ASUS ROG Rapture GT-AC2900 Gaming Router review
Asustor Nimbustor 4 (AS5304T) NAS Review
Promo: VIP-SCDKey Games and Windows 10 / Office
be quiet! Dark Rock SLIM review
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1660 Gaming OC review
Edifier G4 Pro Headset review
Microsoft Office 2016 Pro and Windows 10 Pro for just $34
Cooler Master SK621 Compact keyboard review
AMD Athlon 220GE and 240GE review
Ballistix Sport LT DDR4 3200 MHz 2x8 GB review
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 review
Posted by: on: 06/13/2017 07:01 AM [
37 comment(s) ]
It is quad-core time with the Ryzen 5 1400 (without the X). The 1400 will be tested and overclocked to see how much value you can squeeze out of this four-core and and eight-threaded processor.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2
kapu
Senior Member
Posts: 3743
Senior Member
Posts: 3743
Posted on: 06/13/2017 08:45 AM
Holy crap , it matches 6600K .. Really nice performance.
But we need results of i5 7600k and i5 7500, why no such results Hilbert ?
i5 7500 is priced 20 euro more in Poland and it is direct competition.
Holy crap , it matches 6600K .. Really nice performance.
But we need results of i5 7600k and i5 7500, why no such results Hilbert ?
i5 7500 is priced 20 euro more in Poland and it is direct competition.
jdc2389
Senior Member
Posts: 167
Senior Member
Posts: 167
Posted on: 06/13/2017 09:08 AM
Please add the gaming benchmark results at the overclocked 3.9 Hilbert! Thanks for the review.
Please add the gaming benchmark results at the overclocked 3.9 Hilbert! Thanks for the review.
AndyMutz
Senior Member
Posts: 292
Senior Member
Posts: 292
Posted on: 06/13/2017 09:10 AM
was i lucky with my chip?
mine 1400 does 3900 MHz at 1,33v on a gigabyte GA-AB350-Gaming 3.
4000 MHz ran unstable at 1,35v and i did not want to go higher with the voltage.
-andy-
was i lucky with my chip?
mine 1400 does 3900 MHz at 1,33v on a gigabyte GA-AB350-Gaming 3.
4000 MHz ran unstable at 1,35v and i did not want to go higher with the voltage.
-andy-
Guru3dreader
Member
Posts: 27
Member
Posts: 27
Posted on: 06/13/2017 09:32 AM
CPU-Z benchmark is a joke. I wouldn't give it even a line in a review, not a whole page. Are we going back to the times where people where using SuperPi to check performance? Especially those times when slower Intel processors where finishing it much faster?
CPU-Z benchmark is a joke. I wouldn't give it even a line in a review, not a whole page. Are we going back to the times where people where using SuperPi to check performance? Especially those times when slower Intel processors where finishing it much faster?
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 8777
Senior Member
Posts: 8777
Posted on: 06/13/2017 09:56 AM
I think we can successfully remove CPU-z bench from set. I just updated to 1.79.1.x64.
And its results are not compatible with 1.79.x64 again.
And the Fun(ck) part is: It puts my i5-2500k @ 4,5GHz multi-threaded score 11% above FX-8350 @ 4,0GHz and that would mean double IPC.
But FX-8350 would win in any sane multi-threaded benchmark. In geekbench it does like 50% better without crazy OC.
Simply, for me CPU-z bench has no longer any informative value.
I think we can successfully remove CPU-z bench from set. I just updated to 1.79.1.x64.
And its results are not compatible with 1.79.x64 again.
And the Fun(ck) part is: It puts my i5-2500k @ 4,5GHz multi-threaded score 11% above FX-8350 @ 4,0GHz and that would mean double IPC.
But FX-8350 would win in any sane multi-threaded benchmark. In geekbench it does like 50% better without crazy OC.
Simply, for me CPU-z bench has no longer any informative value.
