[nicoburns]

Yeah, regardless of whose chips are fastest, it's really fantastic how closely competitive they all are currently. You can pick Intel or AMD or Apple, and have a fantastic CPU (and likely a decent iGPU too) whichever one you choose.

[selfhoster11]

Disposable CPU sockets aren't exactly great. I don't care whose chips are faster if I have to throw out my motherboard alongside my CPU if I want more performance.

[nomel]

After seeing the lifespan of AM4, and how cheap upgrading was, this is exactly why my next upgrade will be whatever fits in an AM5 socket.

[archi42]

The Ryzen 5 1600 is nearly 5 years old (Apr 2017), and the current 5600X is a little older than 1 year (Nov 2020). The 5800X refresh (X3D) is announced for Q2 2022.

Now that's still a matter of perspective. If you got an early low-end CPU like a 1600 or even a 1600AF (got mine Jan 2020) and can now upgrade to a more recent, more high-end CPU like e.g. a 5600X or even 5900X the jump is pretty nice - and you get to keep your old board+RAM. Depending on your future computational requirements that system could be useful for quite a while. If you jump on that 5000-series CPU coming from something like Ivy Bridge, you'll still be able to use the system for the same time, but you will only have used the MoBo+RAM for a single generation. In that case the total amount of usefulness you get for your money is less, and you might be better off waiting for the upcoming socket.

[amelius]

> it's really fantastic how closely competitive they all are currently

Which says basically that most of these gains are more likely to come from fabrication technology, not architecture.

[uluyol]

Or that they all employ similarly effective techniques.

[aseipp]

No it doesn't.