1500X vs. 1600 non-X better gaming performance without OC?

Priyank Kumar · May 24, 2017

Getting a PC assembled for AAA gaming at 1080P 60 FPS at high settings. I had decided on a i5 7500 build but feedback on it from members here convinced to switch to AMD Ryzen.

I will be trying to get a B350 board and a 3200 MHz rated memory in the hope the the board will be able to run it at 3200 or at least 2933. I am rather wary of running the CPU on overclock though and so my question is, which of the two would give better performance at stock clock speeds?

Makentox · May 24, 2017

https://youtu.be/3VvwWTQKCZs?t=277
Obviously 4 cores cant be better than 6

Isokolon · May 24, 2017

for 1080P, 60 FPS it doesn't matter.

both chips will easily output more than 60fps

as for performance: right now there are very few if any games that really profit off 6 real cores.
the 1500X offers the same configuration as Intel's i7 (at lower clocks) and that's still the sweet spot for gaming performance.
overall the 1500X might give you better fps on the majority of games due to the higher clock speeds
games that profit off the additional physical cores of the 1600 will run better on the 1600
both should be sufficient.

Personally, it's a matter of budget imo.
I like the 1600 but the 1500X is still a great CPU especially if the 50$ can be better reinvested in other components of your system

concerning overclocking: since the 1600 & the 1600X are the same chip, overclocking it to 1600X levels shouldn't be worrying.

elbert · May 24, 2017

It pretty much takes a highly overclocked 1500x to match a 6 core. As games get more threaded its just going to go more in the 6 cores favor.

aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9ELzkvNjY5MjEzL29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDQ4LnBuZw==

Makentox · May 24, 2017

Isokolon :

So based on your logic at this point when not many games utilise all threads 1500x will have same performance as 1600. Have you ever thought that future games will be made to utilise all threads? So then in 2018 for example OP will have to waste money for new CPU just because he have decided to save 20$.

Priyank Kumar · May 24, 2017

Thanks all, all your replies are very helpful.

1600 is pretty much within my budget, I am going for RX 580 so making a jump to the next tier of GPU will take much more than $50 and I think it's the same with memory as I am going with 16GB 3200 MHz in this budget and I would rather spend the $50 on the cpu than get a prettier case or something.

Future proofing is definitely something I am aiming for, I want to be set at least for 1.5 to 2 years. The graph elbert posted above, the 1600X there without the overclocked speed reflects the performance of a non-OC 1600, right?

boosted1g · May 24, 2017

It frankly comes down to what games you are playing.

1500x has higher clock speed stock so anything that will only use the 8 threads (or less) of that, this CPU will be faster
1600 has 2 more cores and 4 more threads so anything that can use all 12 threads will be faster.

If doing video editing, photoshop, or highly threaded cpu intensive games like BF1 then you will use all 6 cores and thus it will more then compensate for the lower clock speed
If not doing CPU intensive tasks/games then the extra cores make zero difference but the reduced clock speed does.

In a very basic sense performance is bassically how many instructions you can do per clock cycle (called IPC), how many clock cycles you can do per second (that is your gHz speed), and how many threads are being utilized.
So if you can only use 4 threads for the game then x*3.5*4 is going to be greater then x*3.2*4. But lets say you can use all the threads then the 1500x (x*3.5*8) is less then the 1600 (x*3.2*12).

Isokolon · May 24, 2017

Makentox :

so by your logic, since I'm not married and got no kids, I should rent a 5 room apartment because in the future I might need them?
I empathize on the 1600 being the better CPU. No question.
but for 1080p/60Hz I strongly disagree on "you need the 1600" because the 1500X is just fine.
the fact that he was looking at an i5-7500 (4c4t, still potent for gaming) tells me he's looking at a budget friendly build.
and in that sense I argue: if you can afford it a 1600 is nice but the 1500X is fine as well. especially if it opens up some budget.
difference right now is not too big between those CPUs

also your statement before

Obviously 4 cores cant be better than 6

is just rubbish, otherwise a FX8350 wouldn't be outperformed by i3s
concerning the 1500X & the 1600: they're clocked differently and boost differently.

if you compare gaming bechmarks, the difference isn't too big and both deliver enough frames for a 60Hz screen
sadly there aren't many reviews comparing the 1500X vs the 1600(non-X)
I found one though on a German site: https://www.computerbase.de/2017-04/amd-ryzen-5-test/2/#diagramm-the-witcher-3-1080p & https://www.computerbase.de/2017-04/amd-ryzen-5-test/3/#diagramm-anno-2205
yeah, the 1600 is a bit faster (merely 4% in Dx11, bit more in Dx12) but the difference isn't as drastic as you making it sound

Future proofing is definitely something I am aiming for, I want to be set at least for 1.5 to 2 years. The graph elbert posted above, the 1600X there without the overclocked speed reflects the performance of a non-OC 1600, right?

no the 1600X reflects the speed of a 1600 OC'd to 3,6GHz

jowen3400 · May 24, 2017

the 1600 is the sweet spot on the AMD chip line. The lowest price per core and thread. as fast as a 1700 and can beat it in some cases. the 1500x uses the Vross core bus too much. the CXW or CWX something like that. Which slows the CPU WAY down. If amd made a 4 core that was just half of a 1800x not using that second core pack that would be the quad core to get. As it sits the Quad cores only can quickly share data with a second core. So While you get a lot of cashe per core, the 1600 is the best value for gaming/workstation/video editing. The over best is the 1800x, but the best value is 1600 non x OC'ed.

