**The Impact of Extra Cores on Gaming Performance**

When it comes to averages and 1 lows, we all know that single threaded performance is king when it comes to gaming. However, having extra cores can make a significant difference in performance, even for games that don't heavily rely on multi-threading. In this article, we'll explore the impact of extra cores on gaming performance using various titles and scenarios.

**The 5600x vs the 5300x: A Tale of Extra Cores**

One of the most notable differences between the Ryzen 5 5600X and the Ryzen 7 5700X is the presence of an additional two cores. The extra cores give the 5600X a significant advantage in terms of performance, with an average lead of around 12.6% at 1080p and shrinking to a surprisingly low 1.6% at 1440p. However, when the game's quality settings are reduced and the frame rate is boosted, the difference between the two processors becomes less significant. This highlights the importance of single threaded performance in gaming, where the processor's ability to handle complex calculations without multi-threading is crucial.

**Cyberpunk 2077: A Scenario Where Extra Cores Shine**

In Cyberpunk 2077, a game that benefits from having extra cores, the Ryzen 5 5600X excels. The additional two cores give it a clear advantage in terms of performance, with as much as a 25% difference between the processor and its single-core counterpart. This highlights the importance of multi-threading in games that rely heavily on AI, physics, and complex calculations. However, when population density is reduced, the difference between the processors becomes less significant.

**Rainbow Six Siege: A Scenario Where Turbocharging Matters**

In Rainbow Six Siege, a game that benefits from fast turbocharged performance, the Ryzen 5 5300X is able to keep up with its six-core counterpart. The processor's ability to handle complex calculations quickly and efficiently makes it an excellent choice for esports titles like this one.

**F1 2020: A Scenario Where Performance Scales**

In F1 2020, a game that relies heavily on AI and physics, the Ryzen 5 5600X excels. However, its performance scales well with the processor's multi-threading capabilities, allowing it to keep up with more powerful processors like the Ryzen 9 5900X. In this scenario, having extra cores can make a significant difference in performance.

**Death Stranding: A Scenario Where Scaling Matters**

In Death Stranding, a game that benefits from fast single-threaded performance, the processor's ability to handle complex calculations quickly and efficiently is crucial. However, the processor also scales well with multi-threading capabilities, allowing it to keep up with more powerful processors like the Ryzen 9 5900X.

**The Impact of Power on Performance**

Interestingly, removing two cores from a 5600X still results in significant performance gains, even when power consumption is not reduced. This highlights the importance of single threaded performance and multi-threading capabilities in gaming. In some games, the processor's ability to handle complex calculations quickly and efficiently makes up for the lack of extra cores.

**The Future of Gaming Processors: A Quad-Core Ryzen 5300x**

In conclusion, while having extra cores can make a significant difference in gaming performance, it's not always necessary. However, there are scenarios where extra cores and multi-threading capabilities are crucial, such as in games that rely heavily on AI, physics, and complex calculations. Additionally, the use case for fast quad-core processors is definitely there for those who play mostly esports titles or easier to run titles and don't run any production workloads on their PC.

For those on a budget, having a fast quad-core processor like the Ryzen 5 5000 series around $120 can be an excellent option. It would leave more money for a powerful GPU and faster memory, making it an attractive choice for gamers who want to upgrade their system without breaking the bank. However, as we've seen in this article, there are also scenarios where 4 cores and 8 threads is proving to be the limit, so it's not for everyone.

**Final Thoughts**

In conclusion, the impact of extra cores on gaming performance is significant, especially when combined with fast single-threaded performance and multi-threading capabilities. However, the use case for these processors depends on various factors such as game type, population density, and budget. We'd love to hear your thoughts on this down below. As always, thanks for watching!

