I think it's a good deal, if anyone finds better please link me :wink:
15 comments
EndlessWaves
15 Aug 17#1
The same speed as an i5-7400 but more expensive once you add the cost of a graphics card that the i5 doesn't need.
And if you're buying a card for games then the i5-7400 is faster anyway.
A decent niche deal for anyone who needs a card for something else or already has one but nowhere near as good value as the 1600 and above are.
NenoDealHunter to EndlessWaves
15 Aug 17#2
Get a B350 and overclock the CPU! However, get i5-7400 and you can't overclock it.
You won't buy this for pure gaming anyways. This is an entry level multi tasking CPU, unlike the Intel counterpart.
I5-7400 can be matched by Ryzen 3 1200 in games alone when overclocking.
Still a good deal however, have a nice day.
MRP to EndlessWaves
16 Aug 17#11
This is flat out bad information or deliberately false info. People buying this cpu or the i5's(let alone i3's) are likely to not own a 1080 ti which is where 'some' differences at 1080p or lower resolutions are.
If you have a 1060 for example then buy any cpu as it wont make a difference. Ryzen beats the 7700k(the fastest intel single core chip) in some games nowadays anyhow due to multithreading. In the future expect these differences to lessen or fade away as Ryzen is new.
One thing for sure the Ryzen with higher core counts will age much better than lesser core count cpu.
KITTYBOTS to MRP
17 Aug 17#15
Agreed,I have an Ivy Bridge Core i7 3770 and only with a GTX1080 at qHD did I notice some CPU bottlenecking - most of these reviews will test at 1080p using a GTX1080TI,which is a £700 card. Lots of forum enthusiasts don't understand this at all and higher end cards will also put more of a draw call load on a slower Intel or AMD CPU at lower resolution which is artificial. Many people still use Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge CPUs even to this very day for the same reason. You tend to be more CPU limited in most cases. Hence,saving even £20 to £30 on the CPU is better put towards a faster card.
michaeljb
15 Aug 17#3
Good price considering the prices elsewhere, but the 1400 only has 8mb cache like the ryzen 3s so I never really considered it good value, should of always been around this price imo. I think the 1200, 1600 and 1700 are best bang for Buck in the respective 3, 5, 7 ryzen families
vulcanproject to michaeljb
15 Aug 17#9
Agreed on the 1200, 1600 and 1700 assessment. The others like this aren't the best.
Intel's Coffee Lake looks exciting though and may force AMD to change the Ryzen lineup or pricing.
NenoDealHunter to vulcanproject
16 Aug 17#10
Or just get a new lineup and turn down prices a little. AMD's winning hard and I'm shocked.
vulcanproject to NenoDealHunter
16 Aug 17#13
Winning what? AMD just have budget processors with no IGP. They are only relevant for people who will buy discrete graphics cards i.e mostly gamers. Which isn't fantastic considering Ryzen isn't actually that good at gaming versus Intel's architectures anyway.
Believe it or not the vast majority of systems sold do not have discrete graphics, which is why all these Intel parts have not really gone down in price because of Ryzen and still sell by the bucket load to OEMs.
Coffee Lake will be here shortly and the low end quad i3 models will stomp everything up to the Ryzen 1600 series. Whereas the Coffee Lake i5 models will beat up the Ryzen 1600 models, leaving just the Ryzen 8 cores as high end competition.
AMD may have to lower prices even further of everything below the 1700, because a Ryzen refresh is a good year away
Nate1492
15 Aug 17#4
It's hard for this CPU to compare to the i5-7400 at the same price or the G4560 for value...
It doesn't really have a place.
Also, talking about OC'ing the 1200, you better include a nice CPU cooler (30 quid). Which then puts you into the next level of i5-7500, which blows the 1200 out of the water.
NenoDealHunter to Nate1492
15 Aug 17#6
You surely haven't seen anything about Ryzen my boi. Every single youtuber that did an overclock on 1200 that has used a stock cooler GOT easily 3.7GHz --- 4.0GHz WITH A STOCK COOLER. The temperatures are usually around 50-65 degrees (depends on the OC).
