AMD Ryzen 5 1400 3.2 GHz

[qubit]

Right because the 2500K beats the 8350 in BF1, Deus Ex, Far Cry, and broken gamesworks Assassin's Creed right? oh wait:

http://i.imgur.com/oYLpybY.jpg

Hmmm that's weird let's look at what the low res test from 4 years ago said:

http://cdn.overclock.net/7/7f/500x1000px-LL-7f57cf13_51141.png


WOW. What an excellent test of future performance. Good lord do you even fact check anything you say? This is sad.

Look, it's really simple: the review wants to test the framerate performance of the CPUs right now, as in today. Therefore bottlenecking the thing with the GPU at high resolution is idiotic. All that happens then is that the graphs all start to look the same length as the various CPUs on test perform faster than the GPU. Therefore, you now do not know how fast the CPU can actually go. All you can say is that it goes fast enough to shift the bottleneck to the graphics card under those conditions. This is so mind numbingly obvious that I can't believe I actually have to explain it to someone who allegedly has a technical understanding. And you're not the only one on TPU either. Seriously.

Now, when the true framerate performance is known, what one does with that information is another matter.

The comparisons of the 8350 catching up to the 2500K in that stupid video are frankly irrelevent for justifying your point, as it's not the same thing. It's an interesting find for sure, but not the same thing. I'll hazard that the reasons for it are possibly due to better drivers and perhaps Windows and game patches.

 

[Captain_Tom]

The comparisons of the 8350 catching up to the 2500K in that stupid video are frankly irrelevent for justifying your point, as it's not the same thing. It's an interesting find for sure, but not the same thing. I'll hazard that the reasons for it are possibly due to better drivers and perhaps Windows and game patches.

"An interesting find". It's not just interesting, it is the entire bloody point! When one benchmarks CPU's, they are entirely benchmarking to see what the future will bring.

If all you care about is today's performance, then buy a f***ing pentium genius:

 

[Fluffmeister]

Pentium G4560 FTW, still looking for a decent CPU upgrade... hoohum.

 

[Final_Fighter]

@W1zzard, Something that i would like to see tested is visual smoothness. What i mean is actually running a comparable intel and amd system side by side and running some benchmarks while watching to see witch one runs threw the benchmark smoother. its been noted that many people including myself have seen for example an i5-7600 get higher frame rates but just does not look as smooth as say the ryzen 5 1600x. both systems will report a constant 60 fps but from my own experience the Ryzen platform performs smoother. this might also explain why it seems that the Ryzen system is not getting overall higher fps because the its taking care of business differently that results in the more smoother gameplay.

It may just be me but others have noticed this too. If this is within your power i would greatly appreciate seeing the results.

Edit: i should note that both the intel and ryzen are completely playable. its not like the intel is less playable, its just something you have to be around a lot to notice is all im saying, so i would like to see a test.

 

[meirb111]

Imo the R5 1400 should cost $139, and the R3 line-up should fill out the $69 - $119 space.


As for what they would say of Intel: I didn't even look at the score, but I am sure the i3 would get a good store for winning the useless 720p moron test.

your price range is very close to what it should be,this is the reason why intel will not lose much market share simply because the current prices of amd are not tempting for r3 and 8 threaded r5.

 

[AndreiD]

@W1zzard, Something that i would like to see tested is visual smoothness. What i mean is actually running a comparable intel and amd system side by side and running some benchmarks while watching to see witch one runs threw the benchmark smoother. its been noted that many people including myself have seen for example an i5-7600 get higher frame rates but just does not look as smooth as say the ryzen 5 1600x. both systems will report a constant 60 fps but from my own experience the Ryzen platform performs smoother. this might also explain why it seems that the Ryzen system is not getting overall higher fps because the its taking care of business differently that results in the more smoother gameplay.

It may just be me but others have noticed this too. If this is within your power i would greatly appreciate seeing the results.

Edit: i should note that both the intel and ryzen are completely playable. its not like the intel is less playable, its just something you have to be around a lot to notice is all im saying, so i would like to see a test.

