AMD Ryzen 9 5950X Annihilates Intel Core i9-10900K In Early Cinebench R20 Single/Multi-Core Tests

Tsing

The FPS Review
Staff member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
11,437
Points
83
amd-zen-3-logo.jpg
Image: AMD



During last week’s Zen 3 event, AMD suggested that its flagship Ryzen 5000 Series processor would be eating Intel’s for breakfast in both gaming and content creation. While those claims were strictly in-house (i.e., subject to shenanigans), we now have third-party metrics that suggest red team’s performance data is on point.



The first Cinebench R20 benchmarks for the Ryzen 9 5950X can be found on CPU Monkey (via Guru 3D), and they are definitely above and beyond what Intel’s flagship can muster. In the single-core test, AMD’s Ryzen 9 5950X...

Continue reading...
 
I won't be upgrading for a while, but may have to look at AMD next time.
 
I'm interested in the 5900x, but will have to change mobo's.

Maybe after the first of the year
 
More ignorance from the industry & consumers! It is not fair or objective to compare a 16 core cpu with a 10 core and expect similar results. AMD fanboys don't get this because they allow their personal feelings to dedicate their opinions. So of course they believe AMD is winning when garbage articles like this one show up.

To be objective, compare an 8 core Intel cpu with an 8 core AMD such as a 9900k/10700k with a 3800x or 5800x! Sorry so many AMD fanboys can't understand why this is the more objective thing to do.

Since Intel doesn't have a 12 or 16 core cpu for their mainstream platform, compare the 10 core cpus. BUT of course AMD 12 & 16 core cpus will blow away Intel's 10 core, because if they didn't, it would look super bad for AMD!
 
More ignorance from the industry & consumers! It is not fair or objective to compare a 16 core cpu with a 10 core and expect similar results. AMD fanboys don't get this because they allow their personal feelings to dedicate their opinions. So of course they believe AMD is winning when garbage articles like this one show up.

To be objective, compare an 8 core Intel cpu with an 8 core AMD such as a 9900k/10700k with a 3800x or 5800x! Sorry so many AMD fanboys can't understand why this is the more objective thing to do.

Since Intel doesn't have a 12 or 16 core cpu for their mainstream platform, compare the 10 core cpus. BUT of course AMD 12 & 16 core cpus will blow away Intel's 10 core, because if they didn't, it would look super bad for AMD!

Did you just blatantly ignore the single core scores?
 
That 5950x single core score is beastly.

I hope it is able to maintain it better than my 3930x can. It doesn't take much to knock the 3930k off of max boost mode, including almost any background task, which turns it into a little bit of an academic number, rather than a real use one.

Also, why is it only the insane 32 core models come with the best boost clocks?

Why won't they learn that huge core count and high clocks generally have different applications?

I'd like an 8 core model with the max boost clock of the 32 core model. Who the hell needs all those added 24 cores?
 
That 5950x single core score is beastly.

I hope it is able to maintain it better than my 3930x can. It doesn't take much to knock the 3930k off of max boost mode, including almost any background task, which turns it into a little bit of an academic number, rather than a real use one.

Also, why is it only the insane 32 core models come with the best boost clocks?

Why won't they learn that huge core count and high clocks generally have different applications?

I'd like an 8 core model with the max boost clock of the 32 core model. Who the hell needs all those added 24 cores?
Well theyre establishing price points, you want high clocks, pay up :)
 
Well theyre establishing price points, you want high clocks, pay up :)

Yeah, but it's sort of like telling a sports car enthusiast, that if he wants high horsepower, he's going to have to buy a dump truck.

They are different products for different users.
 
More ignorance from the industry & consumers! It is not fair or objective to compare a 16 core cpu with a 10 core and expect similar results. AMD fanboys don't get this because they allow their personal feelings to dedicate their opinions. So of course they believe AMD is winning when garbage articles like this one show up.

To be objective, compare an 8 core Intel cpu with an 8 core AMD such as a 9900k/10700k with a 3800x or 5800x! Sorry so many AMD fanboys can't understand why this is the more objective thing to do.

Since Intel doesn't have a 12 or 16 core cpu for their mainstream platform, compare the 10 core cpus. BUT of course AMD 12 & 16 core cpus will blow away Intel's 10 core, because if they didn't, it would look super bad for AMD!
I would think comparing by price point would be fair.
 
More ignorance from the industry & consumers! It is not fair or objective to compare a 16 core cpu with a 10 core and expect similar results. AMD fanboys don't get this because they allow their personal feelings to dedicate their opinions. So of course they believe AMD is winning when garbage articles like this one show up.

To be objective, compare an 8 core Intel cpu with an 8 core AMD such as a 9900k/10700k with a 3800x or 5800x! Sorry so many AMD fanboys can't understand why this is the more objective thing to do.

