Recommended reading

AMD Ryzen 5 1600X CPU Review

Reviews
By , published

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Civilization VI AI & Graphics Test, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

Civilization VI AI Test

Civilization VI spawns 45 threads during the CPU test. However, higher core counts don't seem to have a big impact on frame rates. Instead, the stock Core i5-7600K handily beats Ryzen 5 1600X in its default configuration. What's more, the six-core Ryzen 5 chip beats AMD's Ryzen 7 1700, which boasts more cores, but lower clock rates. We can assume this game responds better to high clock rates and IPC throughput than lots of cores.

Civilization VI Graphics Test

Image 1 of 7

The stock Ryzen 5 doesn't gain much from turning SMT off in Civilization VI's graphics test. In fact, this surprisingly causes a significant number of frame time spikes.

See those purple spikes in the frame time chart? Those affect all of the Ryzen 7 processors we've tested under Civilization VI, but they don't plague the stock Ryzen 5 1600X. It's also notable that the 1600X provides a much higher frame rate than Ryzen 7 1700, which we attribute to its higher clock rate.

A stock Ryzen 5 1600X beats Intel's Core i5-7600K at its stock settings. Again, though, overclocking Kaby Lake to 5 GHz yields chart-topping performance that Ryzen can't match at 4 GHz.

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

Image 1 of 7

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided remains the only game that Ryzen processors dominate in convincing fashion. The entire Intel line-up falls well below AMD's 1600X, apparently bottlenecked by something the Ryzen chips overcome. Overclocking doesn't help, based on the Core i5-7600K's performance at 5 GHz.

Interestingly, we observe lower performance and more frame time spikes when we disable the 1600X's SMT functionality. Apparently, turning SMT off isn't always a good way to make Ryzen a better gaming CPU.


MORE: Best CPUs


MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy


MORE: All CPU Content

See more CPUs Reviews
Paul Alcorn
Paul Alcorn
Managing Editor: News and Emerging Tech

Paul Alcorn is the Managing Editor: News and Emerging Tech for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

129 Comments Comment from the forums
  • ninja_warrior
    If you can reliably overclock any of the ryzen 5/7 to 4.0, why would you get the 1600x over the 1700? Comparing a 1600x at 4.0 to a 1700 at 3.0 and then concluding that it's a better CPU when the 1700 can overclock exactly the same seems pretty stupid
    Reply
  • dstarr3
    Well, good effort from AMD, at least.
    Reply
  • bloodroses
    A little disappointing for the Ryzen 5's imo. You'd think with the reduced core count you'd get better frequencies (and OC'ing) than what you get with the Ryzen 7.

    I honestly don't see a reason why to get a Ryzen 5 at this point since the i5 is definitely better for gaming and the Ryzen 7 is better for workstation use. The price alone takes it out of its own market.
    Reply
  • tamban
    A CPU review with only gaming benchmarks? Tom's hardware really likes Intel's hardware.
    Reply
  • FormatC
    19547998 said:
    A CPU review with only gaming benchmarks? Tom's hardware really likes Intel's hardware.
    Try page 10 :P

    31(!) Workstation benchmarks. Too less?
    Reply
  • Oranthal
    How about a real world test where you play a game and run a 1080p stream then compare performance? How about 1440p? How about broadening the scope of testing? Nah just ignore the strength of more cores and focus on single thread work and a few games.
    Reply
  • tamban
    Haha, my bad.
    Reply
  • irish_adam
    you say that the i5 7600k comes out on top at stock but just on the gaming benchmarks i make it 4-4 with 2 draws. I wouldnt say that it came out on top at all. I would say they are pretty evenly matched at the moment. Also apart from the odd couple from both sides their frame difference was less than 10, at over 100FPS i'd pay good money that no one would be able to distinguish a difference between either system.
    Reply
  • elbert
    Great review Paul and Igor. Best review I have seen given its the only review with 2 intel cpu's in the price range of Ryzen 5. The RAM info is great which shows that Ryzen gains a real 9ns latency advantage using higher clocked RAM on the Ryzen 5. Given the Ryzen 7 has less cache per core I would expect that gain to be higher.

    An issue that does stick out here is high price of the overclocking solution. How does the 7600k fair with a stock intel heatsink compared to the 1600x wraith spiral best overclocks? I think Ryzen has a real price advantage given the cooler required for a reasonable overclock.

    Also how does the 7600K compare in games while twitch streaming against the 1600X?
    Reply
  • dstarr3
    19548037 said:
    How about a real world test where you play a game and run a 1080p stream then compare performance? How about 1440p? How about broadening the scope of testing? Nah just ignore the strength of more cores and focus on single thread work and a few games.

    Maybe that's your real-world test, but that isn't mine. And am I the only one that can see the workstation benchmarks on page 10? Everyone seems to be ignoring them and then complaining that they aren't there.
    Reply