Ryzen 5 2600x or ryzen 7 2700: AMD Ryzen 5 2600X vs AMD Ryzen 7 2700: What is the difference?

New CPUs, New Process, New CompetitionTalking 12nm and Zen+Improvements to the Cache Hierarchy: Lower Latency = Higher IPCTranslating to IPC: All This for 3%?Precision Boost 2 and XFR2: Ensuring It Hertz MoreNew X470 Chipset and Motherboards: A Focus on PowerStoreMI: The Way To A Faster JBODBenchmarking Setup and Power AnalysisBenchmarking Performance: CPU System TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Rendering TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Web TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Encoding TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Office TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Legacy TestsGaming Performance: Civilization 6Gaming Performance: Shadow of MordorGaming Performance: Rise of the Tomb RaiderGaming Performance: Rocket LeagueGaming Performance: Grand Theft Auto VConclusion: Catching the Incumbent

With 2017 finished, and Ryzen being very successful for AMD, the inevitable question was due: what happens next? Early in 2018, the plans were laid bare: a second generation Ryzen processor was set to come in mid-year, followed by a second generation Threadripper, using GlobalFoundries’ 12nm process. This is not AMD’s next big microarchitecture, which we know is called  Zen 2 on 7nm, but an opportunity to launch a wave of components with minor improvements and take advantage of a manufacturing process that gives more frequency and more performance. Today AMD is launching four CPUs, and we have tested them all.

Updates

• (4/21) Some of our results, initially thought due to Spectre/Meltdown patches, were not in line with others. Testing audit was started.
• (4/25) Our extensive internal audit showed reasons for the differences, as documented in detail in this follow-up article. In short, an issue with a non-standard use timers on Windows was causing the performance of both AMD and Intel processors to dip, particularly impacting the latter.
• (5/2) Benchmark results have been updated.
• (5/22) X470 Motherboard. StoreMI, and Power Analysis pages updated.
• (5/26) Conclusion Updated, Performance Per Dollar graphs added.

Straight To The Scene: The New CPUs

For readers that only want one piece of information, this is it: AMD is launching the Ryzen 7 2700X, the Ryzen 7 2700, the Ryzen 5 2600X, and the Ryzen 5 2600.

Buy AMD Ryzen 7 2700X on Amazon.com

AMD Ryzen 2000-Series CPUss
	Ryzen 7 2700X	Ryzen 7 2700	Ryzen 5 2600X	Ryzen 5 2600
CPU Cores/Threads	8 / 16	8 / 16	6 / 12	6 / 12
Base CPU Frequency	3.7 GHz	3.2 GHz	3.6 GHz	3.4 GHz
Turbo CPU Frequency	4.3 GHz	4.1 GHz	4.2 GHz	3. 9 GHz
TDP @ Base Frequency	105 W	65 W	95 W	65 W
L1 Cache	I: 64K. D: 32K	I: 64K. D: 32K	I: 64K. D: 32K	I: 64K. D: 32K
L2 Cache	512 KB/core	512 KB/core	512 KB/core	512 KB/core
L3 Cache	16 MB	16 MB	16 MB	16 MB
DRAM Support	DDR4-2933 Dual Channel	DDR4-2933 Dual Channel	DDR4-2933 Dual Channel	DDR4-2933 Dual Channel
PCIe Lanes (CPU)	16 Free + 4 NVMe	16 Free + 4 NVMe	16 Free + 4 NVMe	16 Free + 4 NVMe
Price	$329	$299	$229	$199
Bundled Cooler	AMD Prism RGB	AMD Spire RGB	AMD Spire	AMD Stealth

The Ryzen 7 2700X takes over the top spot from the Ryzen 7 1800X, and for an extra 10 W in TDP will provide a base frequency of 3. 7 GHz and a turbo frequency of 4.3 GHz on its eight cores, with simultaneous multi-threading. This is an extra +100 MHz and +300 MHz respectively, going above the average limits of the 1800X when overclocked.

The 2700X also reduces the top cost for the best AM4 Ryzen processor: when launched, the 1800X was set at $499, without a bundled cooler, and was recently dropped to $349 as a price-competitor to Intel’s most powerful mainstream processor. The 2700X undercuts both, by being listed at a suggested e-tail price of $329, and is bundled with the best stock cooler in the business: AMD’s Wraith Prism RGB. AMD is attempting to hit all the targets: aggressive pricing, top performance, and best value, all in one go.

Buy AMD Ryzen 5 2600X on Amazon.com

The Ryzen 5 2600X is the six-core option, also with an aggressive frequency strategy: 3.6 GHz base and 4.2 GHz turbo. At a 95W TDP and a suggested retail price of $229, it comes bundled with AMD’s Wraith Spire cooler, which again is an impressive stock cooler.

The Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 5 2600 are the 65W versions of the X counterparts, offering near-similar frequencies for $30 less. All the CPUs will support dual-channel DDR4-2933 memory, up from the DDR4-2666 memory support of the 2017 Ryzen processors. One of the big changes is that now every processor comes with a bundled stock cooler, ranging from the Silent 65W Stealth models up to the big Prism RGB, all of which are easily sufficient for good turbo performance.

AMD’s intended AM4 Ryzen product line is now going to look like this:

At the top, the 2700X takes over from both the 1700X and 1800X. Rather than having three Ryzen 7 CPUs in the market for this generation, AMD examined its product line and opted on two, perhaps based on sales figures. As seen in this review, the 2700X is already pushing the silicon process to the limit, so there is not much headroom to go above this product for a new model in the future.

The full list ends up being a mix of Ryzen 2000-series CPUs (the new ones), Ryzen 2000-series APUs, and a pair of Ryzen 1000-series. We already examined the APUs in great detail in the past few weeks, showing that they directly replaced some of the original first-generation parts very easily. So far the four new 2000-series will sit at the top of the pile, however AMD’s strategy is often to drip feed its new parts, so we might see some more 2000-series as time goes on.

The Other Information From Today’s Launch

No launch is complete without talking about the features. AMD is using GlobalFoundries’ 12nm manufacturing process which has obvious on-paper benefits, however there are a number of internal firmware adjustments to touch upon, updated features and roles for AMD’s Precision Boost and XFR technologies that can have direct impacts on performance, a new chipset (along with 30+ motherboards) to run alongside the current offerings, and also new/renamed features such StoreMI. We also want to examine how these new products fit into AMD’s longer term plans and whether they are on track.

We’ll cover these in the next few pages, as well as the results from our testing.

• Talking 12nm: GlobalFoundries and Extra Performance
• Improvements to the Cache Hierarchy: +3%  IPC and +10% Overall
• Precision Boost 2: Getting More Hertz Across The Board
• XFR2: A Dynamic Response to Cooling
• New X470 Chipset and Motherboards: A Focus on Power
• StoreMI: The Way To A Faster JBOD
• Power Analysis
• Our CPU Benchmarking Results
• Our Gaming CPU Benchmarking Results
• Conclusions

AMD’s Ryzen 2000 Competition: Intel’s Coffee Lake

As part of today’s launch, AMD went into extensive benchmarking detail about its new chips. It was abundantly clear from the data provided that these new processors are aimed squarely at Intel’s most recent mainstream processors: Coffee Lake. This is in contrast to when the Ryzen 1000-series was launched last year, when the octo-core Ryzen 7 1800X was compared against an 8-core Broadwell-E: in the interim Intel has updated its mainstream processor line to six-cores with high frequencies.

As a result, AMD is suggesting to compare the Ryzen 7 2700X against the Core i7-8700K and the Ryzen 5 2600X against the Core i5-8500K. This is significant – now both of the main x86 players in the processor market are keen to pit their most recent products against each other in a head to head battle. This hasn’t really happened like this for a number of generations. However, certain metrics will still run true as to the launch last year:

• Intel is expected to have a frequency and IPC advantage
• AMD’s counter is to come close on frequency and offer more cores at the same price

It is easy for AMD to wave the multi-threaded crown with its internal testing, however the single thread performance is still a little behind. A number of the new features with the Ryzen 2000-series are designed to help this: slightly higher IPC, higher frequencies, a higher TDP, and a better dynamic frequency boost model. We will cover these over the next few pages.

