intel has launched the new i-5 ten 600k
cpu but how does it compare against
AMD's cheaper risin 530 600 let's see
what the differences are in games and
applications both its stock and wall
overclocked starting out with the specs
both a 6 core 12 thread parts the 3600
has far more cache however the 10 600 K
has a higher TDP and higher clock speeds
the price difference is unfortunately a
best guess at the moment the Rison 5
3600 goes for 172 US dollars however the
10 600 k hasn't hit shelves at the time
of recording Intel lists the 1000 unit
sale price as 262 dollars but the actual
price will probably be more like 280
dollars there is also the 10 600 KF
though which is basically the same price
or so but without integrated graphics
for less money so you could definitely
save some money if you don't need the
IGP you do to this I've split the
difference and listed the 10 600 K at
260 US dollars but check the links in
the description for updated pricing once
that's available I'm mainly comparing
these two processes because they've got
the same core in thread counts yet the
3600 is a fair bit cheaper sure the 3600
X might make more sense from a price
difference perspective as it's around
230 US dollars however in my 3600 verse
36 hundred X comparison I found
extremely minor differences between the
two and based on this it's my opinion
that in most cases it's not worth
getting the more expensive 3600 X unless
it's on a great sale both processors
were tested in the same system but I've
had to change motherboards for the Intel
i5 10 600 K I'm testing with the MSI's
at 490 ace motherboard and for the AMD
risin 530 600 I'm using the asrock x5 70
Taichi when testing stock I'm also not
capping the 10 600 K to its hundred and
25 watt limit as many motherboards
aren't going to limit this by default
anyway and in my opinion it's just
leaving performance on the table if you
have a good cooler that said I have
disabled enhanced turbo in the BIOS
which is MSI's version of MCE as that
would boost the all core turbo speed
from 4.5 to 4.8 gigahertz
the rest of the components were
otherwise the same I've
with 16 gig of ddr4 3200 memory running
in dual channel at seal 14 and with an
Nvidia RTX 20 atti I've used the same
fractal as 36a IO with noctua nth to
paste for both CPUs so we can get an
apples-to-apples temperature comparison
testing was completed with the latest
version of Windows and Nvidia drivers
along with all BIOS updates available
installed with that in mind we'll first
check out the differences in various
applications at stock followed by
overclocked results power draw thermals
then Gaming tests at 1080p and 1440p
resolutions afterwards before finishing
up by comparing some performance /
billet metrics starting with Cinebench
ah 20 I've got the Intel i5 10 600 K up
the top and the horizon 530 600 blur the
i5 had a small 2% lead when it came to
the single core score however
interestingly the 3600 was 2.5 percent
faster when it came to multi-core which
may indicate that the extra cash with a
3600 is giving it an edge there as it's
clocked lower I've also tested the
oldest Cinebench r15 as a lot of people
still use it and again single core was
better with the i5 with a 5 percent
higher score this time but multi-core
was ahead with a 3600 now with a 9
percent higher score I've tested the
blender BMW and classroom benchmarks
this is a core heavy test but we're not
seeing that big of a difference here the
BMW test was just a few seconds faster
on the i-5 however the 3600 was faster
when it came to the classroom test
either way very close results handbrake
was used to convert one of my 4k laptop
review videos to 1080p with the HQ 1080p
30 preset and the i-5 was about 9%
slower in this test so another win for
the 3600 and multi-core Adobe Premiere
was used to export one of my laptop
review videos at 4k and I've used bbr to
pass so both were running for over 50
minutes the 3600 had an edge again but
it's not that big the i5 was around 4%
slower but yeah not great when it costs
around 50% more money premiere was also
tested using the Puget systems benchmark
tool and the 3600 was in front once more
the Puget systems premier test also
gives us a scoffer live playback in
particular and the 3600 had a similar
narrow lead
I've also tested the warp stabiliser
effect in Adobe Premiere which is a less
threaded workload and is used to smooth
out a video clip generally I see clock
speed being quite important for this
test
however these results kind of turn that