MainFrame Alpha
Senior Member
Posts: 138
Senior Member
Posts: 138
Posted on: 06/13/2017 10:05 AM
thank you Hilbert for yet another great review, this is a great value product indeed for for the budget segment level
and thanks for the added DDR4 chart, i think it is most helpful for those in need for a quick guide in which ram to pair with Ryzen
thank you Hilbert for yet another great review, this is a great value product indeed for for the budget segment level
and thanks for the added DDR4 chart, i think it is most helpful for those in need for a quick guide in which ram to pair with Ryzen
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 8777
Senior Member
Posts: 8777
Posted on: 06/13/2017 10:13 AM
thank you Hilbert for yet another great review, this is a great value product indeed for for the budget segment level
and thanks for the added DDR4 chart, i think it is most helpful for those in need for a quick guide in which ram to pair with Ryzen
Watching Ryzen 7 1800X w/ 3600MHz memory results in:
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 review - Performance - System Memory Perf: DDR4 Memory Read / Write
That's quite a step up from 3200MHz.
thank you Hilbert for yet another great review, this is a great value product indeed for for the budget segment level
and thanks for the added DDR4 chart, i think it is most helpful for those in need for a quick guide in which ram to pair with Ryzen
Watching Ryzen 7 1800X w/ 3600MHz memory results in:
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 review - Performance - System Memory Perf: DDR4 Memory Read / Write
That's quite a step up from 3200MHz.
BlueRay
Senior Member
Posts: 259
Senior Member
Posts: 259
Posted on: 06/13/2017 10:39 AM
"With the Ryzen 5 1400 you enter the mainstream gaming segment, paired with a GTX 1060 or Rx 570/580 you will not run into CPU bound limitations, hence such a setup would be a perfect symbiosis."
So my question is what happens when you pair any Ryzen with a faster GPU? Nobody is buying a CPU for only 1 year. Faster cards will come very soon and assuming someone will keep it for 4-5 years this can spell problems?
"With the Ryzen 5 1400 you enter the mainstream gaming segment, paired with a GTX 1060 or Rx 570/580 you will not run into CPU bound limitations, hence such a setup would be a perfect symbiosis."
So my question is what happens when you pair any Ryzen with a faster GPU? Nobody is buying a CPU for only 1 year. Faster cards will come very soon and assuming someone will keep it for 4-5 years this can spell problems?
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 35048
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 35048
Posted on: 06/13/2017 10:54 AM
"With the Ryzen 5 1400 you enter the mainstream gaming segment, paired with a GTX 1060 or Rx 570/580 you will not run into CPU bound limitations, hence such a setup would be a perfect symbiosis."
So my question is what happens when you pair any Ryzen with a faster GPU? Nobody is buying a CPU for only 1 year. Faster cards will come very soon and assuming someone will keep it for 4-5 years this can spell problems?
Within that mindset you could not buy a similar priced Core i5 7400 either right? But sure, 4-5 years from now if you still are at 1080p gaming yet have an Ultra fast graphics card you run into CPU bottle-necking (which has been around for years and is the same with Intel mainstream SKUs).
CPU bottlenecks are nothing new, and in 5 years from now your games will be more graphically demanding as well balancing out that extra graphics horsepower as well. A GPU bottleneck far is more important on its influence on framerate then a CPU bottleneck.
"With the Ryzen 5 1400 you enter the mainstream gaming segment, paired with a GTX 1060 or Rx 570/580 you will not run into CPU bound limitations, hence such a setup would be a perfect symbiosis."
So my question is what happens when you pair any Ryzen with a faster GPU? Nobody is buying a CPU for only 1 year. Faster cards will come very soon and assuming someone will keep it for 4-5 years this can spell problems?
Within that mindset you could not buy a similar priced Core i5 7400 either right? But sure, 4-5 years from now if you still are at 1080p gaming yet have an Ultra fast graphics card you run into CPU bottle-necking (which has been around for years and is the same with Intel mainstream SKUs).
CPU bottlenecks are nothing new, and in 5 years from now your games will be more graphically demanding as well balancing out that extra graphics horsepower as well. A GPU bottleneck far is more important on its influence on framerate then a CPU bottleneck.
vipin
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Posted on: 06/13/2017 01:13 PM
L3 cache shown as 8MB in page 1
@Hilbert since Ryzen 5 1400 has 2 dedicated cores from each CCX should not overall L3 cache be shown as 16MB or 8MB/CCX? Did I miss something?
L3 cache shown as 8MB in page 1
@Hilbert since Ryzen 5 1400 has 2 dedicated cores from each CCX should not overall L3 cache be shown as 16MB or 8MB/CCX? Did I miss something?
