CPU by stefan @ 2017-05-14
Ryzen 5 1400 SKU is the least expensive processor from the series you can get right now, which does come with half of the L3 cache, a base clock of 3.2GHz, an all-core clock of the same 3.2GHz, a 2-core boost of 3.4GHz while the single-core boost does add 50MHz over this frequency. The processor does still feature a 65W TDP, is overclocking unlocked and on retail we can see it shipped along with the Wraith Stealth CPU cooler.
At first, we would like to thank AMD for sending out their AMD Ryzen™ 5 1400 quad-core processor for testing and reviewing.
“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.”
AMD does continue the line of affordable CPUs with the Ryzen 5 1400, which does feature the lowest top speeds (XFR) we have seen so far, has two cores disabled per CCX (2 + 2 CCX configuration), but also comes with the smallest L3 cache size (8MB).
This particular SKU does also come with a 65W TDP, 512K L2 cache per core (for a total of 2MB), a base clock of 3.2GHz, an all-core clock of the same 3.2GHz, 3.4GHz 2-core boost but also a 3.45GHz XFR speed (single core boost). Judging by these stock speeds we did also speculate right from the start a lower overclocking potential versus the Ryzen 5 1500X.
In order to monitor the clock speeds at stock, we have used the HWiNFO64; we could spot several 1-core jumps at 3.45GHz that is perfectly in-line with the AMD specifications:
The Ryzen 5 1400 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 1400 processor inside the socket was pretty straightforward:
As in the last article, we will compare the Ryzen 5 1400 CPU with the other 5-series SKUs we have reviewed before on the same platform and to be more exact, the Ryzen 5 1600, 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.
As we have mentioned before, the Ryzen 5 1400 SKU does feature quite low stock clocks, so we did expect lower overclocking abilities versus the more expensive processors. Our first attempt was at 4GHz, where the system did not seem to boot no matter which voltage we have thrown at it.
3.9GHz is the speed most SKUs were able to achieve at decent voltage, meaning that it was usable 24/7; in the case of the Ryzen 5 1400, the system did not boot while the CPU voltage was set at 1.4V but started showing video output at 1.412V and froze at the login screen. Our last attempt was at 1.418V, where we have succeeded to load Windows 10, but right after we have started the Prime95 stress application, we have got a black screen.
Given the results, we were forced to go one step lower at 3.8GHz; at 1.381V and 1.393V the system has proven unstable, while at 1.4V we have got a crash in Prime95 after a few minutes. To our surprise, when we did set the CPU voltage at 1.412V, the Prime95 instance has passed with flying colors!
Via CPU-Z, we have also performed a validation at this frequency:
First, we’ve got the CineBench R11.5 results, a chart which shows the raw power of the Ryzen 5 1400 CPU; as suspected, the processor does have the lowest scores at stock from all tested Ryzen 5 processors, but when overclocked, it is able to match the Ryzen 5 1500X performance (at stock). Even with these scores, it succeeds to win over the Intel Core i5 7600K, in both stock and overclocked environments.
The same story goes for the CineBench R15 testing, showing the least expensive Ryzen 5 1400 processor winning over the Intel Core i5 7600K.
Since Blender is another rendering application with a similar workload, we do also get about the same results.
The Ryzen 5 1400 battles head-to-head with the more expensive 1500X SKU in PCMark Vantage, but it is no match for it when the 1500X is overclocked.
PCMark 7 does show the fact that the Ryzen 5 1400 wins again over the Intel counterpart, but is no match for the X SKU.
PCMark 8 does show the Ryzen 5 1400 with the lowest scores from the bunch, but is able to match the 1500X performance at stock, when the R5 1400 does have an all-core overclock at 3.8GHz.
SuperPi Benchmark does show the single-thread performance of the CPU, so it was expected for the Ryzen 5 1400 to lose in both cases.
The X265 Benchmark from HWBOT allows the user to calculate the rendering performance of the processor. The Ryzen 5 1400 is the slowest from the bunch at the stock speeds, but again, it is able to match the 1500X SKU at stock, when overclocked.
3DMark Vantage does seem to show the same performance differences as before and in this synthetic benchmark we do also have a surprising win over the Intel Core i5 7600K (both stock and overclocked).
3DMark 11 shows the Ryzen 5 1400 at the bottom placement, because of its lower stock speeds but also the smallest cache size from the Ryzen 5 series.
3DMark 2013 does again show a big difference between the Ryzen 5 1400 and the Ryzen 5 1500X (even when the R5 1400 is overclocked!).
Unigine Valley is another 3D benchmark which benefits clock speed, so the Ryzen 5 1400 results are pretty self-explanatory here.
The Ashes of the Singularity benchmark is showing again the Ryzen 5 1400 processor capable to match the Ryzen 5 1500X only with its all-core overclock at 3.8GHz.
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 1400 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.
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.
Ryzen 5 1400 SKU is the least expensive processor from the series you can get right now, which does come with half of the L3 cache, a base clock of 3.2GHz, an all-core clock of the same 3.2GHz, a 2-core boost of 3.4GHz while the single-core boost does add 50MHz over this frequency. The processor does still feature a 65W TDP, is overclocking unlocked and on retail we can see it shipped along with the Wraith Stealth CPU cooler.
This particular CPU is not the cheapest for nothing, it basically comes with lower overclocking potential; in our tests, 4.0GHz was a no-go, 3.9GHz was not doable even at 1.418V set inside the UEFI interface, but we were able to settle with a 3.8GHz overclock, while working with a 1.412 voltage. The processor does come with a 2 + 2 CCX configuration and since basically half of the cores are turned off, the temperatures in Prime95 were low as well, despite the high voltage and maximum stress levels (58.5 degrees Celsius), while using a Deepcool Captain 240 EX AIO system.
What can we expect regarding performance levels? Well, this SKU is clearly under the rest of the Ryzen 5 series at stock, BUT we have seen that it can surpass the Intel Core i5 7600K processor in rendering and video encoding tasks, in both stock and overclocked environments, even if the last does have much higher clock speeds. When the Ryzen 5 1400 processor is overclocked, it can get to the Ryzen 5 1500X levels at stock, so if you are aiming for better overclocks, it is always a wise decision to go for the 1500X SKU (with this one we were able to reach notable higher clocks, at much lower voltages).
The Ryzen 5 1400 processor can be found online for about 166 Euros, while the better binned Ryzen 5 1500X (which does also come with the full 16MB of L3 cache) is now available for 192 Euros. We do expect to see the Ryzen 5 1400 CPU to be seen more in pre-built systems from OEMs, while the enthusiasts will go for the 1500X variant given its considerably higher overclocking potential.
Regarding the power consumption of the system, we have recorded 50.9W in IDLE, 64.1W while watching a 4K movie clip, 96.8W while encoding with Handbrake but also 110W when gaming. With a 3.8GHz all-core overclock, we have got 51.3W in IDLE, 65.4W when watching the exact same movie clip, 126W while encoding with Handbrake and 131W while gaming.
This particular SKU wins our Value award for its better performance compared to the Intel Core i5 7600K Kaby Lake in productivity applications, which is considerably more expensive at 235 Euros.
We would like to thank again to AMD for making this review possible!