AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X review
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX review
ASUS ROG SWIFT PG27UQ Monitor review
MSI B450i Gaming PLUS AC review
MSI Radeon RX 570 and 580 MECH 2 8G OC review
Preview: Unboxing Threadripper 2950X & 2990WX
Corsair SPEC Omega RGB review
Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro review
MSI B450 Tomahawk review
Guru3D PC Buyers Guide Summer 2018
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 review
Posted by: on: 05/16/2017 08:49 AM [
80 comment(s) ]
We put what could be the best value Ryzen 5 processor to the test as we benchmark the six-core Ryzen 5 1600 (without the X). The 1600 will be tested and overclocked to see how much value you can squeeze out of this six-core and twelve threaded processor.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2 3 4
FM57
Member
Posts: 78
Member
Posts: 78
Posted on: 05/16/2017 11:03 AM
Disabled cores
You mention that 2 cores are disabled. Soft or hardware disabled ? Would some gurus re-enable those two cores ?
I totally assume my ignorance on this matter
Disabled cores
You mention that 2 cores are disabled. Soft or hardware disabled ? Would some gurus re-enable those two cores ?
I totally assume my ignorance on this matter
labidas
Senior Member
Posts: 188
Senior Member
Posts: 188
Posted on: 05/16/2017 11:05 AM
Ryzen and nVidia drivers don't work well together... maybe use a FuryX?
Ryzen and nVidia drivers don't work well together... maybe use a FuryX?
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 32899
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 32899
Posted on: 05/16/2017 11:14 AM
I have yet to run into even a single problem, so no.
Ryzen and nVidia drivers don't work well together... maybe use a FuryX?
I have yet to run into even a single problem, so no.
Coexist
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Posted on: 05/16/2017 11:23 AM
1600 OC temps
Great review Hilbert. Thanks. Although I didn't need convincing as bought a 1600X on release day. For me the extra £30 was worth it as I always intended to add an aftermarket cooler and the chance of a better binned chip for 30 quid was worth it to me even if just a placebo.
Your temps @ 1.43v under stress test on that wraith seem very very good.
Thats quite a high voltage and to maintain 70-2deg under a stress test is really good! Perhaps that wraith cooler is better than we think.
For reference I achieve ~65deg under stress test using a H110i on 1600X @ 4.0GHz, 1.404v. Can reduce this to 62deg if turning pump and fans to max hoover mode.
edit: could you comment on stock boost / XFR? Does it work, I have yet to get my chip to boost past 3.7GHz when set to stock. Actually really annoys me that all the bumf on sales pages state 4.0GHz boost when it is really 3.7. the 4.0 is limited to 2 cores? And I have yet to see it in action.
Coe.
1600 OC temps
Great review Hilbert. Thanks. Although I didn't need convincing as bought a 1600X on release day. For me the extra £30 was worth it as I always intended to add an aftermarket cooler and the chance of a better binned chip for 30 quid was worth it to me even if just a placebo.
Your temps @ 1.43v under stress test on that wraith seem very very good.
Thats quite a high voltage and to maintain 70-2deg under a stress test is really good! Perhaps that wraith cooler is better than we think.
For reference I achieve ~65deg under stress test using a H110i on 1600X @ 4.0GHz, 1.404v. Can reduce this to 62deg if turning pump and fans to max hoover mode.
edit: could you comment on stock boost / XFR? Does it work, I have yet to get my chip to boost past 3.7GHz when set to stock. Actually really annoys me that all the bumf on sales pages state 4.0GHz boost when it is really 3.7. the 4.0 is limited to 2 cores? And I have yet to see it in action.
Coe.
Seikon
Member
Posts: 67
Member
Posts: 67
Posted on: 05/16/2017 11:28 AM
They don't play nice in some dx12 game's like Rise of the Tombraider , a lot of youtubers have shown it , plus many have shown how Ryzen even with a gtx1060 is behind intel on the avrg fps , and its not the cpu since if you put a gtx1080 the fps go up.
Tho intel still will have better avrg fps in a lot of games, but Ryzen feels smoother.
I have yet to run into even a single problem, so no.
They don't play nice in some dx12 game's like Rise of the Tombraider , a lot of youtubers have shown it , plus many have shown how Ryzen even with a gtx1060 is behind intel on the avrg fps , and its not the cpu since if you put a gtx1080 the fps go up.
Tho intel still will have better avrg fps in a lot of games, but Ryzen feels smoother.
