AMD’s Ryzen 7 5800X seemed full of potential on paper. Offering 8 high-performance Zen 3 cores, blistering 4.7 GHz boost speeds, and built using leading edge 7nm manufacturing, early marketing hyped it as an Intel killer.
But for all its next-gen specs, reviewers and customers uncovered the 5800X has some serious, disappointing catches. Should you care? That depends if factors like price, performance, or productivity align with your needs.
I’ll overview the top 8 drawbacks experts and users highlight with the Ryzen 7 5800X to help you weigh up if it fits your use case.
Overview of the 5800X‘s Biggest Complaints
Before diving deep, let‘s briefly summarize the major recurring complaints about AMD’s former Zen 3 flagship:
- No bundled CPU cooler in the box
- Lack of integrated graphics like almost all modern CPUs
- High price tag compared to performance
- Lower than expected gains over preceding 3000 series Ryzen processors
- Caught between much cheaper 5600X and higher core count 5900X
- Efficiency still trails behind latest Intel 10nm desktop chips
- Less manual overclocking flexibility than prior generations
- Weaker gaming performance than cheaper 5600X in many titles
Keep these limitations in mind as we explore each in detail. Doing so helps set reasonable expectations if the 5800X still appeals regardless, or prompt you seek alternatives that avoids such compromises around your needs. Now, let‘s dig deeper!
1. No Included CPU Cooler In The Box
Opening any new processor, you‘d reasonably expect a basic cooler allowing you to use it out the gate. From low power mobile chips to 125+ watt Intel Core i9s, almost all ship with some form of heat sink and fan. Yet, to reviewers’ surprise, AMD’s $449 5800X lacked any included solution.
This omission stood out as the only CPU requiring buyers to immediately factor in an extra $30 to $100+ for mandatory aftermarket cooling. While enthusiasts likely install beefier heatsinks anyway, forcing this upon more casual users stung. So what gives?
Likely AMD felt constrained adding a cooler and keeping profits intact at the 5800X‘s set price point. Rather than compromise cooler quality or performance to hit a cost target, they excised it. Given cosmetic packaging and superfluous manuals still ship with the 5800X though, it registers as an odd choice over adjusting pricing slightly.
Perhaps forecasting high demand amid scarce early supply, AMD knew enthusiasts would purchase regardless and not quibble over DIY cooler costs. Fair enough, and after launch price cuts rendered this less painful. But it remains poor precedent from a customer value angle, requiring unfair surprising extras to operate a flagship CPU. We deserve reasonable disclosure of all compulsory purchases upfront.
2. No Integrated Graphics Capabilities
It’s not only cooling missing from the Ryzen 7 5800X’s box. Like Intel’s high-end K-series chips until recently, AMD‘s CPU lacks any onboard graphics whatsoever. For mid-range and budget chips, modest integrated GPUs allow smoothly running basic applications without a costly dedicated card.
They also serve as essential backup in case of graphics hardware failure. Should your discrete GPU unpredictably die, integrated graphics transform an otherwise blank, inaccessible system into one still allowing system access and troubleshooting. Pulling up a web browser to Google error messages, reinstall drivers or backups, or source replacement cards becomes possible minus a chaotic trip to a retailer or friend‘s PC.
Unfortunately, the 5800X‘s I/O chip skips graphics processing capabilities entirely. So any graphics card faults sees your system rendered inaccessible without a second replacement card on hand. Considering even $1200+ flagship GPUs still demonstrate lifetime failure risk, the total omission seems consumer-adverse rather than a harmless shortcut for the 5800X’s target segment. Would including even basic integrated graphics really blow costs massively for AMD here? Again likely profit prioritization over usability.
3. Premium Pricing Per Performance
Even at launch, critics viewed the Ryzen 7 5800X’s $449 MSRP as ambitious. Sure, it equalled then competitor Intel’s powerhouse i7-10700K in cores, frequencies, and gaming prowess. But given single thread speed translates most directly to higher frame rates, AMD lagged behind Intel’s architectural efficiency. This arguably made absolute performance and value equation a wash at best against Intel‘s lineup.
Since, the situation only worsened for AMD. The impressive Intel i7-12700K now retails at the same $449, outpacing the 5800X by 25% in 1080p game average framerates. The 12700K also offers integrated graphics where the 5800X does not. Such competition makes the 5800X feel distinctly dated at its once cutting-edge pricing.
Unless found heavily discounted well under MSRP, smart shoppers almost always opt for the superior feature-packed Intel 12th generation part instead. Lesser informed buyers risk paying excessive premiums for the 5800X’s flashy Zen 3 branding and cores over actual delivered utility.
4. Underwhelming Improvements Over Zen 2 Predecessors
No doubt, AMD improved reasonable amounts with Zen 3 in terms of processing efficiency and frequencies. However, gains of 19% more performance per clock over earlier Zen 2 CPUs like the Ryzen 7 3700X left some expecting more.
Peak clock frequencies saw similar negligible growth, from 4.4 GHz on the 3700X to 4.7 GHz for the 5800X. Given AMD already extracted incredible performance from its 7nm process node design, they seem to have hit an innovation ceiling with refinements plausible on Zen 3.
