R5 3500 and R5 2600 performance in long-term gaming use
R5 3500 and R5 2600 performance in long-term gaming use
I saw some youtube videos where the R5 2600 usage is 10% less than R5 3500 in almost all games. Like if the R5 3500 hits 99% usage, R5 2600 usage is between 85-90%. Is this because of 6 more threads in R5 2600. Here the price is around 5 USD only with R5 2600 being the costlier one. Please help. Motherboard will be MSI B450 Gaming Plus and GPU will be Zotac GTX 1660. I'm okay to upgrade GPU in next three years or needed, but I want to use the CPU as long as possible. Chosen this motherboard for slight overclock only. So, which processor will have better longevity for the upcoming years? Gaming only PC.
1600AF should be affordable, though it pairs better with the 3600 since it uses 7nm and newer technology.
1600AF or 3600 – the 2600 doesn’t make sense, and the 3500 has to be significantly cheaper to justify its value.
The 3500 isn't a good option. The significant reduction in L3-cache performance actually leads to worse results compared to the 3600, and it uses more power. Consider opting for the 1600AF, which is essentially a 2600, or save a bit more to get the 3600. Don't squander your money. However, if no alternatives exist, even the 2600 remains a reasonable choice depending on the price. I've used one myself and haven't had any complaints.
1600AF isn't available in my region. Prices look like this: R5 3500 ≈ 139 USD, R5 2600 ≈ 145 USD, R5 3600 ≈ 205 USD. I'm avoiding the 50$ jump to a better GPU for that amount. That's why I asked this question. I'm leaning toward R5 2600 since it lacks SMT and has less L3 cache.
I haven't located the 1600 AF product. It seems to have been discontinued.
It seems both options could work. Manually boosting the R5 2600 should likely get you close to top gaming speeds, especially when handling multiple tasks or streaming. For multitasking, the performance might improve noticeably. If you upgrade to a GPU with a higher clock speed, the CPU could become the limiting factor. To stay ahead of future upgrades, a 3600 would be ideal. Personally, I’d prefer the 2600, but it depends on your needs. Pair it with good RAM and you’re ready to go.
You're asking if the R5 2600 will struggle with a next-gen 1080p GPU like the GTX 2660 and why.
So naturally, CPU speed doesn't always match up with image quality. Imagine: a Ryzen 5 3600 can hit 120 frames per second no matter the setting. The Ryzen 5 2600 does the same at any resolution. The RTX 2060 delivers 250 frames at 720p, 120 at 1080p, and drops to 80 at higher settings when the CPU isn't the bottleneck. When paired with the RTX 2060, the 3600 reaches 120 at 720p and 1080p, but only 80 at 1440p and 60 at 4K. The 2600 with the RTX 2060 gives 100 frames at 720p and 1080p, still 80 at 1440p and 60 at 4K. Both CPUs hit their ceiling at 1440p and 4K, which is what the GPU can handle. At lower resolutions, the 3600 benefits more from the stronger GPU. This is just a rough idea, not precise data, but it explains the reasoning. Also, at 720p and 1080p, the 3600 can take full advantage of the GPU's capabilities. In certain games, both might struggle with CPU limits, but still stay under the GPU's power—like many MMOs. In those cases, a quicker CPU usually gives an edge.