AMD Ryzen 7 5700 (non-X), It's NOT What You Think!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 лип 2024
- Support us on Patreon: / hardwareunboxed
Join us on Floatplane: www.floatplane.com/channel/Ha...
Buy relevant products from Amazon, Newegg and others below:
AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D: geni.us/FxBWD
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D: geni.us/BV9I9nH
AMD Ryzen 5 7600: geni.us/qGJVbZ7
AMD Ryzen 5 7600X: geni.us/Hn7m9
AMD Ryzen 7 7700: geni.us/6VP8wD
AMD Ryzen 7 7700X: geni.us/fAfH
AMD Ryzen 9 7900: geni.us/RRL3Fa
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X: geni.us/Rjlq
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X: geni.us/lTmCsO
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D: geni.us/wZd1
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X: amzn.to/32gHUAN
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X: amzn.to/3kUa1gq
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X: amzn.to/32cX9uB
AMD Ryzen 5 5600X: amzn.to/3evOFn9
AMD Ryzen 5 5600: geni.us/dLiI
Intel Core i3-13100: geni.us/DfDsan
Intel Core i5-13400: geni.us/lQZFpt
Intel Core i5-13500: geni.us/goRuq2
Intel Core i5-13600K: geni.us/lJgCa
Intel Core i7-13700K: geni.us/Gpuqh3
Intel Core i9-13900K: geni.us/AieGiL
Intel Core i9-12900K: geni.us/xEZFptS
Intel Core i9-12900KF: geni.us/hCMbu
Intel Core i7-12700K: geni.us/8KvA
Intel Core i7-12700KF: geni.us/ES3BK
Intel Core i5-12600K: geni.us/sDNeS
Intel Core i5-12600KF: geni.us/bbH0ALI
Video Index
00:00 - Welcome to Hardware Unboxed
00:31 - Introducing the Ryzen 7 5700
01:25 - Ryzen 1000/2000 Series Recap
02:06 - Ryzen 3000/5000 Series Overview
05:17 - Ryzen 7 5700 Pricing and Availability
06:57 - Assetto Corsa Competizione
07:23 - Assassin's Creed Mirage
07:43 - Cyberpunk 2077 Phantom Liberty
08:07 - Hitman 3
08:24 - Hogwarts Legacy
08:35 - Marvel’s Spider-Man Remastered
08:56 - Star Wars Jedi Survivor
09:15 - 12 Game Average [1080p + RTX 4090]
09:55 - Final Thoughts
Read this feature on TechSpot: www.techspot.com/review/2802-...
AMD Ryzen 7 5700 Review
Disclaimer: Any pricing information shown or mentioned in this video was accurate at the time of video production, and may have since changed
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. We may also earn a commission on some sales made through other store links
FOLLOW US IN THESE PLACES FOR UPDATES
Twitter - / hardwareunboxed
Facebook - / hardwareunboxed
Instagram - / hardwareunboxed
Outro music by David Vonk/DaJaVo - Наука та технологія
5600: More cache, less cash.
ironically Cache and Cash pronounced similar haha
The 5600 has always been great value. It's a shame there aren't many of them out there.
@@RAM_845 Not in English
@@zorbakaput8537wrong. It's definitely pronounced similarly
I upgraded from an r5 3600 to a 5600 with a slight overclock and was really happy. Then went ahead and grabbed a 5600x3d. Could never get behind the 5700 models.
In this case binned silicon means stuff they actually took out of a garbage bin.
😂
This killed me 😂😂😂😂
That's pretty bruital, damn
Literally AMD will scrambling everything just to sell on old platform, even if the worst one can made AMD look like cheapskate household brand😂😂😂
Pretty much 😂
its mind blowing when you see the 3600 supporting pcie4 but newer ones support just pcie3
It makes sense when you consider the newer ones that do pcie3 only are laptop parts that optimise for power.
This has nothing to do with newer ones, but with desktop/mobile SKUs. PCIe3 simply requires less energy and in mobile parts you usually slower GPUs anyways. Less cache = less power draw.
Same for the current 8000 APU lineup: just like all other Ryzen APUs before, these are mobile APUs with higher TDP and with PCIe4 instead of PCIe5.
Cezanne is developed "mobile first" and come to desktop some time later and limiting to pcie-3 saves power. I have a 5600G in another machine and is amazing power efficiency. For me it's not the pci-e 3.0 the problem, but "only" 16MB L3 cache.
All Ryzen 3k series, you mean
It's the result of botlicker youtuber who keep defending Amd greed and the Amd fanboys too. It looks like they don't have problem either with Amd continuing selling trash cpu like this ryzen.
The "things aren't getting worse" crowd are real quiet about the 5700 losing to the 5600
That's exactly why I got 5600 instead of cheaper 5500. Double cache really shows its merit in games.
Earlier Ryzen x6xx models also were faster than x7xx ones in gaming that is nothing new.
@@molenini my 5500 still doing great in gaming with my RX6650XT.
Things aren’t getting worse. Prices are.
"8GB Vram is just fine"
I always check cache sizes (they are usually written in the description in e-shops) with these AMD cpus as you can never be sure what is the basis, if the "proper" desktop part or the mobile part with lower cache.
Same as Intel 13/14th Gen I3/I5 with its old Alderlake Architectur and less Cache as real Raptor Lake.
Cache and PCI-e
Until this part you pretty much knew what you were getting with AMD when it came to non-OEM parts. Retail Non-X parts were a clock reduction and that was it. You didn't really need to be spying out stuff like cache size or PCIe revision support in the spec sheet. Now AMD can't be trusted going forward to abide by the rules of their naming scheme that they've established. I fucking hate scummy deceptive confusopoly crap like this but the problem is the only viable competition is vastly worse when it comes to this so it's not like I can take my money to somewhere else that doesn't indulge in this crap.
