AMD Ryzen 7 1700X evaluation: a great-value, Eight-core CPU, giving the $500 1800X troubles

Really although the $390 (£359) 1700X truly makes me marvel extra why AMD launched the 1800X within the first place. It appears to me all it has to supply over this extra wallet-friendly model is a 200MHz clockspeed bump that may be ironed out with a easy BIOS tweak.

There was virtually no want for them to launch the eight-core Ryzen chips with three only-very-slightly-different variations when traditionally AMD have launched new parts in pairs. AMD’s common observe for the graphics aspect of the enterprise has been to create a model new GPU after which create two merchandise from that one slice of silicon. They create one top-end with all of the beans after which one other barely cheaper, barely cut-down model. And it’s a tactic which has served them effectively. It’s additionally how they’re stacking the Ryzen 5 release too.

But then the straight 65W Ryzen 7 1700 has additionally received itself some spectacular CPU chops too, which makes selecting between that and this 1700X quite tricksy…

Hit the leap hyperlinks to leap to the part you want most.

AMD Ryzen 7 1700X specs

The 1700X has primarily the identical dual-CCX design as the opposite two octa-core Ryzen CPUs. It’s additionally utilising the identical 14nm manufacturing course of because the others and slots neatly into the identical AM4 motherboard platform, as all good AMD chips ought to any further. Right, AMD? Right? 

We’ve already lined the Zen architecture in our initial Ryzen 7 1800X review so if you need some additional particulars verify that out. But in the event you can’t actually be bothered, suffice to say AMD have labored some silicon wonders to create such reasonably priced eight-core processors.

The middle-child of the octa-core vary nonetheless comes with simultaneous multi-threading (SMT) enabled, so that you get eight full cores, splitting out into 16 logical cores for all that parallel computational grunt. You additionally nonetheless get the complete 20MB complement of aggregated L3 and L2 cache and the identical 20 lanes of PCIe three.zero throughput. Both this and the flagship Ryzen are additionally sporting 95W TDPs too. 

Where issues differ is de facto solely within the inventory clockspeed of the Ryzen 7 1700X. The 1800X runs at three.6GHz base and 4GHz turbo/enhance, whereas the 1700X is 200MHz behind at three.4GHz and three.8GHz respectively. 

Well, that and the worth…

AMD Ryzen 7 1700X benchmarks

 

 

AMD Ryzen 7 1700X efficiency

Once extra it’s the straight CPU efficiency that makes the Ryzen 7 1700X actually stand out, and most particularly with its eight-core multi-threaded chops. At inventory clocks it inevitably benchmarks behind the faster 1800X, however nonetheless effectively out forward of both the eight-core or six-core Intel chips we’ve examined as compared. That’s true in each the Cinebench rendering and X264 encoding exams.

That comparability is arguably extra necessary for this chip as a result of the Core i7 6800K is roughly the identical worth because the Ryzen 7 1700X, however in multi-threaded apps the additional two cores and 4 threads of the AMD chip give it a good efficiency lead.

Obviously the reminiscence bandwidth is off the Intel tempo, because of the AM4 platform’s wrestle at managing to fill its 4 DIMM slots with excessive pace reminiscence and the very fact it’s solely able to working in dual-channel mode versus the X99 setup’s quad-channel reminiscence assist.

Like its different Ryzen brethren it’s additionally a little bit flaky on the storage efficiency too. It’s presumably right down to the hyperlink between reminiscence pace, the Infinity Fabric and the PCIe bus pace, however the 4K random efficiency on our speedy Samsung 960 EVO NVMe drive is unfortunately missing compared to both the Intel X99 or Z270 platforms.

And then, after all, we come to gaming. Like the R7 1800X, although extra so due to the slower clockspeeds, the single-threaded efficiency of the 1700X is off the tempo of Intel Core structure, in all other than the laggardly 3GHz 5960X. Yet even that slow-coach manages to outperform the inventory Ryzen processor in virtually all our gaming exams because of the upper relative in-game efficiency of the Intel’s established Core design.

Against the similarly-priced 6800Okay the 1700X is slightly below 30% slower in our Civ VI and Total War benchmarks, 18% down on GTA V and 11% behind in our DX 12 Hitman and Vulkan Doom exams. The Tomb Raider and Wildlands exams although do present that generally CPU energy doesn’t quantity to a hill of beans to some recreation engines – they’re all in regards to the GPU and nothing else, so there may be efficiency parity throughout the board.

