Gadgetory

welcome back to another harbour our box video today we're going to be checking out the new horizon 5 1600 X and 1500 X CPUs to see how they compare with their closest Intel rivals today AMD is releasing a grand total of 4 new eyes and 5 models though for this video we will be just looking at two of them the 1600 X that we will be reviewing is accompanied by a second six core part the plain 1600 X which comes clocked roughly just 10% lower but given all rising sea views are unlocked they're essentially the same product so while the 1600 X is priced 250 us keep in mind you should be able to achieve pretty much the same performance out of the non ex model for two hundred and twenty dollars in either case the six core CPUs will be doing battle with the core i5 7600 K or possibly the 210 dollar 9k model but for this video we will be focusing on the 7600 K then we have the 1500 X which sounds quite similar especially given how the 1800 X and 1700 X are essentially the same CPU however the 1600 X and 1500 X are very different whereas the 1600 X is a 6 core part the 1500 X is actually a quad core it's worth noting though that SMT is still enabled so like a mainstream core i7 the 1500 X offers 4 cores with 8 threads I'm not going to go into too much detail here as we have already discussed the Rison 5 specifications in a previous video and I'll link up in the video description rather than go over all that again let's jump to the benchmark results please note that the 1600 X was tested with ddr4 3200 memory while these fifteen hundred's has been downgraded to 29:33 memory the memory controller on my 1500 X chip that I received wasn't good enough to handle 3200 memory so I was forced to lower the memory speed meanwhile the Intel lock chips were tested using ddr4 3200 memory while the locked model being the core i5 7500 was tested using ddr4 2400 AMD has provided a new test platform for our review the Isuzu Prime be 350 plus motherboard ddr4 3200 memory and a fresh install of Windows on a samsung 90 Evo SSD therefore I threw out all my previous testing results for both the AMD and Intel CPUs and started again from scratch let's see what we found here we see that memory bandwidth performance has improved using the most up-to-date bios on the Asuza be 350 motherboard the Rison cpus are now good for 35 gigabytes per second previously we were seeing around 32 gigabytes per second with ddr4 29:33 memory this means even with lower rated memory the Rison cpus are delivering at least 10% more bandwidth than the kb lake cpus this will hand the 1500 X a massive advantage over the core i5 7500 in memory intensive workloads as it has over 40% more bandwidth at its disposal using Cinebench r15 to measure single and multi-threaded performance we once again find extremely impressive figures from the rise and cpus the 1600 lays waste to the 7600 case multi-threaded score essentially doubling it that said though for single workloads the higher clock speed of the core i5 means the 1600 X is 11 percent slower here moving to the 1500 X and we find this just 15% slower than the 7700 K in the multi-threaded test and 21% file when looking at single threat of performance however when compared to the similarly priced 7500 the 1500 X was 45% fast from the multi-threaded test and 6 percent faster in the single threaded test so as we found when testing horizon 7 this points to Rison v offering vastly superior productivity performance when compared to competing Intel CPUs the 7-zip benchmark shows similar margins to what we just saw in Cinebench r15 the cool thing here however been that this is a real-world application and the gain T can be enjoyed by the average user there are two tests here one measures the performance when compressing files to an archive for example and then decompressing which basically measures the performance when extracting from an archive it's interesting to note that intel's compression and decompression performance is very similar however AMD cpu is a much faster at decompression than they are at compare though to be fair they are anything but slow it either in fact the 1600 X crushes even the 7700 K in both tests it's 15% faster in compressing and 44% faster and decompressing then when compared to the 7600 K it's over twice as fast when decompressing then we have the 1500 X which is over 60% faster than the 7500 in the decompression test this is obviously a massive difference and the vast majority of users will find themselves doing much more decompression work than they will compression so this is a big win for Aizen the Monte Carlo simulation is an old favourite and this heavy excel workload crushers weak CPUs it's also a great test for measuring multi-threaded performance as it uses all available threads we've seen it do a good job of utilizing a Jules Leon configuration with 40 threads I realize that most of you watching this video are more