"WEBVTTKind: captionsLanguage: enintel's 10th gen cpu lineup goes as low as a quad-core i3 which they're offering for 120 but amd on the other hand their ryzen 5000 lineup just bottoms out at a six core ryzen 5600 x which is 300 so amd where is the budget quad core offering from this generation well amd are having a hard enough time keeping up with the demand of their current brief ryzen 5000 lineup which only includes four cpus i think a theoretical quad-core 5300x could only end up being a paper launch anyway but what we can do is see how one could perform and whether it would be worthwhile for amd to make one in the first place for example could a quad-core 5300x beat the six core from last generation let's take a look so with amd's cheapest ryzen 5000 product being a 300 ryzen 5 5600x there is a lot of room underneath that product stack for some lower core count models and in theory a quad core 5300 x wouldn't be that hard to produce at all it would use the same 8 core chiplet that ships with the 5600x and 5800x but you just end up with half of those cores disabled now personally i have no idea what the yield rates are for amd when it comes to how many of those zen 3 chiplets are successfully and entirely eight functioning cores but you can only assume that the yields of the eight core 5800 x's is a fair bit worse than the six core 5600 x's there you can afford to have two cores not functioning to spec or working at all this might be why the 8 core 5800x has such a considerable price premium over the 5600 x they're just that much harder to make for a 5300x to make production sense you'd have to count on three to four of the eight cores in a single zen three chiplet to fail and that seems maybe as an equally unlikely scenario as getting the full 8 core chiplet otherwise i highly doubt that amd would happily package up a quad core 5300 x even though six or more cores underneath are working just fine regardless though we can easily simulate a four-cylinder zen-three engine by disabling two cores in the bios i'm also going to leave the clock speed and the power properties of the 5600x alone here for the sake of simplicity so this will give our hypothetical 5300x a 65 watt tdp and a socket power of 88 watts so then to start with four cores and eight threads isn't much to work with when it comes to production workloads but our quad core experiment is actually doing okay in cinebench it manages to beat the six core ryzen 5 2600 from two generations ago by a mere two percent but leads the previous gen quad core by around 13 similar performance in v-ray although here core count seems to matter a little bit more it's beaten by the r5 2600 but still manages a nice lead over the previous gen quad core video editing is also not too bad you could definitely get some work done with four zen three cores but here hypothetically you might want to consider the ryzen 5 3600 from the previous generation instead but what we all want to really see is how this processor would hold up when it comes to gaming is a quad core processor really enough to keep up with today's titles and gpus well the answer is mostly yes but the six core 5600x it does have a clear lead in some titles i've used an rtx 3080 here just as i do with all of my game testing for cpus and at just 1080p and 1440p resolution so it's almost a worst case pairing and it does expose a clear limit here in red dead redemption 2 for our theoretical 5300x which you can see on the left cpu usage is noticeably higher and frame rate can stretch as much as 20 fps between them when we dive into the graphs though it's not actually that bad at 1080p resolution our simulated cpu is an upgrade over the ryzen 5 2600 3300x and even the 3600 when it comes to averages and 1 lows we all know that single threaded performance is king when it comes to gaming and we've still got that up our sleeves regardless of two cores missing versus the 5600x speaking of which those two cores give it around a seven percent lead on average here but almost a 16 lead when it comes to the lowest one percent of frame rate indicating a smoother gaming experience when we shift over to 1440p though it's virtually tied with a bunch of the other cpus in the stack whereas the 3300x and 2600 are still held back here somewhat then in the population dense city of cyberpunk 2077 we expose again another scenario where a 5300x could be choked up a bit here there is a clear advantage of the extra two cores in the 5600x in some scenes there was as much as a 25 difference between them but also as little as 10 in less population dense sections population density is a gameplay setting that can be adjusted in this game though but it does make the experience a bit less interesting in my opinion where a turbocharged 4-cylinder 5300x would be totally appropriate though would be for esports titles in rainbow six our experimental cpu can easily keep up with the six core 5600x and there's never more than a few fps between them at the end of the day all of the cpus in this stack would be totally suitable delivering 300 fps and over on average when we drop to 1440p the margins close even further and really the only cpu that is bottlenecking our frame rate at all here and again it's very slim but it's the ryzen 5 2600. similar situation in f1 2020 a high frame rate competitive title although we do have a bit more cpu load here since the game is a lot more ai and physics driven i think the most interesting part of this entire experiment is that all we've done is removed two cores from a 5600 x there's no reduction in power clock speed cash or the cooler being used some games don't show any difference at all whereas other games there is a clear difference so f1 2020 is somewhere in between side by side the difference between the two can be as much as 80 to 90 fps or as little as 10 fps in the end the additional two cores give the 5600x a 12.6 lead on average at 1080p but that lead shrinks to a surprisingly low 1.6 at 1440p if at 1440p you do lower