The Best Ever PC Processor?
Hot on the heels of AMD’s stunning Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600X (see my full launch article) are the non X-editions of those CPUs, and I’ve finally finished benchmarking them — the Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 2700. Today I’ll be taking a close look at the former, which is the cheapest 6-core/12-thread model of the new lineup, in content creation, overclocking and all-important game benchmarks.
Antony Leather
First, we need to set the scene, so cast your minds back to this time last year when AMD was in the midst of releasing its first-generation Ryzen CPUs. Among the numerous four, six, eight — all the way up to 16-core CPUs that hit retailer’s shelves during 2017 — were a couple of gems, and the most precious of those stones was the Ryzen 5 1600. It was a great value, costing less than Intel’s overclockable quad-cores, but outstripping them by big margins in many benchmarks, and once overclocked proved a great CPU.
| Ryzen 5 2600 | Ryzen 5 2600X | Ryzen 7 2700 | Ryzen 7 2700X | |
| Cores/Threads | 6/12 | 6/12 | 8/16 | 8/16 |
| Base Freq | 3.4GHz | 3.6GHz | 3.2GHz | 3.7GHz |
| Max Boost Freq | 3.9GHz | 4.2GHz | 4.1GHz | 4.3GHz |
| L2 Cache | 3MB | 3MB | 4MB | 4MB |
| L3 Cache | 16MB | 16MB | 16MB | 16MB |
| TDP | 65W | 95W | 65W | 105W |
| Price (US) | $259 | £299 |
For me it was a great mid-range all-rounder — a crown it wrestled from Intel’s Core i5-7600K. It lacked a little grunt in some games, but elsewhere it was usually a far better choice than Intel’s quad-core CPU. Coupled with numerous price cuts, which now see it retailing for less than $180, it’s still great value, but as Intel’s Coffee Lake and more recently AMD’s second generation Ryzen CPUs have shown, the original Ryzen models did lack performance in lightly threaded tasks, including some game titles.
With the Ryzen 5 2600, though, AMD is looking to shake up the mid-range $200 CPU market and once again offer the best value all-round CPU in a six-core package.
How to overclock the Ryzen 5 2600
To do this, the Ryzen 5 2600 has the same lower latencies as all 12nm Zen+ Pinnacle Ridge CPUs as well as their enhanced boosting algorithms — Precision Boost 2 and XFR 2. It also has higher frequencies out of the box compared to its predecessor too — the Ryzen 5 1600 has a 200MHz lower base frequency and 250MHz lower maximum boost frequency.
Antony Leather
Everything else is the same, such as the cache, with 19MB in total, as well as the cores and threads — six and 12 — and the TDP, which remains at a relatively low 65W. One thing that isn’t the same, though, is the price, which has fallen along with most other CPUs in the last 12 months, and now sits at $199 for the Ryzen 5 2600.
This is $20 less than its predecessor cost at launch and also $30 less than the Ryzen 5 2600X. It already seems like a bargain given Intel’s Core i5-8600K costs $40 more. Enough on specifications and scene-setting, though — let’s take a look at performance.
Test systems
Both my Intel and AMD systems use the latest Windows 10 updates and drivers, including updates and motherboard BIOS versions to patch the latest Spectre and Meltdown security vulnerabilities, which are known to impact performance. The numbers you see here are exactly what you’d get on a real-world, up-to-date system.
I’ve tested each CPU at stock speed and then also at the maximum safe overclock I could achieve with each of my samples. I’ve used 3000MHz memory for testing, but I should stress that you’ll see a much better performance from AMD CPUs if you use faster memory. I’d like to thank AMD for sending me the official second-generation Ryzen press pack including the Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600X, Intel for the Core i7-8700K, Overclockers UK for the Core i5-8600K, Corsair for the memory and PSU, Zotac for the graphics card, Samsung for the SSDs, Cooler Master for the processor cooler and Asus and MSI for the motherboards.