@@devilmikey00 What they have done with their mobile naming scheme is even worse starting with the "7000" series. They are literally selling zen 2 chips as "7000" series chips to trick people who haven't memorized their new naming scheme into buying old chips basically. For anyone that doesn't know the new naming scheme is this (using 7745hs as example) - The first number is the year it was released, second number is the level it is (ryzen 7 in this case), third number is the actual generation now (zen 4 or actual ryzen 7000 in this case) and the last number and letters are the version of that chip. The letters can also trick you too because for instance the 7940hs and 7945hx are completely different chips with only the number and letter at the end being different. The 7940hs is an 8 core chip. The 7945hx is a 16 core chip. 2 completely different level of cpus with a very similar name.
It's annoying.
@@devilmikey00 And how exactly is Intel worse? Renaming a 12th gen to 13th gen in the sub-600k category didn't change the fact they were still aligned to their naming, and actually moved _up_ a notch with clock speeds. This is just straight up misleading from the 5700x it's name is based off of.
I can understand the product, but not the price or naming. they are basically selling defect 5700G that likely have broken iGPUs in them. Nothing wrong with that... It's just that it needs be sold to consumers in a way that is transparent and not misleading.
you are absolutely right, AMD is doing that in mobile counterparts too. they named lot of older gen product with new gen that confuse normal consumers thinking they all are new product and get scammed by shops!
@@freaky425 like are we going to expect Ryzen 5 7520U (6 cores, Zen 2) outperforms i3 1215U (6 cores 8 threads, Alder Lake)?
@@freaky425 The newer mobile naming scheme are confusing, but at least they actually DO tell you what gen those parts are. It's just that the first digit you'd expect to be the gen is the release year, instead you have to look at the third digit to determine what kinda cores it has (I.e 7040 is zen4, 7030 is zen3 etc.). Not great, and certainly confusing on purpose, but still better than parts like the 5700 where you just can't tell.
normal people who are not tech savy can't understand it. In order to understand it is a older bad product, a normal consumer has to know all the previous gens and their difference, do you get the picture? so what does shopkeepers do? they say, take this latest one and sell in huge profit the mediocre products. AMD gets profit eventually, shopkeepers also make good cut and customers are fked @@Hugh_I
To be fair, that's pretty much how every CPU is. CPU can't quite get up to the clock speeds of an X part? Well sell it as a non-X part. Two out of 8 cores don't function properly but the other 6 are fine? Turn off those two and sell it as a x600 instead of an x800 and so on and so forth. They are selling this as a non-IGPU part thus the lack of a G in the suffix. The deception is in the cache, lack of ECC support and no PCIE 4.0 based on the name which breaks all the prior rules of AMD's naming scheme from the past for non-oem parts.
Congrats on passing 1 Mil subs lads u deserve the world
Take your tongue out of there
Best channel on yt for pc hardware. Rimjob complete
@@WGK90touch grass you angstlord, there's nothing wrong with congratulating a creator that you like on a major milestone.
It's the GForce MX 440 situation all over again. Never gets old on that one.
And the ironic thing is, the MX 460 was a decent budget card. Yes, no DX 8.1 support, but DX7 performance was fine.
I still haven't got over the "8k and beyond" keynote
Next keynote will be 12k with FSR omega super ultra performance using 1080p internal
8k look so amazing in compare to 4k. 8k for gaming!@@cosmic_gate476
Are you saying it cant render 8K? lolz
They didn't even actually mean 8K either. They were talking about the Samsung 57 inch ultra wide. Which is basically half of an 8K monitor
Atleast they didn't claim they can do 12k.....
...Like Intel did with Kaby Lake.
I just bought a ryzen 5600, the 5700x is over 40% more expensive where i am. When i heard about the 5700 a few weeks back i didn't bother wait.
The 5700x3d is over double the price of the 5600 here in Ireland
Same in US
@@ZackMartin177Stop joking Blud
@@Birdman._. 5600 is $135 shipped; 5700x3d is $270 shipped
5600 is currently the real bang for the buck. Nothing comes close to it on AM4 in terms of price/perfroamnce in gaming scenarios.
I mean it's nice to have the 5700x3d as a backup option if you want to stay on AM4 and your 5600 eventually becomes to weak. Well ofc a Ryzen 8000-9000 by then would be probably the better buy but you never know if they cut prices on AM4 by then or the used am4 market will be promising.
I saw the 5700 name and remember seeing a few come in the shop a year ago or so. Then when you mentioned OEM it made sense. I've done two motherboard replacements on an iBuyPower and then Cyber power PC with the 5700 non x. During the GPU shortage pre-builts with the 5700 we're flying off the shelves because the DIY market and small repair shops couldn't get the graphics card for what the complete PCs were going for.
Agreed it should be 5700F or 5700GF.
This is not defensible and stems from the APU 5000 models not having something like Ryzen APU 7 in their brandingm but I can see why it'd require a large price drop to sell an APU 5700F as a scavenged part.
5700F would definitely not make sense. the regular 5700 is already iGPU-less, if that's what you want to name it 5700F for. It also doesn't do anything to clarify the possible misconception.
@@HazewinDog the F stands for "igpu disabled" on Intel, not on AMD
@@maho8204 there's a Ryzen 5 7500F cpu, which is actually real though, but only limited to China
@@HazewinDog If there were a Ryzen 7 5700 already, then this naming would be fraudulent.
