AMD Ryzen 5 1400 Linux Benchmarks: 27-Way CPU Comparison On Ubuntu

[r1348]

It's time for me to build a new AMD-only gaming PC. Now if only bitcoiners did not buy any and all Polaris cards in existence...

[Veerappan]

Including overclocked results too would be nice, considering that barely anyone runs a Ryzen at stock speed.

Umm... my R7 1700 is still stock speed. Note: Not everyone overclocks. Some just want to get work done without having to wonder why their system just locked up.

[Veerappan]

It's time for me to build a new AMD-only gaming PC. Now if only bitcoiners did not buy any and all Polaris cards in existence...

Agreed. I'm wanting to see what the landscape looks like after RX Vega is released, and what I can get for the right price. I had been planning on buying a RX 480/580 after the inevitable drop in MSRP, but the coin miners won't let that price adjustment ever hit retail, unless they abandon the RX 4xx/5xx series in favor of Vega.

[leipero]

Lower single thread performance are mainly because of lower frequency, in some tests it loses to Intel CPU's (AVX) in some wins over 7700k even, that doesn't mean much tho, it's still great CPU, and well worth upgrade from the old FX series (especially 4000-6000). That said, single threaded performance are just fine, i7-3700/4700 CPU's are still good CPU's, and for this price, R5 1400 doesn't have competition to be honest.

[torsionbar28]

Umm... my R7 1700 is still stock speed. Note: Not everyone overclocks. Some just want to get work done without having to wonder why their system just locked up.

x2, last time I overclocked a CPU was my Celeron 300A, from 300 Mhz to 466 Mhz, back in 1998. I have no interest in overclocking. System instability, higher power consumption, and shorter component life to get 2 fps better in some game? Uh.... no thanks.

[mitch074]

x2, last time I overclocked a CPU was my Celeron 300A, from 300 Mhz to 466 Mhz, back in 1998. I have no interest in overclocking. System instability, higher power consumption, and shorter component life to get 2 fps better in some game? Uh.... no thanks.

Been there done that to my Cely 300A too, except I've kept doing it on AMD CPUs for the last 15 years - they do have a tendency to overclock well. The worst I had from AMD was a Duron 950 (frequency wouldn't go up), but I suspect the motherboard was mainly at fault there. I also did overclocks on 1600 MHz Sempron64 (up to 2400MHz, rock stable that were used daily for 5-6 years), a X2 3800+ ([email protected], +20%) and a X4 620 ([email protected] on stock voltage). As I buy quite a lot of DVDs and BDs and systematically archive them with x264, it's quite frequent that I keep a PC running on all cores for hours on end - as such stability (and heat) is paramount.
I'm looking at the Ryzen 1700 with quite some interest, but I'll probably wait for Zen 2 as my current rig is still valid (Core i5 [email protected] GHz with 16 Gb of 2400MHz DDR3) and with the prices of RAM and GPU being what they are these days, building a new rig would be expensive.

[caligula]

Kernel compilation tests are coming in another article. They weren't included here due to some impact on SSD/I/O perf and different SSDs used.

WTF, shouldn't you run the kernel compilation in tmpfs? What's the point in using an SSD as a storage?

[Delgarde]

So, certain tasks like FLAC encoding... the encoder is single-threaded, favouring clock speed over parallelism. But presumably in real-world usage, people often have multiple audio streams to encode - so I'd be interested in seeing how things compare if you take advantage of that. Take 50 audio samples, and see which processor can complete all 50 in the shortest time... see whether the Intel speed advantage is countered by the ability of Ryzen to do more at once...

[duby229]

Been there done that to my Cely 300A too, except I've kept doing it on AMD CPUs for the last 15 years - they do have a tendency to overclock well. The worst I had from AMD was a Duron 950 (frequency wouldn't go up), but I suspect the motherboard was mainly at fault there. I also did overclocks on 1600 MHz Sempron64 (up to 2400MHz, rock stable that were used daily for 5-6 years), a X2 3800+ ([email protected], +20%) and a X4 620 ([email protected] on stock voltage). As I buy quite a lot of DVDs and BDs and systematically archive them with x264, it's quite frequent that I keep a PC running on all cores for hours on end - as such stability (and heat) is paramount.
I'm looking at the Ryzen 1700 with quite some interest, but I'll probably wait for Zen 2 as my current rig is still valid (Core i5 [email protected] GHz with 16 Gb of 2400MHz DDR3) and with the prices of RAM and GPU being what they are these days, building a new rig would be expensive.

Cool memories. I once had a Duron 600 that OCd to 1.1ghz, veery nearly a double overclock. Something like that would be impossible in todays world.

[mitch074]

Cool memories. I once had a Duron 600 that OCd to 1.1ghz, very nearly a double overclock. Something like that would be impossible in todays world.

To be fair, you could get the biggest overclocks on entry level CPUs - the chips used the same process as higher-range and thus had a much higher potential for overclocking (your Duron 600 was made using the same process mine used, and that process was engineered to top up up around 1.2 GHz - like the Cely, which targeted 500 MHz), but if you took the top range model at the end of life of a given process, headroom was much lower.