Intel System:
Asus ROG Strix Z370-E Gaming
AMD System
MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC
Common hardware
Corsair 16GB 3000MHz Vengeance memory
Zotac GeForce GTX 1080 AMP! Edition
Samsung 960 Pro M.2 SSD
Corsair 860i PSU
Cooler Master MasterLiquid ML120L RGB
Overclocking frequencies: Core i5-8600K — 5GHz, Core i7-8700K — 5GHz, Ryzen 5 2600X — 4.2GHz, Ryzen 7 2700X — 4.25GHz, Ryzen 7 1800X — 4.05GHz, Ryzen 5 1600X — 3.95GHz, Ryzen 5 1600 — 3.9GHz Ryzen 7 1700 — 4.05GHz, Ryzen 5 2600 — 4.15GHz
Content creation
Cinebench and HandBrake are two multi-threaded benchmarks that make use of all a CPUs cores and threads. Cinebench is a real-world rendering-program benchmark while HandBrake is a real-world application, and here I’ve converted a video file as a benchmark.
Antony Leather
Antony Leather
Antony Leather
PC Mark 10 is a system benchmark and I’ve used the individual photo editing test to gauge performance using scores obtained by running the benchmark.
Antony Leather
Gaming
Ashes of the Singularity performance was obtained using the built-in CPU benchmark. It responds well to CPU frequency and the number of cores and threads a CPU has.
Antony Leather
Deus Ex is a reasonably CPU-dependent game, especially when you’re using a high-end graphics card such as the GTX 1080 I used in testing. I used the game’s built-in benchmark to obtain results.
Antony Leather
Final Fantasy XV is a classic example of a game that’s more graphics card-bound than CPU-bound, but it’s important to show that some games simply aren’t affected by CPU performance or optimization and than you’ll see no difference between AMD or Intel in these titles.
Antony Leather
Unigine Superposition is a synthetic benchmark and more proof that CPU performance doesn’t always matter when it comes to gaming.
Antony Leather
VR Mark leans towards high single core performance and as a result, responds to overclocking as well as high boost frequencies.
Antony Leather
World of Tanks Encore is a benchmark testing the new Core graphics engine recently introduced in the game. I use fraps to record the frame rates over a one-minute section of gameplay. It’s proven to be more graphics card than CPU-limited.
Antony Leather
Fallout 4 is another game that benefits little from CPU performance unless you’re using a particularly slow CPU. However, it’s still popular and relevant as an example of an easy-to-run game.
Antony Leather
Power Consumption
These tests are fairly self-explanatory.
I measure the power consumption for the system as a whole at stock speed and when overclocked, with the system at idle and with the CPU under load.
Antony Leather
Antony Leather
Performance discussion
To start with, the biggest improvement came in overclocking, with my sample reaching 4.15GHz, which is 250MHz higher than my Ryzen 5 1600 will go with the same voltage of 1.425V. Starting with Cinebench, the Ryzen 5 2600 is noticeably quicker than its predecessor, adding 7% to the score at stock speed and 8% when overclocked. In fact, this was just a fraction behind the overclocked Ryzen 5 2600X and faster than Intel’s Core i7-8700K at stock speed, nearly matching the stock speed 8-core Ryzen 7 1700 as well. It outstrips the Core i5-8600K by big margins too, even with the latter overclocked to 5GHz — amazing for a $200 CPU.
AMD’s single-core performance highlighted in the second Cinebench test still lags behind Intel, but it’s made big gains here with second-generation Ryzen. The Ryzen 5 2600 is quicker than every other first-generation Ryzen CPU and comes close to matching Intel’s Core i5-8600K when overclocked, and faster memory will close the gap even more. Video encoding saw similar results, with HandBrake showing the Ryzen 5 2600 is equivalent to the Ryzen 5 1600X at stock speed and matches the Ryzen 7 1700 when overclocked, as well as matching the overclocked Ryzen 5 2600X. Even when overclocked to 5GHz, the Core i5-8600K was still 8% slower.
Antony Leather
For gaming, I don’t want to gloss over similar results, but the likes of World of Tanks enCore and Fallout 4 are simply graphics card-limited with the CPUs I’m testing here, which are all fairly powerful and sport at least six cores. Intel has a small lead in Fallout 4 with noticeably higher average frame rates, but it’s in Deus Ex and Ashes of the Singularity that the real differences emerge.