A 5700F would show relation to 5700G so makes sense, the 5500 iGPU-less scheme from 5600G didn't leave room for cutting the iGPU from 8c 5800G.
You want them to take a 2022 product.... and add a suffix not used in the 5000 series.
Also when it actually hits the market it'll be £150 so £20 cheaper than the 5700g and equal in price to the 5600, so if you need 8 cores cheap but arent gaming then that makes sense.
All we have right now is false introductor prices, like when the 14900K hit retailers at $999.99.
AMD really did reverse-X3D stuff to the 5700X for this one.
This CPU is not from Vermeer lineup, so it doesn't come from 5700X being stripped of X and cache. It is Cezanne 5700G which was stripped of iGPU (and letter G in naming).
Confusing, yes, logical... Also yes, surprisingly.
And AMD APU's have 16MB of cache. So everything lines up.
5700X3D'nt
@@progamer00006 weak... 5700X0.5D or 5700X1/2D is better
@@DimkaTsv2d, obviously
Classically AMD (and ATi before that) had "LE" on their cut down graphics. And sometimes give them a name in the lower bracket.
So this could be a Ryzen 7 5700 LE or a Ryzen 7 5650 or something like that.
Or, considering it's the 5700G without graphics, something to denote that. Looking back at their Phenom II and FX chips, Ryzen 7 5700E or Ryzen 7 5700T could work.
They used E on their slightly slower APUs. The 5600G has graphics, the 5600GE also has graphics but is slower.
A bit like how Intel uses F on their chips, with and without combining it with their K moniker for unlocked chips, their X moniker for extreme/enthusiast chips , their T moniker for low power chips and their E moniker for embedded chips, which can also be combined in various ways.
You're better off buying a 5600 for gaming.
In EU prices are:
5700 193€
5700X 189€
5700G 170€
5600 132€
The worst product is the more expensive one, it would be "fine" if the naming wasn't deceiving.
@@19aliveWhats the price for 12400 and 7600 there
5700 is $50 more than 5600 even at Microcenter.
Or just buy Intel when you can get much cheaper price for better performance.
@@NamTran-xc2ip 152€ for 12400f and 205€ for 7600 non-x. Am4 is ridiculously cheap so you should not bother with anything else if u want to be cost effective to be quite honest. A 3600 is like 70€ brand new.
Thank you Steve to clearing this up, it's very valuable!
Estava esperando um review assim, congratulations👏
AMD Fire sale ... Everything must GO !!!
Everything must go especially this trash amd cpu, it belongs in the trash bin.
@@runninginthe90s75 its not a bad CPU if they price if correctly
@@agostonpalatinus1513 if it's 100$, imma take it, but now? 12700K will steamroll that defective APU p.o.s
@@baoquoc3710 yeah, but you do get that theres no way to race an APU against a 12700K
Silicon Salvage Wars 🤣
I remember the 2022 launch for OEMs back then, and with good pricing for normal customers it could be interesting back then, but not now.
Absolutely. Price it in the same range as the 5600X and give people the choice. One has more cores, the other faster cores and more cache. So if you have small code that is heavily multithreaded, get the 5700, if your code is narrower, but bigger, get the 5600X
ECC memory support is another thing APU-derived processors sneakily don't have.
Genuine question, are there any use cases for ECC with this segment of CPUs(200-400$ desktop)?
the igpu portion of the APU would definitely struggle with bandwidth restrictions on ECC memory making them a poor pair.
@@ASHDMDSGN if you're building a desktop for work, yes. There are ecc memory kits with double the density and no rgb for basically the same price.
Ryzen PRO APUs eg. 5750G support ECC RAM
@@ASHDMDSGNfor home-server builds there is definitely a good use case. Personally running one and no ECC support is definitely a deal breaker for me.
Thank you very much! You possibly saved me from a medium sized mistake here! (You and the sometimes strange pricing structures in Germany. At the same big retailer the 5700 costs 25€ more than the 5700X)
I got a 5700G many months ago to use in a micro ATX build. It was only after making the purchase I found out PCIe Gen 4 was not supported. That surprised me back then.
Thats been known for 4 years if you bothered to look it up!
@@martytube821It's still misleadingly named.
That hoodie is throwing shade, and I love it
Literally fr no cap ngl smh
@@SimonHaestoelol lmao rofl
Thank you. Good info.
The ryzen 5 3500 was readily available here in India in 2019-20 not just in oem.
So it's the 5500 all over again but at least the 5500 was not named similarly to the 5600. Maybe this should've been called something like 5700GF. AMD already like Intel use the F SKU to denote a SKU as not having an iGPU.
they actually didn't when this CPU first came out though
It's kind of like the 5600g, too, where the 5600g is basically a 5500 with integrated graphics
G signifies graphics.. so your going to say "5700 with graphics but actually without" thats even more confusing than what they did. Product names don't matter and customers should always look at specs and benchmarks instead of trusting product names. You wouldn't buy a mustang assuming its a v8 without looking at the specs first.
No it should've been called the 4700AF. Like a newer Ryzen 7 version of the 1600 AF. Which if I remember correctly the 1600 AF was basically like a Ryzen 5 2600 rebranded for $85. This should've been the same but at around $100-$120 at the most.
@@GhostAcez AF stands for new manufacturing process.. which this isn't. It is also a 5000 series architecture so your methods makes even less sense. A 5500 costs $100 so there is no way 2 extra cores is going to be a similar price. also no the 1600af isnt basically a 2600.. its a 1600 on a smaller node. No other changes.
I think this will come in handy when scouring the used market - when building ultra budget builds.
a couple years down the line perhaps, it simply isn't priced right at this point to make it worth upgrading to from any other CPU.
