Ryzen 5 2600 vs Ryzen 7 2700X

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 7 2700X
2018
8 cores / 16 threads, 105 Watt
11.45
+32.8%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Ryzen 5 2600 by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking698901
Place by popularitynot in top-10022
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.2210.01
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 7AMD Ryzen 5
Power efficiency9.9412.09
Architecture codenameZen+ (2018−2019)Pinnacle Riege (Zen+) (2018)
Release date13 April 2018 (6 years ago)13 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 5 2600 has 9% better value for money than Ryzen 7 2700X.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores8 (Octa-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads1612
Base clock speed3.7 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz3.9 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplier3734
L1 cache768 KB576 KB
L2 cache4 MB3 MB
L3 cache16 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography12 nm12 nm
Die size213 mm2213 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Number of transistors4800 Million4800 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketAM4AM4
Power consumption (TDP)105 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHAMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR4
Maximum memory size64 GB128 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth46.933 GB/s46.933 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card--

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes2020

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Ryzen 7 2700X 11.45
+32.8%
Ryzen 5 2600 8.62

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Ryzen 7 2700X 17517
+32.8%
Ryzen 5 2600 13189

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Ryzen 7 2700X 1255
+7.9%
Ryzen 5 2600 1163

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Ryzen 7 2700X 6128
+25.2%
Ryzen 5 2600 4896

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 7 2700X 5256
+11.2%
Ryzen 5 2600 4726

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 7 2700X 34763
+23.4%
Ryzen 5 2600 28173

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Ryzen 7 2700X 10643
+14.6%
Ryzen 5 2600 9290

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Ryzen 7 2700X 3.48
+58%
Ryzen 5 2600 5.5

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Ryzen 7 2700X 19
+36.3%
Ryzen 5 2600 14

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen 7 2700X 1762
+41.2%
Ryzen 5 2600 1248

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 7 2700X 176
+11.7%
Ryzen 5 2600 157

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 7 2700X 1.95
+10.8%
Ryzen 5 2600 1.76

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ryzen 7 2700X 10.6
+41.3%
Ryzen 5 2600 7.5

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Ryzen 7 2700X 105
+39.3%
Ryzen 5 2600 75

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Ryzen 7 2700X 227
+10.4%
Ryzen 5 2600 205

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Ryzen 7 2700X 4779
+5.8%
Ryzen 5 2600 4517

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 7 2700X 7022
+15.7%
Ryzen 5 2600 6070

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 7 2700X 1177
+5.2%
Ryzen 5 2600 1119

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 7 2700X 4647
+15.6%
Ryzen 5 2600 4020

7-Zip

Ryzen 7 2700X 45814
+48.3%
Ryzen 5 2600 30898

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.45 8.62
Physical cores 8 6
Threads 16 12
Power consumption (TDP) 105 Watt 65 Watt

Ryzen 7 2700X has a 32.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads.

Ryzen 5 2600, on the other hand, has 61.5% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 7 2700X is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 2600 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Ryzen 7 2700X
AMD Ryzen 5 2600
Ryzen 5 2600

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.4 2887 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 2700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 14859 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 2600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 7 2700X or Ryzen 5 2600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.