Deus Ex shows some big improvements for AMD, with a 7% boost to the minimum frame rate compared to the Ryzen 5 1600. Interestingly, the Ryzen 5 2600X is only a little quicker and the two 2600-series CPUs perform identically once overclocked.
While Intel still has a lead here, it’s important to state the impact memory speed had with the Ryzen 7 2700X, which managed a minimum frame rate of 71fps using 3400MHz memory. I didn’t have time to test the Ryzen 5 2600 with the faster stuff here, but I have no doubt it would be well into the 70fps area, closing the gap on Intel. Ashes of the Singularity loves high frequencies and lots of cores, so it’s no surprise to see both the Core i7-8700K and Ryzen 7 2700X at the top of the charts. The Ryzen 5 2600 was less impressive here, although it’s still quicker than its predecessor and matched the Ryzen 5 2600X when overclocked too.
One final great result is the power consumption. At just 124W under load at stock speed, it was the most power-frugal CPU I tested and even when overclocked it only drew a little more power than the Intel Core i5-8600K.
Is this the best all-round ever desktop processor?
The Ryzen 5 2600 doesn’t top the performance graphs, but performance isn’t the only deciding factor when it comes to being a great value product. It’s $40 cheaper than the Core i5-8600K and $30 cheaper than the Ryzen 5 2600X, yet beats the former in every content creation test I tried and matches the latter once overclocked too. There are still a few game titles where Intel is faster, but coupled with faster RAM, those gaps are far smaller than they were last year.
You need to overclock it get the most out of it, but this is very easy to do, and once pushed above 4GHz, it offers unbeatable value for just $200. If that’s you’re budget and your PC use varies between gaming and content creation, look no further than the Ryzen 5 2600.
Office & Productivity — AMD Ryzen 5 2600 CPU Review: Efficient And Affordable
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission.
Here’s how it works.
6 cores for a budget price
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.
Adobe Creative Cloud
Image 1 of 6
Ryzen 5 2600 delivered an incredible performance boost compared to its predecessor in our Adobe Creative Cloud suite. With that said, Intel’s CPUs still lead through most of these lightly-threaded applications. We also saw larger performance differences between the stock and overclocked Ryzen 5 2600 compared to the 2600X, mostly due to the 2600’s lower stock frequencies and similar overclocking limit shared between most Ryzen 2000-series models.
In the end, a stock Ryzen 5 2600 beat Intel’s Core i5-8400 and AMD’s Ryzen 7 2700 in the overall score. That’s impressive for such a value-oriented chip.
Web Browser
Image 1 of 3
- AMD Ryzen 5 2600 (AMD Ryzen 5) at Newegg for $75.
99
The Meltdown and Spectre patches imposed performance penalties on Intel’s CPUs in our web browser tests. However, they still lead through these lightly-threaded tests.
AMD’s Ryzen 5 2600 easily beat the stock Ryzen 5 1600, which took a last-place finish among the models we benchmarked. As expected, overclocking helped put Ryzen 5 2600 on par with the more expensive Ryzen 5 2600X.
Productivity
Image 1 of 5
The application start-up metric measures load time snappiness in word processors, GIMP, and Web browsers under warm- and cold-start conditions. Other platform-level considerations affect this test as well, including the storage subsystem. Intel’s snappy performance in these lightly-threaded apps put its Core CPUs ahead of the competing Ryzen chips.
Our video conferencing suite measures performance in single- and multi-user applications that utilize the Windows Media Foundation for playback and encoding. It also performs facial detection to model real-world usage.
Cores and threads benefit this workload greatly, so Ryzen 5 2600’s six cores naturally fared well.
The photo editing benchmark measures performance with Futuremark’s binaries using the ImageMagick library. Common photo processing workloads also tend to be parallelized, so Ryzen 5 easily beat the Core i5 models.
MORE: Best CPUs
MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy
MORE: All CPUs Content
AMD Ryzen 5 2600: Price Comparison
22 Amazon customer reviews
☆☆☆☆☆
$75.99
View
$101.97
View
$190
View
$287.
