AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Wraith Stealth cooler [$369.99]

Good deal for a great processor.

299USD is about $369CAD currently, So looks MSRP. Launched nov 5, this is 240 days old already. Good to see they are available now

https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Ryzen-3700X-1 ... 36&sr=8-17

.2 ghz slower clock , but 2 more cores, save 2 tens and change to buy bling blings.

Very nice!

DARSHAKJUST4U wrote: ↑ https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Ryzen-3700X-1 ... 36&sr=8-17

.2 ghz slower, but 2 more cores, save 2 tens and change to buy bling blings.

Yes because that is how it works.

The more Ghz the faster. RIGHT GUISE ?

DARSHAKJUST4U wrote: ↑ https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Ryzen-3700X-1 ... 36&sr=8-17

.2 ghz slower, but 2 more cores, save 2 tens and change to buy bling blings.

zen 3 ipc improvements and higher boost clock will make the 5600x a better choice for most people.

Coz4k wrote: ↑ Yes because that is how it works.

The more Ghz the faster. RIGHT GUISE ?

GHz directly references speed (clock speed) , but Infact I'm with u. I don't see any value in getting 4.6 over 4.4, especially at a loss of 2 cores and my 20 bucks...

DARSHAKJUST4U wrote: ↑ GHz directly references speed, but Infact I'm with u. I don't see any value in getting 4.6 over 4.4, especially at a loss of 2 cores and my 20 bucks...

That’s because you don’t know what you’re talking about. While there’s a meager .2ghz difference in clock speed, the 5600x performs much more “tasks” within each cycle (IPC). So not only is it faster clocked, but it’s essentially doing more work too.

Whether the extra 2 cores will be of any benefit will depend on the user. Usually those who need 16 threads will absolutely know they need 16 threads. Productivity users, streamers who have unnecessary programs running in the background, etc.. for anything less, and If you’re not sure, then you will likely be fine with 6 cores, 12 threads, and overall faster to boot.

DARSHAKJUST4U wrote: ↑ GHz directly references speed, but Infact I'm with u. I don't see any value in getting 4.6 over 4.4, especially at a loss of 2 cores and my 20 bucks...

Ok maybe that will shock you but some 1.8ghz processors... are.... faster... than 3ghz processors...

Clock speed does not mean anything unless its the same exact architecture and on the same size die (lithography).

So gaining .2 ghz does not mean anything.

Ryzen 5 isn't the same architecture than Ryzen 3.

is this worth the $20 diff? https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Ryzen-Process ... 08S6B6784/

DARSHAKJUST4U wrote: ↑ https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Ryzen-3700X-1 ... 36&sr=8-17

.2 ghz slower, but 2 more cores, save 2 tens and change to buy bling blings.

According to THIS chart, they are very similar in speeds.

However, single core performance is better on the 5600X, which translates to better gaming.

I'd pay $20 more for the 5600X ...

The performance should be the same when encoding/decoding / video editing / CPU intensive tasks ...

I've heard of some reddit gamers they prefer the 3700X because when gaming, the extra cores help with streaming or recording your gaming ...

Mugen123 wrote: ↑ is this worth the $20 diff? https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Ryzen-Process ... 08S6B6784/

Never heard of this "Mytrix Thermal Paste." I'd pass for the extra $20. Can get a tube of some popular brands for like $10.

Just add my two cents I upgraded from a 3700x to a 5600x. I game mostly at 1440p high refresh rate.
It was an absolute waste of money the only time you would notice any usable difference would be if you game at 1080P or less.

I play a wide variety of current games.

I have it paired with a 6900 XT.

Again just my two cents

DARSHAKJUST4U wrote: ↑https://www.amazon.ca/AMD-Ryzen-3700X-1 ... 36&sr=8-17

.2 ghz slower, but 2 more cores, save 2 tens and change to buy bling blings.

I like your advice, but am most impressed at your ability to create a brand new sentence never before typed.

Same price at Canada Computers if anyone doesn't want to wait for shipping/ wants to support local.
https://www.canadacomputers.com/product ... 75ctvif310

redflagdealsguy wrote: ↑ Yep, it was a waste. CPUs are no longer advancing by leaps and bounds and unless your particular tasks were heavily CPU bound, you'd find what you just found.

That being said, you've future-proofed yourself for a little while. That CPU should push a future RTX 4080 or 5080 variant nearly to threshold performance, less 5% to 10% in certain scenarios.

Life moves on, and we live and learn.

Tbh cpus haven't advanced much for the last decade especially for gaming. At least until ryzen came on scene and started giving Intel some actual competition.

Unless you need high refresh rates or need 8-16 cores, you'll be fine with several generations older cpus.

I upgraded from a 4790k to a 5600x and didn't see much difference except in late-game rts or games with a bunch of particle effects that use to dip my frames down to 30fps are now keeping above 100+ fps.

holyman007 wrote: ↑ Tbh cpus haven't advanced much for the last decade especially for gaming. At least until ryzen came on scene and started giving Intel some actual competition.

Unless you need high refresh rates or need 8-16 cores, you'll be fine with several generations older cpus.

I upgraded from a 4790k to a 5600x and didn't see much difference except in late-game rts or games with a bunch of particle effects that use to dip my frames down to 30fps are now keeping above 100+ fps.

Tripling your fps is a huge frigging difference! You never notice the performance upgrade in the best performing parts of your games, it's the 1% and 0.1% lows that matter, and it sounds like your upgrade was very significant!

DARSHAKJUST4U wrote: ↑ GHz directly references speed

There’s a reason why Apple doesn’t mention M1’s clock speed, clock speed is as useful or useless as RPM when it comes to calculate the speed.

Another analogy is a good fin design fan will move more air at lesser RPM making less noise. Compare any Noctua fan to cheap fan.

I was able to overclock my Core 2 Duo CPUs to 4GHz more than a decade ago.