Ziggymac
Member
Posts: 89
Member
Posts: 89
Posted on: 05/16/2017 12:07 PM
As much as I like the core count I just can't ignore the poor overclocking limits on these Ryzens and as such I'll be sticking with Intel until AMD can give me a Ryzen chip that can hit at least 4.5Ghz.
I use too many things on my PC that rely on high IPC and high core frequency to consider switching.
For now I'll wait and see whether the 6c 12t coffee lake chips turn up..best of both worlds then, same core count and better overclocking.
..more expensive no doubt but I'm willing to pay the extra for the performance.
As much as I like the core count I just can't ignore the poor overclocking limits on these Ryzens and as such I'll be sticking with Intel until AMD can give me a Ryzen chip that can hit at least 4.5Ghz.
I use too many things on my PC that rely on high IPC and high core frequency to consider switching.
For now I'll wait and see whether the 6c 12t coffee lake chips turn up..best of both worlds then, same core count and better overclocking.
..more expensive no doubt but I'm willing to pay the extra for the performance.
TestDrivers
Senior Member
Posts: 109
Senior Member
Posts: 109
Posted on: 05/16/2017 12:17 PM
They don't play nice in some dx12 game's like Rise of the Tombraider , a lot of youtubers have shown it , plus many have shown how Ryzen even with a gtx1060 is behind intel on the avrg fps , and its not the cpu since if you put a gtx1080 the fps go up.
Tho intel still will have better avrg fps in a lot of games, but Ryzen feels smoother.
Nice test test as always Hilbert!
Regarding Tomb Raider, I have also seen a test where 480 in crossfire is much better than 1070 on a Ryzen. The difference was huge, especially in some levels of Tomb Raider where a lot of dx12 was used. So seems AMD or the drivers for their GPU's could be bether suited it dx12 heavy games.
Gonna be interesting to see how Vega fares, but after reading this reddit post I think they will be much better in Tomb Raider than Nvdia
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/62kqph/ryzen-of-the-tomb-raider-when-a-cpu-bottleneck-is/
They don't play nice in some dx12 game's like Rise of the Tombraider , a lot of youtubers have shown it , plus many have shown how Ryzen even with a gtx1060 is behind intel on the avrg fps , and its not the cpu since if you put a gtx1080 the fps go up.
Tho intel still will have better avrg fps in a lot of games, but Ryzen feels smoother.
Nice test test as always Hilbert!
Regarding Tomb Raider, I have also seen a test where 480 in crossfire is much better than 1070 on a Ryzen. The difference was huge, especially in some levels of Tomb Raider where a lot of dx12 was used. So seems AMD or the drivers for their GPU's could be bether suited it dx12 heavy games.
Gonna be interesting to see how Vega fares, but after reading this reddit post I think they will be much better in Tomb Raider than Nvdia
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/62kqph/ryzen-of-the-tomb-raider-when-a-cpu-bottleneck-is/
Odellot
Senior Member
Posts: 669
Senior Member
Posts: 669
Posted on: 05/16/2017 12:23 PM
Really loving the 1600 on Our Family PC..Overclocked to 3.9ghz was able to keep up at a 7700K @ 5.1ghz...
The RX 580 was clocked the same as a RX 480..
When The RX 580 was Overclocked, it was higher..
Really loving the 1600 on Our Family PC..Overclocked to 3.9ghz was able to keep up at a 7700K @ 5.1ghz...
The RX 580 was clocked the same as a RX 480..
When The RX 580 was Overclocked, it was higher..
H83
Senior Member
Posts: 2264
Senior Member
Posts: 2264
Posted on: 05/16/2017 12:34 PM
For me the 1600 and the 1700 are the real stars of the Ryzen line up, they are great cpus and offer amazing value.
Good to see AMD back in the game.
For me the 1600 and the 1700 are the real stars of the Ryzen line up, they are great cpus and offer amazing value.
Good to see AMD back in the game.
Valken
Senior Member
Posts: 1320
Senior Member
Posts: 1320
Posted on: 05/16/2017 12:46 PM
Awesome review Hilbert. R5-1600 is the best cpu value of the year!
I cannot wait until you review Vega with Ryzen and Core cpus!
Awesome review Hilbert. R5-1600 is the best cpu value of the year!
I cannot wait until you review Vega with Ryzen and Core cpus!
Embra
Senior Member
Posts: 600
Senior Member
Posts: 600
Posted on: 05/16/2017 12:51 PM
I really appreciate how comprehensive your reviews for HH. Thank you!