91
View
powered by
Current page:
Office & Productivity
Prev Page Shadow Of War & Project CARS 2
Next Page Rendering, Encoding & Compression
Paul Alcorn is the Deputy Managing Editor for Tom’s Hardware US. He writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage and enterprise hardware.
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 Processor Review and Test
Introduction
As previously reported, AMD made a dizzying return to the processor market with the Ryzen family, which Intel had to urgently respond with the 8th generation of Core processors, which received 50% -100% «Nuclear Growth». The blue giant managed to seize the initiative again, but only until AMD responded with the second generation of Ryzen «Pinnacle Ridge». We previously reviewed two of the four launch products, and now the most affordable option is the Ryzen 5 2600.
Retailers consider the Ryzen 5 1600 to be their cash cow, although at first glance it seems that 1800X or 1600X bring more profit.
After all, we get a 6-core chip with 12 threads and an unlocked multiplier for $ 200, the package also includes a cooler. This price point was simply stunning for Intel’s meager 7th Gen Core i5 lineup, and it wasn’t until the launch of the Core i5-8400 that Intel managed to put a brake on AMD’s success. Unlike Intel, which bloated the 6-core new Core i5 family with five products, AMD’s lineup is quite small, with only two SKUs: Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 5 2600. The 2600X chip in our launch review of the new line impressed many and continues to be one of the best processors under $300.
Table of Contents:
AMD segmented the Ryzen 5 2600 from the 2600X pretty close. It’s still a 6-core chip, available on a 12nm «Pinnacle Ridge» die, with a full 16MB of shared L3 cache, and you still get an unlocked multiplier for some overclocking. Clock speeds succumb to the nominal 3.40 GHz with a 3.90 GHz boost, and a vestige of XFR 2.0 feature adds a 50 MHz cap on top. This is surprisingly close to the nominal 3.
60GHz and 4.10GHz (+200MHz XFR) boost clocks of the Ryzen 5 2600X given the difference between the 2700 and 2700X. Naturally lower frequencies translate into a much lower TDP rating of 65W. The Ryzen 7 2700 surprisingly surprised us with its energy efficiency, and one can only imagine how the 2600X will perform with fewer cores.
The Ryzen 5 2600 is priced at $199, $30 less than the Ryzen 5 2600X. Its price point is aimed at several products from Intel, including the i5-8400, i5-8500 and maybe even the i5-8600. The primary target audience for this processor is avid gamers looking for an affordable processor that won’t bottleneck modern high-end graphics cards and can also deliver decent multi-threaded performance in addition to gaming.
Specifications
| Price | Cores / Threads |
Basic frequency |
Max. Boost |
L3 Cache |
TDP | Architecture | Process | Socket | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core i5-8350K | $175 | 4 / 4 | 4. 0 GHz |
— | 8 MB | 91W | Coffee Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Ryzen 5 1500X | 170 $ | 4 / 8 | 3.5 GHz | 3.7 GHz | 16 MB | 65 W | Zen | 14 nm | AM4 |
| Core i5-7400 | 180 $ | 4 / 4 | 3.0 GHz | 3.5 GHz | 6 MB | 65 W | Kaby Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Core i5-8400 | 180 $ | 6 / 6 | 2.8GHz | 4.0 GHz | 9 MB | 65 W | Coffee Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Core i5-7500 | 200 $ | 4 / 4 | 3.4 GHz | 3.8 GHz | 6 MB | 65 W | Kaby Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Ryzen 5 1600 | 180 $ | 6 / 12 | 3. 2 GHz |