interested in gaming performance than heavy spreadsheet work but this is a good indicator of real-world performance in applications that utilize multiple threads here we see the 1600 X is 10% faster than the 7700 K and 62 percent faster than the 7600 okay meanwhile the 1500 X was 20% slower than the 77 okay but 18% faster than the 7600 K and 61% faster than the 7500 so when compared to similarly priced Intel CPUs Rison 5 delivered around 60% more performance in this application finally before jumping to the games let's check out Premiere Pro CC this is a different workload to my previous Premiere Pro tests it's still a 4k video export but we have reduced the length of the video to speed up the time that the test takes the 1600 X took two hundred and forty-one seconds to complete the workload making it 31 percent faster than the core i5 7600 K meanwhile the 1500 X match the 7600 K making it 22% faster than the 7500 so another excellent application result for AMD now for the games and this is where things tend to get a bit messy with Rison first up we have battlefield 1 and here both the 1800 X and 1600 x fall short of the 7600 case 153 FPS average however if we look at the minimum frame rate both are faster than the 70 600k in fact here the 1800 x match the 69 okay while the 1600 X was just 4% slower the 1500 X on the other hand loses out to the core i5 7,500 for both the minimum and average framerate still it is possible to overclock the 1500 x4 greater performance and we will look into this later in the review Deus Ex mankind divided has been tested using the dx11 API at 1080p with the higher quality preset here the 1600 X matches the performance of the 1800 X though unfortunately both are slower than the 72 Turner okay almost 10% slower in fact when comparing the minimum frame rate that said the 1500 X makes out quite a bit better beating the lock 7,500 by a slim margin the GX 11 hitman results are very competitive for the 1600 X and 1500 X which is great as the 1800 X didn't fare too well against the 7700 K or 6000 okay at least when looking at the average frame rate I should know that the minimum results were very good moving on the 1600 X roughly match the 7600 okay while the 1500 was a good bit faster than the 7500 so a great result for the 1500 X here the plan was to include mafia 3 to showcase how well Rosen can perform in some games previously this was a title where risin 7 processors did very well even beating the 7700 K under certain conditions however this retest shows the 1,800 X to be quite far behind the 7700 K something has changed with this title the 1,800 X has taken a big hit particularly to the minimum frame rate and the same is also true for the 6900 K on the other hand though the 7700 K has gained quite a few extra frames so it seems some optimization must have been done to make this title less demanding on the CPU though this could be down to improvements made by invidious display driver at this point I'm just not sure I believe the game was patched last week but there was no mention of any performance changes the Nvidia driver has also been heavily updated since the previous testing was conducted but improvements were mostly made to DirectX 12 performance so I was expecting the 1600 X to easily beat the 7600 K here and for the 1500 X to demolish the 7500 rather the performance was very competitive amongst these processors and again something must have changed here moving to ashes of the singularity we see that the 1800 X is able to close in on the 7700 K for the normal batch test that said it does flip away in the heavy batch test moving to the new horizon five models and we see the 1600 X looking very competitive alongside the 7600 K meanwhile the 1500 X has no trouble dispatching the locked core i5 7500 providing almost 10 percent more performance in the normal batch test so another strong result for AMD is new affordable quad core cpu I know there are a few viewers who will write me over the coals if I don't include any AMD GPU testing I'm sure you guys want to see our X 480 crossfire testing but right now I can't do that still the r9 295x2 should deliver similar results that being said I instantly wish I never bothered testing with ashes of the singularity and a few other titles such as Davis X mankind divided delivered very disappointing results I want to show you the ashes testing the debut sects findings were even worse for the rise on CPUs oddly the core i5 7500 was quite a bit faster with the r9 290 5 while the 1500 X was quite a bit slower anyway I promise I'll revisit the AMD GPU testing in extreme depth once vaguer arrives when it came time to overclock we found that our 1600 X sample was good for 4.1 gigahertz while the 1500 X sample hit the wall at 3.9 5 gigahertz testing with premier pros or the 1600 X boosts performance by 9 percent once overclocked making it slightly faster than the stock core i7 77 ok and