Gaming Performance
Now we come to the interesting testing we are sure you all can’t wait for, we were also anxious to get to this part and see how it all ends up for gaming performance. In order to test this properly, really get a good feel for it, and cover all the bases for the big picture, we decided to test 1080p, 1440p, and 4K resolutions, all three resolutions to see from top to bottom how these CPUs affect performance games. For testing, we are using an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti Founders Edition video card. Since we are testing all 3 resolutions, it’ll be a good mix to see where the CPU matters and where it doesn’t.
All the graphs below are not sorted, they are not sorted from fastest to slowest as in previous graphs, instead, they are simply labeled in groups by platform, from fastest CPU to least fastest CPU. As you look at performance, try to look down the column of the resolution, to see which one is faster than the other, to help your eyes see which one is faster.
F1 2022
AMD stated that F1 2022 was 11-12% faster on Zen 4 versus the previous generation. We can see here that at 4K there is definitely no difference at all between the CPUs, completely GPU bound even on a 3090 Ti. However, once we go down to 1440p we do start to see some separation. The Ryzen 5 7600X is among the higher performance here. It’s close to Core i5-12600K performance. At 1080p there is greater separation, and the 7600X is one nearer to the top of the charts as well. If you compare the 1080p performance of the 7600X versus the previous generation 5600X the 7600X in our test is 11% faster, therefore validating AMD’s claim.
Dying Light 2
In Dying Light 2 we see much of the same at 4K, we are GPU bound, but things start to change at 1440p and certainly 1080p. At 1440p the Ryzen 5 7600X is near the top on performance but is ultimately beat out by the Alder Lake CPUs. At 1080p the previous generation lags behind quite a bit, and the Ryzen 5 7600X fixes that. However, once again Alder Lake CPUs still edge out the 7600X on performance here. Compared to the last generation Ryzen 5 5600X the new 7600X is 17% faster at 1080p, so that is quite the uplift.
Far Cry 6
Far Cry 6 can definitely be a more CPU-limited game. We see a little fluctuation at 4K, but we see a big one at 1440p and below. You can see which CPUs are bottlenecked as the 1440p and 1080p performance is very close. The 5600X and 5800X were quite limited. The new Ryzen 5 7600X great improves 1440p and 1080p performance over the 5600X. Uplifts in the range of 15%-28% are not bad at all at 1440p and 1080p respectively. When looking at the Intel Core i5-12600K it seems to be on par with the new 7600X here, but the 12700K and 12900K beat it.
Watch Dogs Legion
In Watch Dogs Legion at 4K there isn’t a difference, but at 1440p and below, we do see one. The Ryzen 5 7600X at 1440p is the same performance as the 5600X, but at 1080p it’s 14% faster. Once again though, we see the Intel Alder Lake CPUs, including the 12600K being faster than the 7600X at 1440p and 1080p, the result is actually quite more than we would have thought.
Discussion (13 replies)
Join Discussion →My opinion. If you're currently on Zen2+ or Zen3 on anything less than a 5800X3D, and all you do is game, then the 5800X3D is the best bang for the buck upgrade. That CPU is a gaming powerhouse.
I kind of have mixed feelings about these mid-tier Zen4 CPU's. At least from a gaming perspective. It would cost significantly more to build a 7600X system, for inarguably less gaming performance, than it would be to build a cheaper 5800X3D system. Especially with AMD saying they were going to continue development of X3D AM4 parts.
They kind of put themselves in a tough situation with their product stack.
Yes, for gaming, I agree.
The question one has to ask is what is their intention and use case. What workloads will they need? If all you do is gaming on the PC, then you have your answer. However, if you do much more, or throw other certain kinds of workloads at the CPU, then perhaps there is value. It depends on your needs.
Yar, tough sell to migrate from AM4 to AM5 currently (though if I was building new I'd for sure go AM5).
Looking forward to see how the 7000X3D's perform, but think I won't be migrating until the second revisions come out.
It's nice to see that these lower cost 6C/12T chips can still keep up in gaming, at least if you aren't trying to do TOO much in the background (like encode streams)
I bet these will find their way into a lot of decent gaming machines.
I'm betting they won't find their way in to much of anything until cheaper X670 boards come out, or B-series is released. The value isn't quite there yet. Especially with DDR5 costs, PSU and cooling requirements.
Yep, I think the single chip B650/E will be the way to go. All those extra USB and PCIe connections on the expensive X670/E will be limited by the bridge between the 2 chipsets.
B650 + 7_00X3D will be the best early AM5 for gaming.
If you game at 4k you are better off getting a 5600X.
BTW thanks a lot for using settings one would actually use for gaming. Not Low/mid 720p/1080p settings like many reviews out there.
I think both have value.
Using minimum settings and low resolution you see the potential performance a CPU might have if you have a really fast GPU.
This is valuable for theoretical comparisons and to get an idea how "future proof" the CPU is.
Benchmarking a CPU at real world settings is easier to understand for those who don't get the fact that they will in all likelihood be GPU limited, and helps minimize the arguing over irrelevant performance differences no one will ever actually experience in their CPU due to this GPU limitation.
Honestly, if I had to pick just one, I'd pick the CPU benchmark at minimum settings and low resolution. Using that and GPU benchmarks I can project what my performance will be in almost any combination of hardware. if I only have the latter, I can only really predict how it will perform in that one CPU/GPU combination.
So yeah. I like to see both, but if I had to pick just one, I'd pick the "everything graphical at minimum settings and resolution using an overkill top end GPU" just to try to isolate the CPU performance, because that is honestly more useful.
If I have that CPU isolated data I can look at a CPU benchmark and at a GPU benchmark separately and just pick the minimum framerate of the two, and know that is likely a reasonable prediction of how they will perform together. This is of much greater value to me than real world benchmarks on a system with a GPU I may or may not ever use.
I also see value in both results, low rez, and high rez, for both reasons. That's why I include 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, I think it's all relevant, and important to see scaling between resolutions, comparing CPUs. I'm rather excited about the fact that we represent that, that way anyone reading can hone in on the resolution they take value from, and make up their own mind. I think it gives an overall bigger picture of CPU performance, and I'm very happy people get value out of that in our reviews.
More than the resolution, my issue is low settings. Normally I see cpu benches even at 720p low and those exacerbate the impact of the mobo/cpu.
I recall asking Kyle at several times to do hi-res/high settings on the CPU/Mobo reviews as it would reflect a more real world scenario (which was policy). Never happened.
Thankfully you got all my bases covered.
That's why you look at both the GPU and CPU reviews, and - if you have CPU reviews run at low settings, and GPU reviews with overkill CPU/Platform to avoid it being the limiting factor - you can just take the minimum framerates of each review, and use that as a pretty reasonable predictor of what the combination of that CPU and GPU will look like.
The theory is to make the component under review the bottleneck to see what it is truly capable of so you can understand that particular component, rather than having the results confounded with the system as a whole.
Or just give the reader all the info you can in each review and let them decide what's important to them :p
I'll never argue against more information :p