3.6 GHz | 16 MB | 65 W | Zen | 14 nm | AM4 |
| Core i5-8500 | 205 $ | 6 / 6 | 3.0 GHz | 4.1 GHz | 9 MB | 65 W | Coffee Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Core i5-7600K | 230 $ | 4 / 4 | 3.8 GHz | 4.2 GHz | 6 MB | 91W | Kaby Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Core i5-7640X | 200 $ | 4 / 4 | 4.0 GHz | 4.2 GHz | 6 MB | 112 W | Kaby Lake | 14 nm | LGA 2066 |
| Core i5-6600K | 250 $ | 4 / 4 | 3.5 GHz | 3.9 GHz | 8 MB | 91W | Skylake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Core i5-8600 | 230 $ | 6 / 6 | 3. 6 GHz |
4.3 GHz | 9 MB | 65 W | Coffee Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Ryzen 5 1600X | 200 $ | 6 / 12 | 3.6 GHz | 4.0 GHz | 16 MB | 95 W | Zen | 14 nm | AM4 |
| Core i5-8600K | 250 $ | 6 / 6 | 3.6 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 9 MB | 95 W | Coffee Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Ryzen 5 2600 | 200 $ | 8 / 16 | 3.4 GHz | 3.9 GHz | 16 MB | 65 W | Zen | 12 nm | AM4 |
| Ryzen 7 1700 | 290 $ | 8 / 16 | 3.0 GHz | 3.7 GHz | 16 MB | 65 W | Zen | 14 nm | AM4 |
| Core i7-6700K | 350 $ | 4 / 8 | 4. 0 GHz |
4.2 GHz | 8 MB | 91W | Skylake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Core i7-7700K | 340 $ | 4 / 8 | 4.2 GHz | 4.5 GHz | 8 MB | 91 W | Kaby Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Core i7-8700 | 300 $ | 6 / 12 | 3.2 GHz | 4.6 GHz | 12 MB | 65 W | Coffee Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Ryzen 5 2600X | 230 $ | 6 / 12 | 3.6 GHz | 4.2 GHz | 16 MB | 95 W | Zen | 12 nm | AM4 |
| Ryzen 7 1700X | 290 $ | 8 / 16 | 3.4GHz | 3.8 GHz | 16 MB | 95 W | Zen | 14 nm | AM4 |
| Ryzen 7 2700 | 300 $ | 8 / 16 | 3. 2 GHz |
4.1 GHz | 16 MB | 65 W | Zen | 12 nm | AM4 |
| Core i7-8700K | 350 $ | 6 / 12 | 3.7 GHz | 4.7 GHz | 12 MB | 95 W | Coffee Lake | 14 nm | LGA 1151 |
| Core i7-7800X | 380 $ | 6 / 12 | 3.5 GHz | 4.0 GHz | 8.25 MB | 140 W | Skylake | 14 nm | LGA 2066 |
| Ryzen 7 2700X | 330 $ | 8 / 16 | 3.7 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 16 MB | 105 W | Zen | 12 nm | AM4 |
| Ryzen 7 1800X | 320 $ | 8 / 16 | 3.6 GHz | 4.0 GHz | 16 MB | 95 W | Zen | 14 nm | AM4 |
Let’s take a closer look
The Ryzen 5 2600 processor comes in a decent-sized cubic box, since in addition to the case and literature, it includes 95 Wraith Spire Cooling Solution.
It’s important to note that this is not the Wraith Spire variant that comes with the Ryzen 7 1600, as it lacks backlighting. There is no RGB LED ring on the fan frame and AMD logo. The heatsink and fan are completely identical, so the cooling performance remains the same. In the center of the radiator with radially raised fins, there is a welded-on copper core, ventilated by a large 80mm fan optimized for low noise levels.
The Ryzen 5 2600 case looks identical to any other AMZ Ryzen processor. It comes with a soldered IHS (from 1st gen Ryzen, but unlike Raven Ridge and Intel APUs). AMD claims to use a high-quality indium alloy that reduces operating temperatures by as much as 10°C. Enthusiasts generally prefer a soldered IHS, but gamers don’t care as long as their systems are reasonably quiet.
Architecture, AM4 platform and new X470 chipset
All details of the architecture, as well as the AM4 platform and the new X470 chipset, can be viewed here.
