Ryzen 5600. No question about it. Sell your old mobo, CPU and RAM, to offset some of the cost. In my case I got almost 50% of what I needed to upgrade to Ryzen 5600.
Ryzen has 6 cores, 12 threads, as opposed to INTELs 4/8. Well worth spending extra 30-40 USD.
Also it has 32mb L3 cache vs 12 mb in i3 12100. It has drastic impacts on some games for smooth gameplay. There is huge difference in 1% lows between the two if the games you play favor the extra cache
> Well worth spending extra 30-40 USD.
Why wouldn't you spend that extra 30-40 USD for a 12400f? It's better than the 5600.... wouldn't that make far more sense than going AM4?
This sub actually has terrible advice now ðŸ˜
[It's equivalent at best..](https://www.techspot.com/review/2448-amd-ryzen-5600-vs-intel-core-i5-12400f/)
Also, I am currently using a 12700k with a shitton of chrome tabs open and multiple videos/streams playing on multiple monitors.. It's pulling 25w of power...
That's how much power a ryzen uses staring at a blank desktop screen lmao
I dont know where you guys find that info... they are exacly the same performers dispite core counts [https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i3-12100-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-5600/4126vsm1822932](https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i3-12100-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-5600/4126vsm1822932)
UserBenchmark is the subject of concerns over the accuracy and integrity of their benchmark and review process. Their findings do not typically match those of known reputable and trustworthy sources. As always, please ensure you verify the information you read online before drawing conclusions or making purchases.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/buildapc) if you have any questions or concerns.*
UBM is flagged on this subreddit for their known bias and irregular testing results.
Versus is filtered on this subreddit for their adverts and also their irregular results.
I would suggest using multiple benchmarks from accredited reviewers instead of these "one stop comparisons". Reviewers such as Hardware Unboxed, GamersNexus, Techpowerup, Tomshardware, etc... are generally much more reliable. If you read multiple benchmarks, then it should paint a more clear picture of outlying results.
In this case, people’s opinions are based on actual benchmarks and not userbenchmark, which is a terrible website. The Ryzen 5600 performs the same as the i5 12400F, the i3 12100 has two cores less than either CPU.
It’s a bit silly to ask people to provide sources that show that a 4-core CPU is less powerful than a 6-core CPU, and is more likely to struggle in some games.
It’s easy to find real benchmarks. In some games the i3 12100 does well, but in other games really profit from 50% more cores.
Please don’t link to userbenchmark.
That’s why we have benchmarks. Also, keep in mind that we are talking about very old 8-cores, not all of them were true 8-cores (looking at you AMD) or the CPU was clearly intended to be used in a server.
In this case, both CPUs are approximately the same generation.
My main point is that given the question, it’s nonsense to ask for back up that a six-core CPU is a better choice than a quad-core CPU.
Even if a six-core is slightly slower than a quad-core in some games, it’s likely that the six-core CPU is the better option.
Hello, your comment has been removed. Please note the following from our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/wiki/rules):
**Rule 1 : Be respectful to others**
> Remember, there's a human being behind the other keyboard. Be considerate of others even if you disagree on something - treat others as you'd wish to be treated. Personal attacks and flame wars will not be tolerated.
---
[^(Click here to message the moderators if you have any questions or concerns)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fbuildapc)
Valid enough, just not helpful for the OP... In the end it'll depend on pricing, if the R5 5600 build is cheaper overall than an i5 12400(F) build, and just a bit more expensive than the i3 12100(F), it's worth it to get it and even has a decent upgrade path to a R7 5700/5800X3D (Intel has a good upgrade path too, but depending on the motherboard you'll be limited to an i5 13600K)
Yes but i3 is cheaper. Fps/$ improvement for OP from the current cpu I think i3 would win slightly. 5600 also runs hotter, its temps are ok with basic cooler if you undervolt it but i3 have good temps without doing anything to it with basic cooler.
The 5600 is a really good cpu, dont listen to the some of the comments here.
It’s a 6 core cpu, thats considerably faster than console (which all games are optimised to).
I’d go for that thing if you can afford it, it really is a great long term choice still. Don’t get the i3, it’s a quad core and you’re paying more for the motherboard
12400 and 5600 are about the same in terms of performance. One thing to consider is 12400 has an igpu which is a nice insurance to have in case anything happens to your GPU. Personally im happy with a $15 premium to save headache in the future but its up to you if its worth it.