I really appreciate how comprehensive your reviews for HH. Thank you!
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 9664
Senior Member
Posts: 9664
Posted on: 05/16/2017 12:51 PM
I agree. Ryzen 5 seems like a very good option. Only a mad man would choose i5 over Ryzen 5 at this time.
I agree. Ryzen 5 seems like a very good option. Only a mad man would choose i5 over Ryzen 5 at this time.
moaka
Senior Member
Posts: 264
Senior Member
Posts: 264
Posted on: 05/16/2017 12:56 PM
Ryzen 1700 vs Inte 6700k vs 3570k tested in 11 games
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zc2L3L4E73g
Ryzen 1700 vs Inte 6700k vs 3570k tested in 11 games
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zc2L3L4E73g
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 6730
Senior Member
Posts: 6730
Posted on: 05/16/2017 01:39 PM
If you really want to be heard, don't state this. Youtubers don't know diddly squat.
a lot of youtubers have shown it ,
If you really want to be heard, don't state this. Youtubers don't know diddly squat.
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9002
Senior Member
Posts: 9002
Posted on: 05/16/2017 01:39 PM
Serious value right there. No Ryzen will hold you back from 60FPS at 1080 so that really is getting to be a non factor with the exception of 144Hz monitor users. Even still they are getting adequate performance. WQHD and UHD both have no issues.
Bring on the HEDT R9's I want to see what these do with more memory bandwidth.
Serious value right there. No Ryzen will hold you back from 60FPS at 1080 so that really is getting to be a non factor with the exception of 144Hz monitor users. Even still they are getting adequate performance. WQHD and UHD both have no issues.
Bring on the HEDT R9's I want to see what these do with more memory bandwidth.
AlmondMan
Senior Member
Posts: 399
Senior Member
Posts: 399
Posted on: 05/16/2017 02:30 PM
Nice test test as always Hilbert!
Regarding Tomb Raider, I have also seen a test where 480 in crossfire is much better than 1070 on a Ryzen. The difference was huge, especially in some levels of Tomb Raider where a lot of dx12 was used. So seems AMD or the drivers for their GPU's could be bether suited it dx12 heavy games.
Gonna be interesting to see how Vega fares, but after reading this reddit post I think they will be much better in Tomb Raider than Nvdia
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/62kqph/ryzen-of-the-tomb-raider-when-a-cpu-bottleneck-is/
That video right there is very interesting indeed. I would love to see more benchmarks with Ryzen and AMD graphics cards - we know nVidia isn't the best when it comes to DX12 - so it'd be super-interesting seeing a Ryzen benchmarked with a Fury X. Hell, Crossfire Fury Xs would be great too.
Sure, the Titan Xp is way faster, but if you can make Crossfire 480s appear faster than a OC Titan Xp... then something is certainly amiss.
If you really want to be heard, don't state this. Youtubers don't know diddly squat.
If you really want to be heard, don't state something like this.
Nice test test as always Hilbert!
Regarding Tomb Raider, I have also seen a test where 480 in crossfire is much better than 1070 on a Ryzen. The difference was huge, especially in some levels of Tomb Raider where a lot of dx12 was used. So seems AMD or the drivers for their GPU's could be bether suited it dx12 heavy games.
Gonna be interesting to see how Vega fares, but after reading this reddit post I think they will be much better in Tomb Raider than Nvdia
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/62kqph/ryzen-of-the-tomb-raider-when-a-cpu-bottleneck-is/
That video right there is very interesting indeed. I would love to see more benchmarks with Ryzen and AMD graphics cards - we know nVidia isn't the best when it comes to DX12 - so it'd be super-interesting seeing a Ryzen benchmarked with a Fury X. Hell, Crossfire Fury Xs would be great too.
Sure, the Titan Xp is way faster, but if you can make Crossfire 480s appear faster than a OC Titan Xp... then something is certainly amiss.
If you really want to be heard, don't state this. Youtubers don't know diddly squat.
If you really want to be heard, don't state something like this.
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 6730
Senior Member
Posts: 6730
Posted on: 05/16/2017 02:33 PM
If you really want to be heard, don't state something like this.
lol that's just sad
It amazes me how many people have fallen victim to this youtube review faze.
Not to say many of them are not legit, there are some, but very few, and man are they shady
What i don't understand is if you trust youtubers, why are you even here?