the game's quality settings though and then boost the frame rate you could expose that difference that we saw previously at 1080p one game in the benchmark stack that absolutely loves cores and threads though is death stranding primarily of course most scaling is going to come from the processor's single threaded performance but we do actually see performance scaling here all the way up to the 12 core ryzen 5900x with this in mind a quad-core configuration of the 5600x is still enough to beat the ryzen 5 3600 from last generation on average although the lowest one percent of frames are about equal and then even at 1440p there is a clear advantage here over the quad core 3300x from last generation in assassin's creed odyssey our simulated 5300x is able to keep up with the rest of the stack on average but lags behind a little when it comes to frame rate stability that diminishes though when we bump the resolution up to 1440p just like many of the titles that we've seen so far so i think the clear answer is that yes amd should absolutely make a quad core ryzen 5300x but it probably doesn't make much production sense or financial sense for them to do so right now it would only be eating into the sales of the six core ryzen 5 3600 from last generation and that processor is likely a much easier one for them to produce still though the use case for a fast quad-core cpu is definitely there for those who play mostly esports titles for example where the cpu demand is quite low and also for those who play easier to run titles and don't run any production workloads on their pc but best of all for those on a budget a quad core ryzen 5000 chip around the 120 dollar mark would be an excellent option leaving a lot more cash for a powerful gpu and faster memory although there are definitely some gaming scenarios where 4 cores and 8 threads is proving to be the limit so it's not for everyone but i'd love to know your thoughts on this down below as always a huge thanks for watching and i'll see you all in the next oneintel's 10th gen cpu lineup goes as low as a quad-core i3 which they're offering for 120 but amd on the other hand their ryzen 5000 lineup just bottoms out at a six core ryzen 5600 x which is 300 so amd where is the budget quad core offering from this generation well amd are having a hard enough time keeping up with the demand of their current brief ryzen 5000 lineup which only includes four cpus i think a theoretical quad-core 5300x could only end up being a paper launch anyway but what we can do is see how one could perform and whether it would be worthwhile for amd to make one in the first place for example could a quad-core 5300x beat the six core from last generation let's take a look so with amd's cheapest ryzen 5000 product being a 300 ryzen 5 5600x there is a lot of room underneath that product stack for some lower core count models and in theory a quad core 5300 x wouldn't be that hard to produce at all it would use the same 8 core chiplet that ships with the 5600x and 5800x but you just end up with half of those cores disabled now personally i have no idea what the yield rates are for amd when it comes to how many of those zen 3 chiplets are successfully and entirely eight functioning cores but you can only assume that the yields of the eight core 5800 x's is a fair bit worse than the six core 5600 x's there you can afford to have two cores not functioning to spec or working at all this might be why the 8 core 5800x has such a considerable price premium over the 5600 x they're just that much harder to make for a 5300x to make production sense you'd have to count on three to four of the eight cores in a single zen three chiplet to fail and that seems maybe as an equally unlikely scenario as getting the full 8 core chiplet otherwise i highly doubt that amd would happily package up a quad core 5300 x even though six or more cores underneath are working just fine regardless though we can easily simulate a four-cylinder zen-three engine by disabling two cores in the bios i'm also going to leave the clock speed and the power properties of the 5600x alone here for the sake of simplicity so this will give our hypothetical 5300x a 65 watt tdp and a socket power of 88 watts so then to start with four cores and eight threads isn't much to work with when it comes to production workloads but our quad core experiment is actually doing okay in cinebench it manages to beat the six core ryzen 5 2600 from two generations ago by a mere two percent but leads the previous gen quad core by around 13 similar performance in v-ray although here core count seems to matter a little bit more it's beaten by the r5 2600 but still manages a nice lead over the previous gen quad core video editing is also not too bad you could definitely get some work done with four zen three cores but here hypothetically you might want to consider the ryzen 5 3600 from the previous generation instead but what we all want to really see is how this processor would hold up when it comes to gaming is a quad core processor really enough to keep up with today's titles and gpus well the answer is mostly yes but the six core 5600x it does have a clear lead in some titles i've used an rtx 3080 here just as i do with all of my game testing for cpus and at just 1080p and 1440p resolution so it's almost a worst case pairing and it does expose a clear limit here in red dead redemption 2 for our theoretical 5300x which you can see on the left cpu usage is noticeably higher and frame rate can stretch as much as 20 fps between them when we dive into the graphs though it's not actually that bad at 1080p resolution our simulated cpu is an upgrade over the ryzen 5 2600 3300x and even the 3600 when it comes to averages and 1 lows we all know that single threaded performance is king when it comes to gaming and we've still got that up our sleeves regardless of two cores missing versus the 5600x speaking of which those two cores give it around a seven percent lead on average here but almost