AMD Ryzen 7 1700 CPU Review

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.

Conclusion

Ryzen 7 1700 pulls AMD's entry-level eight-core price point below the quad-core Core i7-7700K. That's powerful. The 1700's compelling performance in desktop productivity and content creation workloads, even at stock settings, is impressive. Moreover, the chip's power consumption and thermal characteristics align with our expectations of a CPU with a 30W-lower TDP. Combine those two strengths and you have a recipe for hard-to-beat efficiency.

The 1700 also challenges or beats Intel's Core i7-6900K in several of our application tests. Moreover, it sells for roughly one-third of the -6900K's $1100 price tag, and the bundled cooler is a nice bonus. Overall, Ryzen 7 1700's price to performance ratio is very attractive for most productivity use-cases.

AMD's higher-end Ryzen 7 1700X and 1800X are fast enough for smooth gaming. But in light of their $400 and $500 prices, there's no real reason to recommend them over Intel's Core i5-7600K or Core i7-7700K. Ryzen 7 1700 demonstrates the same behaviors as both X-series SKUs, albeit with lower frame rates if you refrain from overclocking. Tuning the 1700 somewhat aggressively breaks the 65W chip free of its shackles and allows it to trade blows with the faster Ryzen 7s. It's a bummer that our sample didn't overclock quite as well; it just wouldn't crack 4 GHz like the X-series parts. Still, a respectable clock rate ceiling enables similar performance as the 95W models, so if you expect to overclock, spending more money on a 1700X or 1800X may not make sense.

The recent Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation and Dota 2 patches bring hope that game developers can, and will, address Ryzen's most quantifiable weakness. Ideally, all developers would follow suit, but in reality, most older games won't be changed. It's the future of gaming we must look to. And in that, the more accessible Ryzen 5 and 3 families may prove to be even better options for gaming, perhaps encouraging devs to spend more time improving the FHD experience on Ryzen-based platforms.

For now, Ryzen 7 1700 provides good-enough gaming performance at an acceptably low price point, which makes it a viable option for anyone shopping for an eight-core workstation-class chip ready for some entertainment, too.


MORE: Best CPUs


MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy


MORE: Everything Zen: AMD Presents New Microarchitecture At HotChips


MORE: Intel Kaby Lake Core i7-7700K, i7-7700, i5-7600K, i5-7600 Review


MORE: Broadwell-E: Intel Core i7-6950X, 6900K, 6850K & 6800K Review

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.

  • mitch074
    And how about testing with some AMD GPU? Seems Ryzen gets the short hand of the stick when using an Nvidia GPU... https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/nvidia-dx12-driver-holding-back-ryzen.18774744/
    Reply
  • Sakkura
    Why are the graphs blurry?
    Reply
  • envy14tpe
    Why no 1440p or 4k gaming? Who buys 1700 for 1080p gaming? In gaming, the new 1700, 1700x, 1800 don't compare to 7700k in gaming. But i don't see that like all other testing methodologies done by likes of gamernexus and what not.

    EDIT. Based on the downvoting of this comment it seems AMD lovers are a little butt hurt.
    Reply
  • ykki
    Thanks for the review. Will Tom's bench (or has already benched) the R5s with AMD GPUs? (i5 + 1060, i5 + 480, R5 + 1060, r5 + 480)?
    Reply
  • PaulAlcorn
    19526350 said:
    Why no 1440p or 4k gaming? Who buys 1700 for 1080p gaming? In gaming, the new 1700, 1700x, 1800 don't compare to 7700k in gaming. But i don't see that like all other testing methodologies done by likes of gamernexus and what not.

    Here is some recent testing at 1440p. It includes the 1700, as well.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-vs-intel-kaby-lake-gaming,4977.html

    Reply
  • envy14tpe
    19526465 said:
    19526350 said:
    Why no 1440p or 4k gaming? Who buys 1700 for 1080p gaming? In gaming, the new 1700, 1700x, 1800 don't compare to 7700k in gaming. But i don't see that like all other testing methodologies done by likes of gamernexus and what not.

    Here is some recent testing at 1440p. It includes the 1700, as well.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-vs-intel-kaby-lake-gaming,4977.html

    That shows the new AMD cpus as is. From all I see the i7-7700k blasts the new AMD 1700, 1700x, 1800x series at 1440p +. That's important to keep in mind for gamers that want the most out of a CPU n high end GPU.
    Reply
  • ddpruitt
    even if Ryzen isn't shaping up to be universally superior, as many hoped prior to launch.

    This makes it difficult to universally recommend those high-end parts.

    Why do they have to be universally superior? They do a killer job on highly threaded workloads and are a lot cheaper than equivalent Intel. Sure gamings a wash but they're all playable. Aiming for universally superior is shooting for the moon and doesn't happen even with a single Intel chip.

    But looking at these figures on their own can be misleading. Remember that Intel's top Kaby Lake-based CPU demonstrated a commanding lead in the previous page's AutoCAD workloads, so it ends up offering superior performance per watt.

    Any chance you can multiply the numbers out so we can compare the differences?
    Reply
  • TJ Hooker
    So I have to ask, is there any reason to buy a 1700X/1800X over a 1700 if you're comfortable with overclocking?
    Reply
  • Ian_85
    Can you please repeat this test after each of the Ryzen bios updates in April and May?

    I think people would be interested to show just how much performance in a new CPU architecture improves in the months after its initial release.
    Reply
  • elbert
    19526465 said:
    19526350 said:
    Why no 1440p or 4k gaming? Who buys 1700 for 1080p gaming? In gaming, the new 1700, 1700x, 1800 don't compare to 7700k in gaming. But i don't see that like all other testing methodologies done by likes of gamernexus and what not.

    Here is some recent testing at 1440p. It includes the 1700, as well.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-vs-intel-kaby-lake-gaming,4977.html
    I dont believe that has Ashes of the Singularity updated tests. Good review and I would like to see more. Now that all the Ryzen's have been benchmarked on 1080p maybe 1440p and 4k would make a good review. With and without SLI/crossfire also just to see how it works for Ryzen. Possibly Gskills could pitch in some of their Flare X 3466 RAM for Ryzen.
    Reply