Six-core Ryzen 5 processors gained widespread acceptance long before AMD could move to the Zen 2 microarchitecture. Both the first and second generation of six-core Ryzen 5 processors were able to become quite popular choices in their price segment due to the policy pursued by AMD: to offer customers more advanced multi-threading, than Intel processors can provide, at the same or even lower price. AMD 2017-2018 processors in the $200-$250 price range not only had six processing cores, but also supported SMT virtual multi-core technology, thanks to which they could execute up to 12 threads simultaneously. This ability of theirs became a very important trump card in the confrontation with the Core i5: in many computing tasks, the Ryzen 5 of the first generations really surpassed the options that Intel had at that time.
However, for unconditional leadership in their weight category, this was clearly not enough for them. Gaming tests revealed the same unpleasant picture for AMD: neither the first nor the second generation of the six-core Ryzen 5 could compete with the representatives of the Intel Core i5 series. In modern games, the performance of mid-range graphics cards, including the GeForce RTX 2060 and GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, is noticeably limited even , not to mention the fact that such processors are categorically contraindicated for faster GPUs. In other words, AMD processors of past generations were simply closed to high-end gaming configurations.
But this review would not have appeared on our site if it were not for the time for big changes, because now the next, third generation of Ryzen processors has appeared in the AMD assortment. We have already had the opportunity more than once to marvel at how successful the , which came last month to AMD consumer processors: our site has reviews and and . But today we will see how this microarchitecture can fit into simpler processors - with six processing cores - exactly in those chips that are dearly loved by users for the combination of sufficient performance for most cases and a relatively low price.
The new Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600 really have a good chance of finally winning the title of the best processors for gaming builds of the "optimal" level (in the terminology of our "”), that is, those that provide sufficient frame rates in Full HD and WQHD resolutions. The novelties received not only a new microarchitecture with a 15% increase in specific performance, but also a number of other improvements due to the use of TSMC's 7nm process technology and a fundamentally new chiplet design. For example, increased clock frequencies, reduced heat dissipation, and at the same time a more flexible and omnivorous memory controller.
As a result, from the Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600, one can expect not only unconditional superiority over the competitor's processors with a price of $ 200-250 when creating and processing digital content, but also much more important achievements from the point of view of the mass user: eliminating the previously existing backlog from the Core i5 in gaming loads. How destined to live up to such expectations, we will see in this review.
Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600 in detail
The Ryzen 5 processor family used to include products from three fundamentally different categories. It included both six-core and quad-core representatives, as well as quad-core processors with an integrated graphics core. But with the transition to model numbers from the fourth thousand, the nomenclature has become simpler: the quad-core Ryzen 3000 with the Zen 2 microarchitecture now does not exist at all, and among the new Ryzen 5 there is only one quad-core - the Ryzen 5 3400G hybrid chip based on the Zen + microarchitecture with integrated Vega graphics.
If we do not take into account APUs that differ from the “classic” Ryzen both ideologically and architecturally, then AMD has only two Ryzen 5 options in its assortment - the six-core Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600. By and large, these processors are very similar to each other. friend. If we talk about formal characteristics, then we can see only a 200 MHz discrepancy in the clock frequency in them, although at the price of Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600 they are much more significantly apart - by as much as 25%. This can be explained not by the higher performance of the older six-core processor, but by the fact that it is equipped with a larger and more efficient Wraith Spire cooler compared to the simple Wraith Stealth in the younger model.
