AMD Ryzen 5 Goes Head to Head With Intel i5 7700K

By   /   Aug 7, 2017
AMD Ryzen 5

Digital Foundry conducted a much-needed benchmark test to enlighten the viewers, about the performance difference between latest Intels and AMDs. They tested a Core i5-7600K against AMD RYZEN 5 1600 and 1600X.
Ryzen’s productivity credentials are insanely good.

Its multi threaded performance beats Intel on multiple benchmarks, such as Cinebench with 74% performance gain. The video encoding tests of H264 and HEVC, where Ryzen 1600 and 1600X performed 42% faster on average.

Digital Foundry tested this hardware paired with a GTX 1080, 32 GB DDR4 RAM. Games used were Rise of the Tomb Raider, Far Cry Primal, Crysis 3, The Witcher 3, Tom Clancy’s The Division. The results were pretty clear. Such as Ryzen 1600 / 1600X wins where in game scenes require CPU intensive processing like processing too many NPCs in one place or Too much happening at the same time in a scene.

However when the same CPUs were tested on a mid range card such as GTX 1060, the shoot up the advantage of extra frames mostly got dissipated in the games and the relevant difference became negligible even at Ryzen 1600 OCed to 3.8GHz and Intel 7600K OCed to a 4.8GHz.

Games like Crysis 3 love both CPU and GPU processing and RYZENs outperformed Intel here. Whereas Far Cry Primal is more of a single core bounded game and Intel’s 7600K @ 4.0 GHz gave double digits performance difference. The Witcher 3 has a good balance of efficient CPU and GPU utilization where CPU, with a higher number of cores, took the lead.

Modern day game designs utilize multiple cores over single ones and therefore AMDs RYZEN 5 here is clearly the winner. Especially in gaming instances with intense CPUs loads the 1600/1600X managed it smoothly. The bottom line is, extra threads can lead to a more future proof experience.

Although Intel’s upcoming CoffeeLake i5 and i7 processors with 6 cores and 6 threads are suspected to outperform Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7. Comparison with R5 1600, the 1600X requires an extra cost for the HSF and consume’s 30Watts more with a gaming performance increase of 5-6% on average. The difference is of 400MHz. Every other feature is the same but 1600X costs 30$ extra.

Featured Videos