Makentox · May 24, 2017

Isokolon :

Makentox :

so by your logic, since I'm not married and got no kids, I should rent a 5 room apartment because in the future I might need them?
I empathize on the 1600 being the better CPU. No question.
but for 1080p/60Hz I strongly disagree on "you need the 1600" because the 1500X is just fine.
the fact that he was looking at an i5-7500 (4c4t, still potent for gaming) tells me he's looking at a budget friendly build.
and in that sense I argue: if you can afford it a 1600 is nice but the 1500X is fine as well. especially if it opens up some budget.
difference right now is not too big between those CPUs

also your statement before

Obviously 4 cores cant be better than 6

is just rubbish, otherwise a FX8350 wouldn't be outperformed by i3s
concerning the 1500X & the 1600: they're clocked differently and boost differently.

if you compare gaming bechmarks, the difference isn't too big and both deliver enough frames for a 60Hz screen
sadly there aren't many reviews comparing the 1500X vs the 1600(non-X)
I found one though on a German site: https://www.computerbase.de/2017-04/amd-ryzen-5-test/2/#diagramm-the-witcher-3-1080p & https://www.computerbase.de/2017-04/amd-ryzen-5-test/3/#diagramm-anno-2205
yeah, the 1600 is a bit faster (merely 4% in Dx11, bit more in Dx12) but the difference isn't as drastic as you making it sound

Future proofing is definitely something I am aiming for, I want to be set at least for 1.5 to 2 years. The graph elbert posted above, the 1600X there without the overclocked speed reflects the performance of a non-OC 1600, right?

no the 1600X reflects the speed of a 1600 OC'd to 3,6GHz

Word is RENT, means u can change it any time with no extra cost, and move into, more expensive one. But in his case you have to change CPU. But i get your point anyway..
Also you said that in benchmarks difference is not too big, you are right, but price difference is not too big either.
And maybe OP will do some other stuff beside gaming in the future where 2/4 will make a difference.
You should agree that CPU will always serve longer than GPU before you change it, if you compare GPU and CPU progression each year you will clearly see the difference. This why its so important to buy a future proof CPU unless you dont care about money and feel like you can afford new cpu each year.

Priyank Kumar · May 24, 2017

Isokolon :

Makentox :

so by your logic, since I'm not married and got no kids, I should rent a 5 room apartment because in the future I might need them?
I empathize on the 1600 being the better CPU. No question.
but for 1080p/60Hz I strongly disagree on "you need the 1600" because the 1500X is just fine.
the fact that he was looking at an i5-7500 (4c4t, still potent for gaming) tells me he's looking at a budget friendly build.
and in that sense I argue: if you can afford it a 1600 is nice but the 1500X is fine as well. especially if it opens up some budget.
difference right now is not too big between those CPUs

also your statement before

Obviously 4 cores cant be better than 6

is just rubbish, otherwise a FX8350 wouldn't be outperformed by i3s
concerning the 1500X & the 1600: they're clocked differently and boost differently.

if you compare gaming bechmarks, the difference isn't too big and both deliver enough frames for a 60Hz screen
sadly there aren't many reviews comparing the 1500X vs the 1600(non-X)
I found one though on a German site: https://www.computerbase.de/2017-04/amd-ryzen-5-test/2/#diagramm-the-witcher-3-1080p & https://www.computerbase.de/2017-04/amd-ryzen-5-test/3/#diagramm-anno-2205
yeah, the 1600 is a bit faster (merely 4% in Dx11, bit more in Dx12) but the difference isn't as drastic as you making it sound

Future proofing is definitely something I am aiming for, I want to be set at least for 1.5 to 2 years. The graph elbert posted above, the 1600X there without the overclocked speed reflects the performance of a non-OC 1600, right?

no the 1600X reflects the speed of a 1600 OC'd to 3,6GHz

The 1600 has "boost speed" upto 3.6 GHz, does that mean it can go to 3.6 'automatically' or something? Like I wouldn't have to set it to that?

I will try to go through that review.

But yeah, sorry to seem dense and beating about the same question, but my first concern is even if they are at the same price, would 1600 non-OC be better for gaming than 1500X? I don't want to end up getting 1600 while the fact of the matter was that 1500X was better for gaming.

As it was mentioned in the thread that I didn't specify the games I want to run on it, I generally play a wide range of games. The ones on the heavier side that I have my eyes on are Dark Souls 3, The Witcher 3, Prey, BF1, Metro 2032 and 2033, the new DOOM, the latest Wolfenstein one, etc.