However, the operation of the Ryzen 5 3600 with a standard small-sized cooling system seems quite acceptable, because the thermal package of this processor is formally set at 65, not 95 watts.
| Kernels / threads | Base frequency, MHz | Turbo frequency, MHz | L3 cache, MB | TDP, W | Chiplets | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ryzen 9 3950X | 16/32 | 3,5 | 4,7 | 64 | 105 | 2×CCD + I/O | $749 |
| Ryzen 9 3900X | 12/24 | 3,8 | 4,6 | 64 | 105 | 2×CCD + I/O | $499 |
| Ryzen 7 3800X | 8/16 | 3,9 | 4,5 | 32 | 105 | CCD+I/O | $399 |
| Ryzen 7 3700X | 8/16 | 3,6 | 4,4 | 32 | 65 | CCD+I/O | $329 |
| Ryzen 5 3600X | 6/12 | 3,8 | 4,4 | 32 | 95 | CCD+I/O | $249 |
| Ryzen 5 3600 | 6/12 | 3,6 | 4,2 | 32 | 65 | CCD+I/O | $199 |
Against the background of other Ryzen 3000 processors, six-core representatives stand out not only with a smaller number of computing cores, but also with slightly lower frequencies. That, however, does not at all reduce their attractiveness. Suffice it to recall that the new Ryzen 5 3600 in terms of passport frequencies corresponds to the older six-core from the previous generation, Ryzen 5 2600X, but also has a significantly more progressive Zen 2 microarchitecture, which has a 15% improved IPC indicator (number of instructions executed per clock cycle). All this means that the new Ryzen 5 should certainly be significantly more productive than their predecessors.
Like the next-generation octa-cores, the Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600 are built on a dual-chip scheme and consist of a single chiplet with computing cores (CCD) and an input / output chiplet (cIOD), which are interconnected by the second generation Infinity Fabric bus. The basic CCD chiplet in these processors does not differ from the 7nm semiconductor chip used in the older models, produced at TSMC facilities. It includes two quad-core CCX (Core Complex) complexes, but in the case of the Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600, one core is disabled in each of them.
At the same time, disabling the cores did not affect the amount of cache memory in the third level. The Zen 2 microarchitecture CCXs have 16MB of L3 cache per CCX, and all of that is available in the Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600. In other words, both six-core processors have a 32MB L3 cache that has grown from what offered in the last generation of Ryzen, twice.
Standard in six-core and cIOD chipset. This die contains a memory controller, Infinity Fabric logic, a PCI Express bus controller and SoC elements and is manufactured at the facilities of GlobalFoundries using a 12nm process technology. The complete unification of six-core components with older Ryzen 3000 models means that they inherit all the advantages of older brothers: seamless support for high-speed DDR4 memory, the ability to asynchronously clock the Infinity Fabric bus, and support for the PCI Express 4.0 bus with double the bandwidth.
For detailed testing, we took both new six-core processors: both the Ryzen 5 3600X and the Ryzen 5 3600. However, as it turned out, it was possible to limit ourselves to one particular model. In practice, the differences in the operation of the Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600 are even smaller than reflected in the specifications.
Here, for example, is how the actual operating frequencies of the Ryzen 5 3600X are distributed in Cinebench R20 when loaded with a different number of cores.
Operating frequencies lie in the range from 4,1 to 4,35 GHz. With the Ryzen 5 3600, the picture is similar, but with the upper limit inherent in the specifications, due to which the frequency range shifts slightly downward - from 4,0 to 4,2 GHz. But at the same time, for example, with a 50% load on computing resources, the Ryzen 5 3600X is only 25-50 MHz faster than the younger model.
In addition, one more curious observation can be made from the graphs. Even with an all-core load, new generation AMD six-core processors are able to keep frequencies above 4,0-4,1 GHz. This means that alternatives offered by Intel in the same price category no longer have a significant superiority in clock speed. After all, even the older six-core Core i5-9600K, when fully loaded on all cores, operates only at a frequency of 4,3 GHz, and, for example, the popular Core i5-9400, when all cores are turned on, reduces its frequency to 3,9 GHz. It turns out that in terms of specifications, the Core i5 does not have any convincing advantages over Ryzen 5 at all. The alternatives offered by AMD support the simultaneous execution of twice as many threads due to SMT technology, have a three and a half times more capacious L3 cache, are officially compatible with DDR4-3200 SDRAM, and in addition, they can work with video cards and NVMe drives via the PCI Express 4.0 bus.
