AMD Ryzen 5 1600X CPU Review
Why you can trust Tom's Hardware
GTA V, Hitman (2016), Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor
Grand Theft Auto V
We measure performance during Grand Theft Auto V's F-16 flight sequence with the built-in benchmark.
Core i5-7600K establishes a slight lead over the SMT-disabled Ryzen 5 1600X, but overclocking reveals just how effective Kaby Lake can be when we wring out all of its available headroom. If only we could explain that (repeatable) frame time spike it suffers toward the end of our benchmark...
Hitman (2016)
The overclocked Core i5-7600K lands at the top of our Hitman charts. Separately, disabling the Ryzen 5 1600X's SMT feature once again hurts performance and introduces frame time spikes.
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor appears mostly graphics-bound, so there isn't much difference between the various host processors. That's good new for Ryzen 5 1600X, which provides solid performance against Intel's Core i5-7600K.
It appears that turning off SMT helps average frame rates a little. However, the frame time charts reveal worrying spikes that affect smoothness. Overclocking does help smooth out those wrinkles.
MORE: Best CPUs
MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy
MORE: All CPU Content
Current page: GTA V, Hitman (2016), Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor
Prev Page Civilization VI AI & Graphics Test, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided Next Page Project CARS, Rise of the Tomb Raider, The DivisionStay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
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.
-
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 stupidReply -
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.Reply
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. -
tamban A CPU review with only gaming benchmarks? Tom's hardware really likes Intel's hardware.Reply -
FormatC
Try page 10 :P19547998 said:A CPU review with only gaming benchmarks? Tom's hardware really likes Intel's hardware.
31(!) Workstation benchmarks. Too less?
-
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 -
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.Reply
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? -
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.