Italia1
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Posted on: 06/13/2017 01:19 PM
An italian site has done almost same test (Bit and chips). This cpus look to be very good
An italian site has done almost same test (Bit and chips). This cpus look to be very good
Amx85
Senior Member
Posts: 330
Senior Member
Posts: 330
Posted on: 06/13/2017 01:26 PM
Good review, but i still interested in non-X R5-1600 CPU, in some days i'll upgrade to 4GB RX460 or 2GB RX560 since i got an AOC 1080p LED monitor and my R7-260X + FX-8320E does'nt get +40fps in some games at that resolution.
You forgot update ROTR? last patch has CPU performance optimizations, specially for RYZEN
Thanks and good morning
Good review, but i still interested in non-X R5-1600 CPU, in some days i'll upgrade to 4GB RX460 or 2GB RX560 since i got an AOC 1080p LED monitor and my R7-260X + FX-8320E does'nt get +40fps in some games at that resolution.
You forgot update ROTR? last patch has CPU performance optimizations, specially for RYZEN
Thanks and good morning
Turanis
Senior Member
Posts: 1398
Senior Member
Posts: 1398
Posted on: 06/13/2017 01:39 PM
Not bad vs Intel i5 Skylake (Kaby Lake is an OC Skylake Cpu).
Not bad vs Intel i5 Skylake (Kaby Lake is an OC Skylake Cpu).
AndyMutz
Senior Member
Posts: 292
Senior Member
Posts: 292
Posted on: 06/13/2017 02:05 PM
the 1400 has 4MB/CCX, so 8MB total.
-andy-
@Hilbert since Ryzen 5 1400 has 2 dedicated cores from each CCX should not overall L3 cache be shown as 16MB or 8MB/CCX? Did I miss something?
the 1400 has 4MB/CCX, so 8MB total.
-andy-
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9119
Senior Member
Posts: 9119
Posted on: 06/13/2017 02:26 PM
All hail the new budget gaming KING. No point in the i5 anymore.
All hail the new budget gaming KING. No point in the i5 anymore.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 8777
Senior Member
Posts: 8777
Posted on: 06/13/2017 02:26 PM
Good review, but i still interested in non-X R5-1600 CPU, in some days i'll upgrade to 4GB RX460 or 2GB RX560 since i got an AOC 1080p LED monitor and my R7-260X + FX-8320E does'nt get +40fps in some games at that resolution.
You forgot update ROTR? last patch has CPU performance optimizations, specially for RYZEN
Thanks and good morning
HH tests at stock clocks. If you get Ryzen 5 1600, you will have no trouble clocking it at least to 1600X stock clock. So you can use that as reference.
Good review, but i still interested in non-X R5-1600 CPU, in some days i'll upgrade to 4GB RX460 or 2GB RX560 since i got an AOC 1080p LED monitor and my R7-260X + FX-8320E does'nt get +40fps in some games at that resolution.
You forgot update ROTR? last patch has CPU performance optimizations, specially for RYZEN
Thanks and good morning
HH tests at stock clocks. If you get Ryzen 5 1600, you will have no trouble clocking it at least to 1600X stock clock. So you can use that as reference.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 3852
Senior Member
Posts: 3852
Posted on: 06/13/2017 03:51 PM
Those were some pretty high OC voltages despite not reaching 4GHz.
I personally would've bought the 1400 if it was just a single CCX, because I think it'd have been noticeably faster and probably more capable of higher memory clocks. The smaller L3 doesn't bother me; 16MB was intended to be enough for the 8-core models, so surely 8MB is plenty for a 4-core. Though there are tests showing the smaller L3 does hurt performance (compared to a similarly clocked 1500X), it wasn't a big difference. Anyway, since this CPU is basically just a crippled 1500X with a worse heatsink for only $20 less, this CPU is pretty much on the borderline of not being a good value; if you honestly don't care about the extra L3 and have no intention to use the stock heatsink then I suppose you might as well save yourself the $20 and put that toward the heatsink.
I hear the Ryzen 3 models are supposed to utilize a single CCX. With SMT disabled too, it'll be very interesting to see their single-threaded performance.
Those were some pretty high OC voltages despite not reaching 4GHz.