True, we need to make an important reservation about PCI Express 4.0 support. It is available only in motherboards built on the X570 chipset, which are relatively expensive and are unlikely to be frequent companions to the Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600. operation of the external interface only in PCI Express 4 mode.
But the most important thing is that, despite this limitation, new processors still work with old boards after updating the BIOS (suitable versions should be based on AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.1 and later libraries). And not only supporters of a lean approach to choosing a personal computer configuration will certainly want to take advantage of this, but also many advanced users, because in reality, X570-based boards look very overpriced.
Motherboard on X570 is optional
AMD introduced the new X570 chipset at the same time as the Ryzen 3000 processors, so you involuntarily get the feeling that this chipset is the most suitable option for new CPUs. Indeed, despite the fact that Ryzen 3000 chips continue to use the same Socket AM4 processor socket as their predecessors and are compatible with a significant number of previously released motherboards for this platform, a certain part of the benefits of the Zen 2 architecture can only be revealed in in the case when Ryzen 3000 is installed on new generation motherboards. More specifically, only X570-based boards can offer double-bandwidth PCI Express 4.0 bus support, and legacy boards won't be able to enable PCI Express 4.0. AMD's marketing department strongly emphasizes the importance of this functionality, which may give the impression that the use of old motherboards with new processors is a decision that entails some negative consequences.
But in fact, the need to support PCI Express 4.0 at the moment raises serious doubts. Existing gaming video cards with this high-speed interface (and there are only two of them: Radeon RX 5700 XT and RX 5700) do not receive any discernible performance benefits from increasing the interface bandwidth. NVMe drives that work via PCI Express 4.0 are currently also very narrowly distributed. In addition, they are all based on a rather weak Phison PS5016-E16 controller and lose in real performance to the best drives with PCI Express 3.0 interface, that is, there is little real sense in their use. Therefore, support for PCI Express 4.0 in the X570 is just a reserve for the future with near-zero utility in the current realities.
Does this mean that purchasing motherboards based on the X570 has no practical meaning? Far from it: in addition to the new version of PCI Express, this chipset offers significantly improved possibilities for implementing other external interfaces. It has more PCI Express lanes for additional devices and expansion slots, and supports more high-speed USB 3.1 Gen2 ports.
Here is how its main characteristics look in comparison with the parameters of the previous generation chipsets:
| X570 | X470 | B450 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCI interface | 4.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Number of PCIe lanes | 16 | 8 | 6 |
| USB 3.2 Gen2 ports | 8 | 2 | 2 |
| USB 3.2 Gen1 ports | 0 | 6 | 2 |
| USB 2.0 ports | 4 | 6 | 6 |
| SATA ports | 8 | 8 | 4 |
Thus, solutions based on the new chipset simply must have significantly wider and more up-to-date capabilities.
In addition, there is another weighty argument in favor of the X570 platform. The fact is that boards based on this chip were designed for Ryzen 3000 processors from the very beginning, while motherboards of past generations were created at a time when older Ryzen processors had no more than eight cores and a maximum thermal package of 95 watts. Therefore, only new motherboards really take into account the fact that Socket AM4 processors can carry up to sixteen processing cores and have increased energy appetites, as well as the fact that current processors do not have artificial memory frequency limits. In other words, the designs of the new boards have received additional optimizations: at least improved DIMM slot routing and enhanced processor power converter circuits, now with at least 10 phases (including "virtual").
But you have to pay for everything. While Socket AM4 motherboards based on X470 start at $130-140, and B450-based motherboards can be bought from just $70, a new motherboard with X570 chipset will cost at least $170. In addition, support for the high-speed PCI Express 570 bus introduced in the X4.0 affected the heat dissipation of the chipset. Previous AMD chipsets were manufactured using 55nm technology, but emitted about 5W of heat, while the new X570 chip, although it moved to a 14nm process technology, dissipates up to 15W. Therefore, it requires active cooling, which complicates the design of motherboards and adds another fan to the system, which contributes to the noise level.
