At first, we would like to thank AMD for sending out their AMD Ryzen™ 5 1600 hexa-core processor for testing and reviewing.

 

 

 

About AMD:

 

“Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD) is an American multinational semiconductor company based in Sunnyvale, California, United States, that develops computer processors and related technologies for business and consumer markets. While initially it manufactured its own processors, the company became fabless after GlobalFoundries was spun off in 2009. AMD's main products include microprocessors, motherboard chipsets, embedded processors and graphics processors for servers, workstations and personal computers, and embedded systems applications.

 

AMD is the second-largest supplier and only significant rival to Intel in the market for x86-based microprocessors. Since acquiring ATI in 2006, AMD and its competitor Nvidia have dominated the discrete Graphics Processor Unit (GPU) market.”

 

After trying out the X SKUs from the Ryzen 5 series, it is now time to also analyze the cheaper, non-X variants which are basically the Ryzen 5 1600 along with the Ryzen 5 1400; these two feature different CCX configurations and our first article will concentrate on the 1600 model.

Versus the Ryzen 5 1600X which did come with a TDP of 95W, the Ryzen 5 1600 comes with a 65W TDP, even if these two models share the same 3+3 CCX configuration. We do also have similarities regarding the total of L3 cache that is 16MB and L2 cache per core, which did remain at 512K; the main differences can be found with the clock speeds: while the 1600X does come with a 3.6GHz base clock, the 1600 does only have a 3.2GHz base.

Regarding boost clocks, the 1600X does have an all-core of 3.7GHz, while the 1600 climbs 200MHz at 3.4GHz all-core; the 2-core boost is available at 4GHz for the higher-spec 1600X, while the 1600 does only climb at 3.6GHz. Furthermore, the 1600X can deliver a 4.1GHz XFR, while the 1600 is able to climb up to 3.7GHz in XFR mode; this type of configuration does not verify the theory where non-XFR SKUs should only climb 50MHz in frequency.

 

After monitoring with HWiNFO64, we can see how the core clocks do perform in regular use (Current, Minimum Frequency, Maximum Frequency, and Average Frequency):

 

 

 

We won’t bore you again with the technical details since everything we have described along with the Ryzen 5 1600X does also hold with the Ryzen 5 1600. What is really interesting to check is how the lower-spec SKU does hold against the X-variants in multiple benchmarks and games; we will also analyze further on how the CPU performance does modify with the increase of memory clocks, how overclockable this SKU really is and afterwards draw a final conclusion.

 

The Ryzen 5 1600 CPU sample has arrived in a very simple packaging; if you are getting this particular processor from retail, you will also get with it a stock cooler, so if you do not intend on overclocking the platform, you do not need to invest in a brand new AM4 cooling system too.

 

 

 

The inner transparent plastic mold the CPU is held secure does have the same shape as we have seen with the other processors from the Ryzen series, but this time the Ryzen 5 sticker was not supplied with it:

 

 

 

A closer look at the Ryzen 5 1600 CPU does reveal a central logo that uses specific fonts. The Ryzen CPUs are using solder between the HSF and the cores, for an optimal heat conduction to the cooling system; the later experiments have proven that delidding does not bring any benefit in this case:

 

 

 

 

On the top area of the HSF, we will get to see the exact processor name for easy identification:

 

 

 

The lower area comes with some laser-etched serial numbers; our sample was manufactured in Malaysia:

 

 

 

A view from the side of the processor does reveal the HSF height along with the black sealing gasket:

 

 

 

On the back side of the CPU PCB, we will find 1331 golden pins, and its specific pin placement does not allow wrong installations on the motherboard socket:

 

 

 

The installation of the Ryzen 5 1600 processor inside the socket was pretty straightforward:

 

 

 

As we have mentioned before, we will compare the Ryzen 5 1600 CPU with the other 5-series SKUs we have reviewed before and to be more exact, the Ryzen 5 1600X and the Ryzen 5 1500X. For good measure, we have also re-tested the Ryzen 7 1700 on the new AGESA, which is basically the cheapest octo-core you can get right now. The Intel Core i5 7600K test scores are also available, for reference purposes.

 

We have used the same GEIL PC4 25600 3200MHz CL16 8GBx2 Samsung B-die based kit running at 2133Mhz (15-15-15-36 timings), one KFA2 GTX 1060 OC 6GB video card, a Cooler Master 850 PSU but also an OCZ Vector 150 240GB SSD for storage purposes/boot. During testing, the system was running on a fresh Windows 10 Anniversary installation, while all hardware was mounted inside a Cooler Master ATCS 840 Tower case.

 

CPU

 

 

Motherboard

 

 

RAM

 

 

CPU IMC

 

 

Chipset

 

 

SouthBridge

 

 

When we have worked with the Ryzen 5 1600X, an all-core overclock at 4GHz was not possible even at 1.412V set inside the UEFI interface, so we needed to dial a bit down at 3.9GHz that was perfectly stable at 1.337V.

After testing the Ryzen 5 1600 processor at stock speeds, we went ahead and set a 4GHz frequency inside the BIOS, along with a 1.387 voltage; the system was unable to boot properly so we have went ahead with 1.393V, but we got a hard lock at the Windows 10 login screen. The next step was to try at 1.4V and 1.412V; while the system did boot fine, we got a black screen pretty fast in Prime95 stress testing. This experience told us that we were dealing with a weaker batch in terms of overclocking so we needed to try again at 3.9GHz. Again, we were surprised to see that the system was not Prime95 stable at 1.381V, neither at 1.387V, but we hit the jackpot at 1.393V, which is by far the highest voltage we needed to pump into a Ryzen processor at this frequency.