Frequencies and core counts are one part of the equation, though the way that AMD and Intel have different cache models will also play a significant part. One of the things we will see in this analysis is the comparative cache metrics, as well as the tuning AMD has done to close the gap. For pricing, AMD has put the Ryzen 7 2700X below the i7-8700K, as well as bundling the Wraith Prism RGB stock cooler which easily replaces any $30-40 cooler, saving the user some money.

The Ryzen 5 2600X comparison with the Core i5-8600K is much closer than the higher-end parts. These components share core counts, although the Ryzen 5 has double the threads. For any multithreaded workload that can take advantage of simultaneous multithreading is likely to pull ahead. The Core i5-8600K is slightly ahead in core frequency, and is expected to have an IPC advantage as well. Again, AMD bundles the CPU with a good stock cooler, whereas Intel’s offering is poor-to-nil.

Overall, AMD is claiming that its high-end processors will come in within 1-2% of the competition at 1440p gaming, but give +20% in ‘creative performance’. We’ve got a few ways to test this.

Talking 12nm and Zen+
New CPUs, New Process, New CompetitionTalking 12nm and Zen+Improvements to the Cache Hierarchy: Lower Latency = Higher IPCTranslating to IPC: All This for 3%?Precision Boost 2 and XFR2: Ensuring It Hertz MoreNew X470 Chipset and Motherboards: A Focus on PowerStoreMI: The Way To A Faster JBODBenchmarking Setup and Power AnalysisBenchmarking Performance: CPU System TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Rendering TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Web TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Encoding TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Office TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Legacy TestsGaming Performance: Civilization 6Gaming Performance: Shadow of MordorGaming Performance: Rise of the Tomb RaiderGaming Performance: Rocket LeagueGaming Performance: Grand Theft Auto VConclusion: Catching the Incumbent

Tweet

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

AMD Ryzen 7 2700 vs.

AMD Ryzen 5 2600X

AMD Ryzen 7 2700

The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 operates with 8 cores and 16 CPU threads. It run at 4.10 GHz base 3.60 GHz all cores while the TDP is set at 65 W.The processor is attached to the AM4 CPU socket. This version includes 16.00 MB of L3 cache on one chip, supports 2 memory channels to support DDR4-2933 RAM and features 3.0 PCIe Gen 20 lanes. Tjunction keeps below 95 °C degrees C. In particular, Pinnacle Ridge (Zen+) Architecture is enhanced with 12 nm technology and supports AMD-V, SVM. The product was launched on Q2/2018

AMD Ryzen 5 2600X

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600X operates with 6 cores and 16 CPU threads. It run at 4.20 GHz base 4.00 GHz all cores while the TDP is set at 95 W.The processor is attached to the AM4 CPU socket. This version includes 16.00 MB of L3 cache on one chip, supports 2 memory channels to support DDR4-2933 RAM and features 3.0 PCIe Gen 20 lanes. Tjunction keeps below 95 °C degrees C. In particular, Pinnacle Ridge (Zen+) Architecture is enhanced with 12 nm technology and supports AMD-V, SVM. The product was launched on Q2/2018

AMD Ryzen 7 2700

AMD Ryzen 5 2600X

Compare Detail

3.20 GHz	Frequency	3.60 GHz
8	Cores	6
4.10 GHz	Turbo (1 Core)	4.20 GHz
3.60 GHz	Turbo (All Cores)	4.00 GHz
Yes	Hyperthreading	Yes
Yes	Overclocking	Yes
normal	Core Architecture	normal
no iGPU	GPU	no iGPU
No turbo	GPU (Turbo)	No turbo
12 nm	Technology	12 nm
No turbo	GPU (Turbo)	No turbo
	DirectX Version
	Max. displays
DDR4-2933	Memory	DDR4-2933
2	Memory channels	2
	Max memory
Yes	ECC	Yes
—	L2 Cache	—
16. 00 MB	L3 Cache	16.00 MB
3.0	PCIe version	3.0
20	PCIe lanes	20
12 nm	Technology	12 nm
AM4	Socket	AM4
65 W	TDP	95 W
AMD-V, SVM	Virtualization	AMD-V, SVM
Q2/2018	Release date	Q2/2018
Show more data		Show more data

Cinebench R23 (Single-Core)

Cinebench R23 is the successor of Cinebench R20 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is a worldwide used software to create 3D forms. The single-core test only uses one CPU core, the amount of cores or hyperthreading ability doesn’t count.

Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core)

Cinebench R23 is the successor of Cinebench R20 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is a worldwide used software to create 3D forms. The multi-core test involves all CPU cores and taks a big advantage of hyperthreading.

Cinebench R20 (Single-Core)

Cinebench R20 is the successor of Cinebench R15 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is a worldwide used software to create 3D forms. The single-core test only uses one CPU core, the amount of cores or hyperthreading ability doesn’t count.

Cinebench R20 (Multi-Core)

Cinebench R20 is the successor of Cinebench R15 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is a worldwide used software to create 3D forms. The multi-core test involves all CPU cores and taks a big advantage of hyperthreading.

Cinebench R15 (Single-Core)

Cinebench R15 is the successor of Cinebench 11.5 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is a worldwide used software to create 3D forms. The single-core test only uses one CPU core, the amount of cores or hyperthreading ability doesn’t count.

Cinebench R15 (Multi-Core)

Cinebench R15 is the successor of Cinebench 11. 5 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is a worldwide used software to create 3D forms. The multi-core test involves all CPU cores and taks a big advantage of hyperthreading.

Geekbench 5, 64bit (Single-Core)

Geekbench 5 is a cross plattform benchmark that heavily uses the systems memory. A fast memory will push the result a lot. The single-core test only uses one CPU core, the amount of cores or hyperthreading ability doesn’t count.

Geekbench 5, 64bit (Multi-Core)

Geekbench 5 is a cross plattform benchmark that heavily uses the systems memory. A fast memory will push the result a lot. The multi-core test involves all CPU cores and taks a big advantage of hyperthreading.

Blender 2.81 (bmw27)

Blender is a free 3D graphics software for rendering (creating) 3D bodies, which can also be textured and animated in the software. The Blender benchmark creates predefined scenes and measures the time (s) required for the entire scene. The shorter the time required, the better. We selected bmw27 as the benchmark scene.

Geekbench 3, 64bit (Single-Core)

Geekbench 3 is a cross plattform benchmark that heavily uses the systems memory. A fast memory will push the result a lot. The single-core test only uses one CPU core, the amount of cores or hyperthreading ability doesn’t count.

Geekbench 3, 64bit (Multi-Core)

Geekbench 3 is a cross plattform benchmark that heavily uses the systems memory. A fast memory will push the result a lot. The multi-core test involves all CPU cores and taks a big advantage of hyperthreading.

Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (Single-Core)

Cinebench 11.5 is based on the Cinema 4D Suite, a software that is popular to generate forms and other stuff in 3D. The single-core test only uses one CPU core, the amount of cores or hyperthreading ability doesn’t count.

Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (Multi-Core)

Cinebench 11.5 is based on the Cinema 4D Suite, a software that is popular to generate forms and other stuff in 3D. The multi-core test involves all CPU cores and taks a big advantage of hyperthreading.

Estimated results for PassMark CPU Mark

Some of the CPUs listed below have been benchmarked by CPU-Comparison. However the majority of CPUs have not been tested and the results have been estimated by a CPU-Comparison’s secret proprietary formula. As such they do not accurately reflect the actual Passmark CPU mark values and are not endorsed by PassMark Software Pty Ltd.

Monero Hashrate kH/s

The crypto currency Monero has been using the RandomX algorithm since November 2019. This PoW (proof of work) algorithm can only efficiently be calculated using a processor (CPU) or a graphics card (GPU). The CryptoNight algorithm was used for Monero until November 2019, but it could be calculated using ASICs. RandomX benefits from a high number of CPU cores, cache and a fast connection of the memory via as many memory channels as possible

Electric Usage Estimate

Average hours of use per day

Average CPU Utilization (0-100%)

Power cost, dollar per kWh

Electric Usage Estimate

Average hours of use per day

Average CPU Utilization (0-100%)

Power cost, dollar per kWh

Popular Comparision

Comments

Massive Performance Gains Are Bad News For Intel

Another year, another processor war — that’s a good thing mind you and if 2017 was anything to go by 2018 looks set to be just as tight in the fight between AMD and Intel for dominance. AMD has had a fair amount of work to do as well in order to offer meaningful gains with its 2nd Gen Ryzen CPUs. It’s only offering a modest manufacturing process shrink from 14nm to 12nm with its new Zen+ architecture, also known as Pinnacle Ridge and there have been no core count increases this time either.