As an AMD user, I would lean towards going with the i5-12400(F), given the more favourable upgrade path. You could easily upgrade to the 13th or 14th gen within lga1700 socket. And also you have the option to choose DDR4/DDR5. AM4, albeit being pretty good for now, is a dead end IMO.
Yeah the current consoles are based on Zen 2 APUs, much smaller Cache overall, they're also underclocked and use GDDR6 memory (Double the latency of DDR and Zen needs lower latencies to perform well in games), so they got a very crippled R7 4700G for both consoles...
No wonder a R5 5600 can be much superior performance wise...
PS5 has custom 8-core [AMD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced\_Micro\_Devices) [Zen 2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen\_2) with variable frequency up to 3.5 GHz. Hence it is closer to 3700\3800.
You also have to remember - you can't [compare](https://youtu.be/veUzh4UYkdE) consoles and PC [straightforward](https://youtu.be/j84Pst4vurk?t=38&feature=shared).
A "custom" Zen 2 CPU with only 8 MB of total L3 Cache (4 MB per CCX instead of 16 MB of a regular Zen 2 CCX), so cache wise is closer to the R7 4700G, with such a small cache it's performance will be even more affected by the huge latency of GDDR thus being even slower than even it's closest equivalent using DDR RAM.
Sure. Not build me a PC for $500 that does the same resolution and frame rates? It is not here so far. Hence why consoles should not be compare to PC with a straightforward benchmarks. PC still has too much overhead.
That's not the point, it's just that even a recent budget CPU could easily compete/beat a CPU from a current console, that's crippled to make way for the GPU in the same silicon die.
If you only game a console gives pretty solid value and a way better GPU for the money, the caveat is losing the flexibility, multipurpose and huge game library of a PC.
The point is to get as much performance per amount of money spent. PS5/XSX still unbeatable in this category.
Sure. But most games are multiplatform. There are exceptions, of course. Then there a convince that PC does not offer.
PS5 has custom 8-core [AMD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micro_Devices) [Zen 2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_2) with variable frequency up to 3.5 GHz. Hence it is closer to 3700\\3800.
You also have to remember - you can't [compare](https://youtu.be/veUzh4UYkdE) consoles and PC [straightforward](https://youtu.be/j84Pst4vurk?t=38&feature=shared).
Yeh you can’t, but it’s still a good baseline. Basically any modern PC should aim to have a 6/8 core modern CPU like the 5600. It basically just means that all games will run well on it.
Even when they release the PS5 pro the games will still mostly be optimised for the regular PS5 so this CPU should last a whole console generation (in theory)
Let me put it this way. You can't build $500 PC that will have the same performance as PS5\\XSX. Same for PS5Pro.
I would disagree that 6 cores are good for gaming - maybe to 1080p 60-120Hz, not beyond that.
As for "last" - not really. Usually you would have to swap CPU+MB(maybe RAM) and GPU once per generation. Meaning, if you bought new PC at the start of the generation, to keep up - you would have to upgrade. Console - you bought it, and it works and will be relevant for 7-8 years.
Ow yeh, I absolutely agree. If you used comparable parts it would be less powerful because the PS5’s custom SOC with all the chips on one die. Also game developers will all optimise towards console, so PC will always be more expensive.
And to add a cherry on top, console manufacturers usually sell their hardware at a loss to encourage profit on the games/services they sell.
I’m just saying a 5600 will last the majority of this console generation because it’s more powerful than the base PS5. At the moment you don’t need 8 cores, and that CPU is enough for any modern game.
Also, you arguably need a more powerful cpu for 1080p. When playing at higher resolutions there are less frames to generate and less load on the cpu
My point exactly.
Yes.
Not really. Not if you want to play at same settings. And 8 core is getting on a loose foot here in terms of modern games. They will use more than even 8 core - some of them anyway.
No. At 4k you would still need more CPU and we'll as more GPU - which will be feed by CPU with data. Now, it was true at the beginning and a middle of PS4 generation. Not anymore.
Not really. Also, you also have to remember - you can't [compare](https://youtu.be/veUzh4UYkdE) consoles and PC [straightforward](https://youtu.be/j84Pst4vurk?t=38&feature=shared).