Since Intel doesn't have a 12 or 16 core cpu for their mainstream platform, compare the 10 core cpus. BUT of course AMD 12 & 16 core cpus will blow away Intel's 10 core, because if they didn't, it would look super bad for AMD!

Looking at the comparisons posted, I would agree that they weren't the best choices. Finding a comparison for reviews can be challenging - we tend to go towards price as the arbiter of comparison, so in this case, the 10900 is the comparison to the 5900x as they are in the same ballpark.

For the 5950x, that's more difficult - you have to move to the Intel workstation platform to get more cores, but there's also platform cost differences since you're getting out of the consumer space. There really is no good comparison there other than maybe the 3950x.

I suppose the single core tests will be fine for now... Meanwhile we wait for reviews!
 
Yeah, but it's sort of like telling a sports car enthusiast, that if he wants high horsepower, he's going to have to buy a dump truck.

They are different products for different users.
Nah, he just needs to buy the "S" model of said sporstcar....(ask Porsche)
 
Did nobody notice he completely has the wrong numbers in this story? Look at the chart, it's the 5600x that got 604, not the 5950x... that scored 641. At least he got the right MT score I guess ;).
 
Did nobody notice he completely has the wrong numbers in this story? Look at the chart, it's the 5600x that got 604, not the 5950x... that scored 641. At least he got the right MT score I guess ;).


Yep, according to the chart you are correct.
 
More ignorance from the industry & consumers! It is not fair or objective to compare a 16 core cpu with a 10 core and expect similar results. AMD fanboys don't get this because they allow their personal feelings to dedicate their opinions. So of course they believe AMD is winning when garbage articles like this one show up.

To be objective, compare an 8 core Intel cpu with an 8 core AMD such as a 9900k/10700k with a 3800x or 5800x! Sorry so many AMD fanboys can't understand why this is the more objective thing to do.

Since Intel doesn't have a 12 or 16 core cpu for their mainstream platform, compare the 10 core cpus. BUT of course AMD 12 & 16 core cpus will blow away Intel's 10 core, because if they didn't, it would look super bad for AMD!
lol, this is rich. It's not fair to compare top end to top end, or even 2 items in the same price range. Let me guess, you were against comparing AMD's 5700xt to anything above $400 too? Yah, that's what I thought, if you want to stay in your vacuum that's fine, the rest of us live in the real world. Amazing how quick Intel sends the shills out before benchmarks even start showing up. With a name like Amdguru, you aren't fooling anyone.
 
I would think comparing by price point would be fair.

It's really the only comparison that matters.

If I spend X dollars, what can I get for it, and how will it perform.

Other comparisons can be interesting from an academic perspective to determine all sorts of things like performance per core, per clock, etc. but in th end, where the rubber meets the road, all that matters is, how did it perform for the money.
 
I might actually wait around for the fire sale on Zen 2 parts, and pick up a 3800x or 3800xt as a last hurrah upgrade for my stepsons B350 Tomahawk motherboard.

I wonder what the Zen3 Threadrippers would bring.

I opted for a Threadripper my last upgrade because the regular Ryzens didn't have enough PCIe lanes for me, not because I needed or wanted the extra cores.

If I had my druthers I'd be able to buy a Zen3 Threadripper with all the PCIe lanes and same max clocks as the 5950x, but only 8C16T. I know this will never happen, but this would essentially be the ideal CPU for me. I have no need for all these crazy core counts, but I still like my expansion.

I hate how they have to tie high PCIe lanes, high core counts and high clock speeds together. It's really frustrating.
 
More ignorance from the industry & consumers! It is not fair or objective to compare a 16 core cpu with a 10 core and expect similar results. AMD fanboys don't get this because they allow their personal feelings to dedicate their opinions. So of course they believe AMD is winning when garbage articles like this one show up.

To be objective, compare an 8 core Intel cpu with an 8 core AMD such as a 9900k/10700k with a 3800x or 5800x! Sorry so many AMD fanboys can't understand why this is the more objective thing to do.

Since Intel doesn't have a 12 or 16 core cpu for their mainstream platform, compare the 10 core cpus. BUT of course AMD 12 & 16 core cpus will blow away Intel's 10 core, because if they didn't, it would look super bad for AMD!
I'm an AMD fanboy ... but I don't quite fit into your little box there .. As Zarathustra mentioned .. what does my hard earned dollar get me that gives ME the best bang for MY buck .. right now, it looks like AMD's offerings and even more so their future offerings are what gives ME what I want .. :)
 
Single Core = beautiful
Multi Core = beautiful
Price to performance is the only thing that really matters, you don't match up core count without first checking price to performance. Can't wait to see third party reviews and benchmarks.
 
Become a Patron!
Back
Top