I'm glad you made this video, I was recommending the 5700 to a friend debating making a budget AM4 build since I assumed it was the 5700x but downclocked, and came with a stock cooler.
A couple of minutes researching the chip on AMD's website would have told you everything you need to know without making assumptions.
Right now the ryzen 5 5600x is for 159$ and the ryzen 7 5700x is 180$ that's great! 20$ is not a big difference in price so I recommend the ryzen 7 5700x even over the legendary 5 5600x
9:40 did anyone else notice that the 5600x3d is exactly to same fps as the 5700x3d
Some games the core count doesn't matter much, also the 5600X3D has a clock speed advantage.
Gotcha
This makes 5700X3D really frstrating option for it's current price. 5700X3D was released almost a year after 5600X3D, yet it costs more and offers the same level of performance. $220 is what this "new" CPU should really cost, at worst.
5600x3d does not exist in most places.
as for gaming performance, most games dont use more than 4 or 6 cores. value for money is always the cheaper cpu.@@stangamer1151
@@stangamer1151 in a lot countries, including the UK. the 5800x3d is not much more expensive like £20 or even the same price as the 5700x3d which makes it even worse
I was just about to upgrade to that chip. Will go with the X instead, thanks for saving me the hassle of exchanging it 2 days later.
Doesn't take much time to look up some specs! Better for the environment than causing unnecessary returns.
This is a great video to help someone like me to decide which processor to go for to max out performance on my current MB. I soon want to upgrade from Ryzen 3 3600. Thank you 😊
I think Steve @gamersnexus said it best when talking about the i7-14700k: "This enables companies every where to make "bigger number better", but without all of the hard work of making the number bigger better."
"With 3 GHz Intel Pentium 4 processor and 256 MB nvidia graphics"
Turns out that Pentium 4 throttles under load in the horrible OEM case and the GPU is a 6600 LE with DDR on a 64 bit bus and not a 6800 GT with GDDR3 on a 256 bit bus and four times the shaders.
And of course the GT 1030 is better than a GTX 980 because 1030 is bigger than 980. In fact, it's 60 more.
AMD is basically trying to recycle all their old chips, whilst propping up the prices of their existing chips. The 5700x3d exists to reduce discounts on the 5800x3d as much as it is a new product. Its a well known strategy. Id say the 5700x and 5700x3d were good additions though, but this one is just pushing it
I'd say it's beyond pushing it. It's at the very least misleading.
5700X is a great CPU in terms of price/performance, it is one of the cheapest modern 8-core CPUs. While 5700X3D is still a bit too expensive. For $220 it would be a great upgrade option for all existing AM4 owners, though.
@@stangamer1151i wonder if it's better for productivity on the 3d version of the 5700x
@@stangamer1151kinda willing to buy it but that 5800x3d is just a few bucks more...
@@mythydamashii9978 Productivity apps mostly rely on core clock, rather than cache. Since 5700X has 600 MHz (800 MHz with enabled PBO) higher core clock than 5700X3D, it would be a better option in this case. But if you can find 5800X3D for just a few bucks more than 5700X (which is unbelievable price) and game frequently, the 3D would be a better buy.
*Sad times, 5600 better than the 5700*
For gaming! Though I suspect that's what most people would consider it for.
Core i5-12400F or 13400F. If not, there is the 12600K.
@@saricubra2867considering the 13400F is more expensive than the 12600K and 12600KF the choice is pretty easy.
In fact taking a 5700X or a 12400F with DDR4 over the 5700 saves about 8 € and a 12600KF with DDR4 costs only 35 € And if you really want DDR5, pairing it with a 12400F costs only 50 € more.
If you want a system with iGPU, 12600K with DDR 4 is about the same price as 12400F with DDR5 and a 5700G saves about 3 € over a 5700
The only reason for the 5700 to exist in the market is for situations where you want 8 cores/16 threads, but the reduction in price is worth having less cache.
if, and that is a big IF, the price would be adequate, which is it not. It's priced like the APU and the X model, which both are simply better.
Putting it close to the 5600X, in the 140 € range would make it much more attractive as a tradeoff between cache and cores.
I managed to got one of these in june for $115 seemed like an okay upgrade from a 2700x at that price. Reconsidering given the notes here about the cache.
I got a ryzen 7 5700x for quite a while, i am quite happy for 200 dollars, it isn't bad.
I think it is quite a hit... for 300$ you get yourself a decent cpu for gaming and a decent b650 motherboard.
Its also 200 here in eastern europe, and with a b550m mobo I can upgrwde for 300€, love that
Hey AMD, remember the other letters? That aren't X or G? Remember we had the E model in Vishera times? Hmm?
The objective is to confound,not to elucidate.
You can find used GE processors from China. More expensive than regular versions so it’s not really worth it, better to buy new processors and just use eco mode 🤣
The biggest problem with the 5700 is the price, because I really think that both the 5600 and the 5700X are a better value, ESPECIALLY for gaming. I don't think AMD is obligated to make the naming conventions completely consistent with previous generations, but in this case, I would agree that the naming combined with the pricing is misleading. That larger cache on the 5600 and the 5700X is a HUGE deal, and likely will be an increasingly big deal over the next few years as games become more CPU demanding.
This product should be cheaper, and if it was, I wouldn't mind the naming.
The 5700 might look like a reasonable value based on these charts, but the fact that even the cheaper 5600 is a better gaming CPU is a big problem.