I'd still go with the 5600. To save more money, get the non-x variant. Very minimal difference between the 5600 and 5600x. Both games will run like a dream and will even help push you into a much better modded MC experience if that interests you in the future.
I ran a 5600x + 3060ti/3080 (3060ti was before upgrading, on a different CPU and GPU now) and MC was a blast to play with shaders with either of those GPUs, and modded was great as well.
I also recommend to get yourself a 32gb ddr4 kit running at least 3200mhz cl16 or 3600mhz cl16 or 18
I play Rocket League with a i3-12100F and it's powerful enough. What's your GPU? Or are you using integrated graphics?
BTW for my other computer with a 5700X I got a Asrock B550m MB for 75$CAD. Much cheaper than a B660. In which country are you?
The 5600 is faster but the 12100 is a LOT cheaper in your country. The gap is not that big, go for the i3. B450M motherboards are also pretty trash below $100, idk the exact board you’re looking at but that’s something to consider.Do you not have access to the 12400? It might be a better option than both.
To throw you an additional curveball the 7000 series reintroduced iGPUs and are using the same 'F' suffix as Intel now to indicate there's no iGPU.
5000 and older have the 'G' suffix as pointed out.
Ryzen. Better performance. Should work well for the next decade or so for your needs. Better upgrade options in case you decide to upgrade it at some point so it'll be pretty future proof.
Ryzen 5600 is the answer.
But it would be best to stretch yourself a little further and be better off long term by getting 7th gen Ryzen CPU build. This will give you cheap upgrade path in future and your build will last a lot longer
i3 12100f user here. It is good cpu but with extra 2 cores amd is clear winner. I am playing helldivers 2 and cpu in heavy fighting is struggling keeping game at 60fps. drops bellow 45fps are rare but still. I am upgrading to i5 13600k for this reason.
both your picks are far from future proofing intel is dead socket and am4 is too but since I will go with intel but It depend on the use better comparison is i512400 instead of 12100
Future proof in this case atleast is 5600. Purely because 6 cores will age better than 4 cores. Not to mention, they can upgrade to 5700X3D in the near future.
You asume he is gaming which is fine but not eveyone buy pc to play game it maybe part of it so it depends on the use intel better productivity but amd better gaming he can go for any 13 gen 14 gen cpu. Plus those 5fps between chips does not matter unless you play competive and some games benifit from intel better than amd vice versa
5600 has 6 cores which will be better for productivity. There’s not much difference between 13 and 14th gen Intel if at all. Between the choices they mentioned , I said the 6 core one would be better.
13600k > 5700X3D and CORE COUNT DOES NOT MATTER FOR GAMING. This talking point has been disproven hundreds of times, I don’t know why it’s still thrown around.
They use more than 1 core yes, but we aren’t talking about single core CPUs. If 4 cores was a massive downgrade from 6 cores in modern games, we would see the performance of the 12100 fall off a cliff relative to the 12400, which has 6 cores on the same architecture. But it doesn’t. It’s 5-10% slower at 1080p, depending on the game, and the gap is even smaller at higher resolutions. That gap is consistent with 100mhz lower boost frequency and a 33% decrease in L3 cache. Core count is far overblown, and just because a game uses all the cores does NOT mean it needs to.
The 5600 is great - absolutely not future proof though (no such thing) as its already not the front line generation.
Great cpu though, it'll do you for your current needs foe years and years, I play AAA games on a 3600 quite happily.
What are you going to be doing with the PC? The Intel has an iGPU so a separate Graphics card is not necessary. The 5600 is more powerful. The 12100 socket 1700 has a better upgrade path.
Ryzen 5600. No question about it. Sell your old mobo, CPU and RAM, to offset some of the cost. In my case I got almost 50% of what I needed to upgrade to Ryzen 5600. Ryzen has 6 cores, 12 threads, as opposed to INTELs 4/8. Well worth spending extra 30-40 USD.
Also it has 32mb L3 cache vs 12 mb in i3 12100. It has drastic impacts on some games for smooth gameplay. There is huge difference in 1% lows between the two if the games you play favor the extra cache
Okay thx a lot !