With all this in mind, the use of more affordable motherboards of the past generation, built on X470 or B450 chipsets, especially paired with six-core Ryzen 5 3600 and Ryzen 5 3600X processors, which do not have high power consumption, can be fully justified. Even AMD itself, in anticipation of the release of the new platform, explained that the new Ryzen 3000 processors (almost) will not lose performance if they are installed in compatible Socket AM4 boards of the past generation. From the company's point of view, the X570 is a flagship-level platform, and not all users of new processors need it. For the mid-priced Ryzen 5 3600 and Ryzen 5 3600X, more affordable boards may be suitable, according to AMD itself.
But in fact, fears that the third-generation Ryzen in inexpensive motherboards of the previous generation will work in something worse than in the new platform still remain. Therefore, we decided to take one of these boards and check everything with our own hands.
The experiments were carried out with a budget ASRock B450M Pro4 motherboard based on the B450 chipset, which today can be bought for as little as $80. Recently, several BIOS versions have appeared for this board, built on the basis of the current AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3 libraries, and this ensures its compatibility with the Ryzen 3000. And indeed, after uploading one of these firmware to the board, the Ryzen 5 3600X test processor starts up and works in it without any problem. But let's check the details.
Infinity memory support and overclocking Fabric. There were no obstacles to the choice of high-speed memory modes on the board with the B450 chipset. After installing the Ryzen 5 3600X in it, we were able to easily activate the DDR4-3600 mode, which AMD considers the “gold standard” for its new generation processors in terms of performance.
Moreover, the B450-based board offers exactly the same options for manually setting the frequency of the Infinity Fabric bus as the versions on the flagship X570.
And this means that, if desired, the memory can be overclocked in the "correct" synchronous mode and beyond the DDR4-3600 mark. For example, with the existing instance of the Ryzen 5 3600X processor, we were able to see stable memory operation in DDR450-4 mode with an Infinity Fabric bus frequency of 3733 MHz with a board based on the B1866 chipset.
Naturally, memory overclocking in asynchronous mode is also possible - here the B450 also does not create any restrictions. However, you need to understand that separate clocking of the memory controller and the Infinity Fabric bus leads to a significant deterioration in latencies and a drop in performance. And what chipset the used motherboard is based on has no effect here. This is true for the B450 and X470 as well as the latest X570.
Overclocking processor via Precision Boost Override. Overclocking Ryzen 3000 processors in the usual ways is a practically useless undertaking, since the automatic overclocking technology Precision Boost 2, which works out of the box, effectively uses all the available frequency potential. Therefore, any attempt to overclock the processor to some fixed frequency values leads to the fact that it turns out to be lower than the maximum nominal frequencies in turbo mode. And this, in turn, means that a small increase in performance with multi-threaded loads is accompanied by a drop in performance in tasks that load only a part of the processor cores.
But in order for enthusiasts to still have the opportunity to fully increase the performance of the Ryzen 3000 above par, AMD came up with a special technology - Precision Boost Override. The bottom line is that the operation of the processor in turbo mode is controlled based on a number of predefined constants that describe the maximum possible frequencies for each processor, consumption, temperatures, voltages, and the like. A certain part of these constants can be changed, and this possibility is fully provided not only by X570-based boards, but also by more affordable solutions.
For example, among the BIOS settings of the ASRock B450M Pro4 board we took for testing, there were tools for changing all four main constants of the Precision Boost Override technology:
- PPT Limit (Package Power Tracking) - limits for processor consumption in watts;
- TDC Limit (Thermal Design Current) - limits for the maximum current supplied to the processor, which is determined by the cooling efficiency of the VRM on the motherboard;
- EDC Limit (Electrical Design Current) - limits for the maximum current supplied to the processor, which is determined by the VRM circuitry on the motherboard;
- Precision Boost Overide Scalar - the coefficient of dependence of the voltage applied to the processor on its frequency.
In addition, among the settings provided by the board on the B450, there is also MAX CPU Boost Clock Override - a new parameter for Ryzen 3000 processors, which allows you to increase the maximum frequency allowed by Precision Boost 0 technology by 200-2 MHz.