If you really want to be heard, don't state something like this.
lol that's just sad
It amazes me how many people have fallen victim to this youtube review faze.
Not to say many of them are not legit, there are some, but very few, and man are they shady
What i don't understand is if you trust youtubers, why are you even here?
AlmondMan
Senior Member
Posts: 399
Senior Member
Posts: 399
Posted on: 05/16/2017 03:21 PM
lol that's just sad
It amazes me how many people have fallen victim to this youtube review faze.
Not to say many of them are not legit, there are some, but very few, and man are they shady
What i don't understand is if you trust youtubers, why are you even here?
What I don't understand is how you can even put up such a ridiculous blanket statement. Hilbert's reviews are under as much scrutiny in my book as youtubers, Anandtech, DF, Toms, HardOCP, pcper and so many others. Critical sense is a requirement for reading and using reviews.
lol that's just sad
It amazes me how many people have fallen victim to this youtube review faze.
Not to say many of them are not legit, there are some, but very few, and man are they shady
What i don't understand is if you trust youtubers, why are you even here?
What I don't understand is how you can even put up such a ridiculous blanket statement. Hilbert's reviews are under as much scrutiny in my book as youtubers, Anandtech, DF, Toms, HardOCP, pcper and so many others. Critical sense is a requirement for reading and using reviews.
Ricepudding
Senior Member
Posts: 354
Senior Member
Posts: 354
Posted on: 05/16/2017 03:28 PM
lol that's just sad
It amazes me how many people have fallen victim to this youtube review faze.
Not to say many of them are not legit, there are some, but very few, and man are they shady
What i don't understand is if you trust youtubers, why are you even here?
Agreed. Many are straight up being paid by intel/nvidia/amd or whoever to show better results... or results in a prime condition. as consumers we should be very careful with what we see and hear. and as always take everything with a grain of salt.
Though i disagree with your last statement i think people should be looking at multiple sources to contrast and compare to make sure they are getting valid information. The more information we consumers have the better
lol that's just sad
It amazes me how many people have fallen victim to this youtube review faze.
Not to say many of them are not legit, there are some, but very few, and man are they shady
What i don't understand is if you trust youtubers, why are you even here?
Agreed. Many are straight up being paid by intel/nvidia/amd or whoever to show better results... or results in a prime condition. as consumers we should be very careful with what we see and hear. and as always take everything with a grain of salt.
Though i disagree with your last statement i think people should be looking at multiple sources to contrast and compare to make sure they are getting valid information. The more information we consumers have the better
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 3086
Senior Member
Posts: 3086
Posted on: 05/16/2017 03:38 PM
I'm a little surprised this was ranked as just a "Great Value". Aside from the underwhelming OCing and flaky memory support, what is there to not recommend about this? It is objectively the best-valued Ryzen CPU, and considering the performance-per-dollar of the 1800X (the worst-valued Ryzen) it is probably has the best value of high-performance desktop CPUs in general. I understand value doesn't correlate to quality, but I don't think the 1600 lacks in quality.
You mention that 2 cores are disabled. Soft or hardware disabled ? Would some gurus re-enable those two cores ?
I totally assume my ignorance on this matter
Doesn't really matter which way was done - it doesn't seem AMD or any motherboard manufacturers are willing to unlock cores. Even if you could, it seems doing so would be a bad idea.
I'm a little surprised this was ranked as just a "Great Value". Aside from the underwhelming OCing and flaky memory support, what is there to not recommend about this? It is objectively the best-valued Ryzen CPU, and considering the performance-per-dollar of the 1800X (the worst-valued Ryzen) it is probably has the best value of high-performance desktop CPUs in general. I understand value doesn't correlate to quality, but I don't think the 1600 lacks in quality.
You mention that 2 cores are disabled. Soft or hardware disabled ? Would some gurus re-enable those two cores ?
I totally assume my ignorance on this matter
Doesn't really matter which way was done - it doesn't seem AMD or any motherboard manufacturers are willing to unlock cores. Even if you could, it seems doing so would be a bad idea.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 32899
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 32899
Posted on: 05/16/2017 04:54 PM
I'm a little surprised this was ranked as just a "Great Value". Aside from the underwhelming OCing and flaky memory support, what is there to not recommend about this? It is objectively the best-valued Ryzen CPU, and considering the performance-per-dollar of the 1800X (the worst-valued Ryzen) it is probably has the best value of high-performance desktop CPUs in general. I understand value doesn't correlate to quality, but I don't think the 1600 lacks in quality.