In the context of the cost of the entire system, the 5700X would be well worth the extra price vs. the 5700, especially because there are limited upgrade options other than the X3D equiped Zen 3 chips. Of course, the 5700X3D might be an even better value, and simply upgrading to an AM5 system with a 7600 is arguably also going to be a better option for a lot of people (all three are extremely cost effective options, and probably better than the very mediocre 5700).
In the past, the X versions have often been overpriced for virtually no improvement, and that is arguably more misleading. People should assume that a different name MAY mean significantly different performance and/or features. Even the 5600 will likely be the better gaming CPU over the next few years in most games simply because of its much larger L3 Cache, and the 5700X is, for the same reason, a much better CPU than the 5700 non X in gaming. There's also the PCIe support differences, which is another issue. To me, the naming of the 5700 is misleading, but only in conjunction with the price. If the price was as low as the 5600, or lower, I think people would be dumb to assume that the 5700 is just a slightly slower version of the 5700X, and they'd still be getting a good product for the price, capable of handily beating the 5600 in heavily threaded workloads, and even in some games, but with the current pricing, it's reasonable for people to expect the 5700 to just be a somewhat slower version of the 5700X, but it ISN'T. The price is too high.
I looked at the price, and right now the 5700X is actually slightly cheaper than the 5700, and the 5600 is vastly cheaper.
And while the 5700X3D is obviously more expensive (more than a 5800X actually) it's pretty much equal in cost to a 7600 for a whole platform purchase.
How does the memory controller preform? Its monolithic so there should be some more headroom in it.
Nice! I was wondering what the difference was from my 5700x to the new ones that just came out.
this are just 5700G without the G ? so silicon where the GPU was not working?
The only sense I could see here, is for Memory Overclocking with a good memory kit, since the APU are far better in memory OC than the Chiplet design. It will go faster in Infinity Fabric and in Memory frequency, also with far less memory latency (also improving the cache issue) and if you want something more general purpose, but for the price the 5700G is close with discounts and you get an iGPU just in case.
Thank you for including 5600x3D :) I was pretty curious how it stands VS 5700x3D , great review as always !! Keep doing what you are doing guys !!
Thanks for the review. Appreciate all the money and time you spend to bring them to us.
Glad I bought a 5800X3D. Massive amounts of Cache.
7600X matches it in performance for $80 less. I know everything else is more expensive but you can always sell the CPU and upgrade while staying on the same AM5 board and ram.
@@BlackJesus8463i went with 5800 after that came out because of ram prices, and I'll never buy 1st gen. there's always issues like ram compatability and bios chip size that get fixed a generation or 2 later
I have 7600 non x I think there's no much difference between the two
@@BlackJesus8463 I could do that. But, that would mean getting rid of what is essentailly a new part in my build.
Thanks for including the 5600x3d in all the results
Damn, look guys, one of the 134 owner
Looks like most of the CPU spec sites like TPU and CPU-World had the correct info on these, showing they are Cezanne. There's reference to these chips going back over a year, since they were OEM only, so at least the correct info has been out there for awhile.
Congrats on 1m subs. U guys deserve it from your passionate work to inform us all of what is price to performance, and other details that revealed corporate greed. You guys are really legends.
I am not sure what to think of this one naming wise.
I understand it can be misleading, but on the other hand it's a 5700g without the Graphics so the name does make sense there.
With ryzen 7000 cpu's include integrated graphics by default, so here there would need to be a qualifier that it doesn't.
Other than that I don't think x vs non x ever implied a clock speed drop per-se, just a slower version with the same core count, this could also be a drop in cache size.
Still calling it the 5700GF would have been better.
It really should have an F in there, the X, XT have always been clock speed & TDP; selling a G model as if it added gfx without compromises on PCI & L3 was always unclear, so dropping any suffix is doubly so.
Buying 5700GF 😂
There is precedent: 7500F. It's the only Zen 4 based Ryzen CPU that has the iGPU disabled. Calling it 5700GF would make no sense as the iGPU is disabled. A simple F is enough to denote the lack of iGPU. Including G would be misleading.
Except the 5600G without graphics is called 5500... To be sliiiightly consistent with that... maybe Ryzen 5650 or something like that in stead? Basically AMD ran out of good options when they launched this.
@@Raivo_K The difference is that the 7000 series has an igpu by default, the 5000 series does not. the F suffix makes little sense on its own when not having integrated graphics is the default.
Isn't this simply a 5500 with 8 cores?? I got a 5500 and it was a very good pick...
Cost per frame is very good. I guess they couldn't "create" a number between 7 and 6... so "non-x" it is...
5650 maybe? but I think 5700 (with a letter denoting disabled iGPU) would be a welcome addition to the naming of these CPU's for clarity. I have a few 5300g and 5600g CPU's and they arent BAD CPU's, but are definitely not as strong IPC as the chiplet based CPU's when using discrete GPU's. However, they have considerably lower latency and are great for memory overclocking. However, that doesnt make up for the lower cache present on the CPU.
@@EMU15650 is a refresh 6 core... there was no number available, like there was for 6-core... the 5700x should have been called 5800 non-x... there, I said it.
@@vitaobatera You are absolutely correct!! 5700x should have been 5800, and then this 5700 would match the 5500 in both architecture and name.
I had known that the 5700 was based on the Cezanne architecture before this video, so it wasnt a surprise to me. I just wish that they wouldnt have gimped these APU's or even the 8000 APU's with cache. However, if that was the case, then nobody would buy the chiplet CPU's... But, we would have much stronger 6-8c options. Especially for gaming.
@@vitaobateraThe 5800 actually exists as an OEM exclusive CPU (like the 5700 used to be), and the specs are basically identical to the 5700X, which makes me wonder why AMD decided on the 5700X naming instead when launching it to all markets. Keeping the 5800 naming would've completely solved the main issue of the 5700: the deceptively similar naming to the 5700X.
This is a 5700G without graphics. It is to the 5800X what the 5500 is to the 5600X and the 5100 to the 5300X
But totally agree, the 5700X and 5800 are so nearly identical, releasing it as 5800 and keeping the 5700 name for this chip would've been better.
I bought the 5700 X 3-D literally two days ago on Newegg. When shopping for that processor, the 5700 X was $180 and came with a free one terabyte NVME SSD!
This is some scummy pricing that they have going on. Literally raising the price of the 5700 X drastically when the 5700 arrives, and they have to know how horrible the 5700 is.
If I could get my PC parts, cheaper elsewhere, I would. But there are times I just have to get them from Newegg and I hate doing it.
Thanks for another great piece of content gentleman. Thank you for all your hard work, and have a good day.
Hey Steve!! How you doing?
AMD did that for the R5 5500 too if I recall, and probably with others.
It's an APU monolithic die with the GPU disabled.
I mean I def appreciate the willingness to give that much durability to a platform... But goddamn, now AMD is just kicking that dead horse lmao.
Dumping old silicon that they couldn't sell
@@wile123456 Pretty much. Ryzen CPUs are basically defective Epyc CPUs in a smaller package. It's the neat thing about all of AMD's CPU stack being based on the exact same microarchitecture, they can scale them up or down as needed. So defective high end parts can be repurposed for lower end stuff. But the other hand is it does lead to things like the 5700 lol
@@wile123456 absolutely 😂 I feel bad for people that bought it thinking this was going to be a 5600x vs 5600 situation again.
@@wile123456 Dumping old Silicon is not an Issue. Like at all ever. But kinda misleading and also Price it to high... yes that is scammy.
Nvidia's scam school
Strange to see the R5 3500 get some attention. Got mine a while back and now im looking to replace it with the new 5700X3D as its driving me nuts while gaming
5700x3d will be a great platform upgrade
I daily drive an R7 5700, I bought it on eBay mid June of last year. After purchasing I found out what it really was, but I only paid $115 so it wasnt a terrible deal, and I get by just fine. My biggest gripe might be the PCIe Gen 3
Thank you so much for doing this video.
I thought based AMD did for the 5500U/5700U (which were Zen 2 instead of the 5600U/5800U), the 5700 non-X non-G was going to be a rebranded 3700X
Desktop Zen 2 is on 3000/4000 series.
Yeah, AMD SKU naming is kinda clusterf*** right now.
@@titan_fx Ryzen 3000 G series are Zen+. Mobile Ryzen 3000 (U and H series) are also Zen+.
Then Ryzen 4000 and 5000 are Zen 2 and Zen 3 respectively, but they each have their own variants.
For example, Ryzen 5000 U/H/G series have the codename Cezanne and don't have PCIe 4.0 support, while Zen 3 Vermeer (which is used for Ryzen 5000 X and no-letter series) does support PCIe 4.0.
Basically, Ryzen U/H series are Laptop chips, and Ryzen G series are laptop chips repurposed for Desktop.
Yet here we're getting a Ryzen 7 5700 which doesn't support PCIe 4.0 (10:24) so it probably means it's Zen 3 Cezanne, and it's very likely they had to name it this way because the Ryzen 7 5700G already exists.
Damn, their naming scheme is a huge mess, I don't understand how people could have been mad against Nvidia's GTX vs RTX naming on the GPU side, when this Ryzen 7 5700 (Zen 3 Cezanne) is entirely misleading if you compare it against the Ryzen 5 5600 (Zen 3 Vermeer). + the fact this Ryzen 7 loses to a Ryzen 5 from the same generation is a shame.
Lucienne(5300u, 5500u, 5700u), which are usually configurable from 10-25 Watt TDP and were designed with improved clock gating, better memory controllers and per-core voltage regulation, are a revision of Renoir(4300u, 4500u, etc). They're mobile chips, designed for long battery life. 3700X was in the Matisse family of desktop CPUs, 65W to 105W processors with substantially higher cache and better PCIe support.
The 5500U is still the best budget laptop APU on the market in my opinion.
@@rinsenpai135 5400U, 5600U and 5800U were Cezanne, the 5300U, 5500U and 5700U were Lucienne
What a waste of sand as another Steve once said.
it's recycled sand in this case, but it's a waste of money.
If those are salvaged cpus then there's not a lot that they could do with them, selling them isn't the problem, the problem is the name
Isn't this an older CPU? I have an ibuypower machine I use as a secondary machine I got used that has a 5700 in it, machine serial claims a manufacturing date of 2021. Or maybe it was only available via OEM until recently?
I'm using the 5700G currently, didn't realize it was that slow compared to other CPUs - but I wanted to upgrade it anyway since my GPU is way too strong for that CPU matchup
This is really not that surprising, isn't the R5 5500 also a cut down model also limited to PCIe 3.0! Basically a 5600g without integrated graphics! This has been out for a while now!
Atleast the name stayed at 5 and the price is lower this 5700 is worse.
And everyone agreed it should have been name ryzen 5300
Agreed. It's definitely not ideal, but I think Steve is blowing it a bit out of proportion.
@@HazewinDog No, AMD knew this was deceptive marketing and they still released it.
The issue is that there wasn't a 5500X on the end user market.
The 5500 is to the 5600X what the 5700 is to the 5800X
Before even watching the video, what "I think" is that it's APU silicon, just without the iGPU, and will therefore perform much slower than the 5700X. I seem to recall a news piece/rumor or some such to that effect.