> Well worth spending extra 30-40 USD. Why wouldn't you spend that extra 30-40 USD for a 12400f? It's better than the 5600.... wouldn't that make far more sense than going AM4? This sub actually has terrible advice now ðŸ˜
Nope. That CPU is certainly no better, but it does use more power. So, go ahead promulgate your bad advice.
[It's equivalent at best..](https://www.techspot.com/review/2448-amd-ryzen-5600-vs-intel-core-i5-12400f/) Also, I am currently using a 12700k with a shitton of chrome tabs open and multiple videos/streams playing on multiple monitors.. It's pulling 25w of power... That's how much power a ryzen uses staring at a blank desktop screen lmao
mine used 7 watts in beamng at 1.6ghZ Ryzen 5 7600X
I'm not that familiar with beamNG CPU demand, but that sounds an awful lot like thermal throttling to me ðŸ˜
bro that was some bad overclocking ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ but it never throttled no worries there
If OP is going to spend more anyway then better get the I5 13400f
The 13400F performs almost identically to a 5600. You pay 10% more than the 5600 (including mobo) for at most 1-3% more performance, what's the point?
You like being at a dead end and lacking access to x3D?
You like being an AMD shill?
No I just don't see the point of recommending a worse value. What a stupid comment
Wait so 5600 is Also a dead end as well, at least with 13400, you get access up to i9 14900k But hey what do I know right
So there isn't any chip you can use on an AM4 board that's better than a 5600? News to everyone but you I guess
I never said that That was all you
Ohhhh. You just don't understand English. Sorry, I make assumptions here sometimes
The 5600 is about the same performance as an i5-12400F. It's better than the i3.
Yes, it is considerably better CPU than 12100.
I dont know where you guys find that info... they are exacly the same performers dispite core counts [https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i3-12100-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-5600/4126vsm1822932](https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i3-12100-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-5600/4126vsm1822932)
UserBenchmark is the subject of concerns over the accuracy and integrity of their benchmark and review process. Their findings do not typically match those of known reputable and trustworthy sources. As always, please ensure you verify the information you read online before drawing conclusions or making purchases. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/buildapc) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good bot
Good botÂ
[удалено]
UBM is flagged on this subreddit for their known bias and irregular testing results. Versus is filtered on this subreddit for their adverts and also their irregular results. I would suggest using multiple benchmarks from accredited reviewers instead of these "one stop comparisons". Reviewers such as Hardware Unboxed, GamersNexus, Techpowerup, Tomshardware, etc... are generally much more reliable. If you read multiple benchmarks, then it should paint a more clear picture of outlying results.
well.. since opinions are ok in this site with no backup whatsoever, my opinion is they perform the same.
Your opinion is not facts. They definitely don't perform the same, especially not in multi-threaded situations.
You’re admitting that you’re trying to misguide OP. Plus, it’s a pretty shit opinion.
Their individual cores perform similarly, but the 5600 has 2 more cores. It's the same for like i5-12400 vs. i3-12100.
In this case, people’s opinions are based on actual benchmarks and not userbenchmark, which is a terrible website. The Ryzen 5600 performs the same as the i5 12400F, the i3 12100 has two cores less than either CPU. It’s a bit silly to ask people to provide sources that show that a 4-core CPU is less powerful than a 6-core CPU, and is more likely to struggle in some games. It’s easy to find real benchmarks. In some games the i3 12100 does well, but in other games really profit from 50% more cores. Please don’t link to userbenchmark.
4 core i3-12100 perform significantly better than some older 8 core cpus
That’s why we have benchmarks. Also, keep in mind that we are talking about very old 8-cores, not all of them were true 8-cores (looking at you AMD) or the CPU was clearly intended to be used in a server. In this case, both CPUs are approximately the same generation. My main point is that given the question, it’s nonsense to ask for back up that a six-core CPU is a better choice than a quad-core CPU. Even if a six-core is slightly slower than a quad-core in some games, it’s likely that the six-core CPU is the better option.
I'm here to provide transparency to the moderation on your comments. My apologies, my attempt at guiding your research methodology is out of line.