2nd Gen Ryzen has landed with four new CPUs and more to follow

AMD

However, the company has been able to increase CPU frequencies across the board and has some other significant tweaks in store too. Today, it’s launching its first four 2nd Gen Ryzen CPUs with more to follow, which comprise the Ryzen 7 2700X, Ryzen 7 2700, Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 5 2600. They’ve been on pre-order since last week and prices are very keen indeed. In fact, the flagship Ryzen 7 2700X costs a huge amount less than the $499 launch price of the Ryzen 7 1800X, so there’s no let up here for Intel in the price department — AMD has things well and truly nailed down. As you can probably tell from this list, there is no Ryzen 7 2800X to replace the Ryzen 7 1800X. The rumors were true, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have a new flagship for AMD. Far from it.

AMD has launched four new Ryzen CPUs, with more to follow.

Antony Leather

Higher frequencies and better overclocking

There are three things that AMD needed to improve upon and each has been tweaked. Firstly, there are frequencies. The Ryzen 7 2700X, for example, has a 300MHz higher boost frequency than the Ryzen 7 1800X and an additional 100MHz on the base frequency too, so the CPUs will be faster out of the box than their predecessors. AMD is also promising higher overclocks, and following my own testing with the Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600X this week, I can certainly confirm that my samples have offered up to 200MHz higher overclocks using everyday settings. Good news so far then.

Better support for fast memory

Memory speed and compatibility dogged Ryzen’s launch, but later in 2017, a spate of BIOS updates for AM4 motherboards saw speeds above 3000MHz become more readily achievable. I haven’t failed to hit 3,466MHz on AM4 for a while now and AMD has been bold enough to include a 3400MHz memory kit with its 2nd Gen Ryzen press kit too.

AMD has improved memory support with Ryzen so it’s now possible to achieve speeds above 3,400MHz

G.Skill

This is good news because AMD far more than Intel, benefits from fast memory because of its high-speed data interlink, Infinity Fabric, is directly related to memory speed. In general, the faster the memory you use, the faster your processor will be. Being limited to 3000MHz and below really hurt Ryzen, and I say that because now I’ve had the opportunity to try out 3,400MHz, I wouldn’t recommend you buy anything slower for your Ryzen system and to back this up I’ve run tests at 2666MHz, 3000MHz and 3400MHz in a few tests so you can see the difference.

Better boosting algorithms: Precision Boost 2 and XFR 2

2nd Gen Ryzen’s higher frequencies are very welcome, but another issue with original Ryzen CPUs was that they struggled to hit their boost frequencies. When a CPU is under load, it will normally boost the frequency to offer better performance, clocking them back to either reign in power consumption under lighter loads or to curb temperatures. The original Ryzen CPUs could boost one or two cores to high frequencies, but if more than a couple of work threads landed on it, it would quickly reduce the frequencies, assuming many of its cores were under heavy load.

Games are classic examples. There are usually one or two high-load threads, but very often several other threads will spawn off and while they’re very low load threads, the Ryzen CPU would cut the frequencies of the other cores. This saw performance drop off a cliff — not quite as dramatic as that mind you, but the end result is the same in that in lightly-threaded tests, Ryzen’s performance was being unnecessarily curtailed.

Precision Boost 2 will allow 2nd Gen Ryzen CPUs to reach their boost frequencies more often

AMD

To combat this, AMD has introduced Precision Boost 2 and XFR 2 and they work in similar ways across similar numbers of threads to their predecessors. The key, though, is that AMD has put in place certain limits to allow the CPU to keep reaching its maximum boost frequency, regardless of how many other threads are active. Keep your CPU cool enough and use a motherboard with elaborate enough power circuitry, and the CPU will stick to those high frequencies even if more cores are used, potentially offering a lot more performance in both lightly and heavily multi-threaded workloads, from games to content creation.

Compatibility

Unlike Intel’s Coffee Lake CPUs, 2nd Gen Ryzen CPUs will be compatible with older X370 motherboards, and the new X470 motherboards are compatible with first generation Ryzen CPUs too, which is good news. There has also been no change to the processor socket or cooler mounts, so if you own a Socket AM4 compatible cooler, it will still work fine on X470 motherboards.

New X470 chipset motherboards will offer benefits compared to current AM4 motherboards

Antony Leather

New Chipsets

AMD’s chipset lineup is getting some additions to. X470 is the new kid on the block for premium motherboards, but there will also be a B450 chipset. Interestingly, Gigabyte sent me this slide, which has been doing the rounds in the rumor mill over the last day or two, and the Z490 chipset has made an appearance. There has been no mention of this at all from AMD so far, but if it does make an appearance, it looks set to offer additional PCI-E Gen 3 lanes from the chipset.

X370 and X470 are essentially the same except the former lacks support for AMD’s new rapid data access feature — StoreMI,  which plants regularly used files onto fast storage such as SSDs, and leaves the rest on hard disks and the like using real-time tiering technology, as well as Precision Boost Overdrive, which promises even higher boosting frequencies so could well offer even better performance. Similarly, B350 boards also lack support for these features.

Gigabyte released some detailed information about AMD’s old and new chipsets

Gigabyte

New Ryzen Master Overclocking Software

AMD’s Ryzen Master software has proven quite useful, even if you prefer to overclock your CPU in the EFI. Now there’s even more reason to use it as the software can identify the best cores on each Core Complex (CCX) on a CPU for overclocking. Sadly, there’s no per-core overclocking like you can do on Intel systems plus overclocking the highlighted cores will see the others drop in frequency, so it has limited use. However, it could allow you to boost the frequency of several cores to increase performance in programs that benefit from having high lightly-threaded grunt.

AMD’s new Ryzen Master overclocking software identifies the best cores for overclocking

Antony Leather

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 on performance. The numbers you see here are exactly what you’d get on a real-world, up-to-date system.

I’ve used 3000MHz memory for most of the tests, but in areas where AMD’s new CPUs benefitted significantly from faster memory, I’ve run additional tests at both 3400MHz and 2666MHz for comparison. I’d like to thank AMD for sending me the official 2nd Gen 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 Gigabyte for the motherboards.

Intel System:

Asus ROG Strix Z370-E Gaming

AMD System

Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 WiFi

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.

Benchmarks

Content creation and Rendering

PCMark 10 Photo Editing

Antony Leather

HandBrake Video Encoding

Antony Leather

Cinebench Single Core benchmark

Antony Leather

Cinebench Multi Core benchmark

Antony Leather

Gaming and 3D

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

Antony Leather

Ashes of the Singularity

Antony Leather

Fallout 4 benchmark

Antony Leather

World of tanks en Core benchmark

Antony Leather

Final Fantasy benchmark

Antony Leather

VRMark benchmark

Antony Leather

Unigine Superpsotion benchmark

Antony Leather

Power consumption

Stock power consumption

Antony Leather

Overclocked power consumption

Antony Leather

Overclocking 2nd Gen Ryzen

The Ryzen 5 2600X reached an all-core overclock of 4. 2GHz

Antony Leather

I was pleased to see that overclocking has definitely improved and typically you’ll be looking at around 200MHz more headroom compared to first generation CPUs. There was one small issue, though, which was that the Ryzen 7 2700X’s boost frequencies being so high, even though I overclocked it across all cores to 4.25GHz, this is lower than its maximum boost frequency, which is why in a couple of tests, for example in the Cinebench single-core test, the overclocked result is actually lower. for the most part, though, 4.2GHz all-core on the Ryzen 5 2600X and 4.25GHz all-core on the Ryzen 7 2700X are decent overclocks compared to their predecessors, but still some way off the 5GHz mark achieved by Intel’s latest CPUs.

Results discussion

The first thing to talk about is memory speed. This had a huge impact in a couple of benchmarks, most notably in Deus Ex. AMD had made some ground here compared to previous generation CPUs anyway, but it still lagged behind Intel with minimum frame rates in the mid 60’s. However, switching to 3400MHz RAM saw the Ryzen 7 2700X reach 71fps minimum, which is just 4fps behind Intel.