a 16 lead when it comes to the lowest one percent of frame rate indicating a smoother gaming experience when we shift over to 1440p though it's virtually tied with a bunch of the other cpus in the stack whereas the 3300x and 2600 are still held back here somewhat then in the population dense city of cyberpunk 2077 we expose again another scenario where a 5300x could be choked up a bit here there is a clear advantage of the extra two cores in the 5600x in some scenes there was as much as a 25 difference between them but also as little as 10 in less population dense sections population density is a gameplay setting that can be adjusted in this game though but it does make the experience a bit less interesting in my opinion where a turbocharged 4-cylinder 5300x would be totally appropriate though would be for esports titles in rainbow six our experimental cpu can easily keep up with the six core 5600x and there's never more than a few fps between them at the end of the day all of the cpus in this stack would be totally suitable delivering 300 fps and over on average when we drop to 1440p the margins close even further and really the only cpu that is bottlenecking our frame rate at all here and again it's very slim but it's the ryzen 5 2600. similar situation in f1 2020 a high frame rate competitive title although we do have a bit more cpu load here since the game is a lot more ai and physics driven i think the most interesting part of this entire experiment is that all we've done is removed two cores from a 5600 x there's no reduction in power clock speed cash or the cooler being used some games don't show any difference at all whereas other games there is a clear difference so f1 2020 is somewhere in between side by side the difference between the two can be as much as 80 to 90 fps or as little as 10 fps in the end the additional two cores give the 5600x a 12.6 lead on average at 1080p but that lead shrinks to a surprisingly low 1.6 at 1440p if at 1440p you do lower the game's quality settings though and then boost the frame rate you could expose that difference that we saw previously at 1080p one game in the benchmark stack that absolutely loves cores and threads though is death stranding primarily of course most scaling is going to come from the processor's single threaded performance but we do actually see performance scaling here all the way up to the 12 core ryzen 5900x with this in mind a quad-core configuration of the 5600x is still enough to beat the ryzen 5 3600 from last generation on average although the lowest one percent of frames are about equal and then even at 1440p there is a clear advantage here over the quad core 3300x from last generation in assassin's creed odyssey our simulated 5300x is able to keep up with the rest of the stack on average but lags behind a little when it comes to frame rate stability that diminishes though when we bump the resolution up to 1440p just like many of the titles that we've seen so far so i think the clear answer is that yes amd should absolutely make a quad core ryzen 5300x but it probably doesn't make much production sense or financial sense for them to do so right now it would only be eating into the sales of the six core ryzen 5 3600 from last generation and that processor is likely a much easier one for them to produce still though the use case for a fast quad-core cpu is definitely there for those who play mostly esports titles for example where the cpu demand is quite low and also for those who play easier to run titles and don't run any production workloads on their pc but best of all for those on a budget a quad core ryzen 5000 chip around the 120 dollar mark would be an excellent option leaving a lot more cash for a powerful gpu and faster memory although there are definitely some gaming scenarios where 4 cores and 8 threads is proving to be the limit so it's not for everyone but i'd love to know your thoughts on this down below as always a huge thanks for watching and i'll see you all in the next oneintel's 10th gen cpu lineup goes as low as a quad-core i3 which they're offering for 120 but amd on the other hand their ryzen 5000 lineup just bottoms out at a six core ryzen 5600 x which is 300 so amd where is the budget quad core offering from this generation well amd are having a hard enough time keeping up with the demand of their current brief ryzen 5000 lineup which only includes four cpus i think a theoretical quad-core 5300x could only end up being a paper launch anyway but what we can do is see how one could perform and whether it would be worthwhile for amd to make one in the first place for example could a quad-core 5300x beat the six core from last generation let's take a look so with amd's cheapest ryzen 5000 product being a 300 ryzen 5 5600x there is a lot of room underneath that product stack for some lower core count models and in theory a quad core 5300 x wouldn't be that hard to produce at all it would use the same 8 core chiplet that ships with the 5600x and 5800x but you just end up with half of those cores disabled now personally i have no idea what the yield rates are for amd when it comes to how many of those zen 3 chiplets are successfully and entirely eight functioning cores but you can only assume that the yields of the eight core 5800 x's is a fair bit worse than the six core 5600 x's there you can afford to have two cores not functioning to spec or working at all this might be why the 8 core 5800x has such a considerable price premium over the 5600 x they're just that much harder to make for a 5300x to make production sense you'd have to count on three to four of the eight cores in a single zen three chiplet to fail and that seems maybe as an equally unlikely scenario as getting the full 8 core chiplet otherwise i highly doubt that amd would happily package up a quad core 5300 x even though six or more cores underneath are working just fine regardless though we can easily simulate a four-cylinder zen-three engine by disabling two cores in