The combination of the lower clocks and the smaller cache that results in lower performance figures is not reflected in the price difference, so the price-performance ratio is worse compared to the Ryzen 5 1600. The Ryzen 5 1400, however, which is currently around 50 Euros (~$56) less expensive, requires more attention from the user: Four cores and eight threads can still be considered "modern", but they are much less future-proof compared to six cores. This is getting less important though, so we do not think it is a big deal and it does not really affect our positive impression of the 1600, because the CPU can beat even the expensive i7 models from Intel in the majority of practical scenarios. PCMark 10 Storage Test is the most advanced and most accurate real-world consumer storage test ever made. The performance of the CPU, which currently retails for around 220 Euros (~$248), is sufficient for complex games as well as all other usage scenarios – in short: Even ambitious users just do not need a more powerful CPU right now.Īs with the more powerful Ryzen CPUs, however, we have to mention the lower single-core performance compared to (much more expensive) Intel CPUs. Our verdict for the Ryis pretty clear: AMD's hexa-core (also) manages to offer high performance at a very competitive price. However, the Core i7-7700K is already ~100 Euros (~$112) more expensive. Looking at the Intel competition, the 1600 sits between the Core i7-7700K and the i7-5960X. It is not surprising that the situation is more drastic in the multi-core test: The Ryis more than 60% faster than the entry-level chip. The end result is still the same: If you require high single-core performance, you will basically have to get an Intel CPU. We can also see the almost linear scaling between the clocks and the Cinebench result, so the cache does not have a big effect in this benchmark. The 1400 on the other hand does not really stand a chance against the in-house competition: The Ryis already 11% faster, the 1800X 22%.
It is interesting that the Ryis on par with the Ryin the single-core test – despite the 100 MHz difference for the Turbo.
#Ryzen 1600 pcmark 10 windows
I must know if this Ryzen processor will be work in Windows 11.Cinebench R15 determines the raw CPU performance, and the tool almost scales linear to the clocks when the architecture and the cache size are identical. I don't want waste my money for old hardware. I want to have answer from Microsoft official engineers.
#Ryzen 1600 pcmark 10 Pc
I also found on the internet on reddit that some guys wrote that they checked compatibility with Windows 11 by PC Health Check application from Microsoft and they told that their machines with RyAF was accepted like compatible with Windows 11. On above list I can't see RyAF but like we know this CPU is similar to Ryzen 5 2600.
I found official compatibility list on microsoft website but this does not answer for my question: AMD Ry(Clock speed at 100) with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Clock speed at 100) x1 will produce only 1.07 of. Graphic card and processor will work great together on 1440p resolution.
#Ryzen 1600 pcmark 10 windows 10
I will be not use Windows 10 so it is important for me. Please do not use this calculator primary as decision maker than as helping tool to understand performance correlations between different components. I must know if it will be offcialy supported by Microsoft? Why? Because I want to buy new computer and Windows 11 operating system. I would like to buy AMD RyAF but I must have 100% sure if it will be working in Windows 11 without any issues.
0 kommentar(er)