"Supah-Dupah Great Quality & Value and all that stuffz" didn't fit in the award logo, but also isn't my lingo. Mate, it's a great value CPU, period. If memory support was 100% out of the box supported on all popular DIMMs and if it would beat Intel in tweaking overall, it would/could have been a best hardware award. Among all things considered the 1600 shines in its fantastic value, hence this award. I understand your comment though, so i am adding a recommended award as well..
I'm a little surprised this was ranked as just a "Great Value". Aside from the underwhelming OCing and flaky memory support, what is there to not recommend about this? It is objectively the best-valued Ryzen CPU, and considering the performance-per-dollar of the 1800X (the worst-valued Ryzen) it is probably has the best value of high-performance desktop CPUs in general. I understand value doesn't correlate to quality, but I don't think the 1600 lacks in quality.
"Supah-Dupah Great Quality & Value and all that stuffz" didn't fit in the award logo, but also isn't my lingo. Mate, it's a great value CPU, period. If memory support was 100% out of the box supported on all popular DIMMs and if it would beat Intel in tweaking overall, it would/could have been a best hardware award. Among all things considered the 1600 shines in its fantastic value, hence this award. I understand your comment though, so i am adding a recommended award as well..
alanm
Senior Member
Posts: 7899
Senior Member
Posts: 7899
Posted on: 05/16/2017 05:10 PM
That was funny
"Supah-Dupah Great Quality & Value and all that stuffz" didn't fit in the award logo...
That was funny
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 3086
Senior Member
Posts: 3086
Posted on: 05/16/2017 05:40 PM
I think you're finding my comment a lot more whiny than I intended...
I wasn't expecting you to change your stance, but rather to clarify it. There was a reason your first instinct wasn't to declare it as "recommended"; perhaps you were looking at it in a purely high-end enthusiast perspective (in which case yes, it is just a "great value"). But, that'd be a little too niche, hence my comment.
"Supah-Dupah Great Quality & Value and all that stuffz" didn't fit in the award logo, but also isn't my lingo. Mate, it's a great value CPU, period. If memory support was 100% out of the box supported on all popular DIMMs and if it would beat Intel in tweaking overall, it would/could have been a best hardware award. Among all things considered the 1600 shines in its fantastic value, hence this award. I understand your comment though, so i am adding a recommended award as well..
I think you're finding my comment a lot more whiny than I intended...
I wasn't expecting you to change your stance, but rather to clarify it. There was a reason your first instinct wasn't to declare it as "recommended"; perhaps you were looking at it in a purely high-end enthusiast perspective (in which case yes, it is just a "great value"). But, that'd be a little too niche, hence my comment.
kapu
Senior Member
Posts: 3739
Senior Member
Posts: 3739
Posted on: 05/16/2017 09:25 PM
Not really . If You play 1080p , i5 is better option (or similar ? )
Price here is EXACTLY the same and just test them i5 at minimum 4.8Ghz ( which you do just basically changing the multi).
Alot of people play at 1080p, i'm one of them and still not planing to hit higher rest untill some very good monitors show up (OLEDs?). My VA Ezio has better black than any of " modern " IPS screens.
It's a great chip tho , it seems it maybe more future proof than i5/i7.
It's bad that we can't find any review of overclocked i5 vs overclocked ryzen , which matters a lot considering how high they clock now. Most chips of i5 clock 4.8Ghz without changing the volts just changing the multi.
I really like to see benchamrk like this ...
I agree. Ryzen 5 seems like a very good option. Only a mad man would choose i5 over Ryzen 5 at this time.
Not really . If You play 1080p , i5 is better option (or similar ? )
Price here is EXACTLY the same and just test them i5 at minimum 4.8Ghz ( which you do just basically changing the multi).
Alot of people play at 1080p, i'm one of them and still not planing to hit higher rest untill some very good monitors show up (OLEDs?). My VA Ezio has better black than any of " modern " IPS screens.
It's a great chip tho , it seems it maybe more future proof than i5/i7.
It's bad that we can't find any review of overclocked i5 vs overclocked ryzen , which matters a lot considering how high they clock now. Most chips of i5 clock 4.8Ghz without changing the volts just changing the multi.
I really like to see benchamrk like this ...
pages 1 2 3 4
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Member
Posts: 25
The results speak for themselves. I already jumped on the Skylake train but hopefully next generation of Ryzen will have better memory compatibility and stay cheaper than equivalent intel chips so I can put it in my next build.