I love this only because it makes Hardware Unboxed job more interesting. No one would expect this level of performance given the naming scheme!
i have bought a ryzen7 5700g 1.5 years ago and i use it in my server because i needed more cores but my cooler cant more the 45w and the only diffence between G and GE is the bios tdp setting that on oem system is locked if you bought a system with a GE but with a G you can decide if you wont the lower GE setting.
Honestly i don't mind any of these companies doing misleading naming schemes. If customers can't even bother to allocate 30 minutes of internet research when buying something like a new CPU i don't care if they get mislead. We have laws that prevent companies from straight up lying about what they sell. Other then that people should learn not to trust these corporations or rather trust that their sole purpose is to make money. Glad to see AMD is doing it too so their fanboys will hopefully understand they are the same as nVidia or Intel.
Should have been called the 4600F.
Wrong amouth of cores.. 5700 has 8 core… so it belongs to 5700 series. 4600f would mean 6 cores…
@@haukionkannel That kind of performance doesn't deserve the 7th number when its losing to the 5600 non X.
@@evergaolbird
It is not about the speed, it is the amounth of cores.
@@haukionkannel I mean, RYZEN followed Intel's naming scheme for quite some time now, (3-5-7-9 for CPUs and B-X3/4/5/6 for their boards).
If Intel's Core 3 series went from 2 Cores to 4 Cores, I don't see why RYZEN can't do that with an 8-core 4600F.
Great review
As you said, the issue is the misleading naming not the cpu. If this had been named as a laptop chip for instance.
The 5600 non X still got it
Could have been called the 5700E or something, half its sins would be forgiven. Atleast they changed the 5600G without the igpu to a 5500.
Thanks for the information. I would have never thought about this. I don't think it is dishonest as I am sure it is in the specs, but definitely something that needs to be considered when buying a new CPU.
5700G owner here! So I'm not upgrading!
I don't have a GPU, idk what's the best one for 4k
I think if you were to test the i5 12600 vs 12600K or even worse the i5 13600 vs 13600K you would see similar results.
Maybe? I haven't seen anybody revisiting the Intel lineup after launch.
The 12700 has to be slower than the 12600 for your logic to apply to Intel.
@@KimBoKastekniv47 the 12600K has 6+4 cores, the 12600 has 6+0 cores, the 12700 has 8+4 cores
The 13600K has 2 MB/0.5 MB L2 per core, the 13600 has 1.25 MB/ 0.25 MB L2 per core.
So the 12600K has more cores and theads than the 12600 non-K
The 13600K has more cache per core than the 13600 non-K
@@HappyBeezerStudios Is there a situation where an i7 of the same gen is slower than an i5?
I disagree on this one, the naming is fine.
There have always odd SKUs resulting from binning (like the 3100 have 4 cores spread over 2 CCXs).
If the pricing reflects the performance it’s fine 🙏
The naming is not consistent with what previous generations established, like the 2700 being a slightly downclocked version of the 2700X. The 5700 instead loses a lot of features that the 5700X has, most notably in terms of cache and PCIE lanes. (16 3.0 vs 20 4.0)
@@Dango-God The 5700X should've been the 5800, which exists as OEM model and has basically the same clocks, caches and TDP as the 5700X. That way the entire 5700 range is open for different chips, like how the 5500 is relative to the 5600 and 5600X.
But they aren't the only ones to do that stuff.
Intel gave the i5-12600 less cores than the 12600K. And the 13600K has more cache than the 13600.
Or that the Pentium E6600 is not the same as the Core 2 E6600
Or that the i9-9900K is better than the i9-9900X, despite X always being the "xtreme" model.
Or that the i9-11900K is just a 100 MHz faster i7-11700K, despite previous (and later) series giving the i9 always more cores.
And don't forget the RTX 4080 12 GB that was so badly received, they unlaunched it. Or the 3 different models of the 8400 GS, which got progressively weaker. Or that the GT 720 is faster than 2 of the 3 models of the GT 730, one of which is actually a GT 430
Or how the Geforce 4 MX was actually a Geforce 2 with better memory.
Or the GTX 970 4 GB VRAM situation.
Or how the entire RX 200 series was just a rebrand of the HD 7000 series, but put one tier lower. (they were also reused as HD 8000 series, but nvidia did the same with their GT/GTX 100, 300 and 800 series)
This is exactly why I watch tech review videos. Nice info HUB...
I just picked up a 5500 for my sons gaming rig, missed the cache size, i mean it was sub $100 US so that's not terrible but I thought it was a down clocked 5600. I never really paid attention to the G variant chips and therefore didn't know they were substantially slower.
5000 series was legendary though
Maybe it's just the 5700 isn't a gaming CPU?
People gotta learn reading specs.
Good to have a "heads up".
Considering the 5600 was faster than the 5700, that should be the end of the discussion. :p
@@Ander01SEno, the 5700 could be good at productivity for a better price not everything is for gaming
Who are the people who piddle about at this low end for productivity?@@theplayerofus319
5:04 5700F, the F stands for Failure
For me its if you are in the 5000 series and are upgrading cpu it has to be one of the x3d in the 5000 family to keep the system for longer. All those that i know have do the same to see what the 8000 series brings
Names matter because they give an indication of architecture and performance. Most people do not research pc parts the way that we do, and would have no idea how significant the difference is between the 5700x and 5700. My brother for example bought his son a prebuilt (without asking me!) that came with a dedicated gpu and a 5700g, not knowing he was losing significant cpu performance.
People have been able to get their hands on these for about a year, here and there. Funny to see them showing up boxed in stores now, though.
I bought 5800x been using it for a year and I'm very satisfied
Thank you Dave for saving the world. I, for one, was quite excited about the Ryzen 5700 for budget builds.
