Here's Some Early Benchmarks With The Ryzen 5 1400 CPU

Image: Kotaku

The official embargo on the Ryzen 5 series of CPUs isn't supposed to lift for another week. But that hasn't stopped one YouTuber from (somehow) getting his hands on a Ryzen 5 1400 CPU and publishing his results for the world to see.

The video, courtesy of Santiago Santiago, is a comparison using a HIS Radeon RX 480 and 8GB of Kingston DDR4 2133MHz RAM with three different CPUs: AMD's Ryzen 5 1400, at stock speeds and overclocked to 3.8Ghz; a Pentium G4560; and an i5-7400, a more mainstream-level CPU.

The G4560 isn't really the sort of tech you'd buy unless you were extremely strapped for cash, so it's the comparison between the Ryzen 1400 and the i5-7400 that's most interesting. For the most part, the i5-7400 has a solid lead on the Ryzen 1400 - but not so much on the overclocked model, and it even falls behind in some instances:

Even in some instances, like Fallout 4, the performance is still worth noting. Bethesda and AMD announced a "long-term strategic partnership" at this year's GDC, which at the very least in practical terms means the company will be working with AMD more to optimise their engines and games to run better on AMD hardware. (Another consequence could be that more Bethesda games will utilise the Vulkan API instead of DirectX or OpenGL going forward, but that's purely speculation on my part.)

You can view the full scenes in motion below: skip to 26 seconds if you want to see the settings being entered into BIOS, and 1:10 if you want to start viewing the first benchmarks. For reference, it's worth noting that an i5-7400 will set you back around $230 locally. Pricing for the Ryzen 5 series hasn't been announced in Australia, but I'll let you know as soon as I find out. We've also received a few Ryzen CPUs of our own to test, and I'll have a comparison between the 7 series and 5 series in the next couple of weeks.


Comments

    I think the term is "meh". I guess it will boil down to the pricing as to whether its a better purchase than the Intel chip.

      Actually pricing is what makes it very attractive. The i5 7400 used in this test is approx $25US more expensive than Ryzen's RRP.

      But unlike the 7400, the 1400 @$169US can be overclocked no issue. The equivalent overclocking part - i5 7600k - is $239US.

      Ryzen also scales better with ram - and let's face it he went super cheap on that.

      What's interesting isn't that - it's the 1600 launching with it. You will get slightly better performance for gaming, but with 2core/4threads extra at the $219US - you can both game and do more on it (like stream) or much faster encoding etc.

      It really isn't "meh", this is a huge shift in price/performance where there is now quite a few instances - intel isn't the best option.

    Everyone's speculating whether this chip will be in Scorpio.

      Well, that would continue the recent console trend of hardware mediocrity.

        For what it's worth, AMD had a little logo in their booth at CES this year advertising that they were in Project Scorpio. They wouldn't offer specifics - their contract with Microsoft prevents them from saying pretty much anything, really - but the fact that they were promoting it was intriguing.

          I would be very surprised if they weren't. With the rumours of a Scorpio spec reveal soon, I guess we'll find out.

          It's not that I think AMD isn't up to the task, it's that Microsoft and Sony both went for underpowered APUs this generation, presumably for cost reasons. Here's hoping Microsoft will choose a high-range processor for Scorpio.

    Alex, did you notice that the CPU usage on the amd processors is almost half that of intels in all cases?

    AMD CPU's running at 53-59% whereas Intel CPU's running between 89-99%

      I did. It'll be interesting to see what happens down the road as more developers become accustomed to working with AMD hardware; it's not like they had much of a reason to in years past. There's some motherboard updates due out in a week or so for the AGESA code which is expected to give Ryzen systems a fraction of a bump (with some added stability, more importantly).

      That's because the Intel is 4C/4T and the AMD is 4C/8T, ie. the AMD CPU has SMT but the Intel doesn't. Most games are lucky to use 4 cores at the moment so the extra virtual cores on the AMD aren't properly utilised.

      If so re the cpu usage, its damning for the intel chip.

      Its madness to have an expensive gpu & even RISK having it wait for the cpu.

      I "hear" gpuS max out also, but games seems to take that in their stride better than if its the cpu.

      Its especially destructive for real time gaming, as in, stutter.

      At above playable fps, its not max frames that counts, its min frames ps.

        very normal for a cpu to max out. its a good sign that the cpu is being fully utilized. the fact that the ryzen processors are not being utilised iss actually a bad sign as it means there is tons of unutilized headroom that will, if past practices by amd are to go by, will never be used to its fullest potential.

        thats why intel works so closeloly with developers...

    Can all AM4 motherboards overclock, so you can reach performance parity, or would you need to spend some extra money on that?

      there are 3 levels of AM4 boards, only the bottom one doesn't have OC'ing, and all CPUs are overclockable

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now