Some are suggesting that’s as a result of these accursed lazy builders have solely been optimising their code for Intel CPUs and never an unreleased AMD CPU structure. Others, AMD included, have claimed it’s right down to the Windows Scheduler failing to play properly with Ryzen’s new SMT implementation. That’s eminently doable, nevertheless it’s additionally doable that is how gaming on AMD’s first-gen Zen core goes to play out.

AMD are promising extra gaming performance fixes down the street, as soon as builders begin spending the time to optimise for his or her design, however that has to enter the ‘believe it when I see it’ drawer in my workplace desk. There’s an entire bunch of Bulldozer-based chips in there ready for his or her gaming efficiency boosts too.

Of course my benchmarks are designed to spotlight relative CPU efficiency in gaming, weighting accountability extra on the processor than the graphics card by testing at 1080p the place it shouldn’t be over-stressing the GPU. You can, clearly, disguise these efficiency variations by working video games at increased resolutions, the place the GPU turns into virtually solely chargeable for your body fee. But that’s kinda like whenever you disguise a lump of human excrement underneath your unbearable housemate’s butter, you recognize, the one who places their very own labels on every thing within the fridge. They don’t know something in regards to the shit underneath the floor till it’s too late. Only this time I would be knowingly hiding poo in my very own benchmarking butter.

But virtually extra fascinating than the Intel vs. AMD gaming debate is the relative efficiency of the Ryzen octa-core chips themselves. There is nearly nothing between the Ryzen 7 1700X and the 1800X, besides within the solitary Vulkan-based Doom benchmark. The slight drop in clockspeed has actually carried out nothing to distinguish the 2 CPUs.

It’s the identical story with the overclocking efficiency, regardless of the marginally increased most overclock we squeezed out of our 1800X pattern. The solely problem right here is that that is the place the cheaper 65W Ryzen 7 1700 begins to make its presence felt. Our straight 1700 couldn’t fairly stretch to 4GHz stably with primary overclocking, nevertheless it was nonetheless very shut in efficiency phrases to each the 1700X and the 1800X. I’m beginning to marvel what these XFR-based ‘X’ suffixes are actually value.

AMD Ryzen 7 1700X verdict

Before I began testing this chip I used to be half-expecting to name out the Ryzen 7 1700X because the undesirable center baby of AMD’s new octa-core vary, however the extra I give it some thought it’s the 1800X that begins to look primarily irrelevant.

The 1700X is a genuinely spectacular chip, with severe multi-threaded efficiency and a hefty worth delta between it and the flagship Ryzen processor. Its gaming efficiency continues to be behind the Intel competitors, however when it’s virtually the identical worth because the i7 6800Okay selecting between the 2 turns into quite a bit harder.

You actually are then purely buying and selling multi-threaded efficiency in opposition to gaming, however in the event you’re into each then all of the sudden the Ryzen begins to look far more tempting. I’ll wager the variety of avid gamers who take pleasure in a little bit gentle 3D rendering or encoding whereas they play Mass Effect Andromeda is fairly small, likewise the variety of pro-streamers who completely should use CPU-based encoding quite than both the Nvidia or AMD GPU streaming might be comparatively small too. But with the Ryzen chip you’ll have the ability to chew via no matter CPU-intensive duties you’re ready on a lot faster than the Intel and get again to gaming with out anything chasing system sources.

The Ryzen 7 1700X is a real contender even in case you are at the moment leaving a few of your GPU’s efficiency within the field utilizing a Ryzen processor. That in all probability makes it a tricky name for the devoted avid gamers on the market, who would nonetheless be higher off with a less expensive, eminently-overclockable, Okay-series i7 6700Okay.

The sticking level for everybody else although comes with the Ryzen 7 1700. With a easy wave of the overclocking wand you’ll be able to push the less expensive chip as much as virtually similar ranges of processing and gaming efficiency as both the 1800X or 1700X. If I had been out there for a brand new excessive core depend CPU I’d in all probability be wanting on the non-X chip as an alternative, however then I’m completely happy to threat working my silicon overclocked underneath water-cooling. But in the event you’re not, the Ryzen 7 1700X is a superb little chip for content material creators who prefer to recreation on the aspect.