Test Configurations
| Ryzen | |
| CPU: | All AMD Ryzen 2000, Ryzen 2000G and Ryzen 1000 |
|---|---|
| MB: | MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC AMD X470, BIOS v1.11 |
| RAM: | 2x 8 GB G.SKILL Flare X DDR4 DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 |
| GPU: | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti |
| Accumulators: | Crucial MX300 750GB |
| BP: | Seasonic SS-860XP |
| OS: | Windows 10 64-bit Creators Update |
| Drivers: | NVIDIA GeForce 391.35 WHQL |
| «Coffee Lake» | |
| CPU: | Intel Core i3-8350K, Core i5-8400, Core i5-8600K, Intel Core i7-8700K |
|---|---|
| MB: | ASRock Z370 Professional Gaming i7 Intel Z370, BIOS 1.  70 |
| RAM: | 2x 8 GB G.SKILL Flare X DDR4 DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 |
| GPU: | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti |
| Storage: | Crucial MX300 750GB |
| BP: | Seasonic SS-860XP |
| OS: | Windows 10 64-bit Creators Update |
| Drivers: | NVIDIA GeForce 391.35 WHQL |
| Kaby Lake | |
| CPU: | Intel Core i5-7400, Core i5-7600K, Core i7-7700K |
|---|---|
| MB: | ASUS Maximus IX Code Intel Z270, BIOS 1203 |
| RAM: | 2x 8 GB G.SKILL Flare X DDR4 DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 |
| GPU: | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti |
| Storage: | Crucial MX300 750GB |
| BP: | Seasonic SS-860XP |
| OS: | Windows 10 64-bit Creators Update |
| Drivers: | NVIDIA GeForce 391. 35 WHQL |
Arithmetic CPU tests: Super Pi, wPrime
Encryption: VeraCrypt
Media encoding: MP3, H.264, H.265
4
40601
Machine Learning: Tensorflow
Game Test: 720p
Individual results
Game Test: 1080p
Individual results
Game Test: 1440p
9000 9000 9000 9
Individual results
Boost clock and frequency analysis
Most modern processors are equipped with a “Boost” or “Turbo” function, the task of which is to automatically overclock, subject to certain conditions related to the number of threads, power consumption and temperature. This page explores what actual real world frequencies can be achieved in such scenarios. The data below represents the minimum, maximum, and average clock speeds for a given core/thread combination for a typical heavy workload. The test starts with a single thread, and then we gradually move up to the maximum number of processor threads, while at the same time measuring the average clock speed for these temporary test runs.
The Ryzen 5 2600 can maintain its maximum boost frequency with five threads. The 3.90GHz chip clock is unshakable with 1-3 threads. But! As we approach 4th threads there is a slight 8 MHz rolloff, probably at this point the processor decides whether to maintain the maximum boost frequency or switch to a lower boost state. It’s not just about the load of 4 threads, there are some bursts of load on other cores arising from OS background tasks, which affect the final solution. This becomes apparent when 5 streams are reached, at which point the observed frequency is 3.88 GHz.
Approaching 6 and 7 threads, clock speeds drop by 25 MHz (Zen chips have a multiplier of 0.25x) to around 3.875 GHz. The load with 8 threads «eats» another 25 MHz and is about 3.85 GHz. With 9 and 10 threads another 25 MHz to 3.80 GHz, and when 11 and 12 threads are reached, another 50 MHz drops.
When we recently tested the Ryzen 7 2700, we noticed that its boost frequency fell off a cliff after hitting 4 threads, by almost 450 MHz, and when it reached the maximum level of 16 threads, it lost an amazing 1 GHz of clock speed, remaining only 200 MHz above nominal frequencies.
Therefore, a comparative analysis was carried out:
As you can see, the Ryzen 7 2700’s boost frequency steadily degrades as multi-threaded load increases, and ends up dropping sharply after 4 threads. On the other hand, the Ryzen 5 2600 loses clock speeds very slowly and in very small amounts (25 MHz, rarely 50 MHz), with almost no steep drops and almost always stays close to the maximum frequency supported by up to 6 threads, and only drops by 150 MHz at max 12 thread load (compare to the 1 GHz Ryzen 7 2700 it loses at max workload!).