This is hugely significant as it means that the gap is now so small here that there’s barely any difference between AMD and Intel, at least in Deus Ex. However, Ashes of the Singularity also saw an improvement, rising from 41/46fps min/avg with 3000MHz memory to 43/47fps, which again is just a fraction behind Intel. I also saw some improvements to the PCMark 10 image editing score too, which rose from 4526 with 2666MHz RAM to 4792 with 3400MHz RAM — a boost of 6%. If you’re buying a new AMD system, you clearly need to get the fastest memory you can afford.

AMDs 2nd Gen Ryzen

Antony Leather

The new AMD CPUs were quicker even using 3000MHz RAM, though, with the Ryzen 5 2600X scoring 1372 points in Cinebench compared to 1241 for the Ryzen 5 1600X and just 1003 for the Core i5-8600K. Similarly, the mighty Ryzen 7 2700X tops the chart and offers a massive increase here over the Ryzen 7 1800X, at 1810 points versus 1630 and just 1397 for the Intel Core i7-8700K. it was a similar story in Handbrake and here, the Ryzen 7 2700X is now significantly quicker than Intel’s Core i7-8700K, even with the latter overclocked to a massive 5GHz.

Now for the all-important game benchmarks. It’s fairly clear to see that Intel is still a bit quicker, but my how that gap has narrowed. Firstly, we should say that not every game benefits from using an Intel CPU. Three of the game tests barely showed any movement — World of Tanks, Final Fantasy XV and Fallout 4 are all games that are fairly easy to run and are more reliant on the graphics card. In fact, World of Tanks was so easy to run that I decided to bump the resolution up to 1440p. If you play any of these games, it really doesn’t matter what CPU you use.

More CPU-limited benchmarks such as the built-in Ashes of the Singularity CPU test, reveal a slight bias towards Intel still, but again the gap has closed. Ashes of the Singularity sees the Core i7-8700K top the chart, but even at stock speed and using 3400MHz RAM, the Ryzen 7 2700X is just a couple of frames per second behind.

The Ryzen 7 2700X with 3400MHz is massively quicker in some benchmarks than the Ryzen 7 1800X

Antony Leather

Deus Ex saw Intel top the charts again, but just look at the performance gains made by the Ryzrn 7 2700X compared to the Ryzen 7 1800X when using faster memory. A 10fps boost to the minimum frame rate is an absolutely huge improvement and works out at 16%. Amazingly, AMD has done this without a significant architecture tweak, just better frequency boosting and better memory support.

Power consumption is the only place the graphs were heading in the wrong direction, with both new CPUs drawing more power than their predecessors in nearly every test. A 40W increase for the Ryzen 7 2700X at stock speed under load might seem large, but given the huge performance increases, I doubt many enthusiasts will be bothers by this.

Conclusion

Without a significant architecture tweak, I was worried what exactly AMD would be able to achieve with Zen+, but 2nd Gen Ryzen has confirmed my suspicions following talks with various people at AMD over the last few months, that higher frequencies and better frequency boosting had huge room for improvement. AMD has capitalized on this and rightly so — just look at the performance increases.

This has allowed AMD to reign in Intel across the board and sometimes by significant margins. With the right hardware, namely fast memory, the game titles I tested that have traditionally shown big gaps between Intel and AMD, now reveal only small margins of difference.  Two weeks ago, if you were building a PC purely for games, I’d have said go with Intel. Today, I’d say you have a choice, and that’s a hugely important development.

Finally, AMD has ticked the other important box, which is to build upon the advantages it already had over Intel, namely the multi-threaded performance leads enjoyed over similarly-priced Intel CPUs. For example, the Ryzen 7 1800X was usually quicker than the Core i7-8700K in video encoding and rendering benchmarks, but if you overclocked the latter to 5GHz — a relatively easy task — it could match or even better the AMD CPU in some situations. The Ryzen 7 2700X now puts the Core i7-8700K firmly in its place and even when overclocked it can’t get close.

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

Antony Leather

AMD starts the 2018 processor war on a very strong footing, and the next few months should prove very interesting, especially with 2nd Gen Threadripper due before the year is out as well. Intel will likely respond, of course, not least of all with an 8-core mainstream CPU that will undoubtedly be the fastest mainstream desktop CPU available. However, AMD is being particularly aggressive on pricing.

The Ryzen 7 2700X for example, retails for just $329 and the 6-core Intel CPU comes in at $350. This means that an 8-core Intel CPU will obviously cost a lot more, so while Intel might be king of the hill, in terms of value, AMD is well ahead. The Core i7-8700K is still a fantastic CPU, though, and Intel still has the upper hand in a few areas, including games. But today is a huge success for AMD, with the Ryzen 7 2700X being an awesome CPU for the money, and the Ryzen 5 2600X also standing head and shoulders above its predecessor and its Intel equivalent in many tests too.

You can buy the Ryzen 7 2700X for $329  and the Ryzen 5 2600X for $229 and I’ll be taking a look at the rest of AMD’s lineup soon.

TOP 5 AMD Ryzen Processors Still Relevant in 2021

Table of Contents

TOP 5 AMD Ryzen Processors

Over the past three years, AMD Ryzen processors have proven themselves well both in the gaming processor segment for home PCs and in the professional environment. It is also worth mentioning that more and more streamers prefer Ryzen processors due to good multithreading and high performance per core. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves and look at all the advantages and disadvantages of our TOP 5 AMD Ryzen desktop processors in 2021.

Let’s go!

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G Processor

The AMD Ryzen 3 processor line is designed for entry-level home systems. Since the Ryzen 3 2200G has integrated graphics, there is no need for a discrete graphics card. For undemanding users, the integrated Radeon Vega 8 is more than enough. The performance of this graphics chip is comparable to Nvidia GT1030.

If it comes to more serious games, then the question arises of the advisability of buying this CPU, because the installation from the eighth Vega, even at the lowest graphics settings, will hardly squeeze out an acceptable 30 FPS in AAA level games. In this case, it is better to consider buying a budget-level graphics card, such as the Nvidia GTX 1050ti, GTX 1060 or Radeon RX 5500XT.

So, what about the processor itself?

And here everything is very clear. Four cores is four cores. These cores are enough to run most modern programs.

This CPU is not afraid of overclocking, and it is happy to share with you a stable frequency of 3.9GHz. Impressive, isn’t it? The AMD Ryzen 3 2200G is a great CPU for everyday use of your PC and light games.

The Ryzen 3 2200G is the sweet spot for building a budget entry-level PC while keeping your budget as low as possible. And if you need a good processor to work in resource-intensive applications, then it’s better to turn your attention to the older processors of the Ryzen line.

Features

Number of CPU cores	4
Number of threads	4
Base frequency	3.5GHz
Max. frequency	up to 3.7GHz
L1 cache size	384KB
L2 cache size	2MB
L3 cache size	4MB
Unlocked multiplier	D a
Process	14nm FinFET
Socket	AM4
PCI Express Version	PCIe 3.0 x8
Overtemperature protection (PIB)	Wraith Stealth
Cooling system (MPK)	Wraith Stealth
TDP nominal / TDP	65W
cTDP	46-65W
Max. temperature	95°C
Max. memory speed	2993MHz
Memory type	DDR4
Memory channels	2

Integrated graphics card specifications

Supported Technologies

Sales launch date — February 12, 2018

AMD Ryzen 7 2700

The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 is primarily an enthusiast processor. 8 cores and 16 threads, much more serious than the previous line in the face of the Ryzen 5 2600 with 6 cores and 12 threads. 2nd generation AMD Ryzen processors are built on the Zen+ architecture, which has received significant improvements over the Zen architecture. The Infinity Fabric bus has not gone away, but the performance per core has increased significantly (by as much as 3%).

All Zen+-based processors received support for a nominal RAM frequency of 2933 MHz out of the box, versus 2667 MHz on the Zen architecture. Also, AMD engineers reduced CPU latency to RAM by 11%, L1 cache by 13%, L2 cache by 34%, and L3 cache by 13%. All this did not give some crazy performance for all processors on the Zen + architecture, but improved their work with L1, L2, L3 cache and RAM, which in turn affected the overall performance of the entire system.