the bios i'm also going to leave the clock speed and the power properties of the 5600x alone here for the sake of simplicity so this will give our hypothetical 5300x a 65 watt tdp and a socket power of 88 watts so then to start with four cores and eight threads isn't much to work with when it comes to production workloads but our quad core experiment is actually doing okay in cinebench it manages to beat the six core ryzen 5 2600 from two generations ago by a mere two percent but leads the previous gen quad core by around 13 similar performance in v-ray although here core count seems to matter a little bit more it's beaten by the r5 2600 but still manages a nice lead over the previous gen quad core video editing is also not too bad you could definitely get some work done with four zen three cores but here hypothetically you might want to consider the ryzen 5 3600 from the previous generation instead but what we all want to really see is how this processor would hold up when it comes to gaming is a quad core processor really enough to keep up with today's titles and gpus well the answer is mostly yes but the six core 5600x it does have a clear lead in some titles i've used an rtx 3080 here just as i do with all of my game testing for cpus and at just 1080p and 1440p resolution so it's almost a worst case pairing and it does expose a clear limit here in red dead redemption 2 for our theoretical 5300x which you can see on the left cpu usage is noticeably higher and frame rate can stretch as much as 20 fps between them when we dive into the graphs though it's not actually that bad at 1080p resolution our simulated cpu is an upgrade over the ryzen 5 2600 3300x and even the 3600 when it comes to averages and 1 lows we all know that single threaded performance is king when it comes to gaming and we've still got that up our sleeves regardless of two cores missing versus the 5600x speaking of which those two cores give it around a seven percent lead on average here but almost a 16 lead when it comes to the lowest one percent of frame rate indicating a smoother gaming experience when we shift over to 1440p though it's virtually tied with a bunch of the other cpus in the stack whereas the 3300x and 2600 are still held back here somewhat then in the population dense city of cyberpunk 2077 we expose again another scenario where a 5300x could be choked up a bit here there is a clear advantage of the extra two cores in the 5600x in some scenes there was as much as a 25 difference between them but also as little as 10 in less population dense sections population density is a gameplay setting that can be adjusted in this game though but it does make the experience a bit less interesting in my opinion where a turbocharged 4-cylinder 5300x would be totally appropriate though would be for esports titles in rainbow six our experimental cpu can easily keep up with the six core 5600x and there's never more than a few fps between them at the end of the day all of the cpus in this stack would be totally suitable delivering 300 fps and over on average when we drop to 1440p the margins close even further and really the only cpu that is bottlenecking our frame rate at all here and again it's very slim but it's the ryzen 5 2600. similar situation in f1 2020 a high frame rate competitive title although we do have a bit more cpu load here since the game is a lot more ai and physics driven i think the most interesting part of this entire experiment is that all we've done is removed two cores from a 5600 x there's no reduction in power clock speed cash or the cooler being used some games don't show any difference at all whereas other games there is a clear difference so f1 2020 is somewhere in between side by side the difference between the two can be as much as 80 to 90 fps or as little as 10 fps in the end the additional two cores give the 5600x a 12.6 lead on average at 1080p but that lead shrinks to a surprisingly low 1.6 at 1440p if at 1440p you do lower the game's quality settings though and then boost the frame rate you could expose that difference that we saw previously at 1080p one game in the benchmark stack that absolutely loves cores and threads though is death stranding primarily of course most scaling is going to come from the processor's single threaded performance but we do actually see performance scaling here all the way up to the 12 core ryzen 5900x with this in mind a quad-core configuration of the 5600x is still enough to beat the ryzen 5 3600 from last generation on average although the lowest one percent of frames are about equal and then even at 1440p there is a clear advantage here over the quad core 3300x from last generation in assassin's creed odyssey our simulated 5300x is able to keep up with the rest of the stack on average but lags behind a little when it comes to frame rate stability that diminishes though when we bump the resolution up to 1440p just like many of the titles that we've seen so far so i think the clear answer is that yes amd should absolutely make a quad core ryzen 5300x but it probably doesn't make much production sense or financial sense for them to do so right now it would only be eating into the sales of the six core ryzen 5 3600 from last generation and that processor is likely a much easier one for them to produce still though the use case for a fast quad-core cpu is definitely there for those who play mostly esports titles for example where the cpu demand is quite low and also for those who play easier to run titles and don't run any production workloads on their pc but best of all for those on a budget a quad core ryzen 5000 chip around the 120 dollar mark would be an excellent option leaving a lot more cash for a powerful gpu and faster memory although there are definitely some gaming scenarios where 4 cores and 8 threads is proving to be the limit so it's not for everyone but i'd love to know your thoughts on this down below as always a huge thanks for watching and i'll see you all in the next one\n"