
Far Cry New Dawn is the least CPU demanding recreation we have examined up to now, so unsurprisingly the 3500X does not undergo poor 1% low efficiency right here, in truth it’s a bit of higher than the 3600 in that regard. Overall efficiency was the identical and never an amazing deal higher than the 2nd-gen Ryzen.
At 1440p we see the identical habits, so for older and fewer demanding titles the six-threaded 3500X shall be completely tremendous, no surprises there.
Hitman 2 performed properly on the 3500X, definitely properly sufficient regardless of the 1% lows taking a much bigger hit than what you’ll expertise on a contemporary eight and 12-thread processor. Performance total was similar to the Ryzen 5 2600, not less than when testing at 1080p.
Even at 1440p the weaker than anticipated 1% low efficiency persists and though common body charges are much like the 2nd-gen 2600 and 2600X, the minimal body charges are a lot decrease.
Finally we have now Total War: Three Kingdoms and right here the 3500X is similar to the first-gen Ryzen 5 1600X, so the 3600 was a lot better when 1% low figures. Here the 3600 was nearly 40% sooner which is an enormous efficiency uplift due to the usage of SMT.
Once we transfer to 1440p the place the GPU is crucial issue, all margins are nullified and right here the 3500X performs very similar to another CPU in our chart, it’s simply the R5 1600 that falls a bit of off the tempo right here.
Is It Worth It?
That’s all of the blue bar graphs we have now for you (nearly!), now it’s time to determine if the Ryzen 5 3500X is value shopping for, must you come throughout it. For these shopping for in the present day, the very best worth we’ve discovered on-line is $155 and as we mentioned earlier, that makes it about ~20% cheaper than the R5 3600 within the US. For fellow Aussies, it’s about 30% cheaper.
Depending on pricing in your area for first, and specifically second-gen Ryzen, the 3500X might or might not be value it. In the States, the Ryzen 5 2600 might be had for simply $120 and albeit at that worth it’s a a lot better deal, and that’s no matter what you propose on doing along with your system.
For productiveness duties the R5 2600 is clearly the higher alternative because it was sooner than the 3500X in each single core-heavy workload we ran. Couple the higher efficiency with the cheaper price and you’ve got an apparent winner. Even in relation to gaming, the superior IPC of the 3500X’s Zen 2 cores cannot make up for the dearth of SMT help and to raised illustrate that, right here’s a have a look at some up to date price per body graphs.
Here we will see when body charge efficiency at a 7-game common, the 3500X was solely capable of match the first-gen Ryzen 5 1600. You’re spending 36% extra per body and that makes it a poor worth alternative for US and Australian avid gamers proper now.
Moreover, in case you solely had the selection of a 6-core/6-thread processor for about $150, the 3500X or the 9400F, we’d go along with Intel each time for gaming. But because the Ryzen 5 2600 exists, that’s the apparent alternative right here.
For these involved about gaming efficiency not simply in the present day, however in a yr or two, the 3500X makes even much less sense. If we have a look at 1% low efficiency throughout the 7 video games examined you get a good suggestion of how restricted this CPU will ultimately be. Here it was the slowest of the trendy processors and on common the R5 3600 was 37% sooner, whereas the R5 2600 was 17% sooner.
In the absence of first or second-gen Ryzen elements with extra threads, would the 3500X value shopping for? If you are largely gaming we’d suggest the Core i5-9400F as a substitute, whereas for productiveness you could possibly go both approach. The precise state of affairs is that AMD is offloading Ryzen 3600 processors that did not cross high quality assurance to OEMs, and for funds pre-built PCs, this may make sense.
For shopping for off the shelf although, given the guarantee points you may run into with the 3500X, the Core i5-9400F looks like the higher alternative at $150. As a 6-core/6-thread processor, the 9400F most likely isn’t the wisest funding both. The greatest funds CPU proper now could be the Ryzen 5 2600 or Ryzen 5 2400G (in case you want built-in graphics) or coughing up the additional $50 for the Ryzen 5 3600, which is an astonishing CPU for the cash that may little doubt maintain up properly for years to come back.