For owners of preceding Zen 2 Ryzen desktop models, this provides lackluster incentive to invest in upgraded motherboards and pricier DDR4 RAM kits to adopt Zen 3. Without revolutionary IPC and clock gains, it failed to convince existing AMD customers to undertake expensive full platform upgrades. Much controversy arose on whether relatively minor 19% application gains justified the significantly greater combined upgrade costs.
5. trapped Between Low Cost 5600X And Higher Core Count 5900X
An odd dilemma emerged for AMD amidst their Zen 3 rollout. Retailing around $300, their new 6 core 5600X stunned with nearly equal 1080p gaming performance as the pricier 8 core 5800X. Likely thanks to game software failing to utilize even its abundant cores and threads.
Just $100 more than the 5800X bought access to AMD‘s compute heavy 12 core / 24 thread 5900X. This dominated intensive rendering, coding, analysis and content creation/editing workloads.
Squashed between these two alternatives offering better value or performance for money, the Ryzen 7 5800X awkwardly lacked a supreme niche besides future-proofing. For today‘s software natively supporting under eight cores, the affordable 5600X matched gaming power and cost over $150 less. Professionals needing crushing multi-threaded speed found the 5900X‘s extra $100 one of PC building‘s best bang-for-buck investments.
This squeeze led many buyers to default to the logical 5600X or 5900X bookends over the weird middle child 5800X. Understandably, seeing tiny performance sacrifices but immense pricing differences between siblings left the 5800X the least compelling option for savvy AMD shoppers.
6. Power Efficiency Still Lags Behind Intel
There‘s no denying AMD‘s switch to ultra-dense 7nm transistor fabrication enabled once impossible Ryzenfrequencies and performance at reasonable thermals. However, rival Intel continued traditionally superior x86 power efficiency thanks to architectural maturity.
Intel‘s 10nm mobile Tiger Lake effectively power sipped its way past Zen 2 mobile Ryzens. Now 12th gen hybrid 10/14nm desktop Alder Lake runs astonishingly cool for delivered speed. The Ryzen 7 5800X by comparison seems positively power hungry with its 105 watt TDP.
Total system draw hovers around 150-170 watts depending on workload. Compare to Intel‘s i5-12600K managing similar multi threaded rendering using 20%+ less power – just 120-140 watts whole system!
So those valuing low energy bills or smaller form factors will still view latest generation Intel desktop CPUs as superior currently. Only in maxed out creative workloads does the 5800X earn its keep over Intel counterparts.
7. Overclocking Headroom hamstrung
Each silicon fabrication leap promises tantalizing power, thermal and frequency improvements for enthusiasts. The shift from 12nm to 7nm indeed afforded AMD ample thermal headroom to push clock speeds 30% over first generation Zen.
However further node shrinks produce diminishing returns for traditional "overclocking" – manually running chips above standard specifications. Where earlier Ryzens frequently overclocked around 4.2 GHz all-core, the Ryzen 7 5800X largely stuck stubbornly at its 4.7 GHz factory maximum when manually tuning.
Adding extra voltage and cooling failed to coerce meaningfully higher frequencies before stability suffered. Only exotic liquid nitrogen setups breach much past AMD‘s out-the-box specifications. This leaves conventional cooling limited overclockers finding lesser joy tweaking modern Zen 3 parts.
8. Weaker Gaming Performance Per Dollar than 5600X
AMD designed Zen microarchitecture focus primarily around parallelizable workstation-oriented software. Contrast with Intel‘s hybrid architectures seeking to squeeze ultimate gaming frame rates from fewer active cores. Despite housing 33% more cores, the 5800X underperforms cheaper 5600X competitor in games!
When benchmarked with high resolutions demanding maximum CPU horsepower, the two TPU review found negligible differences between 5600X and 5800X gaming prowess:
| 1080p Assassins Creed FPS | 1440p Assassins Creed FPS |
|---|---|
| 5600X: 151 | 5600X: 150 |
| 5800X: 152 | 5800X: 150 |
The extra $150+ cost failed to deliver meaningful gaming speed increases. This indicates titles simply not saturating even plentiful 8 core resources. Gamers should invest savings into stronger GPUs likely proving more beneficial than needlessly overspecced CPUs.
We‘ve explored frustrations experts and consumers have voiced regarding AMD‘s Ryzen 7 5800X. What‘s the verdict though taking a holistic view?
-
For gaming alone, no.* The 5600X or Intel 12600K serve you better here.
-
For lightly-threaded general desktop use, no.* The same logic applies here – cheaper but decent six core CPUs handle these workloads fine at lower cost and power draw.
-
For professional content creation and coding? Yes…with caveats.* The 5800X outpaces Intel mainstream offerings thanks to plentiful cores and threads. However Intel still rules supreme for pure power draw efficiency. Shop sales removing the 5800X price premium versus initial MSRP.
Ultimately, while an undeniably capable processor, the 5800X‘s awkward slot between Ford and Chevy demands examination against your exact computing needs before biting. Sizing up strengths against weaknesses explored above helps make an informed choice whether it appropriately fits your workflows and budget.
I hope this detailed yet readable analysis gives you the insightful overview required to make that desktop-building decision correctly in your case! Let me know if any follow up questions.