AMD Ryzen 7 2700 is not afraid of the heaviest games, programs and streaming. Its cores, threads and power will last for 5 years with a margin. The price tag for a new processor varies from $225 for the OEM version to $300 for the BOX version. On AliExpress and the second-hand market, you can buy it for about $225.

Features

Number of CPU cores	8
Number of threads	16
Base frequency	3.2GHz
Max. frequency	up to 4.1GHz
L1 cache size	768KB
L2 cache size	4MB
L3 cache size	16MB
Unlocked multiplier	D a
Process	12nm FinFET
Socket	AM4
PCI Express Version	PCIe 3. 0 x16
Overtemperature protection (PIB)	Wraith Spire with RGB LED
Cooling system (MPK)	Wraith Spire
TDP nominal / TDP	65W
cTDP	46-65W
Max. temperature	95°C
Max. memory speed	2933MHz
Memory type	DDR4
Memory channels	2

Supported technologies

Sales launch date — April 19, 2018

Processor AMD Ryzen 5 1600

price/performance ratio. It is Ryzen 5 1600 that has flickered in recent years in the recommended system requirements in almost all modern games. This is not a general insanity, but only an illustration of how AMD has advanced in the production of modern central processors.

For an average user, this processor is enough to perform all everyday tasks and a comfortable FPS. For its low price, it will be able to offer high performance in all games and programs. Good multi-threading ensures fast video and 3D rendering.

Overclocking also takes place. On better crystals, you can reach a frequency of 4.1 GHz across all cores, but it’s still better not to risk it and stop at a stable 3.9-4 GHz.

AMD Ryzen 5 1600 deservedly is the «popular» processor in its price segment. And if you want to purchase an updated version of the 1600, then you should take a closer look at its updated version of the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF.

Features

Number of CPU cores	6
Number of threads	12
Base frequency	3. 2GHz
Max. frequency	up to 3.6GHz
L1 cache size	576KB
L2 cache size	3MB
L3 cache size	16MB
Unlocked multiplier	D a
Process	14nm
Socket	AM4
PCI Express Version	PCIe 3.0 x16
Overtemperature protection (PIB)	Wraith Spire (No LED )
Cooling system (MPK)	Wraith Spire
TDP nominal / TDP	65W
cTDP	46-65W
Max. temperature	95°C
Max. memory speed	2667MHz
Memory type	DDR4
Memory channels	2

Supported technologies

Sales launch date — April 11, 2017

AMD Ryzen 5 2600

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is an overclocked version of the R5 1600 with updated Zen+ architecture and 12nm process technology. As for the Zen + architecture itself, everything is exactly the same as in the case of the Ryzen 7 2700, namely, reducing the delays in accessing RAM and L1, L2, L3 cache memory.

AMD Ryzen 5 2600 boasts better performance than its junior model, Ryzen 5 1600, due to minor improvements. In some cases, the performance increase can reach up to 17%.

Ryzen 5 2600 overclocking lacks stars from the sky and stable operation can be achieved at a frequency of up to 4.1GHz on all cores with a TDP of about 120W. A boxed cooler, which is expected, will not cope with such a volume of TDP and you will have to get at least a three-tube tower cooler.

For games, 6 physical cores and 12 logical processors (threads) will be enough for a long time. Today, a large number of games are being developed taking into account multithreading, and since our friend has a small reserve for the future, it’s definitely not worth worrying about the fact that this processor will not “pull” modern games.

Thanks to the newer Zen+ architecture, the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is one of the most attractive processors in its price segment. For $150-200 you will get a new powerful processor with little overclocking potential and support for all modern instructions.

Features

Number of CPU cores	6
Number of threads	12
Base frequency	3.4GHz
Max. frequency	up to 3.9GHz
L1 cache size	576KB
L2 cache size	3MB
L3 cache size	16MB
Unlocked multiplier	D a
Process	12nm FinFET
Socket	AM4
PCI Express Version	PCIe 3. 0 x16
Overtemperature protection (PIB)	Wraith Stealth
Cooling system (MPK)	Wraith Stealth
TDP nominal / TDP	65W
cTDP	46-65W
Max. temperature	95°C
Max. memory speed	2933MHz
Memory type	DDR4
Memory channels	2

Supported technologies

Sales launch date — 19April 2018

AMD Ryzen 5 3600

Our next test subject is the AMD Ryzen 5 3600. Six-core, twelve-thread processor based on the new Zen2 architecture. You can learn more about the innovations of the architecture in comparison with Zen and Zen + by looking at the review of the Ryzen 7 2700 processor. Note that one of the key features of the Zen2 architecture was the decoupling of the Infinity Fabric bus frequency from the frequency of RAM, which had a positive effect on the processing speed of paged data. from RAM.

Basically, all the changes in the performance of the 3rd generation Ryzen processors are due to the new architecture. Hence the high frequencies of the processor itself, and support for RAM with a frequency of 3200 MHz as a nominal one.

TDP remains at the level of Ryzen first and second generation, and is 65W due to the “thin” 7nm process technology. But let’s be realistic, still the factory TDP of 65W has nothing to do with real numbers. At stock frequencies, under full load, the Ryzen 5 3600 can “eat” all 90W, which is almost one and a half times higher than the declared power consumption. When overclocking, you should take this moment into account and get a more powerful cooler in advance. Personally, I advise you to immediately change the boxed cooler to a tower cooler with two or three copper tubes.

In general, the AMD Ryzen 5 3600 processor has every chance of becoming the 1600’s successor in the title of «people’s processor». This will not happen immediately, but only when AMD announces a new line of its processors and lowers prices for past generations of Ryzen 5 processors.0003

Features

Number of CPU cores	6
Number of threads	12
Base frequency	3.6GHz
Max. frequency	up to 4.2GHz
L1 cache size	384KB
L2 cache size	3MB
L3 cache size	32MB
Unlocked multiplier	D a
Process	TSMC 7nm FinFET
Socket	AM4
PCI Express Version	PCIe 4. 0 x16
Overtemperature protection (PIB)	Wraith Stealth
Cooling system (MPK)	Wraith Stealth
TDP nominal / TDP	65W
cTDP	46-65W
Max. temperature	95°C
Max. memory speed	3200MHz
Memory type	DDR4
Memory channels	2

Supported technologies

Sales launch date — July 7, 201

CONS

• Infinity Fabric bus (yes, it’s a plus and a minus)
• Infinity Fabric frequency lock to RAM frequency (Zen, Zen26)

High RAM latency

(Zen)

• Not the best cooling out of the box

Tags: AMDRyzen

Review of the Ryzen 7 2700X processor.

Unleashing the potential of AMD’s flagship 8-core processor with Kingston HyperX memory / Sudo Null IT News0001

Hi Giktimes! AMD has finally unveiled its 2nd generation 8- and 6-core Ryzen processors based on the Zen+ architecture. In our blog, we have studied the decisions of the Reds more than once, so we could not pass by such an event. We study the flagship model Ryzen 7 2700X and find out its strengths and weaknesses.

Over a year ago, AMD introduced the first generation of Ryzen processors. We are not afraid to say that this event was one of the most important in the industry last year. First of all, this is due to the fact that real competition has finally resumed in the desktop CPU market. The Ryzen 3, Ryzen 5, and Ryzen 7 series models took the fight to the then Intel processors. The success of the «Reds» is confirmed by other indirect phenomena that occurred last year. So, in a hurry, Intel released the LGA1151-v2 platform and the first mass-produced 6-core Coffee Lake processors. This spring, the lineup of «coffee» CPUs was replenished with new models, and therefore enthusiasts around the world held their breath — how AMD will respond. And the answer followed in the form of new chips — two 6-core and two 8-core processors, which were introduced in April.

You probably remember that in March our blog published an experiment with the Ryzen 5 2400G central processor — this chip belongs to the two thousandth family of Ryzen CPUs, although it was produced using the «old» 14-nm process technology. The Ryzen 7 2700X is a product of a different class, and in the near future this chip will defend the honor and dignity of the AMD AM4 mainstream platform. The Reds themselves are not shy about calling their second-generation chips the ultimate CPU for gamers, content creators, and enthusiasts. This is what we will check today, and once again we will make sure that the “big ship” cannot do without a good set of RAM.