TDP is the only possible explanation. AMD is positioning the Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 5 2600 as «high performance» products and setting their TDP to 65W. The Ryzen 7 2700 has two cores and four threads «on top» of the Ryzen 5 2600, and thus there is an attempt to keep the TDP at 65W, which severely penalizes its boost frequency. The clock speed therefore drops to a whopping 450 MHz in 4 threads, and 1 GHz in 16 threads. The Ryzen 5 2600 has fewer cores and is therefore more balanced to maintain its boost clocks.
When not loaded at all, the idle frequency is 1550 MHz.
Power Consumption
Energy Efficiency
In this section, we measure the total amount of power consumed to run SuperPi (single-threaded) and for Cinebench (multi-threaded). Since a faster processor will complete a given workload faster, the total amount of power used may be lower than on a low-powered processor, which may consume less power but take longer to complete the test.
Overclocking
The Ryzen 5 2600 has an unlocked multiplier in its arsenal, so you can have some fun. We set the voltage to 1.4 V, and step by step we began to raise the frequency. We easily reached 4.00 GHz, but 4.1 GHz was already out of reach, even with 1.45V and 240mm AIO.
If you have carefully studied the previous page, then you know that the Ryzen 5 2600 supports 3.75-3.90 GHz without manual overclocking on your part, so forcing it to run at 4.
00 GHz does not make much sense in terms of performance. Here, in fact, depending on the number of threads of your applications, you get only 100-250 MHz compared to an untouched chip.
Performance summary
Performance Per Dollar
Rating and Review
The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 retails for $199.
- Demonstrates the gaming performance of Ryzen 7 1800X
- Restores competition in the sub-$200 segment
- Good energy efficiency
- Excellent multithreading performance
- Unlocked multiplier
- Supports existing AM4 motherboards
- Cooler kit
- IHS soldering
- Gaming performance is lower than Intel Core i5 chips
- Overclocking potential limited
- While memory problems remain
- Integrated graphics missing
9.0
A lot depends on AMD’s most affordable 12nm processor, the Ryzen 5 2600.
It still lifts the mantle of the tired Ryzen 5 1600, which once hurt Intel’s sub-$200 lineup until the Core i5-8400 happened. The good news is that the Ryzen 5 2600 managed to take revenge on the i5-8400 in CPU tests with higher performance (3.5%). The bad news is that our today’s hero still lags a bit behind the i5-8400 in gaming tests, with the Intel chip offering 7% more at 1080p and 3.5% more at 1440p, at two key gaming resolutions. But it’s nothing short of the performance differences seen with the previous generation Ryzen 5 1600. AMD has certainly been successful — impressive for a second release just a year later.
Intel didn’t sit idly by before AMD launched its second generation Ryzen chips. Blue has bolstered its 8th Gen Core lineup with more products, closing the $189-$249 space with five products. Closest to the Ryzen 5 2600 is the Core i5-8500 which is priced around $204. This chip has nearly the same gaming specs as the $249 i5-8600 and i5-8600K, and is far behind them in CPU benchmarks, meaning its gaming performance is slightly better than the Core i5-8400.
In general, the differences are insignificant mainly for academic interest — a difference of several percent is not really noticeable in real gaming.
Like the Ryzen 7 2700, the Ryzen 5 2600 is one of AMD’s «high performance» SKUs, with its idle and multi-threaded power on par with Intel’s offerings in this price range. Even its gaming capabilities are in the same league as Core i5 chips. Intel’s only trump card is the i5-8500 chip, which consumes less power. In this category, the Ryzen 5 2600 competes with the i7-8700K, the i5-8400 is ahead here. Overclocking the Ryzen 5 2600 is easy thanks to the unlocked multiplier, we were able to push our sample up to 4.00 GHz, which is not much higher than the maximum boost frequency of the chip, which it supports very well in multi-threaded workloads. For higher thread counts, especially when running at max count (12 threads), there are some significant overclocking benefits, such as an 8% increase in Blender rendering. It is also worth noting that this processor holds its boost frequencies much more confidently than the Ryzen 7 2700, as it better matches the TDP of 65W due to the lower number of cores.