not much slower than the stock 1800 X the 1500 X performance on the other hand was improved by just 4% and this was a disappointing result mostly because overclocking the 7600 K led to an 18% improvement taking just 269 seconds to complete the workload that said the 7600 K is a more expensive CPU and requires a third party cooler as well when compared to the similarly priced Core i5 7500 the overclocked 1,500 X was 28% faster so that is another strong result for AMD the overclocked 1600 X squeezed out a few more frames in battle to the one though the result wasn't worth getting excited over the 1500 X on the other hand was a or more impressive here and the overclock did allow it to just outpace the core i5 7500 here the 1600 x-games 6% more performance and ashes of the singularity once overclocked allowing it to beat the overclock to 7500 K at least when comparing the average framerate meanwhile the 1500 X is now 14 percent faster than 7500 hitting 73 FPS on average so again a good result for the 1500 X looking at the power consumption figures when running the Cinebench r15 multi-threaded test I have to say the rise in cpus don't look particularly fuel-efficient the 1600 X push total system consumption 64 percent higher than that of the core i5 7600 K however here we need a bit more context remember the 1600 X was almost 100 percent faster in this test so increasing total system consumption by just 64 percent to deliver twice the performance is actually very impressive the 1500 X wasn't quite as good as its configuration consumes 66% more power while it was only 45% faster still not a bad result though the 1500 X does look quite inefficient in this test when compared to 7700 K here we have the maximum power consumption figures for the Excel tests as well as the system idle figures as you can see the idle results are all much the same hovering around 60 to 70 watts again the power consumption figures on their own are a bit misleading here the 1600 X can be seen pushing system consumption 34% higher than that of the 7600 K configuration and that looks pretty bad you'd complete the test 62 percent faster so while it consumed more power it completed the test much faster actually making it the more efficient processor here the same is true for the 1500 X it consumed 33% more power than the 7500 while delivering 61% more performance as is often the case power efficiency goes right out the window once you start overclocking and increasing voltages if you carry around efficiency then overclocking rise and fire processors might not be a desirable option the performance gains were quite slim and yet we see the 1600 X increased total system consumption by a staggering 49% hard to believe but it's true the 1500 X increased consumption by a more reasonable 30 percent at best we only saw about half that margin in performance games by the way this power-hungry overclocking stuff isn't just an issue on AMD side the 7600 case sucked down 42% more power once overclocked but we only saw performance gains of up to 20% now for the operating temperatures using the stock AMD coolers actually I should note that the risin 5 overclocking was done using the race spire for the 1500 X and the Wraith max for the 1600 X but I will talk more about CPU coolers more towards the end of the video out of the box the 1500 X are 35 degrees and peaked at 68 degrees when using the Wraith spire overclocked to 3.9 5 gigahertz those temperatures did shoot up quite a bit the idle was now at 42 degrees but it was a load temp of 88 degrees which was getting a bit roasty that said the heatsink wasn't uncomfortable touch and while Oliver fan wasn't screaming loud the 1600 X pimp with the Wraith max addled at 36 degrees and maxed out at 61 degrees at the stock frequencies that's that when overclocking it did hit 90 degrees under load so that's getting a bit too hot in my opinion though keep in mind I'm using a power bug type program to stress the CPU so in gaming you won't see temperatures get nearly as high as these for the most part keep in mind though while the 1600 does come with the Wraith spire the 1600 X that we have for testing here doesn't come with a cooler at all for this reason I strongly suggest buying the cheaper 1600 over the 1600 X of course if you are going to seriously overclock either 6 core model you're probably better off investing in a large tower style cooler or an all-in-one liquid cooler these are of course mandatory items for the core i5 7600 K okay so now to make sense of the data and try and work out which CPU it is you guys should buy in my opinion priced at $250 us the 1600 X is an exceptionally good buy and a fantastic alternative to Intel's Core i5 7600 K the problem with the 7600 K is that for the same price you do only get four cores granted they are exceptionally good cause that can be pushed quite high through overclocking and in most games they are very