Briefly about the new AMD Ryzen processors

The Ryzen 5 2600/2600X and Ryzen 7 2700/2700X processors belong to the new generation of Pinnacle Ridge and are based on the Zen+ architecture. Perhaps the main innovation of the new architecture was the transition from 14-nanometer to 12-nanometer process technology. The above models were presented back in April, and therefore there are plenty of detailed reviews about these chips on the Web. We believe that all sympathizers have already familiarized themselves with all the features of Pinnacle Ridge. Below we briefly describe the most important.

Transfer the production of second-generation Ryzen processors to the new “rails” of AMD was helped by GlobalFoundries, which managed to launch an improved process technology with 12-nm 12LP (Leading Performance) standards. Thus, 6- and 8-core Zen+ chips are still based on two CCX (CPU Complex) clusters. The use of 12nm process technology and GlobalFoundries manufacturing facilities made Pinnacle Ridge processors faster. This can be easily judged if we compare the characteristics of the new Ryzen 5 2600/2600X and Ryzen 7 2700/2700X chips with their first-generation counterparts — the Ryzen 5 1600/1600X and Ryzen 7 1700/1700X processors, respectively. On average, the clock speed of the Pinnacle Ridge models has increased by 200-300 MHz. Structurally (the presence of quad-core CCX modules, the amount of cache memory, support for SMT technology, SoC components), the processors have not changed in any way.

*Source — Anandtech.com

The Ryzen 7 2700X has replaced the Ryzen 7 1800X. The novelty has a 200-300 MHz higher frequency, but at the same time a lower cost. True, the calculated heat dissipation of the new flagship turned out to be 10 W more: 105 W versus 95 W. It turns out that even though Pinnacle Ridge was transferred to a thinner process technology, the increase in clock frequency still affected heat dissipation.

The 200-300 MHz clock speed increase is great, of course, but the difference in performance between the first and second generation Ryzen is not only due to this value. The new processors received more advanced frequency control algorithms under load — Precision Boost 2 and XFR2 technologies. Therefore, the difference in performance of the new Pinnacle Ridge can be even greater in scenarios that do not fully load the processor’s computing resources. Let’s take the following chart as an example.

Precision Boost technology is somewhat analogous to Turbo Boost technology used in Intel CPUs. The essence of its work is to collect data on temperatures and power consumption of processor cores. If the CPU does not overheat and its characteristics are within certain limits, then its frequency is increased above the default value in 25 MHz steps up to a certain set limit. The first version of Precision Boost determined the frequency of operation for one or two processor cores. If a larger number of cores were loaded, then their frequency decreased by 200-300 MHz relative to the maximum indicator stated in the specifications. Precision Boost 2 is not tied to the number of loaded cores. The graph above clearly shows that the Ryzen 7 1800X, under serious load, dropped the frequency from 4 GHz immediately to 3. 7 GHz. And the frequency of the Ryzen 7 2700X with Precision Boost 2 enabled changes smoothly depending on the number of loaded threads. According to this graph, the flagship Pinnacle Ridge, when loaded, for example, 4 threads, is more efficient than the Ryzen 7 1800X already at 500 MHz, and this is a huge advantage for Ryzen processors.

Precision Boost 2 complements XFR2 (Extended Frequency Range) technology perfectly. The first revision of this feature made it possible to increase the frequency of one CPU core by 100-200 MHz, depending on the model. At the same time, the CPU could even go beyond the limits of the thermal package if its temperature did not exceed a certain value. XFR2, as you might guess, has become even more flexible in controlling the frequency of Ryzen 2000 processors — now this technology works with any number of threads involved.

As a result, the performance level of Pinnacle Ridge depends, among other things, on the efficiency of the cooling system used in the PC. The screenshot above clearly shows how the Ryzen 7 2700X works, on which the boxed cooler from the Ryzen 7 1700 processor was installed. Under heavy load, the chip frequency drops to 3.367 GHz.

Replacing the boxed cooler with an efficient Noctua NH-D14 model allowed the temperature of the Ryzen 7 2700X to drop from 84.8 degrees Celsius to 69.8 degrees Celsius. At the same time, under load in the Prime95 program, the minimum frequency of the 8-core was 3.71 GHz, and the average was 3.83 GHz.

The conclusion in this whole situation is simple: when using the Ryzen 7 2700X, you definitely should not skimp on the cooling system.

Importantly, Pinnacle Ridge processors are fully compatible with motherboards based on A320, B350 and X370 chipsets. You only need to make sure that the BIOS of the device is updated to the correct version before buying — otherwise the motherboard will not detect the chip. In general, AMD representatives have repeatedly stated that the AM4 platform will be relevant until 2020 — and that’s great!

Nevertheless, along with Pinnacle Ridge, the X470 chipset was introduced, and a bit later the B450 chipset will appear. In short, these microcircuits do not introduce any innovations, since their level of functionality is fully comparable to solutions based on the X370 and B350 logic. We hope that the emergence of new sets of logic will encourage motherboard manufacturers to release better solutions and, so to speak, to make a kind of work on the bugs.

DDR4 RAM support

And now let’s touch on the most interesting topic. The first generation Ryzen processors officially support DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400 and DDR4-2666 RAM in dual-channel mode. At the same time, at the very dawn, the AM4 platform, which is obvious, experienced serious difficulties with the support of high-frequency RAM whales. Only with the release of AGESA 1.0.0.6 microcode, in our opinion, the situation began to improve for the better. But fast RAM is the key to the efficient operation of any Ryzen chip.

The Pinnacle Ridge Dual Channel Memory Controller officially supports DDR4-2933 RAM. This fact does not mean at all that the first generation Ryzen could not work with such memory — it just makes it clear that some optimization of the memory controller was nevertheless made. In particular, motherboards now support DDR4-4200 RAM, but, to be honest, we don’t have examples of successful operation of such memory with Ryzen 2000 chips.

As before, when assembling a system based on the AM4 platform, we suggest focusing on RAM kits operating at effective frequencies of 3000, 3200 and 3466 MHz — with a high probability they will work in PCs based on Ryzen chips. At the same time, it is preferable that only two of the four DIMM slots are used in motherboards. Well, the motherboard itself must be created from a 6-layer textolite, and not a 4-layer one.

We have already shown how RAM affects the performance of Ryzen processors. With the release of the Pinnacle Ridge generation, the situation does not fundamentally change. The fact is that Ryzen chips have a very slow TLB buffer. Secondly, the frequency of the built-in North Bridge Data Fabric is strictly tied to the frequency of the RAM. For best synchronization in Ryzen, it always runs at half the effective memory frequency. It turns out that if the computer uses a set of DDR4-2133 RAM, then the Data Fabric operates at a frequency of 1066 MHz. The northbridge is one of the most important components of the Ryzen processor, since it is he who is responsible for the interaction of CCX (CPU Complex) — clusters that host cores and cache. The lower the frequency of the Data Fabric, the worse the internuclear interaction in the crystal.

Testing has shown that the impact of RAM on the performance of Ryzen processors is most noticeable in games. The graphs from the article are shown below.

So, when comparing systems with DDR4-2133 and DDR4-3200 kits, the system became 3% faster when rendering in the CINEMA 4D animation package at CL16 delays. In the x265 benchmark, exactly the same situation is observed. In general, a large performance gain is seen in such tasks that require large amounts of data. These include archivers and graphic editors. In these applications, the difference between systems with different DDR4 memory can reach 6-10%.

In games, the situation changes significantly. So, in GTA V, if we compare a system with DDR4-2133 CL16 memory with a system with DDR4-3200 CL16, there is a difference of 14% and 22% in average and minimum FPS, respectively.

The conclusion suggests itself: together with Ryzen chips, it is really best to use RAM kits operating at an effective frequency of 2933 MHz and higher. This is the memory we will use during testing of the Ryzen 7 2700X.

Test

The HyperX Fury series of RAM has a large number of kits that will satisfy the needs of all users: both experienced enthusiasts and beginners who have just wished to build their first system unit. To test the Ryzen 7 2700X, we chose the HyperX Fury HX432C18FBK2 / 32 dual-channel kit, consisting of two modules with a total capacity of 32 GB. Since on the basis of this processor you can assemble a fairly productive workstation, our choice fell on a large-capacity kit. Recall that the Ryzen chips maximum support up to 64 GB of RAM.