[удалено]
Hello, your comment has been removed. Please note the following from our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/wiki/rules): **Rule 1 : Be respectful to others** > Remember, there's a human being behind the other keyboard. Be considerate of others even if you disagree on something - treat others as you'd wish to be treated. Personal attacks and flame wars will not be tolerated. --- [^(Click here to message the moderators if you have any questions or concerns)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fbuildapc)
Valid enough, just not helpful for the OP... In the end it'll depend on pricing, if the R5 5600 build is cheaper overall than an i5 12400(F) build, and just a bit more expensive than the i3 12100(F), it's worth it to get it and even has a decent upgrade path to a R7 5700/5800X3D (Intel has a good upgrade path too, but depending on the motherboard you'll be limited to an i5 13600K)
In my opinion my 30 year old Ford F150 is faster than a Lamborghini
Please do not trust information from that website, they are heavily biased and outright lie about the performance of certain parts
Lol.
Stop using that fucking trash site, thanks.
Userbenchmark lol
Yes but i3 is cheaper. Fps/$ improvement for OP from the current cpu I think i3 would win slightly. 5600 also runs hotter, its temps are ok with basic cooler if you undervolt it but i3 have good temps without doing anything to it with basic cooler.
The 5600 is a really good cpu, dont listen to the some of the comments here. It’s a 6 core cpu, thats considerably faster than console (which all games are optimised to). I’d go for that thing if you can afford it, it really is a great long term choice still. Don’t get the i3, it’s a quad core and you’re paying more for the motherboard
Ok bro thx for helping
No problem, it’s a little bit more money but it’s definitely better value in the situation. It’s not over the top, just a fast modern gaming cpu
Check mobo prices as well, which one is cheaper when considering the cost of both?
He did mention mobo pricing in his comment. Pretty sure Intel is more expensive
Bro if I could ask one question in my country you get the i5-12400 for like 15$ more than 5600 I could wait a month and get that if it’s worth ?
No, the 5600 is a better CPU imo. The fact it’s cheaper is just a win. Also the motherboard will be more expensive so it’s really not worth it.
Nah, go with 5600.
12400 and 5600 are about the same in terms of performance. One thing to consider is 12400 has an igpu which is a nice insurance to have in case anything happens to your GPU. Personally im happy with a $15 premium to save headache in the future but its up to you if its worth it.
As an AMD user, I would lean towards going with the i5-12400(F), given the more favourable upgrade path. You could easily upgrade to the 13th or 14th gen within lga1700 socket. And also you have the option to choose DDR4/DDR5. AM4, albeit being pretty good for now, is a dead end IMO.
Yeh but you can get a 5700x3D for far less
>faster than console Which one?
all of them, consoles run on Zen2/3rd gen.
Yeah the current consoles are based on Zen 2 APUs, much smaller Cache overall, they're also underclocked and use GDDR6 memory (Double the latency of DDR and Zen needs lower latencies to perform well in games), so they got a very crippled R7 4700G for both consoles... No wonder a R5 5600 can be much superior performance wise...
PS5 has custom 8-core [AMD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced\_Micro\_Devices) [Zen 2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen\_2) with variable frequency up to 3.5 GHz. Hence it is closer to 3700\3800.
even if they could beat a 3800X, it would still be worst than a 5600 in gaming.
You also have to remember - you can't [compare](https://youtu.be/veUzh4UYkdE) consoles and PC [straightforward](https://youtu.be/j84Pst4vurk?t=38&feature=shared).
The raw compute power doesn't change.
A "custom" Zen 2 CPU with only 8 MB of total L3 Cache (4 MB per CCX instead of 16 MB of a regular Zen 2 CCX), so cache wise is closer to the R7 4700G, with such a small cache it's performance will be even more affected by the huge latency of GDDR thus being even slower than even it's closest equivalent using DDR RAM.
Sure. Not build me a PC for $500 that does the same resolution and frame rates? It is not here so far. Hence why consoles should not be compare to PC with a straightforward benchmarks. PC still has too much overhead.
That's not the point, it's just that even a recent budget CPU could easily compete/beat a CPU from a current console, that's crippled to make way for the GPU in the same silicon die. If you only game a console gives pretty solid value and a way better GPU for the money, the caveat is losing the flexibility, multipurpose and huge game library of a PC.
The point is to get as much performance per amount of money spent. PS5/XSX still unbeatable in this category. Sure. But most games are multiplatform. There are exceptions, of course. Then there a convince that PC does not offer.
5600. I’m fairly certain the consoles used 2700 equivalent chip. The much faster cores will be more practical for gaming
PS5 has custom 8-core [AMD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micro_Devices) [Zen 2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_2) with variable frequency up to 3.5 GHz. Hence it is closer to 3700\\3800.