Thus, boards on X570 and on B450 or X470 provide exactly the same level of access to the parameters responsible for configuring the processor frequency in turbo mode. That is, the dynamic overclocking of the Ryzen 3000 on cheap boards is limited only by the design of their processor power converter, which, due to the smaller number of phases, may not produce the necessary currents or overheat. However, this problem, most likely, will not arise with the six-core Ryzen 5 3600 and Ryzen 5 3600X processors: they have rather restrained energy appetites.
Performance. At the time of the release of boards built on the X570 chipset, there were a lot of rumors that they could provide increased performance due to more aggressive Precision Boost 2 settings programmed by default. However, this turned out not to be true: the B450, X470, and X570 boards we tested use exactly the same PPT Limit, TDC Limit, and EDC Limit constants. At least, if we talk about the three motherboards we took for example ASRock B450M Pro4, ASRock X470 Taichi and ASRock X570 Taichi. Which, however, is not at all surprising, because the values of these constants are laid down in the specifications of the CPUs themselves.
| Thermal package | Processors | PPT Limit | TDC Limit | EDC Limit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 65 W | Ryzen 5 3600, Ryzen 7 3700X | 88 W | A 60 | A 90 |
| 95 W | Ryzen 5 3600X | 128 W | A 80 | A 125 |
| 105 W | Ryzen 7 3800X, Ryzen 9 3900X | 142 W | A 95 | A 140 |
It turns out that there are no objective reasons why processors, being installed in motherboards based on the B450, X470 and X570 chipsets, could show different performance.
However, to further confirm this conclusion, we ran a quick test of the Ryzen 5 3600X processor in several applications and games, installing it sequentially in ASRock B450M Pro4, ASRock X470 Taichi and ASRock X570 Taichi.
The results turned out to be natural: Socket AM4 boards based on different chipsets provide completely identical performance. And this means that there are no really good reasons why the six-core Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600 processors should not use the past generation boards.
Moreover, if you prefer boards with B450 or X470 chipsets, you can win in power consumption. Due to the high power of the X570 chipset, boards based on it consistently consume several watts more. And this applies to both work under load and idle state.
The conclusion from all this is simple: you should select a board for the new Ryzen 3000 based on their required expansion options, design convenience, and enough power of the processor power converter. By itself, the set of system logic in modern Socket AM4 systems practically does not solve anything.
Overclocking
Overclocking Ryzen 3000 processors is a thankless task. We were already convinced of this when we tried to overclock the older representatives of the series. AMD was able to use all the frequency potential available in the new 7nm chips, and there was practically no room for manual overclocking. Precision Boost 2 technology implements a very efficient algorithm, which, based on the analysis of the state and load on the processor at any given moment, sets almost the maximum possible frequency for this mode.
As a result, when manually overclocking to some single fixed mark, we will almost certainly lose performance in low-threaded modes, since Precision Boost 2 in them will most likely be able to overclock the processor more. However, we still had to try, if only to make sure: the Ryzen 5 3600 and Ryzen 5 3600X, like their older counterparts, were already overclocked to us.
The older six-core processor, the Ryzen 5 3600X, was able to operate at a maximum frequency of 4,25 GHz, at which stability was achieved when choosing a supply voltage of 1,35 V.
Recall that in the nominal mode, the Ryzen 5 3600X can reach frequencies up to 4,4 GHz, but only at low loads. If all the cores are loaded with work, then its frequency drops to about 4,1 GHz. In other words, our manual overclocking in some sense turns out to be effective, but one can doubt that this result has practical value.
Approximately the same situation has developed with overclocking Ryzen 5 3600 - adjusted for the fact that AMD selects more successful silicon for older models of its processors, and therefore younger processors have a lower ceiling for the maximum achievable frequency. As a result, the Ryzen 5 3600 overclocked to 4,15 GHz when the supply voltage was increased to 1,4 V.