Priyank Kumar · May 24, 2017

Makentox :

Word is RENT, means u can change it any time with no extra cost, and move into, more expensive one. But in his case you have to change CPU. But i get your point anyway..
Also you said that in benchmarks difference is not too big, you are right, but price difference is not too big either.
And maybe OP will do some other stuff beside gaming in the future where 2/4 will make a difference.
You should agree that CPU will always serve longer than GPU before you change it, if you compare GPU and CPU progression each year you will clearly see the difference. This why its so important to buy a future proof CPU unless you dont care about money and feel like you can afford new cpu each year.

Yeah I definitely want to upgrade the RX 580 in about an year.

Makentox · May 24, 2017

Priyank Kumar :

Yeah right, personally i change gpu every 1-2 years just to keep up with newest games, well i did before when played a lot.
And CPU often if not always last 2-3 times longer, i mean that you will most likely change gpu 2-3 times before CPU. Ofc unless you can afford paying 200-300 $ ( sometimes more if u have to buy compatible motherboard or RAM for new gen cpu ) every year when new generation comes out.

Also yes 1600 will boost automatically, you dont have to do anything. But i also suggest you to do some slight overclocking, just because its easy and MAY give you extra performance for 0$.

Priyank Kumar · May 24, 2017

Makentox :

Priyank Kumar :

Yeah right, personally i change gpu every 1-2 years just to keep up with newest games, well i did before when played a lot.
And CPU often if not always last 2-3 times longer, i mean that you will most likely change gpu 2-3 times before CPU. Ofc unless you can afford paying 200-300 $ ( sometimes more if u have to buy compatible motherboard or RAM for new gen cpu ) every year when new generation comes out.

Also yes 1600 will boost automatically, you dont have to do anything. But i also suggest you to do some slight overclocking, just because its easy and MAY give you extra performance for 0$.

Are there set values for the voltage you have to give for particular speeds or is it like trial and error? I am afraid of the later. Going by youtube reviews it seems the stock cooler is decent so I wouldn't mind overclocking a little above the automatic 3.6, maybe ~3.8, if the process is easy.

Makentox · May 24, 2017

Priyank Kumar :

Makentox :

Are there set values for the voltage you have to give for particular speeds or is it like trial and error? I am afraid of the later. Going by youtube reviews it seems the stock cooler is decent so I wouldn't mind overclocking a little above the automatic 3.6, maybe ~3.8, if the process is easy.

Yeah, there are tons of basic guides on ryzen overclocking, You may use 1-2 hours if you want it to be perfect, and u may even reach 3.9 on stock cooler. Basic overclocking is not as hard as you think. Anyone can do it. Anyway goodluck

Ditt44 · May 25, 2017

Tom's "Best Deals" update listed the 1600x at $219 sale price today, May 25th.... IF that is true, I don't see the change atm on newegg... then get the 1600x. Either way, you get faster base speed without the need to OC the base-1600. And you have a bit more headroom if you want it to OC in the future.

IF the $219 price is legit, it is an even better buy that I think it was at $249. My opinion, obviously.

Priyank Kumar · May 26, 2017

Makentox :

Priyank Kumar :

Yeah, there are tons of basic guides on ryzen overclocking, You may use 1-2 hours if you want it to be perfect, and u may even reach 3.9 on stock cooler. Basic overclocking is not as hard as you think. Anyone can do it. Anyway goodluck

Thanks! I will look into it after trying out games at stock settings.

@Ditt44: I will have to buy from retail stores in my city where there probably wouldn't be a discount.

Arc911 · May 26, 2017

Isokolon :

here you go AMD Ryzen 5 1400 and Ryzen 5 1600 Hexus Review

i agree with you that we dont see fps gains going from r5 1400 upto r5 1600 with ops given choice of rx 580

but as ops budget allows for a r5 1600 he should most definately go for it considering he upgrades gpu in 2 years

a r5 1600 will allow op at least 2 cycles of gpu upgrade spanning 4 years

Isokolon · May 26, 2017

Arc911 :

comparing the 1400 to the 1600 makes no point.
the 1400 and the 1500X are just too different from one another

OP didn't postualte that he can comfortably afford the 1600
of course, if you can afford it obviously the 1600 is the ultimately better choice.
but if the 1500X is already stretching the budget, the need to stretch it even further for the 1600 (or downgrade to a Rx470 to afford it) is simply not there.

Arc911 · May 26, 2017

Isokolon :

Priyank Kumar :

Isokolon · May 27, 2017

Arc911 :

OP didn't specify that it is within his budget in his initial post and in time of my initial reply
I then just responded to a suggestive request by Makentox
no idea what your goal is right here or what are you trying to prove.
OP picked his solution and got the answer he was seeking.

1500X vs. 1600 non-X better gaming performance without OC?

Honorable

Distinguished

Judicious

Glorious

Distinguished

Honorable

Titan

Judicious

Notable

Distinguished

Honorable

Honorable

Distinguished

Honorable

Distinguished

Honorable

Honorable

Prominent

Judicious

Prominent

Judicious

Share this page