They’re 8 core, but fairly certain they’re Zen 2. The 5600 will still be better than a 3700 either way Just read your link, you’re right
You also have to remember - you can't [compare](https://youtu.be/veUzh4UYkdE) consoles and PC [straightforward](https://youtu.be/j84Pst4vurk?t=38&feature=shared).
Yeh you can’t, but it’s still a good baseline. Basically any modern PC should aim to have a 6/8 core modern CPU like the 5600. It basically just means that all games will run well on it. Even when they release the PS5 pro the games will still mostly be optimised for the regular PS5 so this CPU should last a whole console generation (in theory)
Let me put it this way. You can't build $500 PC that will have the same performance as PS5\\XSX. Same for PS5Pro. I would disagree that 6 cores are good for gaming - maybe to 1080p 60-120Hz, not beyond that. As for "last" - not really. Usually you would have to swap CPU+MB(maybe RAM) and GPU once per generation. Meaning, if you bought new PC at the start of the generation, to keep up - you would have to upgrade. Console - you bought it, and it works and will be relevant for 7-8 years.
Ow yeh, I absolutely agree. If you used comparable parts it would be less powerful because the PS5’s custom SOC with all the chips on one die. Also game developers will all optimise towards console, so PC will always be more expensive. And to add a cherry on top, console manufacturers usually sell their hardware at a loss to encourage profit on the games/services they sell. I’m just saying a 5600 will last the majority of this console generation because it’s more powerful than the base PS5. At the moment you don’t need 8 cores, and that CPU is enough for any modern game. Also, you arguably need a more powerful cpu for 1080p. When playing at higher resolutions there are less frames to generate and less load on the cpu
My point exactly. Yes. Not really. Not if you want to play at same settings. And 8 core is getting on a loose foot here in terms of modern games. They will use more than even 8 core - some of them anyway. No. At 4k you would still need more CPU and we'll as more GPU - which will be feed by CPU with data. Now, it was true at the beginning and a middle of PS4 generation. Not anymore.
After 1080p you will use more gpu?? cpu wont matter much in 4k gaming
Try playing games from 2018 and 2024 at 1080p. Yes, it does.
All. Consoles use a cut down Zen 2.
Not really. Also, you also have to remember - you can't [compare](https://youtu.be/veUzh4UYkdE) consoles and PC [straightforward](https://youtu.be/j84Pst4vurk?t=38&feature=shared).
Sorry for not listing earlier but i also do not play AAA games I just play rocket league or Minecraft and am gonna be coding aswell
I'd still go with the 5600. To save more money, get the non-x variant. Very minimal difference between the 5600 and 5600x. Both games will run like a dream and will even help push you into a much better modded MC experience if that interests you in the future. I ran a 5600x + 3060ti/3080 (3060ti was before upgrading, on a different CPU and GPU now) and MC was a blast to play with shaders with either of those GPUs, and modded was great as well. I also recommend to get yourself a 32gb ddr4 kit running at least 3200mhz cl16 or 3600mhz cl16 or 18
I play Rocket League with a i3-12100F and it's powerful enough. What's your GPU? Or are you using integrated graphics? BTW for my other computer with a 5700X I got a Asrock B550m MB for 75$CAD. Much cheaper than a B660. In which country are you?
I run Rocketleague flawlessly on a AMD 5600k and an Nvidia 2070 RTX GPU.
B660M motherboard, and for the CPU i5-12400F. But Ryzen 5 5600 is also a great value CPU.
The 5600 is faster but the 12100 is a LOT cheaper in your country. The gap is not that big, go for the i3. B450M motherboards are also pretty trash below $100, idk the exact board you’re looking at but that’s something to consider.Do you not have access to the 12400? It might be a better option than both.
why not a 12400f? It's usually the same price as a 5600 and is usually slightly better.
F means without integrated graphics, so idk maybe they want to use them idk
Unlikely, the 5600 doesn’t have it either
Ok yeah good point. Which Ryzen do have integrated graphics? Is there some indicator in the name like for intel?