around perhaps the cache difference is
important here as the i5 was 10% slower
in this one Adobe Photoshop was also
tested with the benchmark from Puget
systems and this is definitely a test
that favors clock speed and single core
performance so the i-5 was now scoring
three percent above the 3600 but again
it's not really worth paying 50 percent
more money for that 7-zip was used to
test compression and decompression
speeds and is typically a workload where
Rison gets an edge the compression speed
was a little ahead on the 3600 however
there was a much larger difference when
it came to decompression when the i5 was
13 percent slower veracrypt was used to
test a es encryption and decryption
speeds and again there was an edge to
the 3600 as the i5 was 7 to 8 percent
slower the v-ray benchmark uses a cpu to
render out a scene and the results were
extremely close together in this test
this is a heavily threaded workload and
it seems that both processes perform
about the same due to having 6 cores 12
threads that said the corona benchmark
also uses the processor to render out a
scene
however the i5 was 5.5 percent faster in
this multi-core test so it may favor
those higher clock speeds more in the
hardware unboxed Microsoft Excel tests
the 3600 was in front again this was the
largest difference out of all tests the
3600 was completing the task 15 percent
faster like most other single core tests
the 10 600 K was ahead in single core in
Geekbench but also as per most hubber
tests the 3600 had the edge when it came
to the multi-core score he is how the
Intel i5 10 600 K stacks up against the
horizon 530 600 in these tests at stock
in most cases the i5 is slower which I
found extremely interesting honestly I
didn't expect it given that both
processors have the same core and thread
count yet the 3600 is winning in the
majority of core heavy workloads despite
having lower clock speeds the i5 is
doing better in single core performance
in typical Intel fashion though I'm
thinking that this difference is perhaps
due to the Rison process are having more
than
double the cash and when you consider
that the 3600 is around $90 cheaper it's
clearly got the edge in these sorts of
productivity workloads don't worry we'll
get to gaming shortly I've also done
some tests with both processors
overclocked I was able to get my 3600 to
4.2 gigahertz on all calls at one point
three to five volts and the 10 600 K to
five gigahertz on all cores at the same
one point three to five volts I tried a
hundred megahertz higher on both with
higher voltage but this wasn't stable in
blender when we look at the total system
power draw from the wall with the
blender test running the 3600 is using
less power
the gap widens considerably once both
processes are overclocked the power draw
and the i-5 blows out completely in this
scenario interestingly the 3600 actually
used less power when overclocked and I
found this was because at stock the
motherboard was automatically applying
Clair voltage than the 1.3 to 5 volts I
manually set for the overclock higher
power draw typically results in more
heat and that was the case here where
the 10 600 K was running hotter - and
like the power draw once overclocked the
i-5 is far worse off again the 3600 was
actually a little cooler with my
overclock applied as it was now using
slightly less voltage although not
exactly directly comparable the 10 600 K
was running at higher clock speeds
during the same test though as we just
saw it was drawing more power and
creating more heat to sustain this while
offering comparable performance to be
feather the i-5 does have much more
overclock Headroom as I was only
boosting the 3600 by 89 megahertz the
extra overclock Headroom with the i-5
allows it to start outperforming the
3600 in multi-core workloads as seen
here in Cinebench at stock the 3600 was
ahead but now the 10 600 K takes the
lead once both are overclocked the i5
also saw bigger gains to single core
performance as the 4.2 gigahertz all
core overclocked to the 3600 is
basically the same as what it boosts up
to in 1 to 2 core workloads anyway at
stock the same result was also seen in
blender the i5 is now completing the
task faster than the 3600 however as we
just saw earlier it's using
significantly more power and running
quite a bit hotter even with a 360
all-in-one with
would call it to achieve this it's worth
noting that the 3600 does at least come
with a stock cola while the ten 600k
does not so if you want to do some good