The problem with unwritten rules is that they're not worth the paper they're written on.
I think you are missing how the chips are made. They have to sacrifice 1/2 of 4 5700x L3 cache to make 5700X3D. Under the blood moon they have to remove the heat spreader and the shaman removes half the cache.
All sarcasm aside, I would have assumed that this was just the 5700x, but a bit slower.
it would've been cool to see if the better memory controller from the apu base chip ( 6400 'sweet spot' vs 6000 on regular ryzen ) could ever so slightly mitigate the lowered cache, still good job shining a light on this, it should've been called 5700f
Not to a degree that matters
5700F would have been equally if not more misleading. the 5700 doesn't have an iGPU, so why state the obvious? If anything it would cause confusion and have people simply think it doesn't have an iGPU.
@@HazewinDog The issue you bring up wouldn't exist if the 5700 was instead named as the 5700F, because there wouldn't be a Ryzen 7 5700 to draw relation to. The 5700X already doesn't have an iGPU, so people would see the 5700(F) as the iGPU-less 5700G that it is.
Are we talking transfer rate here? Because I doubt any of them would get DDR4 over 6000, in fact the fastest DDR4 I can find only does 5333
The naming issues seems to be for the G variants. They could have used a different number since they have more difference than just an iGPU compared to the first model with that number (this case the 5700X).
But at least the F suffix can make sense going forward since they by default have iGPUs (then I would presume if AMD has lots of 8000G series without working iGPUs in the future it would be called 8000F and not 7000F, unless they reuse 7000 mobile variants for desktop then they could be called 7000F).
They would probably use a different letter than Intel. In the past they used E and T for cut down CPUs and VE and SE for cut down GPUs, so those seem plausible.
@@HappyBeezerStudios also possible they could have just used another letter to indicate the cutdown cache lol
One thing I noticed is that some older boards (B350) have new bios revisions that support the 5700, and 5700x3D, but they don't support any other 5000 series CPUs. So, depending on the board, this might be an ok upgrade for an older machine that is primarily used for productivity rather than gaming. Don't buy an x3D if you don't 3D game. Look at your board's CPU support before you buy anything.
I am guessing the L3 is in slices that can be disabled, and the 5700 had one or more L3 defects, and they simply disabled those slices, halving the L3 size, allowing them to sell a defective die. There is a good chance that half of what was disabled was fine, but it has to make the L3 symmetric across cores.
Any data on the ('New') AMD Ryzen 5 8600G - Ryzen 5 8000-G? No ratings on Newegg.
My pre-built system has the 5700 non-X....i always assumed they were the same thing. I wish you'd done higher resolution testing, just to be thorough.
I'm not mad since the price is reflective of the value difference and i have a 4070 TI Super so almost every game i play is at either 1440p or 4K so GPU is more important.
Good to know for the future though.
The real world price absolutely does not reflect the performance difference. They are priced nearly identical.
@@HappyBeezerStudioson average the X is 16% faster BUT it's also 15% more expensive AND it doesn't come with a CPU cooler. I would say that's basically fair.
I'd be willing to bet the difference is even less at 1440p where the GPU will be more important than at 1080p.
Hey Steve. I would love to see 12400/13400/14400 f series Cpus added to the benches. K series are ( I always buy the xx700k model) great but not usually as budget friendly. Thanks.
The 12400F is an incredible value chip. Not as cheap as a Ryzen 5600, but in-platform upgrade to a 14900K later on means a lot.
Looking at the start of the video, I paid attention to the text printed on the CPUs. I noticed (@ 41 seconds) how the marking "EF 2340SUS" is remarkably similar to the one on the 5700G "EF 2338SUS". So I then kinda could predict the story...
the chip is indeed very SUS
Only thing that bother me in 5700 is lack of pci-e 4.0. Yes, in stock it has lower performance that you expect, but due to monolithic design you can expect 4200+ ram speed, that can make absence of 16MB L3 not so painful :)
Just desync the Fabric at the other CPUs and you will get 32 MB Cache and faster RAM speed
@@Syping As I can understand you suggestion, you talking about non monolith CPU like 5700x and set 1:2 ration for IF to get higher RAM speed? My point was to rise RAM speed with timings for CPU with small amount of L3 cache to make that difference between 32 and 16mb not so noticable. With 4600g and 4266MHz RAM I got something like 56-57ns latency, that help me a lot with many apps when I compared it to some "stock" values like 3600CL18.
What is the power consumption?
Is there at least a saving there?
I was thinking about getting the 5900 non-x for that reason. If this 5700 non-x is 40 watts I might still pick it up.
Never thought I'd feel smug owning a 5600, but here we are :D
On a more serious note, 5700 should be a good part for production workloads, where keeping the 5700X clock speed would usually be better than keeping the cache.
Just FYI Amazon had the 5700x selling in Feb last year for just $150 with Company Of Heroes 3 bundled in, its why half the guys on my Discord (me included) are rocking 5700Xs 🤗 And I could see buying one of these for say my grandson who has an A320 board as losing PCIe-4 isn't a big deal if your board doesn't have it anyway if they get the price to say $150.
I wish there a bit more about non-gaming stuff. Power draw and workstation loads might make more sense over alternatives. if its 25% more cores than a 5600/5600x that could be great for something like cinebench. Also arent clock speeds higher, its just cache thats lower? So apps might be happier with it too. Name really should have been 5700GF just like the way Intel uses the F sku for igpu removed chips. Price might make sense though outside of gaming.
How is total cost of ownership? I suspect you're going to feel the difference in the power bill. Did you test that?