I personally would've bought the 1400 if it was just a single CCX, because I think it'd have been noticeably faster and probably more capable of higher memory clocks. The smaller L3 doesn't bother me; 16MB was intended to be enough for the 8-core models, so surely 8MB is plenty for a 4-core. Though there are tests showing the smaller L3 does hurt performance (compared to a similarly clocked 1500X), it wasn't a big difference. Anyway, since this CPU is basically just a crippled 1500X with a worse heatsink for only $20 less, this CPU is pretty much on the borderline of not being a good value; if you honestly don't care about the extra L3 and have no intention to use the stock heatsink then I suppose you might as well save yourself the $20 and put that toward the heatsink.
I hear the Ryzen 3 models are supposed to utilize a single CCX. With SMT disabled too, it'll be very interesting to see their single-threaded performance.
Amx85
Senior Member
Posts: 330
Senior Member
Posts: 330
Posted on: 06/13/2017 04:32 PM
i know, and the 1600 has stock cooler
and 1600X no 
HH tests at stock clocks. If you get Ryzen 5 1600, you will have no trouble clocking it at least to 1600X stock clock. So you can use that as reference.
i know, and the 1600 has stock cooler
and 1600X no
waltc3
Senior Member
Posts: 875
Senior Member
Posts: 875
Posted on: 06/13/2017 04:36 PM
Agreed. What makes it even sillier is the fact that the guy didn't like the fact that it made the Intel cpus look bad so he rewrote it specifically to make the Ryzens appear slower in the comparison...
Hopefully, people catch a glimmer of how benchmarks can be used--and often are--to mislead. He's certainly not alone in playing favorites with his benchmarks, though. Benchmarks are very much like election polls--rarely accurate, and exist primarily to shape and form opinions and biases.
CPU-Z benchmark is a joke. I wouldn't give it even a line in a review, not a whole page. Are we going back to the times where people where using SuperPi to check performance? Especially those times when slower Intel processors where finishing it much faster?
Agreed. What makes it even sillier is the fact that the guy didn't like the fact that it made the Intel cpus look bad so he rewrote it specifically to make the Ryzens appear slower in the comparison...
Hopefully, people catch a glimmer of how benchmarks can be used--and often are--to mislead. He's certainly not alone in playing favorites with his benchmarks, though. Benchmarks are very much like election polls--rarely accurate, and exist primarily to shape and form opinions and biases.
waltc3
Senior Member
Posts: 875
Senior Member
Posts: 875
Posted on: 06/13/2017 04:43 PM
Good review, but i still interested in non-X R5-1600 CPU, in some days i'll upgrade to 4GB RX460 or 2GB RX560 since i got an AOC 1080p LED monitor and my R7-260X + FX-8320E does'nt get +40fps in some games at that resolution.
You forgot update ROTR? last patch has CPU performance optimizations, specially for RYZEN
Thanks and good morning
You can buy 4GB RX-480's right now for ~$200 or <. I've got the same CPU that you do right now--getting Ryzen a little later--and an AoC 2560x1440 LCD and that's the resolution I use for gaming. At that resolution the cpu barely makes a difference, but the GPU is everything. 1080P is strictly entry-level these days. I'm very happy with my RX-480 8GB that I bought for ~$230. But even if you stay at 1080 for awhile, I'd recommend you spend your money on your GPU first--R7 is also entry-level, imo. You will see a big improvement in performance with a better GPU. Just my two cents...
Good review, but i still interested in non-X R5-1600 CPU, in some days i'll upgrade to 4GB RX460 or 2GB RX560 since i got an AOC 1080p LED monitor and my R7-260X + FX-8320E does'nt get +40fps in some games at that resolution.
You forgot update ROTR? last patch has CPU performance optimizations, specially for RYZEN
Thanks and good morning
You can buy 4GB RX-480's right now for ~$200 or <. I've got the same CPU that you do right now--getting Ryzen a little later--and an AoC 2560x1440 LCD and that's the resolution I use for gaming. At that resolution the cpu barely makes a difference, but the GPU is everything. 1080P is strictly entry-level these days. I'm very happy with my RX-480 8GB that I bought for ~$230. But even if you stay at 1080 for awhile, I'd recommend you spend your money on your GPU first--R7 is also entry-level, imo. You will see a big improvement in performance with a better GPU. Just my two cents...
vbetts
Posts: 14345
Posts: 14345
Posted on: 06/13/2017 04:50 PM
If you can find an available RX 480 4GB, then you have the best luck ever! Right now they're going upwards of $500 or so thanks to the whole mining craze.