Lots of Youtubers have said that all Ryzen CPUs OC the same, so if you overclocked on one, you overclocked on every.
Personally, R5 1400 is a very good entry level CPU from this line up, and the only reason why I'm going to buy this when I build a new rig is because it can be found cheap like this and has 8 threads which is a beauty for my workload.
1600s 6 cores / 12 threads look tempting but I don't think it's worth the upgrade for me.
KITTYBOTS to NenoDealHunter
17 Aug 17#14
Dude you don't need to explain it to these people - deal is getting hot and they are angry for someone buying an AMD CPU due to E-PEEN. See how they are trying their best to stop people buying AMD and for them to get Intel at all costs.
When you have the Digital Foundry recommending the Ryzen 5 1600 over a Core i5 7600K its clear that many major reviewers seem to think Ryzen is a better bet:
"But with the CPUs available to buy right now, Ryzen 5 1600 is our choice as the best mainstream gaming CPU on the market. And that's a simply phenomenal achievement - since the debut of the Core i5 2500K back in 2011, Intel's i5 K chips have earned their place at the heart of millions of users' gaming PCs. The Ryzen alternative is faster where it needs to be, better suited to more modern game engines, and comes across overall as a kind of hybrid of i5 and four-core/six-core i7s depending on how its resources are deployed. This is AMD at its best: innovative, disruptive and bringing about radical change in a static market, with a simply superb alternative product."
If you read the article they used the stock cooler and overclocked it and the Core i5 7600K had a H110i GT which costs a £100.
Zoea
15 Aug 17#5
Nate, apparently the ryzen 1200 will overclock nicely to 3.8 at 50-55 degrees with the included free cooler, so you don't have to go aftermarket at all. Source: Pauls Hardware or Bitwit recently (forget which) or possibly Jayz2Cents
vulcanproject
15 Aug 17#7
Think I would rather take an i5 7400 and a decent but cheap board than the Ryzen 1400 and a slightly more expensive board to overclock it just to generally match the Intel. It's not really the best value CPU in the range
NenoDealHunter to vulcanproject
15 Aug 17#8
Cores
Intel 4/4 Ryzen 4/8
Cache
Intel 6MB Ryzen 8MB
This CPU is for entry level users that love multitasking.
EndlessWaves to NenoDealHunter
16 Aug 17#12
Engine Displacement:
Mondeo 2,000cc Elise 1,600cc
Horsepower:
Mondeo 150hp Elise 134hp
Apparently anyone after a performance car should opt for a Diesel Ford Mondeo, a Lotus Elise obviously can't compete.
It's as absurd as that to compare cache and core counts between different CPU designs. The only sensible comparison is the end result, you have to look at the lap times and application performance.
The future will be better tomorrow.
Let's look at Hardware.fr's recent re-testing of the FX-8350 against the 2500k. The FX-8350 is 133% of the speed of the 2500k in non-games, while in games it's gone from 81.1% to 86.4%
Any FX-8350 buyer who bought into the idea that games will run much more like non-games in the future, hasn't had their expectations fulfilled.
So no, it's not at all certain how different architectures will age relative to each other in the future. It's entirely possible that games will become more demanding in memory bandwidth or inter-core communication and Ryzen performance will decrease relative to Kaby Lake.
![Fresh Breakfast Meat Box (Using code) @ Campbells Meat [Haggis / Lorne Sausage / Bacon / Black Pudding & More]](/images/topics/208684_1.jpg)
![[Amazon. fr] AMD Ryzen 1400 4/8 3.6GHz £137](/images/topics/194560_1.jpg)
![[Xbox One] Q. u. b. e: Director's Cut on Deals with Gold](/images/topics/208716_1.jpg)
Opening post
15 comments
And if you're buying a card for games then the i5-7400 is faster anyway.
A decent niche deal for anyone who needs a card for something else or already has one but nowhere near as good value as the 1600 and above are.
However, get i5-7400 and you can't overclock it.