During this time, we have monitored the temperatures with the HWiNFO64 utility and saw maximim Tdie temperatures of 66.8 degrees Celsius, which can be considered more than acceptable.

 

 

 

Via CPU-Z, we have also performed a validation at this frequency:

 

 

 

 

 

AIDA64

Memory

CPU Queen

CPU PhotoWorxx

CPU Zlib

CPU AES

CPU Hash

FPU VP8

FPU Julia

FPU Mandel

FPU SinJulia

FP32 Ray-Trace

FP64 Ray-Trace

CineBench R11.5 is one of the benchmarks which clearly shows the benefits of having more cores; we have the Ryzen 7 1700 in the lead, then the Ryzen 5 1600X and 1600 which are very close when overclocked, while the Ryzen 5 1500X falls short because it does only have four physical cores.

 

The exact same situation happens when looking at the CineBench R15 chart too.

 

Blender (Ryzen Render) is another rendering application which clearly shows the Ryzen 7 1700 in the lead.

 

PCMark Vantage does seem to benefit more from clock speeds rather than the number of cores, so the 1500X picks up the pace when overclocked at 4GHz.

 

In PCMark 7, the Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X are very competitive, especially when overclocked.

 

PCMark 8 is painting a similar image, with the Ryzen 7 1700 in the lead (when overclocked), while the Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X are very close behind.

 

 

 

 

 

CineBench R11.5

CineBench R15

Blender Ryzen Render

PCMark Vantage

PCMark 7

PCMark 8

 

SuperPi does only measure single-threaded performance, so the Ryzen 5 1600X takes the lead due to its 4.1GHz XFR. The Intel platform is strong in this benchmark due to higher clocks.

 

X265 Benchmark by HWBOT team is showing again the brute force of the Ryzen processors; more cores means faster rendering so the Ryzen 7 1700 clearly takes the lead, is followed by the Ryzen 5 1600X and Ryzen 5 1600, while the Ryzen 5 1500X falls short because it only packs a 2+2 CCX configuration.

 

3DMark Vantage scales very well with the number of cores, so we are seeing the Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X close together again when overclocked; at stock clocks however, the Ryzen 5 1600 is notably behind because of lower clock speeds.

 

3DMark 11 benchmark does mostly show differences in Performance mode, where we do have a similar situation, with the octo-core SKU in the lead.

 

Similar results we have received in 3DMark 2013.

 

The Unigine Valley Benchmark, which does also show minimum and maximum FPS count, we can see better results when the clocks are higher; because of this, the Ryzen 5 1600X clearly wins vs 1600 when at stock, but the advantage is gone when both CPUs are overclocked at the same speed. This is another benchmark which brings a win to the Intel platform.

 

Ashes of Singularity (CPU Focused Benchmark) does give another crown to the Ryzen 7 1700 at stock, but also when overclocked at 3.9GHz. The Ryzen 5 1600X/1600 remain very competitive though, leaving the 1500X in the dust.

 

 

 

 

 

SuperPI XS 32M

X265 Benchmark (HWBOT)

1080P 64-bit Normal

3DMark Vantage

3DMark 11

3DMark 2013

Unigine Valley

Ultra AA Off DX11 1920X1080

Ashes of the Singularity DX12

CPU Focused

 

By using the memory timings of the previously supplied AMD kit (GEIL PC4 25600 3200MHz CL16 8GBx2 Samsung B-die based), we will check out how the performance of the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 does scale when the memory frequency increases. For this aspect, we have included games, CineBench R15 suite for rendering, HWBOT X265 Encoding suite but also SuperPi 32M.

 

 

Bioshock Infinite

 

Tomb Raider

 

Hitman: Absolution

 

Ashes of the Singularity DX12 FHD

CPU Focused

 

CineBench R15 Multicore

 

X265 Benchmark (HWBOT)

1080P 64-bit Normal

 

SuperPI 32M

With the help of the AIDA64 utility, we have been able to check out the memory bandwidth differences at the speeds we have tried during the DDR scaling tests.

2133MHz

2400MHz

2667MHz

2933MHz

 

The Ryzen 5 1600 CPU does arrive with notably lower core clocks and 30W lower TDP versus its 1600X brother, all other technical specifications remaining the same. While we can see a small performance drop with the Ryzen 5 1600, both CPUs seem to share similar overclock margins on AIO water cooling; however, we did manage to achieve 3.9GHz at a considerably higher voltage than on the 1600X, which tells us that the more expensive SKU did belong from a more capable batch.

 

While the Ryzen 5 1600X can be found online for about 260 Euros (without the boxed cooler), the Ryzen 5 1600 is available for just 217 Euros and we really consider it as being a very good deal if you do intend on overclocking. This statement is valid when comparing with the 1600X but also versus the 1500X, which can be had for about 192 Euros (and only packs four physical cores). Having two more cores does not only benefit in productivity applications such as encoding or rendering, but we can see it as a more future proof hardware for games which begin to make use of more and more cores. While for doing office work or browsing the web the stock Ryzen 5 1600 may be enough, we would recommend working with the CPU overclocked when gaming in order to have the best experience, this as long as we do also have a capable cooling solution as a more recent AIO water cooling system.

 

Regarding the power consumption of the system, we have recorded 52.5W in IDLE, 67.1W while watching a 4K movie clip, 114W while encoding with Handbrake but also 124W when gaming. With a 3.9GHz all-core overclock, we have got 53.7W in IDLE, 69.9W when watching the exact same movie clip, 148W while encoding with Handbrake and 135W while gaming.

AMD Ryzen 5 1600 Processor is Recommended for:

 

 

We would like to thank again to AMD for making this review possible!