That's what frame times are for, and from what I gather only TechReport seems to gather that data for their reviews. You can see how the R5s compare to I5s in that regard in their review here: http://techreport.com/review/31724/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-and-ryzen-5-1500x-cpus-reviewed-part-one
My personal experience has been that I haven't noticed any difference in 'smoothness' with my R7 1700 coming from an overclocked i7 2600K with higher speed DDR3.

 

[qubit]

"An interesting find". It's not just interesting, it is the entire bloody point! When one benchmarks CPU's, they are entirely benchmarking to see what the future will bring.

If all you care about is today's performance, then buy a f***ing pentium genius:

Oh dear, you've lost the argument so badly that you're now resorting to personal insults, lol. How can you not realize that the graph you've just posted beautifully demonstrating the graphics card bottleneck is making my point?

Ok, let's try just one more time with this analogy: you have two supercars with engine powers of about 500 horsepower. You want to find out their top speeds.

Now, instead of just putting that pedal to the metal as it were and let them go, which would give you their top speeds, you put a 100mph limiter in the engines (aka the graphics card at 4K). All you could do then is confirm that both cars can hit 100mph and not their actual top speeds of, say, 170mph and 200mph. Therefore you can't measure their top speeds this way. Can you see it now?

 

[Ruru]

I think you guys are overreacting a bit. There were groups of people crying for minimum FPS tests, they delivered. Then, some asked for all-out CPU only test, which in this case is the 720p test, and they delivered. I don't really see a problem with this review, I mean everything was tested.

To comment on the review, expected a tad bit more from this CPU but still, it could possibly be my next upgrade if something was to happen to the current setup.

Agree. Nobody forces us to check those 720p tests if we don't want to look them.

 

[Frick]

The real star - as in all game benchmarks - is the Pentium G4560. Imagine if it was unlocked.

 

[biffzinker]

Well that didn't take long, Dell is now offering a AIO 27" (1080P) with a Ryzen 5 1400, and Radeon RX 560.

Dell Inspiron 27 7775

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11455/dell-launches-inspiron-27-7775-aio-ryzen-7-rx-580

 

[dirtyferret]

There's nothing stopping you from grabbing a Ryzen today and waiting till games get written to uses all those cores

...besides reality

 

[Gungar]

- We have a problem, sir.
- What's wrong?
- Ryzen looking too good overall.
- Add 720p game test.
- Genius!
P.S. As retro gamer, can i ask add 480p test?

If you want to do CPU testing, you want low resolution so you can see the TRUE power of the cpu without being distorted by gpu performance. So yes 720p is a very good resolution to test CPUs.

1440p and 4k cpu tests are utterly stupid and doesn't reflect real cpu performance. And it's not even funny anymore to look at "tests" and you see every single cpu tested at around the same fps.

 

[64K]

"An interesting find". It's not just interesting, it is the entire bloody point! When one benchmarks CPU's, they are entirely benchmarking to see what the future will bring.

If all you care about is today's performance, then buy a f***ing pentium genius:

The REDengine probably isn't using more than 2 cores 4 threads. Also that GTX 1080 is maxxing out at 4K in that game.

 

[notb]

Well that didn't take long, Dell is now offering a AIO 27" (1080P) with a Ryzen 5 1400, and Radeon RX 560.

Dell Inspiron 27 7775

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11455/dell-launches-inspiron-27-7775-aio-ryzen-7-rx-580

Actually it took weeks. Finally an AIO with Ryzen 7. Where are the notebooks?!
But hold on... Ryzen 7 + RX580 in an AIO powered by 330W PSU. Based on the reviews we've seen, just these 2 parts are able to consume those 330W in heavy load and there has to be a ~100W margin for the LCD, memory and everything else.
Significantly limited clocks? Or maybe it's the RX580 mobile version?

 

[Basard]

mor

As much as I prefer AMD, I wouldn't recommend that upgrade. Having said that if you live beyond the wall, you need all the heat you can get for the long awaited winter, is coming this July.

P.S. bad joke, probably applies more to the newbie Freez(a?) from Syberia.

More of a replacement than an upgrade.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

Good lord when will you guys stop benching games at 720p?! This tests nothing, and only proves Ryzen is siting around 50% cpu usage in legacy games.

1) Do you not understand removing GPU bottlenecks to test CPU performance? That's the entire point of low res gaming tests - to test the cpu without having a GPU bottleneck.

Why do you think the i5s and i7s, or the ryzen 6 and ryzen 7s are all getting the same fps at higher resolutions? GPU bottleneck.

2) The games tested aren't legacy games. They're all fairly new. Crysis 1 would be a legacy game.

3) Ryzen sitting at 50% means it performs worse in games due to unoptimization. Kinda important for folks running lower end hardware with weaker GPUs.

 

[GoldenX]

Low cost PC, Pentium for gaming, R5 1400 for the rest.
I still think the G4560 is the only good Intel CPU right now, considering price and performance.

 

[bug]

1) Do you not understand removing GPU bottlenecks to test CPU performance? That's the entire point of low res gaming tests - to test the cpu without having a GPU bottleneck.

Why do you think the i5s and i7s, or the ryzen 6 and ryzen 7s are all getting the same fps at higher resolutions? GPU bottleneck.

2) The games tested aren't legacy games. They're all fairly new. Crysis 1 would be a legacy game.

3) Ryzen sitting at 50% means it performs worse in games due to unoptimization. Kinda important for folks running lower end hardware with weaker GPUs.

I don't think he doesn't understand as much as he seems to be allergic to anything that paints Ryzen in less than stellar colors.

I wonder when he says "software will evolve to put Ryzen to better use", whether "software will simply need to be rewritten with less conditionals to take better advantage of Netburst's pipeline" or "Windows 8 offers such an advanced GUI, all it takes is people getting used to it" ring any bells.

Ok, Ryzen is a good chip we all get that. But do you fanboys think you'll accomplish by clubbing anyone that highlights some of its shortcomings? Cause you can't seriously think it's a perfect chip.

 

[0x4452]

Great unbiased review.

Sadly many either die-hard fanboys or hired guns in the forums, always taking the same stance of accusing anybody who disagrees with the greatness of AMD products of being incompetent or a sucker for Intel/NVIDIA.

As for the Ryzen 1400, I think it should have been priced $20 lower.

 

[dwade]

Ya'll acting like those petty liberals losing the election. We already know AMD doesn't have the best performance with Ryzen. A 4c8t variant is expected to get slaughtered like this.

 

[creativeusername]

Ya'll acting like those petty liberals losing the election. We already know AMD doesn't have the best performance with Ryzen. A 4c8t variant is expected to get slaughtered like this.

Why are you bringing politics into the conversation?

 

[THU31]

The minimum framerates are just awful in so many games. I would love to buy a 6-core or 8-core Ryzen CPU, because the multithreaded value is just amazing, but unfortunately the gaming performance is still so far from Intel.

Sad to say it, but at the moment I am waiting for mainstream 6-core Intel CPUs.

 

[Melvis]

Get off your high horse, 720p is the best way to test CPU load and ensure the GPU isn't taking the load. If you knew anything about CPU tests you wouldn't have questioned it.

This is 2017 not 2005. You also need a good CPU to make use of a good GPU also and in these tests its a 1080.

 

[notb]

This is 2017 not 2005. You also need a good CPU to make use of a good GPU also and in these tests its a 1080.

How is this even relevant?
You concentrate way to much on the "it's 2017" and 1080p. This is in fact a synthetic benchmark for checking how a CPU performs in gaming applications. The impact of GPU is therefore minimized. Simple as that.

 

[bug]

This is 2017 not 2005. You also need a good CPU to make use of a good GPU also and in these tests its a 1080.

You're obviously an obvious intel shill. AMD users should hang on to their Phenoms, games don't need CPU power. /s