You won't buy this for pure gaming anyways. This is an entry level multi tasking CPU, unlike the Intel counterpart.
I5-7400 can be matched by Ryzen 3 1200 in games alone when overclocking.
Still a good deal however, have a nice day.
If you have a 1060 for example then buy any cpu as it wont make a difference. Ryzen beats the 7700k(the fastest intel single core chip) in some games nowadays anyhow due to multithreading. In the future expect these differences to lessen or fade away as Ryzen is new.
One thing for sure the Ryzen with higher core counts will age much better than lesser core count cpu.
I think the 1200, 1600 and 1700 are best bang for Buck in the respective 3, 5, 7 ryzen families
Intel's Coffee Lake looks exciting though and may force AMD to change the Ryzen lineup or pricing.
Believe it or not the vast majority of systems sold do not have discrete graphics, which is why all these Intel parts have not really gone down in price because of Ryzen and still sell by the bucket load to OEMs.
Coffee Lake will be here shortly and the low end quad i3 models will stomp everything up to the Ryzen 1600 series. Whereas the Coffee Lake i5 models will beat up the Ryzen 1600 models, leaving just the Ryzen 8 cores as high end competition.
AMD may have to lower prices even further of everything below the 1700, because a Ryzen refresh is a good year away
It doesn't really have a place.
Also, talking about OC'ing the 1200, you better include a nice CPU cooler (30 quid). Which then puts you into the next level of i5-7500, which blows the 1200 out of the water.
Every single youtuber that did an overclock on 1200 that has used a stock cooler GOT easily 3.7GHz --- 4.0GHz WITH A STOCK COOLER. The temperatures are usually around 50-65 degrees (depends on the OC).
Lots of Youtubers have said that all Ryzen CPUs OC the same, so if you overclocked on one, you overclocked on every.
Personally, R5 1400 is a very good entry level CPU from this line up, and the only reason why I'm going to buy this when I build a new rig is because it can be found cheap like this and has 8 threads which is a beauty for my workload.
1600s 6 cores / 12 threads look tempting but I don't think it's worth the upgrade for me.
When you have the Digital Foundry recommending the Ryzen 5 1600 over a Core i5 7600K its clear that many major reviewers seem to think Ryzen is a better bet:
eurogamer.net/art…iew
"But with the CPUs available to buy right now, Ryzen 5 1600 is our choice as the best mainstream gaming CPU on the market. And that's a simply phenomenal achievement - since the debut of the Core i5 2500K back in 2011, Intel's i5 K chips have earned their place at the heart of millions of users' gaming PCs. The Ryzen alternative is faster where it needs to be, better suited to more modern game engines, and comes across overall as a kind of hybrid of i5 and four-core/six-core i7s depending on how its resources are deployed. This is AMD at its best: innovative, disruptive and bringing about radical change in a static market, with a simply superb alternative product."
If you read the article they used the stock cooler and overclocked it and the Core i5 7600K had a H110i GT which costs a £100.
Intel 4/4
Ryzen 4/8
Cache
Intel 6MB
Ryzen 8MB
This CPU is for entry level users that love multitasking.
Mondeo 2,000cc
Elise 1,600cc
Horsepower:
Mondeo 150hp
Elise 134hp
Apparently anyone after a performance car should opt for a Diesel Ford Mondeo, a Lotus Elise obviously can't compete.
It's as absurd as that to compare cache and core counts between different CPU designs. The only sensible comparison is the end result, you have to look at the lap times and application performance.
The future will be better tomorrow.
Let's look at Hardware.fr's recent re-testing of the FX-8350 against the 2500k. The FX-8350 is 133% of the speed of the 2500k in non-games, while in games it's gone from 81.1% to 86.4%
hardware.fr/art…tml
hardware.fr/art…tml
Any FX-8350 buyer who bought into the idea that games will run much more like non-games in the future, hasn't had their expectations fulfilled.
So no, it's not at all certain how different architectures will age relative to each other in the future. It's entirely possible that games will become more demanding in memory bandwidth or inter-core communication and Ryzen performance will decrease relative to Kaby Lake.