AMD Zen 3 Ryzen Deep Dive Review: 5950X, 5900X, 5800X and 5600X Tested
by Dr. Ian Cutress on November 5, 2020 9:01 AM ESTGaming Tests: Far Cry 5
The fifth title in Ubisoft's Far Cry series lands us right into the unwelcoming arms of an armed militant cult in Montana, one of the many middles-of-nowhere in the United States. With a charismatic and enigmatic adversary, gorgeous landscapes of the northwestern American flavor, and lots of violence, it is classic Far Cry fare. Graphically intensive in an open-world environment, the game mixes in action and exploration with a lot of configurability.
Unfortunately, the game doesn’t like us changing the resolution in the results file when using certain monitors, resorting to 1080p but keeping the quality settings. But resolution scaling does work, so we decided to fix the resolution at 1080p and use a variety of different scaling factors to give the following:
- 720p Low, 1440p Low, 4K Low, 1440p Max.
Far Cry 5 outputs a results file here, but that the file is a HTML file, which showcases a graph of the FPS detected. At no point in the HTML file does it contain the frame times for each frame, but it does show the frames per second, as a value once per second in the graph. The graph in HTML form is a series of (x,y) co-ordinates scaled to the min/max of the graph, rather than the raw (second, FPS) data, and so using regex I carefully tease out the values of the graph, convert them into a (second, FPS) format, and take our values of averages and percentiles that way.
If anyone from Ubisoft wants to chat about building a benchmark platform that would not only help me but also every other member of the tech press build our benchmark testing platform to help our readers decide what is the best hardware to use on your games, please reach out to ian@anandtech.com. Some of the suggestions I want to give you will take less than half a day and it’s easily free advertising to use the benchmark over the next couple of years (or more).
As with the other gaming tests, we run each resolution/setting combination for a minimum of 10 minutes and take the relevant frame data for averages and percentiles.
| AnandTech | Low Resolution Low Quality |
Medium Resolution Low Quality |
High Resolution Low Quality |
Medium Resolution Max Quality |
| Average FPS |  |
 |
 |
 |
| 95th Percentile |  |
 |
 |
 |
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
339 Comments
View All Comments
Qasar - Tuesday, November 10, 2020 - link
simple. if intel/nvidia does it, its ok, and accepted. but if amd does it ? its a crime, and becomes important.TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, November 12, 2020 - link
The leectrical costs from running intel VS amd add up to literal cents per month. If you are that concerned....you shouldnt be buying $500 CPUs.Cost of ownership really only matters, similarly, on cheap low end cars. People buying $100K+ mercedes are not particularly concerned about the price of parts or fuel, if they were they wouldnt be buying a $100K car.
Threska - Monday, November 16, 2020 - link
Funny thing my APC UPS keeps track of something like that for things plugged it. Only thing that demonstrates is that everything costs, even FUN.Spunjji - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link
Only if you totally ignore performance per watt... You need a cooler capable of dissipating up to 250W to hit that performance, and even then, your characterisation here is garbage. Overall the 5800X is a superior product for the same price, and it's only just been released.Let the shitty, bitter takes continue!
Gigaplex - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link
And when Intel held the performance crown, they priced their parts higher than the competition. This is to be expected. AMD only undercut on price because they couldn't compete on performance previously.LithiumFirefly - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link
They didn't just price their parts higher for nearly 25 years they just slapped $1,000 price tag on their top chip didn't matter what its performance was $1,000 that's what it was.just4U - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link
the 5900X is nice at it's price point @ only 3-10 bucks more than the 10900K which appears to be what it's competing with.. and all the 10core parts really. The 5800X is in a odd position.. and I doubt it's going to be all that popular at that price point.Spunjji - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link
5600 and 5700 non-X will be where it's at for value when they roll around.just4U - Monday, November 9, 2020 - link
Yeah I agree.. plus it's likely that prices will come down on these parts somewhat or be offered on sale or bundled..(saw a bit of that on launch day but they all sold out so whatever)bananaforscale - Monday, November 9, 2020 - link
"Value destroying price hike"? Sure for 3600 vs 5600X (which is *arguably* comparable), 3900X vs 5900X there's no contest. 5900X is demonstrably more than 10% faster is most cases. FWIW, I'd go for the 5800X over 10900K performance being equal because PCIe 4 and lower power draw.