You can buy 4GB RX-480's right now for ~$200 or <. I've got the same CPU that you do right now--getting Ryzen a little later--and an AoC 2560x1440 LCD and that's the resolution I use for gaming. At that resolution the cpu barely makes a difference, but the GPU is everything. 1080P is strictly entry-level these days. I'm very happy with my RX-480 8GB that I bought for ~$230. But even if you stay at 1080 for awhile, I'd recommend you spend your money on your GPU first--R7 is also entry-level, imo. You will see a big improvement in performance with a better GPU. Just my two cents...
If you can find an available RX 480 4GB, then you have the best luck ever! Right now they're going upwards of $500 or so thanks to the whole mining craze.
CrazY_Milojko
Senior Member
Posts: 1985
Senior Member
Posts: 1985
Posted on: 06/13/2017 05:03 PM
@ vbetts... was going to say that: RX 480 4GB for $200!!!... where!?!?!? Oh well, nowhere
Even here in Serbia (Radeon, mostly RX 470 and up) GPU stocks are empty, not a single importer or retailer have them on stock for more than a week, not a single RX 470, 480, 570 or 580. Manic miner craze, as you said...
You can buy 4GB RX-480's right now for ~$200 or <....
If you can find an available RX 480 4GB, then you have the best luck ever! Right now they're going upwards of $500 or so thanks to the whole mining craze.
@ vbetts... was going to say that: RX 480 4GB for $200!!!... where!?!?!? Oh well, nowhere
Even here in Serbia (Radeon, mostly RX 470 and up) GPU stocks are empty, not a single importer or retailer have them on stock for more than a week, not a single RX 470, 480, 570 or 580. Manic miner craze, as you said...
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 6759
Senior Member
Posts: 6759
Posted on: 06/13/2017 05:26 PM
@ vbetts... was going to say that: RX 480 4GB for $200!!!... where!?!?!? Oh well, nowhere
I gave less than $149 for mine a year ago....I trade it for a 1070 any day!
@ vbetts... was going to say that: RX 480 4GB for $200!!!... where!?!?!? Oh well, nowhere
I gave less than $149 for mine a year ago....I trade it for a 1070 any day!
Amx85
Senior Member
Posts: 330
Senior Member
Posts: 330
Posted on: 06/13/2017 05:30 PM
i know, i was interested on a RX470/480 and FreeSync monitor but i bought this monitor by oportunity and is´nt FreeSync or over 60hertz at max res. and i´ll sell my R7-260X at end of month and i don´t want to spend much more and im not interested going over 1080p, i know that i can get 60fps with RX460/560 using ultra settings except for shadows and other settings i did´nt like (i don´t use HBAO+ or Motion Blur in some games)
thanks however
You can buy 4GB RX-480's right now for ~$200 or <. I've got the same CPU that you do right now--getting Ryzen a little later--and an AoC 2560x1440 LCD and that's the resolution I use for gaming. At that resolution the cpu barely makes a difference, but the GPU is everything. 1080P is strictly entry-level these days. I'm very happy with my RX-480 8GB that I bought for ~$230. But even if you stay at 1080 for awhile, I'd recommend you spend your money on your GPU first--R7 is also entry-level, imo. You will see a big improvement in performance with a better GPU. Just my two cents...
i know, i was interested on a RX470/480 and FreeSync monitor but i bought this monitor by oportunity and is´nt FreeSync or over 60hertz at max res. and i´ll sell my R7-260X at end of month and i don´t want to spend much more and im not interested going over 1080p, i know that i can get 60fps with RX460/560 using ultra settings except for shadows and other settings i did´nt like (i don´t use HBAO+ or Motion Blur in some games)
thanks however
pages 1 2
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Member
Posts: 60
Nice review and a good budget chip, but I agree with the summary that the age of quad core processors is drawing to an end.
@Hilbert is there any chance you will be doing a more in depth article about memory speeds on AGESA 1.0.0.6? It would be great to see how far the speeds can be pushed using a few different configurations of both single and double DDR4 DIMMs in both 2 and 4 stick setups.