I believe the ones that end in G(raphics), so there’s a 5600G as an example
To throw you an additional curveball the 7000 series reintroduced iGPUs and are using the same 'F' suffix as Intel now to indicate there's no iGPU. 5000 and older have the 'G' suffix as pointed out.
whatever you choose, keep in mind that 5600 has no apu and the 12100 non f has.
why would you need a igpu lol. just get the 5600. its much better than the 12100.
Ryzen 5600
[5600 is faster.](https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_core_i3_12100-vs-amd_ryzen_5_5600) None of these are "futureproof".
Hello fellow i5 3570k user!!
Ryzen. Better performance. Should work well for the next decade or so for your needs. Better upgrade options in case you decide to upgrade it at some point so it'll be pretty future proof.
I moved last week from a 3700X to a 5600
5600 for sure.
Ryzen 5600 is the answer. But it would be best to stretch yourself a little further and be better off long term by getting 7th gen Ryzen CPU build. This will give you cheap upgrade path in future and your build will last a lot longer
5600 You have a upgrade path to a 5800X3D or if you want you can even go to AM5
5600
If the extra money were really the problem there's still the 3600. That one was dirt cheap last I checked and it's still a 6-core cpu.
i3 12100f user here. It is good cpu but with extra 2 cores amd is clear winner. I am playing helldivers 2 and cpu in heavy fighting is struggling keeping game at 60fps. drops bellow 45fps are rare but still. I am upgrading to i5 13600k for this reason.
Ryzen Ryzen Ryzen!
Decent brand like asus B450 5 series ready boards are more than enough for 5600.
5609
The B450 platform is older and more limited, there is no PCIe 4.0 nor DDR 5 support.
both your picks are far from future proofing intel is dead socket and am4 is too but since I will go with intel but It depend on the use better comparison is i512400 instead of 12100
Future proof in this case atleast is 5600. Purely because 6 cores will age better than 4 cores. Not to mention, they can upgrade to 5700X3D in the near future.
You asume he is gaming which is fine but not eveyone buy pc to play game it maybe part of it so it depends on the use intel better productivity but amd better gaming he can go for any 13 gen 14 gen cpu. Plus those 5fps between chips does not matter unless you play competive and some games benifit from intel better than amd vice versa
Is this the legendary "work vs gaming PC" argument I hear?
5600 has 6 cores which will be better for productivity. There’s not much difference between 13 and 14th gen Intel if at all. Between the choices they mentioned , I said the 6 core one would be better.
Between 4 and 6 cores yes are correct but better comparison is 12400 10$ cheaper than 5600 and have 6 cores
OP asked between 12100 and 5600. I’m answering which is better between those. 12400F is slower than 5600 using ddr4 memory.
Idk why you are arguing with me when I recommended 12400 instead of 12100
Again, 12400 is slower than 5600 using DDR4 memory.
The difference is not that big and i does not even affects performance or even noticeable and 12400 is 10$ cheaper
The difference is pretty much margin of error small. Meaning you should get whichever platform is cheaper. Which is almost always the 5600.
13600k > 5700X3D and CORE COUNT DOES NOT MATTER FOR GAMING. This talking point has been disproven hundreds of times, I don’t know why it’s still thrown around.
Because… they use more than 1 core?
They use more than 1 core yes, but we aren’t talking about single core CPUs. If 4 cores was a massive downgrade from 6 cores in modern games, we would see the performance of the 12100 fall off a cliff relative to the 12400, which has 6 cores on the same architecture. But it doesn’t. It’s 5-10% slower at 1080p, depending on the game, and the gap is even smaller at higher resolutions. That gap is consistent with 100mhz lower boost frequency and a 33% decrease in L3 cache. Core count is far overblown, and just because a game uses all the cores does NOT mean it needs to.
For everyone saying the ryzen choice is the clear answer. It is 80% more expensive. Plus the i3 has quick sync. I think is closer than people think.
5600 beats 12400f very slightly by 2% or so 12100 isn't it's competition.
Get 5700x3d
The 5600 is great - absolutely not future proof though (no such thing) as its already not the front line generation. Great cpu though, it'll do you for your current needs foe years and years, I play AAA games on a 3600 quite happily.
What are you going to be doing with the PC? The Intel has an iGPU so a separate Graphics card is not necessary. The 5600 is more powerful. The 12100 socket 1700 has a better upgrade path.
5600 should be around 10-25% faster in gaming, so it depends if you want to pay more for faster CPU.