AMD Ryzen 5 1600 CPU Review

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

rasmusdf

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2011
13
0
18,510
0
Nice review - will be interesting to see how the next "Best CPUs" list will reflect on this.

Good consideration on effect of old/new games.
 

Linkspike

Prominent
May 29, 2017
1
0
510
0
I have the 1600 and i have seen how it core speed rize until 3700Mhz in two cores at the same time. Is striking that it doesnt appears in the specifications of de cpu
 

PaulAlcorn

Senior Editor
Editor
Feb 24, 2015
712
64
5,060
0


http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/paullie1/XFR3.jpg

It may just be confusing marketing, but much of the information points to XFR on X-SKUs only.
 

$hawn

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2009
854
1
19,060
49
How there's come no Intel vs AMD power comparisons like you guys used to have in your articles before?
Is it because Intel loses the efficiency battle this time around, and Intel pays you to not add it to your review?
 

thebytemaster

Prominent
May 29, 2017
2
0
510
0
^^ Of course, you conveniently leave out a pretty important point when defending toms.
Those are AMD's 6-core and 8-core processors vs inte's 4-core processors. If you look at the performance per watt, it's an absolute massacre.
 

Sakkura

Illustrious


They have power consumption comparisons in their earlier Ryzen reviews, it's probably just getting a bit unnecessary to test.
 


And you conveniently forget that these 6-core chips are marketed against Intel's 4-core 7-series. So it's irrelevant.

 

thebytemaster

Prominent
May 29, 2017
2
0
510
0


Yes? So? Better perf/watt is better perf/watt.
I don't see how the 6-cores being marketed against intel's 4-cores changes this?
 


From a technical standpoint you are correct. But when you are looking at buying an overclocking chip, power consumption per core is not even on the radar (good for laptops of course). Also keep in mind that Intel has not released a new 6 or 8 core chip yet for Kaby Lake (or Skylake). The last release were the 6-series Broadwell-E's in 5th generation platform which were power hogs without question. So we'll have to see what Intel trots out later this summer to compare.

Toms just can't win apparently. And again, it doesn't take much effort to go find another Ryzen review, like one of the X-series, and then find a review from last year of Intel's 6-core i7 6950X:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10337/the-intel-broadwell-e-review-core-i7-6950x-6900k-6850k-and-6800k-tested-up-to-10-cores/10

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11244/the-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-vs-core-i5-review-twelve-threads-vs-four/2

Oh and while you are in complain mode, you may want to go over to Guru3D and tell them they are hiding something to for Intel bias since they too didn't report per core watt consumption/performance:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_5_1600_review,7.html
 

none12345

Honorable
Apr 27, 2013
430
1
10,780
0
I personaly dont care about power consumption(within reason).

With bulldozer every review was hammering how bad buldozer was on power usage. And its deserved, its performance/watt is a lot worse then intel. Since that was the case, one would think there would be a high priority to test ryzen to see if AMD fixed it. Yet curiously its missing from most reviews. AMD not only fixed it, but they currently have the lead on performance/watt. It would seem that if AMD loses on power its a HUGE deal, and if they win, all of a sudden no one cares. That just seems a bit fishy to me, this isnt about toms, this is all reviewers for some reason.

I dont think there is some huge conspirecy theory, i just would like to see the data, so we can compare ryzen to bulldozer, ryzen to core, intel core to amd core, etc.
 

JocPro

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2007
12
0
18,510
0


Still the same, it doesn't say "" = Standard Desktop CPU WITHOUT XFR, you are just proving my point :D

I know it's just semantics, but we really went through all the material available, so it wasn't a surprise that non-x had limited XFR instead of full XFR...
 

PaulAlcorn

Senior Editor
Editor
Feb 24, 2015
712
64
5,060
0


That's a good point. I'll reach out for clarification.
 

ravenshrike

Prominent
May 29, 2017
3
0
510
0
Did you calculate the cost of the cooler for the 7600k as well as the fact that to significantly overclock it or its memory you need to get the top end chipsets to do so?
 

ravenshrike

Prominent
May 29, 2017
3
0
510
0
To put this issue in perspective to get the cheapest possible setup to OC at the speeds seen is ~ 60 bucks cheaper on AMD than on Ryzen. If you're willing to sacrifice 100 MHz on the 1600 you can get away without buying aftermarket thermal paste and that goes to ~ a 65-70 dollar difference.
 

iPanda

Reputable
Mar 25, 2015
87
0
4,640
2
Rise of the Tomb Raider is a very finnicky game as far as benchmarking. I would not really trust it for intel vs amd; it just isn't uniform across the whole game. (specific parts unusually favor one over the other, while most other games have a fairly linear benchmark).
 

T0ned0g666

Prominent
May 19, 2017
3
0
510
0
I bought the Ryzen 5 1600 and I must tell you that it's all that and a truckload of chips. The overclocking features are quick and easy and STABLE! But I'd have to say that even for a novice, the chip right out of the box performs better than expected.
 

papality

Honorable
Dec 1, 2012
74
0
10,640
1
I think it's about time to start testing BF1 in multiplayer, no? Considering nobody's buying a 1080 to play Avanti Savoia, they're doing it to play 64 player Conquest. I realize other concerns spring up that make it difficult to isolate performance relative to specific components when doing this, but I'd have to think anything MP at all would be better than no MP test.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

You cannot draw any conclusions with any sort of reasonable confidence from non-repeatable tests. You have no way of knowing if dips on one run were caused by an extra explosion or any event being within line of sight of your draw distance compared to other runs. Every little difference between runs can add up to massive discrepancies.
 
With all the various pages you have for each graph, I would like to humbly request one more graph be added.

A nice line graph that shows total CPU load during your bench runs. This would be helpful in gauging how much leftover horsepower there is for the CPU to work on other tasks, such as recording, streaming, etc.

I ended up on the Tom's UK site earlier today which has the same article and commented there, not realizing. Is there a reason that comments on articles are being separated by region?
 

Supahos

Champion
Herald
Just glad to see a ryzen review that wasn't full of over the top superlatives for either chip. This boardered on tech journalism might have actually been so. Present the facts, pet readers decide. Stick 1060/580 tests on here and I'd call it complete. Even a 1070 would be sufficient to make it fully fleshed out. Look forward to the multi tasking while gaming runs coming up soon. Good job on this one Paul. I know I was very critical of the process during the best CPUs list , this addresses some of the concerns.
 
The value of an unlocked multiplier becomes clear during this benchmark...

...At the end of the day, all of these processors facilitate a smooth experience in Middle-earth, and their performance is quite similar.
So the clear value of an unlocked multiplier is that their performance remains quite similar? : P


I kind of agree, but at least Toms includes some graphs that might indicate that to anyone who looks, unlike many other reviews that just toss out a set of frame rate numbers. You can clearly see where the game's built-in benchmark switches to the Geothermal Valley section of the test, which is where the AMD processors fall behind in terms of minimum and average frame rates. Up until that point, the performance of all the processors is very close. Even the Intel chips show some significant stutters during that last section. It might have been nice if they had made better note of the weird performance affecting that section in their review though.
 

Dinky_Di

Prominent
May 30, 2017
2
0
510
0
Interesting that the price of the i5 7600k is listed here as $240. Find me one that comes with the tested Noctua NH-U12S that you tested with for that price.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS