AMD Ryzen 5 1600X Overclocked Benchmark Results At 4.1GHz

Jump To:

Memory Bandwidth Benchmarks

SiSoftware Sandra 2016 SP3 Memory Bandwidth: link

SiSoftware Sandra 2016 is a utility, which includes remote analysis, benchmarking and diagnostic features for PCs, servers, mobile devices and networks. This test has been popular for CPU and memory benchmarks for well over a decade and it is one of the easiest benchmarks out there to run.

Memory Bandwidth Results Summary: Memory performance on Ryzen 5 is very similar to that of Ryzen 7 processors, so nothing new or shocking to note here! Since our overclock didn’t change the memory clock frequency we didn’t expect to see any performance gains here.

Print
Jump To:
  • Reylegh

    Did you reach 4.1GHz on 1.38V? How…
    I have to set it at 1.395 to hold 4.05GHz
    And even at 1.4125 I was not able to hold 4.1GHz…it crashed after 2-3 second from when I started the stress test…and that not due to temperature (71 degree when the system crashed).

    • Nathan Kirsch

      Every processor is slightly different when it comes to overclocking as are the actual voltages on each particular model board!

      • Reylegh

        But does this mean I need to add more voltage to try 4.1, or that my CPU can’t do 4.1 at all?

  • christopher evensen

    Yikes. So as a pure gamer, am I reading this correctly that my 6 year old 2600k @ 4.5 Ghz beats this chip? I’ve been wanting to go back to AMD but this just doesn’t so it for me.

    • Cody T

      Yes. If you were running on a non-k like I was, however, it’d be a monumental boost. Maybe this bit is placebo but it feels like everything is running so much smoother after switching as well. 3200MHz ram is pretty good too, and for me the upgrade ‘included’ usb 3.0.

      6700k would be a better aim as a current-gen gamer looking to upgrade again in a couple years (if even then in all fairness). I’m investing in 6-core because from the looks of sales more games are going to support it at least after two years, possibly/probably before. Stock air will have you at pretty much the same frequency you’re at now, but compare the two performance-wise. Ultimately though if it ain’t breaking, don’t fix it.

  • Lubuis L

    Hey this is my local Microcenter too! I go there a lot. This is my favorite store and the people are really nice there. Good review also

  • Harshal

    :-/ I’ve a ryzen 1600x today I tried out Asus ai suit 3 and that shit
    Oc my cpu to 4.1ghz with 1.545 voltage :v it was rediculous
    Had to remove CMOS to normalize it

    • Buddydudeguy

      pro tip: software overclocking is not the correct way to do it. Big surprise it uses way to much Vcore. NOT.

      • Harshal

        Yeah learned that

      • Harshal

        Yep , figured that out

  • ronch

    It’s great to see Thief in the game benchmarks as I’m a huge Thief series fan and I’m actually playing Thief 4 these days on my FX-8350, which runs it well enough, BTW. I see that the 7700K still soundly beats the Ryzen chips, and given how I don’t expect them to optimize Thief for Ryzen anymore makes me want to consider Intel if I’m buying for gaming because it’s not like I really run those apps used in benchmarks that show Ryzen 5 really killing Intel. Then again the 1600X still soundly beats the FX also so I guess it’s still a viable choice. I hope Zen 2.0 really improves Ryzen’s gaming numbers even on games that don’t get Ryzen-specific optimizations, like Thief.

    One thing missing here is the Core i5 7600K. Isn’t that the main competitor of the 1600X? Shouldn’t it be included?

  • JTR

    I hope you guys do realize there is a 20c offset on ryzen X series processors. Take 20c off your temperatures and you’ll see it never got close to 80c. Sad to see articles misleading people even after AMD announced the offset was for the xfr boost on the x series cpu’s to keep them running with a more aggressive fan profile to stay nice and cool.

  • Daniel

    Am I missing something? Only average FPS on game benchmarks? If you want to be a “Legit” review site you need 1% and .1% lows as average does not come close to telling the whole story. And Thief, a game from 2014?

    • renegadepestisrac

      Thief is a nice cpu bencher.
      Its even better with mantle.

      • AotS is a better cpu bencher with more modern api and coding practices.

        • JTR

          AotS is broken on ryzen cpus, they can barely match intel quadcores in that game. The games developers already came out and said they are working to fix the issues it has with ryzen.

  • Jason Kane

    Well I sure as hell wouldn’t buy a Ryzen if your heavily into emulation.

    That Dolphin benchmark result sucks..big time.

    Ryzen’s inability to overclock to Intel levels really does hurt it, even at stock speeds, the 7700K is nearly TWICE as fast as a Ryzen 1700 when it comes to Dolphin!

    • Nathan Kirsch

      Thanks for the feedback and glad including that benchmark in our CPU reviews has been beneficial!

      • Coach

        Yeah, I’d buy a Ryzen or Kaby-Lake cpu so I could emulate old Nintendo games…

    • Ken Hodson

      Deceivingly you cherry pick your numbers. It is obvious from the graph that Dolphin has no advantage with a CPU with over 4 cores. Maybe even 2? The other factor is that because Intel has a obvious per/core advantage in this benchmark it does not mean that “emulation” is no good on Ryzen. That is a nice fan-boi brush stroke your trying to paint there. Dolphin runs very well on CPU’s far less then Ryzen. And if you want us to believe you “emulation” comment you will need to back that up with something.

      • Mike Lukic

        Hey, I was going to say same thing, Dolphin runs great even on my FX 6350 @4.8 GHz. and is known for lousy single core performance.