Kit HyperX Fury HX432C18FBK2/32 operates at an effective frequency of 3200 MHz with delays of 18-21-21. To do this, you need to activate the XMP profile. And this RAM kit also has a second XMP profile, in which the modules will operate at an effective frequency of 2933 MHz with a latency of 17-19-19. By default (that is, without activating the XMP profile) HyperX Fury HX432C18FBK2/32 operates at an effective frequency of 2933 MHz with delays of 18-20-20-36. It turns out that even without activating the XMP profile, the RAM kit will “plow” at a high frequency.

Our recent testing has shown that there is no need for more than 16 GB of memory in a gaming PC yet. The key word in this sentence is “yet”, the era of “16+ GB” will come very soon, because there are already a decent number of games that consume, for example, more than 10 GB of RAM.

The flagship Ryzen 7 2700X, as you might guess, is opposed to the 6-core Core i7-8700K processor. The AMD chip costs less but has four more threads. It is logical that in multi-threaded tasks, the “red” CPU should look brighter. The Core i7-8700K runs at 4.3GHz when all six cores are loaded. This processor is equipped with an unlocked multiplier, but we did not overclock it. Coffee Lake processors have ordinary thermal paste under the lid, so effective overclocking of the Core i7-8700K (say, up to 5 GHz) is possible only with an ultra-efficient cooling system and after scalping with replacing the thermal interface with liquid metal.

The article also presents the results of testing the Ryzen 7 1700 processor, the most affordable 8-core Ryzen processor at the moment, judging by the real cost of AMD solutions in Russia.

*source — Anandtech.com

ASUS X370-PRO motherboard was used in the AMD booth. The Intel booth used the ASRock Z370 Killer SLI motherboard. In both cases, there was an ASUS ROG Strix GeForce GTX 1080 graphics card and a Noctua NH-D14 CPU cooler. Naturally, the same builds of Windows 10, drivers and software were used.

Processor and memory performance was measured using the following software:

• Corona 1.3. Testing rendering speed using the renderer of the same name. Measures the build speed of the standard BTR scene used to measure performance.
• WinRAR 5.40. Archiving a folder of 11 GB with various data in RAR5 format and with the maximum degree of compression.
• Blender 2.79. Determination of the final rendering speed in one of the popular free packages for creating three-dimensional graphics. The duration of building the final model from Blender Cycles Benchmark rev4 is measured.
• x264 FHD Benchmark. Testing the speed of video transcoding to H.264/AVC format.
• x265 HD Benchmark. Testing the speed of video transcoding to H.265/HEVC format.
• CINEBENCH R15. Performance measurement of photorealistic 3D rendering in CINEMA 4D animation package, CPU test.
• Fritz 9 Chess Benchmarks. Testing the speed of a popular chess engine.
• Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.9. Performance testing when exporting 200 RAW photos at 5184 x 3456 pixels to JPEG at 1620 x 1080 at maximum quality.
• JetStream 1.1 (browser — Google Chrome). Performance testing of Internet applications built using HTML5 and JavaScript algorithms.
• TrueCrypt. Testing data encryption with AES-Twofish-Serpent algorithms.

Game builds were tested in Full HD resolution. The graphs show not only the average, but the minimum FPS. The application list is as follows:

• GTA V. DirectX 11. Built-in benchmark. Maximum graphics quality, advanced graphics quality settings enabled, image resolution scaling disabled, 16x AF, FXAA + 2x MSAA.
• The Witcher III. DirectX 11. Novigrad. Outrageous graphics quality, maximum settings NVIDIA HairWorks, HBAO+, AA.
• World of Tanks 1.0 EnCore. DirectX 11. Benchmark. Ultra mode, TSSAA HQ.
• Far Cry 5. DirectX 11. Built-in benchmark. Mode «Maximum», TAA.
• Fallout 4. DirectX 11. Commonwealth. Textures of maximum resolution. Maximum graphics quality, HBAO, TAA, bullet fragments off.
• Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. DirectX 12. Built-in benchmark. Maximum graphics quality, 2x MSSA.
• Assassin’s Creed Origins. DirectX 11. Built-in benchmark. Mode «Highest», high smoothing.
• Rise of the Tomb Raider. DirectX 11. Location «Soviet base». Maximum graphics quality, but HBAO+, SMAA.
• Battlefield 1. DirectX 12. Mission «Or we will win …». Mode «Ultra», TAA.
• Total War: WARHAMMER II. DirectX 12. Built-in campaign benchmark. Maximum quality, 2x AA.
• Watch Dogs 2. DirectX 11. San Francisco. Ultra mode, but HBAO, temporal anti-aliasing 2x MSAA.

The Ryzen 7 2700X has been further overclocked to a stable 4. 2 GHz for all eight cores. It should be noted that this is a good result for this chip. A study of other reviews shows that the Ryzen 7 2700X overclocks to 4-4.1 GHz on average.

So, let’s see how the Ryzen 7 2700X performs when performing resource-intensive tasks. Indeed, in most cases, the Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms the Core i7-8700K in most cases. At the same time, the AMD flagship performs very well in tasks such as graphics rendering, video encoding, and encryption. For example, in Corona 1.3, the “red” CPU is 12% ahead of its competitor. However, in Adobe programs, as well as in tasks that do not use multithreading, the 6-core Core i7-8700K looks preferable.

Please note that in most cases, overclocking the Ryzen 7 2700X in a positive direction affects the performance level of the stand with AMD components. However, such an increase in performance cannot be called significant. So, in CINEBENCH R15, the system became only 6% faster. It’s all about the work of Precision Boost 2 and XFR2 technologies, which we wrote about earlier, because the difference in frequency of 500 MHz should have given a more tangible performance boost. But he is not.

In games, the difference between overclocked and non-overclocked Ryzen 7 2700X-based systems is even harder to find. Our results clearly prove that games that desperately need all 16 threads have not yet appeared in 2018. And it is unlikely that such projects will appear in the near future.

In general, a fairly obvious conclusion suggests itself. It turns out that there is not much point in overclocking the Ryzen 7 2700X. Efficient cooling and high-frequency DDR4 memory are the attributes required for a high-performance system based on Pinnacle Ridge. It makes sense to overclock younger chips — Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 2700.

Sure enough, you’ll notice that the Core i7-8700K bench consistently outperforms the Ryzen 7 2700X system in games. There is nothing new in these results. Nevertheless, in defense of the «red» PC, let’s say that in both cases, the stands demonstrate a completely playable frame rate. Obviously, as the load on the GPU increases (for example, when the resolution is increased from Full HD to Ultra HD), the difference between the Core i7-8700K and the Ryzen 7 2700X will be even smaller.

Terminals

In our opinion, AMD has done a good job over the past year. Pinnacle Ridge processors are noticeably faster. The increase in clock frequencies ensured the transition to a new 12-nanometer process technology. The performance boost is also enhanced by the agility of the CPU through Precision Boost 2 and XFR2 technologies. However, the older models in the series — Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600X — must be equipped with an efficient cooling system.

Does it make sense to build a PC based on the Ryzen 7 2700X? Definitely, there is! The processor performs well in tasks such as graphics and video processing, content transcoding and data encryption. At the same time, we clearly showed that efficient cooling and a fast set of RAM are more necessary for this processor than overclocking. Kingston modules will look the best in such assemblies.

The Ryzen 7 2700X is also suitable for building a gaming PC, although the Core i7-8700K option looks somewhat preferable. It turns out that if you not only play on your PC, but also create content, then the build with Pinnacle Ridge will look quite balanced.

For more information about Kingston and HyperX products, please visit the official website of the company.

AMD Ryzen 7 2700 & Ryzen 5 2600 Review

Pros

• Huge Value
• Huge multi-threaded performance
• overclockable

Cons

• Slower single core performance than Intel
• Bad acceleration

Key features

• 12 nm manufacturing process
• 65W TDP
• Precision Boost Technology 2
• XFR2 Technology
• Unlocked multiplier
• Eight or six performance cores

What is AMD Ryzen 2700 and 2600?

Ryzen 2700 and 2600 are two slightly slower octa-core and six-core counterparts of the AMD Ryzen 2700X and 2600X. Their lower clock speeds match lower prices, but unlike lower-end Intel processors, they still keep an unlocked multiplier for easy overclocking. Thus, they may be the best option for those looking to overclock.

In particular, the 2600 might be the perfect choice for mid-range gaming. It costs just £166 but offers six cores capable of handling 12 threads simultaneously and a top clock speed of 3.9GHz.