overclocking like this to boost the
multi-core performance of the i-5 you'll
need to spend even more money on the
Intel option let's get into the gaming
results next I've tested 15 games of
both 1080p and 1440p resolutions will
start with stock results and look at
overclocked average differences and cost
per frame afterwards battlefield 5 was
tested running through the same section
of the game in campaign mode I've got
the 1080p results down the bottom and
the 1440p results above that in this
game the ten 600k was able to hit ten
percent higher average FPS at 1080p
lowering to a five percent gain of 1440p
assassin's creed Odyssey was tested with
the game's benchmark tool and at 1080p
the results were similar with the ten
600k reaching 11% higher average FPS
then at 1440p this increases to a 13
percent lead over the 3600 call of duty
modern warfare was tested in campaign
mode and the differences were very
interesting here
the 1% lowers really sink to favor the
3600 in this test given the i-5 was only
around 3% faster in terms of average FPS
the 3600 would likely do better overall
in this title due to those big 1% low
gains bottle and 3 was tested using the
game's built-in benchmark and the i-5
was reaching 10% higher average FPS at
1080p than just 3% at 1440p as where
presumably more GPU bound there so the
CPU matters less that said the 1%
lowered 1440p was still 10% higher on
the 10 600k control was tested by
performing the same test pass through
the game on both machines and this
seemingly GPU heavy game or at least
with these settings saw one of the
smallest differences out of all 15 games
tested Red Dead Redemption 2 was tested
using the game's benchmark tool and this
game saw one of the biggest differences
with the 10 600k out of all titles
tested with a 17 percent higher average
FPS at 1080p and 10% at 1440p shadow of
the Tomb Raider was tested with the
game's benchmark tool so no 1 percent
load data here unfortunately there was
an above-average 14% higher average FPS
at 1080p with the i-5
lowering down to a below average 6% lead
at 1440p which makes sense as
realistically this is more of a GPU
heavy test Rainbow six siege was tested
using the built-in benchmark with Vulcan
this was another game where the
differences to 1% lower was larger than
the average framerate the i-5 was just
the rate of 4% ahead in average FPS
however there was a much larger 15%
boost to 1% lows csgo was tested using
the illogical FPS benchmark and as a
game that typically favors CPU clock
speed with core count not being a major
factor the 10600 case or fair gains to
the average framerate however the 1% low
difference was far more minor
comparatively dota 2 seems to be similar
in that it prefers CPU clock speeds but
honestly realistically we're basically
near the engine frame cap anyway the i-5
is around 7% faster at 1080p but given
the 3600 it is and here 200 FPS already
you're probably going to need to be a
pro to notice the difference the
division 2 was tested using the games
benchmark tool and while the i-5 was
once more in front the gains were below
average with just a 6% higher average
FPS at 1080p lowering down to a 2% lead
of 1440p though there was a higher 13%
boost of 1% low performance on i-5 at
1080p
overwatch was tested in the practice
range and while this runs better than
actual gameplay it more easily allows me
to perform the exact same test run which
is ideal for a comparison like this both
processes were close to the 300 FPS
frame Kappa 1080p
however the 10 600k had a 9% higher 1%
lower which could be important if you're
a competitive eSports player The Witcher
3 had some interesting results although
the difference in average FPS is well
below most other games tested the 1% low
at 1440p had a massive 38% higher result
with the i-5 Ghost Recon breakpoint was
tested with the game's built-in
benchmark there was less of a difference
to 1% lower performance here compared to
average FPS now the i-5 was 12% faster
in average framerate at 1080p and 10%
ahead of 1440p bakra a new dawn was also
tested with the game's built-in
benchmark and this test saw the biggest
improvement with the i5 processor out of
all 15 titles tested at 1080p it was
reaching 24% higher average
GFP us and still 20% higher even at
1440p on average over these 15 games
tested the Intel i5 10 600k was around
9% faster at 1080p on average when
compared to the horizon 5 3600 as you
can see the results really varied by
game rainy dawn at the top for