efficient but it is still just a quad core as good as the 7600 K's gaming performance is the 6 300x still offered more consistent performance in games such as battlefield 1 and of course he although the averages were lower we were still pushing over 120 FPS at all times it also made out better in ashes of the singularity escalation and provided similar performance in a hitman even in games such as Mafia 3 and Deus Ex mankind divided where the 1600 x-trail to 7600 K the margin wasn't exactly significant so out of the box gaming performance right now is very similar what isn't similar is the productivity performance it really doesn't matter what the application is there will be hundreds that mimic what we saw in 7-zip and Excel for example for content creation the 1600 X is a beast at the price point roughly matching the 7700 K even if we take overclocking performance into account the 7600 K can't live with the 1600 X when it comes to productivity likewise once more games start to utilize horizon as well as these applications are the 7600 K is going to be left well behind for me rosen v also feels much more like an enthusiast grade product thanks to the unlocked clock multiplier overclocking support on not just the flagship chipset but also the Affordable B 350 and of course that impressive box cooler for the 1600 X which offers quite a bit of overclocking Headroom on the contrary the 7600 K requires a reasonably expensive flagship Zed Series chipset if you plan to overclock and don't forget there's no box cooler at all that's right you're paying more for an unlocked a model and Intel does you the favor by keeping the medal so right away you can tack on around another 20 to 30 dollars us on to the price tag for a basic air cooler there's also around a $20 premium for the motherboard as well if we combine the CPU price entry-level motherboard supporting overclocking and the cooler we find the 1600 X actually ends up costing 8 percent less than the 7600 K combo and not the four percent more you'd pay for just the CPUs of course if you opt for the vanilla 1600 like I suggest then you're saving a little over 15% on the core components that's pretty insane for a 12 thread setup opposed to a quad core if you thought the 60 100x seemed like a pretty obvious choice then sit down the 1500 X is no brainer you might think quad cores in 2017 are old news and well they kind of are however with its SMT support the four core eight thread 1500 X does very well for itself and at just 190 us it's exceptional value the alternates around the same money or the core i5 7400 or the 7500 which we tested and as you just saw the 1500 X had no trouble dispatching Intel's budget quad core for gaming they were quite evenly match for the most part though of course at no additional cost the 1500 X can be overclocked while it's impossible to squeeze any more performance out of the locked Intel chip again when it came to productivity workloads the 1500 X was in a different league as I said when discussing the 1600 X the 1500 X really is a chip that will be appreciated by enthusiasts as it can be overclocked and can take advantage of faster memory something else I should also quickly note is that gaming performance will also be considerably more competitive with a mid-range to high-end graphics card something like the rx 480 or gtx 1060 up to say the gtx 1070 the upshot being that in cpu-bound games rise and will still have an advantage thanks to its additional resources and therefore in those situations we'll pull ahead of the 7600 k overall I think I am more impressed with the risin 5 Series than I was a month earlier with Rison 7 for the simple fact that there is less competition at these price points Intel has done a pretty poor job of looking after enthusiasts particularly those on a budget and this is where these new Rison 5 chips really hit hard this makes me think how incredible the Rison 3 range is going to be in terms of value you might stop at 130 to 150 dollar u.s. quad core that lacks SMT support but remember the upgrade party is very rich the a m4 motherboard that you purchased today should still be able to support AMD processors all the way to 2020 at least that's the plan so the option to move from an affordable quad core that you buy today to something much more substantial or at least capable in a few years time should be possible and this is the reason why I'm so keen on the 1500 X and that brings me to the end of my released day rise and 5 coverage hope you guys enjoyed it and remember if you want to get your hands on an incredibly cool custom-built Rison 7 game see then be sure to enter our competition I'll throw the link in the video description below there's also more isin 5 coverage to come on their channel so this will not be the end of it I now have the 1600 and 1400 on hand so expect to see some testing done on them soon I'm a host Eve catch again next time