AMD Zen 3 Ryzen Deep Dive Review: 5950X, 5900X, 5800X and 5600X Tested
by Dr. Ian Cutress on November 5, 2020 9:01 AM ESTCPU Tests: Synthetic
Most of the people in our industry have a love/hate relationship when it comes to synthetic tests. On the one hand, they’re often good for quick summaries of performance and are easy to use, but most of the time the tests aren’t related to any real software. Synthetic tests are often very good at burrowing down to a specific set of instructions and maximizing the performance out of those. Due to requests from a number of our readers, we have the following synthetic tests.
Linux OpenSSL Speed: SHA256
One of our readers reached out in early 2020 and stated that he was interested in looking at OpenSSL hashing rates in Linux. Luckily OpenSSL in Linux has a function called ‘speed’ that allows the user to determine how fast the system is for any given hashing algorithm, as well as signing and verifying messages.
OpenSSL offers a lot of algorithms to choose from, and based on a quick Twitter poll, we narrowed it down to the following:
- rsa2048 sign and rsa2048 verify
- sha256 at 8K block size
- md5 at 8K block size
For each of these tests, we run them in single thread and multithreaded mode. All the graphs are in our benchmark database, Bench, and we use the sha256 and md5 results in published reviews.
GeekBench 5: Link
As a common tool for cross-platform testing between mobile, PC, and Mac, GeekBench is an ultimate exercise in synthetic testing across a range of algorithms looking for peak throughput. Tests include encryption, compression, fast Fourier transform, memory operations, n-body physics, matrix operations, histogram manipulation, and HTML parsing.
I’m including this test due to popular demand, although the results do come across as overly synthetic, and a lot of users often put a lot of weight behind the test due to the fact that it is compiled across different platforms (although with different compilers).
We have both GB5 and GB4 results in our benchmark database. GB5 was introduced to our test suite after already having tested ~25 CPUs, and so the results are a little sporadic by comparison. These spots will be filled in when we retest any of the CPUs.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
339 Comments
View All Comments
LithiumFirefly - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link
I thought the whole point to a civilization game benchmark was a time to complete turn not FPS who cares about FPS and a turn-based game.dagobah123 - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link
The more benchmarks the better. These are general purpose CPUs. Wouldn't it be a shame if you bought a 120hz+ 4k monitor with an expensive graphics card, only to find out your CPU was limiting your frames? Sure the game is playable @ 5 FPS as the author mentioned. However, it's getting harder to make the CPU the bottleneck in a lot of these games at higher resolutions and quality settings, so they have to resort to this. Would anyone play a game @ 360p? No, but if you want to see which CPU is better I say lets include every benchmark we can find.CookieBin - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link
I find it funny that these huge gains mean literally nothing at 4K. So all these different review sites highlight sky high fps at 1080p because at 4K that huge advantage becomes less than a 0.3% improvement.. keep pounding sand linus tech tips. I've never seen such a big nothing burger. No idiot out there buys a $800 5950X to play video games at 1080p.chuyayala - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link
The reason they test 1080p is because game processing is CPU-bound at that resolution (they are testing the CPU after-all). The higher the resolution, the more the GPU is working (not the CPU). The reason why there aren't much gains in 4k is because processing is limited by the GPU power. If we assume we get ultra powerful GPUs that can run 4k games at 120+ frames per second, then the CPU becomes more important.dagobah123 - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link
This is simply not true. It only appears to 'mean nothing' if you don't realize the bottleneck in the testing system on most of the benchmarks are the GPU. Meaning the GPU is maxed out at 100%. In this case you're right, the difference between many CPUs will not matter, but what about next year when you decide to buy the next high-end GPU, only to find out the CPU you choose couldn't handle much more. This is why 360p, 720p, even 1080p benchmarks are included to show you just how much more ahead one CPU is over another. Check out the test setup--they are using a 2080 Ti. Come check out the updated reviews after they test all this on 3090s and 6900 XTs.Pit a Ferarri and a Ford Model T against one another. Sure they both keep up with one another in the grocery parking lot @ 15mph. Take em out on the freeway with a 70mph speed limit and you'll have a clear winner. Let alone let em loose on the race track.
Future proof yourself a bit, buy a 5600k or 5800k for your 4k gaming. If you don't update your CPU often you'll be glad you did a couple years out if you drop in that next GPU.
nandnandnand - Saturday, November 7, 2020 - link
5950X will make your web browsing snappier... so you can load more AnandTech ads. ;)zodiacfml - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link
duh? Steam survey shows 1080p the most popular resolution for gaming. Aside from that, it is difficult to maintain frame rates for 240Hz/360Hz monitors.You might have a point with 720p res though
realbabilu - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link
First: I think you should compare with F or KF Intel version, for price comparison. Since they don't have internal Gpu. Somehow AMD not included the FAN also, beware good cooling isn't cheap.SECOND: it's nice to had coding bench with optimization here windows, with AVX2 and some flags compiling, Amd only provide optimization compiling on Linux only, I think they should be on windows too with optimized math kernel and compiler.
ThIrd: the price performance is justified now. In zen2 release the price was lower than Intel that time, made Intel justified the price for 10th Gen. Now from price sensitive, Intel still fine per price / performance ratio,even though it's need more power consumption.
duploxxx - Saturday, November 7, 2020 - link
the ryzens have a base TDP of 105W and peaking towards 140-150Wnot like the intels that peak at +200ish W, there you need good cooling.
A Dark rock slim or shadow rock can easily handle this and it will cost you 50-60$..
go find a cooler for the +200W so that it wont throttle all the time for the Intel
realbabilu - Saturday, November 7, 2020 - link
Great. I think Anand tech should do cooling shootout for 5900x/5950x bench.To find the minimum air cooler for this,
AMD only list noctua and bequiet as air cooler, others as liquid cooler at https://www.amd.com/en/processors/ryzen-thermal-so...
The slim rock and nh14s maybe the cheapest on the list. It is interesting could more budget double fan tower should enough for 5900x/5950x that has 145 watt max like deepcool gammax 400 pro (double fan), coolermaster ma410p, and shadow rock 2/3, and maybe cheapest aio coolermaster liquid master 120 lite that not listed on amd list.