instance saw big gains with the Intel
processor while others like overwatch
and control saw basically no change
though the i5 was always ahead in
average FPS when we step up to 1440p the
10600 cave now has an average 6 percent
lead over the 3600 in average framerate
where more GPU bound here
so the CPU starts to matter less making
the difference between the two
processors narrow em and the difference
would be even less pronounced at 4k I've
also got the differences in 1% lower
performance tuner as these results are
typically more sensitive to CPU changes
when compared to the average frame rates
we just looked at interestingly at 1080p
the i-5 was also around 9% higher here
however it's being dragged down by call
of duty which was the only game that
seemed to love the 3600 in terms of 1%
lower at 1440p the i5 is now around 10%
faster on average when it comes to 1%
lower as that Call of Duty a liar isn't
as bad as we saw at 1080p in most games
that at 1% lower on the i5 would
translate into a smoother experience
with fewer dips
now for some overclocked gaming results
in Far Cry new dawn it was possible to
get a few extra fps in all instances but
nothing too crazy the i5 sees a larger
boost from the overclock which makes
sense given it has better overclock
Headroom in call of duty modern warfare
the UFO clocks caused mixed results for
the i5 there was actually slightly lower
averages however the one percent low
improved the 3600 saw minimal change to
average FPS begain dan nice boost to the
one percent lower in Assassin's Creed
Odyssey the 3600 seemed to gain a bigger
improvement particularly to the 1% lower
performance which was now around 10 FPS
higher compared to the 2 game to the i5
the gaming results aren't too surprising
when we consider that Intel's last gen
AI 590 600 K was also beating the 3600
when it came to gaming for the most part
and that was without hyper-threading
the difference was less than what we're
seeing here if your focus is gaming the
10 600 K is the better option out of the
two in terms of role performance however
once we take the price into
consideration the 3600 is offering
better value at the time of recording
the i-5 is approximately 50% more money
than the 3600 whether or not it's worth
paying that much extra for an on average
10% performance improvement or so in
games is up to you and how much you
value higher FPS the 3600 is definitely
still capable of offering a good gaming
experience it just depends on your
budget and priorities
although the 3600 had an edge in most of
our productivity workloads in most cases
it's not that big of a difference if
you're primarily performing these sorts
of tasks and not gaming then the 3600 is
an easy choice when combined with its
cheaper price in terms of future upgrade
ability AMD recently announced that it
will be possible for existing B 450 and
x4 70 motherboards to support up
Cummings and 3 processors those support
depends on which boards companies picked
up date and that's not currently clear
even if you aren't looking for next-gen
if you already have a decent motherboard
you'll probably be able to find cheaper
options within the same generation in
future say a 3700 X 3900 X or 3950 X for
example Intel 10th gen processors on the
other hand launched with the new Zed 490
in B 460 chipsets and new motherboards
so if you've got anything older you
definitely need a new motherboard anyway
it's likely the motherboards will also
support 11th gen in future but in
typical Intel fashion nothing has been
stated there perhaps for good reason
after the mess AMD recently got itself
into with a m4 support either platform
should hopefully give you some options
there the main difference is that AMD
have confirmed next-gen support while
with Intel we're kind of just assuming
based on past behavior so to conclude at
the end of the day it only seems worth
paying around 50% more money for the i5
10 600 K if you're gaming and really
want the extra around 10 percent on
average performance boost though of
course results will vary between
specific games the 3600 is still a
capable gaming processor and offers much
better value in terms of dollar per
frame while also outperforming the 10
600 K in most multi-core workload
at a lower price point let me know which
CPU you'd pick and wide down in the
comments Intel's new i-5 10 600 K or
AMD's risin 530 600 and if you're new to
the channel then get subscribed for the
rest of my upcoming 10th gen processor
comparisons there's a lot more to come