In the complex, such overclocking can even be considered quite meaningful, because the frequency of the Ryzen 5 3600 at full load on all cores drops to 4,0 GHz, and in the case of low-threaded scenarios, such a processor self-overclocks only up to 4,2 GHz. However, the general rule that the Ryzen 3000 in turbo mode will independently conquer frequencies higher than achievable with simple manual overclocking continues to be true. And that is why we do not recommend overclocking "on the forehead": the result, most likely, will not be worth the effort expended.
Separately, it is worth noting that in the overclocking experiments we again encountered the problem of high temperatures of Ryzen processors. To remove heat from the CPU, we used a fairly efficient Noctua NH-U14S air cooler in the experiments, but this did not prevent the processors from heating up to 90-95 degrees even with fairly moderate overclocking and a slight increase in frequency and supply voltage. It seems that this is another serious obstacle that stands in the way of increasing the operating frequencies. The CCD processor die, produced according to the new 7nm process technology, has a very small area, only 74 mm2, and it is extremely difficult to remove the generated heat from its surface. As you can see, even soldering the heat-dissipating cover to the crystal surface does not help.
How does Precision Boost Override work and can Ryzen 5 3600 be converted into Ryzen 5 3600X?
The overclocking fiasco does not mean at all that it is better not to interfere with the operating modes of Ryzen processors. You just need to approach it differently. A noticeably better effect can be achieved not by trying to fix the operating frequency of the CPU at some high value, but by making adjustments to how Precision Boost 2 works. even more aggressive. For this, the Precision Boost Override function exists, which allows you to correct the constants that specify the nature of the frequency behavior within Precision Boost 2. This is the way buyers of the younger Ryzen 5 3600 processor can switch it to modes characteristic of the Ryzen 5 3600X, or even more. fast.
However, increasing the PPT Limit, TDC Limit and EDC Limit limits to the maximum, which are set to 5 W, 3600 A and 88 A by default for the Ryzen 60 90, respectively, will not be enough, since all this will not cancel the frequency limit set in the specifications of this CPU at 4,2, 200 GHz. But if we add to this a 5-MHz increase in this limit through the Max CPU Boost Clock Override setting, simultaneously increasing the Precision Boost Override Scalar coefficient, then the Ryzen 3600 5 can be achieved at frequencies almost like the Ryzen 3600 4,1X (4,4-XNUMX. XNUMX GHz), with similar dynamic frequency control depending on the load.
An additional help with this approach can be a small (about 25-75 mV) increase in the CPU supply voltage, made through the Offset Voltage setting, as well as enabling the Load-Line Calibration function. This should help the Precision Boost 2 engine handle higher clock speeds more confidently.
As a result, the performance of the Ryzen 5 3600 at these settings really pulls up to the level of the Ryzen 5 3600X, which, of course, should please those who want to save $50 out of the blue.
Of course, this trick with adjusting the Precision Boost 2 technology constants can also be done for the older six-core. However, for it, it is most likely that it will not be possible to obtain an equally noticeable increase in frequencies. If the Ryzen 5 3600 can be overclocked by an average of 100-200 MHz due to Precision Boost Override, then the Ryzen 5 3600X, when the consumption limits are canceled, adds no more than 50-100 MHz to the frequency.
In order to evaluate the effect of such a fine tuning of frequency modes, we conducted express testing. In the above diagrams, the performance of processors with modified PPT Limit, TDC Limit and EDC Limit limits is denoted by the abbreviation PBO (Precision Boost Override).
Summing up, we would not argue that due to Precision Boost Override, it turns out to somehow noticeably speed up the processor, especially when it comes to the Ryzen 5 3600X. As follows from the results, the performance gain is literally a few percent, and you should definitely not place any special hopes on this technology, as well as on overclocking by traditional methods.
However, it still makes sense for Ryzen 5 3600 owners to turn on Precision Boost Override right away in order to get performance close to that of the more expensive six-core Ryzen 5 3600X for free.
Source: 3dnews.ru