Otherwise, these two chips offer the same core features as their X brothers. These include a new 12nm manufacturing process, Precision Boost 2, and XFR2. Read on to see if they keep their promise.

AMD Ryzen 2700 & 2600 Features

Basically, the only thing that separates the 2700X from the 2700 and the 2600X from the 2600 is clock speed, so let’s get into the numbers.

	AMD Ryzen 7 2700X	AMD Ryzen 7 2700	AMD Ryzen 5 2600X	AMD Ryzen 5 2600	Intel Core i7-8700K	Intel Core i5-8600K	Intel Core i5-8400	Intel Core i3-8350K
Cores / Threads	8/16	8/16	6/12	6/12	6/12	6/6	6/6	4/4
Base clock	3. 7GHz	3.2GHz	3.6 GHz	3.4GHz	3.7GHz	3.6 GHz	2.8GHz	4.0 GHz
Increase clock speed	4.3GHz	4.1GHz	4.2GHz	3.9GHz	4.7GHz	4.3GHz	4.0 GHz	4.0 GHz
L3 cache	20MB	20MB	19MB	19MB	12MB	9MB	9MB	6MB
TDP	105W	65W	65W	65W	95W	95W	65W	91W
Production process	12 nm	12 nm	12 nm	12 nm	14nm	14nm	14nm	14nm
Price	£350	£260	£200	£170	£350	£230	£170	£155

Starting with the 2700, its maximum clock speed of 4. 1 GHz is within striking distance of the 2700X and is a marked improvement over last year’s 1700X and 1700. As a result, it should be able to handle the 2700X in single-core workloads.

However, its base clock is relatively low at just 3.2GHz, compared to 3.7GHz for the 2700X. This was also the case with the older 1700X and 1700, and it especially hampered those chips when more than one core was under load; The chip dropped substantially to this base clock speed.

For the 2700 to be a viable option, it will need to better support clock speeds in multi-core workloads.

The benefit of these lower clock speeds is that the 2700 has a rated power consumption of only 65W TDP. This compares to 105W for the 2700X.

As for the 2600, it peaks at 3.9 GHz, which is a little further from the 2600X’s 4.25 GHz. This means it will be a bit difficult to keep up if not overclocked. However, it has a base clock of 3.4GHz, which means it will perform slightly better than the higher-clocked 2700 when multiple cores are under load.

Moreover, compared with 1600 last year, it received a good boost. Its base clock is 200MHz higher while its boost clock is 300MHz higher.

Other than the clock speed, the other main difference between these two chips and the X chips is the included cooler. For its first-generation Ryzen processors, AMD has not bundled a cooler with top-tier processors. This made its low-end products even more beneficial for those who didn’t already have a compatible cooler.

However, this time around, the 2700X comes with the excellent Wraith Prism cooler, which makes the price significantly higher, especially when compared to the Intel 8700K and 8600K, which don’t include a cooler.

From the 2700 AMD dropped to the less attractive and less functional Wraith Spire LED cooler. It uses a milled aluminum heatsink rather than the stacked sheet metal construction of a ghost prism, and does not include heatpipes. In general, it is much less able to dissipate heat.

Meanwhile, the 2600 falls even further to the Wraith Stealth, which has a heatsink that’s half the size of the Wraith Spire and doesn’t even include the copper base.

Both coolers will support processors quite satisfactorily in the default configuration, but overclocking will be limited to such base coolers.

Everyone says that because they cost, these processors will be noticeably slower than their X counterparts. However, if you already have a quality cooler that will be compatible with these CPUs and you’re ready to overclock, there’s still potential here.

Meanwhile, Intel’s main competition for the 2700 is not a direct competitor per se, as it is only a six-core part that lacks HyperThreading and can only process six threads at a time. However, the 8600K has a base clock of 3.6GHz and a boost clock of 4.3GHz, giving it a clear edge in this regard.

Thus, although they have the same price, they almost satisfy different needs. The 2700 will be the choice for those who value multi-core workloads, while the 8600K will be for those who just want speed like gamers.

For the 2600, the competition is a bit more direct. The Core i7-8400 is Intel’s closest competitor. This is a six-core processor that does not have HyperThreading, and has relatively modest clock speeds of 2.8GHz and 4.0GHz Turbo. It also has a locked multiplier, so overclocking is much more limited.

Then there’s the 8350K, which is just a 4GHz quad-core processor (it doesn’t have a boost clock), but can be overclocked. Such a high overall clock speed and overclocking make it potentially the best choice at this price point for gamers.

For more information on the basic improvements made with AMD’s second generation Ryzen processors, see our 2700X and 2600X review.

The short version is that AMD increased clock speeds without increasing power consumption by switching to a 12nm manufacturing process. You’ll also get the improved Precision Boost 2 and XFR2 automatic overclocking features.

Also improved memory latency and compatibility. These chips are officially compatible with DDR4 at 2993MHz (faster RAM should work but is not officially supported), and memory latency has been reduced, making the processors slightly less dependent on fast RAM.

AMD Ryzen 2700 & 2600 Performance

AMD chips were loaded into an Asus Strix X470-F Gaming motherboard equipped with a Zotac Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti graphics card, Corsair Vengeance RGB 3000MHz RAM (CMR16GX4M2C3000C15) and Samsung 860 Evo SSD . For comparison, we tested the Intel Core i7-8600K, Core i5-8400, and Core i3-8350K loaded on an Asus Z370 motherboard.

We started testing with the very reliable Cinebench R15, which gives a very stable CPU speed score. It provides both single-core and multi-core test.

Looking at the results of the single-core test and the clock speed advantage of Intel processors, there are all three competing chips.

However, this is a complete reversal of roles when it comes to a multi-threaded test. Here, AMD’s advantage in core count means that its chips draw huge benefits.

We then ran the rendering test in POV-Ray, which is another very robust test for both single-core and multi-core workloads.

In the single-core test, we again see a slight advantage in single-core performance for Intel, and then a big turnaround for the multi-core test.

gambling

When it comes to gaming, clock speed is still king. We mostly see results that reflect Intel’s overall single-core speed advantage.

However, in particular, this advantage is only significant at lower resolutions, where the graphics card is not a performance bottleneck. For example, in the 1440p test with Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, the difference is less than 2.6 fps across all five processors.

Even at 1080p this only increases to 22.5 fps. It shouldn’t be noticed, but given that all processors delivered over 100fps, those dropped frames per second feel much less poignant than if the overall average were much lower.

This is a similar story in Rise of the Tomb Raider with very little difference in performance at higher resolutions. However, there are wilder variations at lower resolutions, so much so that the results were a bit anomalous — the 8350K shouldn’t be faster than the 8600K, but there’s enough template to get the general idea: if gaming is your priority, then any of the tested here Intel processors would be a better choice than 2700 or 2600.

Overclockable

One of the key things AMD is aiming to show in their latest processors is that they are all unlocked and therefore easy to overclock. However, this is actually a very limited benefit.

In our tests, we struggled to get the 2700 or 2600 to run all cores at the same frequency as a single core processor, meaning single core performance and hence gaming performance did not improve.

Now there are reports of these chips hilariously overclocking to over 5 GHz in extreme situations, but at reasonable voltages and temperatures they just don’t deliver goods.

In fact, we’ve almost gone as far as to say that you really shouldn’t think of overclocking these chips for granted, but rather overclocking potential as a little extra potential that you can play with. .

On the contrary, if you buy any of the Intel 8700K, 8600K or 8350K processors, then you are almost guaranteed that they will run at 4.8 GHz without any additional voltage if you have a decent cooler. For the 8700K it’s only a small upgrade, but for the 8600K and 8350K it’s a significant performance boost, making them potential bargains.

Why buy an AMD Ryzen 2700 or 2600?

Both are value processors ideal for high-load workstations where heavy multitasking or multi-threaded workloads are the norm. They absolutely erase the competition from Intel for such tasks. They’re also perfect for everything else, including gaming.

That said, there’s no getting around the fact that AMD simply can’t keep up with Intel on clock speeds, so when it comes to single-core tasks, including gaming, Intel’s competing offerings will prove to be the better choice.

AMD should have countered this basic fact by offering easy overclocking, but these chips don’t stretch enough to fill that gap.