With Rocket Lake-S just around the corner, it is normal for many to wonder what to do right now with two of the star processors for gaming from AMD and Intel. Is the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X or the i5-10400F better for gaming? Which is the most complete? What if I intend to use it more professionally as an edition rather than play? We are going to know the technical comparison of these two processors to discern which is the best scenario for both 5600x vs i5-10400F ?
Choosing a processor is really difficult for several reasons. The first is the performance factor, the second is the price and the third is the future that it will have. How to hit the tightest range of CPUs ever? We will try to put white on black based on its technical specifications and certain comparative data.
Ryzen 5 5600x vs i5-10400F, a battle for the user
We will start with the “older” of the two, the Intel processor, which integrates a Comet Lake architecture and was launched in Q2 of this 2020 under a 14 nm ++ lithography.
It has 6 cores with 12 threads thanks to HT and achieves a base frequency of 2.9 GHz , while the boost shoots up to 4.3 GHz , all with 12 MB of L3 and a TDP of only 65 watts . Being the F version, this CPU lacks an iGPU, not physically, since it does integrate it, but it is disabled and we will not be able to use it, so the price is usually somewhat lower.
As for RAM support, Intel will let us install up to 128 GB of DDR4-2666 MHz RAM as a standard frequency, but this value can be increased to much higher speeds, although then it is considered overclocked. Finally, we talk about a CPU that will be installed in the company’s new socket 1200, compatible with Z490 and lower boards and with the new chipsets that will come out.
AMD processor gains in frequency and IPC
What can we say about the AMD option? Well, it integrates the same number of threads and cores, but with a base frequency of 3.7 GHz and a Boost of 4.6 GHz , along with 32 MB of L3, all manufactured in a 7 nm lithographic by TSMC.
Another aspect that must be taken into account is the 65 watts of TDP and the fact that it is a CPU unlocked for overclock, while Intel will have to gather together the many techniques that are being launched by motherboard manufacturers to enable it for longer. the PL2 state and thus achieve more stable and faster frequencies in the cores.
Another detail to take into account is that the AMD IMC supports 3200 MHz frequencies from stock, while with overclock 3800 MHz is recommended as an ideal point of performance. Here’s a technical draw when it comes to overclocking, as both manage to scale very well in frequency.
PCIe 4.0 vs PCIe 3.0
It is important to note that the AMD processor has native support for PCIe 4.0 as well as the X570 and B550 boards, while Intel has to settle for PCIe 3.0 until the arrival of Rocket Lake, an architecture that will enable support in a way. native.
So, considering its main features, which one is worth it in terms of gaming or raw CPU performance? As we have not had the opportunity to test both processors for the moment, we will gather data from TechPowerUp colleagues to understand where both processors are located.
Comparative performance
Despite having the same number of cores and threads, the AMD processor is 20.6% faster in pure CPU tasks, something that could be due to the higher IPC of the architecture and those supposed 300 MHz difference between them, which propels the AMD processor to new heights.
But in gaming the differences become insignificant, since with 1.5% we will hardly notice a difference, therefore, it is time to go on to know the price at which these two CPUs are.
The Intel processor is currently at a suggested price of 173.03 euros , while the AMD one goes up to 449 euros . The problem is that there is no stock of the AMD, so the price has shot up quite a bit, but it should cost about 320-350 euros at most.
So, looking at the data and the platforms in general, knowing that between PCIe 3.0 and PCIe 4.0 in gaming there is currently no palpable performance difference, if what we want is only to play the Intel CPU has better performance / price obviously.
If instead we perform CPU-intensive tasks, such as rendering, encoding, decompressing or the like, but also to play for many hours, then AMD’s option is more complete, since, although it costs almost double, that more than 20% is time that we save, and time is more expensive than money really, unless we do not value it clearly.
If we want the equipment to work, render, or perform intensive tasks and no gaming, then the AMD processor takes on the greatest sense and would be the most correct choice. As we can see, choosing in the battle of 5600x vs i5-10400F is not easy, so we will have to take a good look at our preferences before deciding, already with a view to Rocket Lake-S, which will replace Comet Lake-S with its 11th Generation of processors.
What about the i5-10600K?
That will be another comparison, fairer than this one, since the natural rival of this Ryzen 5 5600X is precisely this CPU, where the differences are reduced in all aspects, including the price, but that for another article later.