OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

AMD Ryzen 5 1400 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£25PassMark multi-core score:7737N. of physical cores:4CPU boost clock speed:3.4 GHzCPU socket:AM4TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

AMD Ryzen 5 1400 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 28 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen 5 1400
5.9/10

Overall score

Score
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components

40%

4.2

Technical score

25%

7.6

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

4.2

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 81% of processors
7.1

Value for money

Value for money
7.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
Score components

70%

5.9

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 66%
4.2

Technical score

Technical score
4.2/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
Score components

60%

3.1

Performance

18%

4.5

Architecture

10%

6.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.1

Power & Thermal

4%

8.0

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

â–¼Worse than 79%
7.6

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 50% of models

80%

7.2

Average grade

20%

9.4

Popularity

Grades by review (28)
13 reviews: 6 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 15 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 50%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • amd-ryzen-5-1400
  • amd-ryzen-5-1400
  • amd-ryzen-5-1400
amd-ryzen-5-1400
amd-ryzen-5-1400
amd-ryzen-5-1400
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Ryzen 5 1400

Based on 10 · 18

Reviewers like its core count, cool running and overclocking headroom, but find gaming hit-and-miss and clock speeds low.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the AMD Ryzen 5 1400

Based on 188 owners sharing their experience in online comments

51%positive11%mixed38%negative

Owners praise affordable gaming and useful overclocking, while inconsistent frame rates and stutters remain recurring frustrations.

What owners dislike

  • Some owners get only 40 to 70 fps in titles such as Battlefield 1 or Overwatch, even at low settings.34
  • Owners report stutters and lag spikes, sometimes every minute or two, plus freezes in League of Legends; one said faster RAM helped partly.14
  • With GTX 1060 or better cards, owners see the CPU near full load while the graphics card runs only 40 to 65 percent.13
  • Owners report GTA V dropping to about 35 to 50 fps, especially while driving or in online sessions with many players.12
  • Some boards block BIOS overclocking, so owners use AMD Ryzen Master; reaching 4.0 GHz may need a bigger cooler than stock.11
  • Many owners find RAM stuck at 2400 to 2933 MHz, with some high-speed XMP kits not running at their rated speed.9
  • Some owners see the PC shut down during certain games, and a few report it failing to boot with particular RAM kits.5

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 5 1400

Technical score
Technical score
4.2/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
Score components:

60%

3.1

Performance

18%

4.5

Architecture

10%

6.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.1

Power & Thermal

4%

8.0

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

4.2
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
Score components:

70%

5.9

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.1
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
AM4
This processor uses the AM4 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 75.1% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Chipset
X470, B450, X370, B350, A320
This processor supports X470, B450, X370, B350, A320 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 67.4% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA instruction sets, which is broader support than 58% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
N. of physical cores
4
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 4 CPU cores, which is fewer than 52.8% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
CPU threads
8
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 8 CPU threads, which is more than 33.4% of processors and equal to 18.8% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
3.4 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 3.4 GHz which is lower than that of 84.6% of processors and equal to that of 2.8% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
4x 3.2 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 4x3.2 GHz which is lower than that of 57.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
7,737
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 7,737 in PassMark, which is lower than 59.9% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 32.9% of processors.
Foundry
GlobalFoundries 14 nm
This processor is built on the GlobalFoundries 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 51.6% of processors and equal to that of 4.2% of processors.
L3 cache
8 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 8 MB which is smaller than that of 50.7% of processors and equal to that of 11.5% of processors.
L2 cache
2 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 2 MB which is smaller than that of 52.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
L1 cache
384 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 384 KB which is larger than that of 44% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,667 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,667 MHz, which is lower than that of 55.4% of processors and equal to 1.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
?
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 65 W which is higher than that of 68% of processors and equal to that of 17% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 65 W which is higher than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 17.4% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

AMD Ryzen 5 1400 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 5 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • 13.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.6/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 50% of models

    80%

    7.2

    Average grade

    20%

    9.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (28)
    13 reviews: 6 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 15 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.6 vs 6.7
  • 13.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.6/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 50% of models

    80%

    7.2

    Average grade

    20%

    9.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (28)
    13 reviews: 6 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 15 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.6 vs 6.7
  • 10x cheaper
    AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is cheaper than the average processor (£25 vs £250).
    £25 vs £250
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (AM4 vs FP5).
    AM4 vs FP5
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (GlobalFoundries 14 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    GlobalFoundries 14 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • 5 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 22.7% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    3.4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 26.2% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,888 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    1,888 vs 2,558
  • 36.2% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (979 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    979 vs 1,535
  • 32.9% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (329 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    329 vs 490
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Summit Ridge vs Kaby Lake).
    Summit Ridge vs Kaby Lake
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 86.7% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (53 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    52.99 vs 398.015
  • 41.7% lower sentiment score
    4.2 vs 7.2
  • 2.2% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 5 1400 has worse value for money than the average processor (7.13 vs 7.3).
    7.13 vs 7.29
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Processor, Secure Boot, SME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Processor, Secure Boot, SME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 3 years older release date
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2017 vs 2020).
    April 2017
    2017 vs 2020
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 22.7% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    3.4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 26.2% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,888 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    1,888 vs 2,558
  • 36.2% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (979 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    979 vs 1,535
  • 32.9% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (329 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    329 vs 490
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • 86.7% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (53 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    52.99 vs 398.015
  • 39.9% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (3,132 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    3,132 vs 5,209
  • 45.2% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1,537 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,537 vs 2,804.5
  • 32.5% lower PassMark score
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (7,737 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    7,737 vs 11,469
  • 84.4% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (53 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    52.99 vs 340.075
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Summit Ridge vs Kaby Lake).
    Summit Ridge vs Kaby Lake
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 20.3% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (213 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    213 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 33.3% smaller L2 cache
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (2 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    2 MB vs 3 MB
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 16.7% lower memory speed
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (2,667 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    2,667 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 44.4% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0
tronger
≈ estimated
02/03/2026
Full build and gaming tests · 1080p low to medium settings
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is a solid budget foundation for light to mid gaming, with realistic settings expected.
4.0
Mike21Daisu
≈ estimated
10/08/2024
Hands-on gaming benchmarks · 2024 tests across many titles
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 gives mixed results across games, so it is no longer recommended for gaming in 2024.
8.0
Eight-Six
≈ estimated
15/05/2017
Build walkthrough · benchmarks and case notes
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 gives strong results in a low-cost build, though the case and LED lighting disappoint.
9.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
26/04/2017
Hands-on review · benchmarks, gaming and power tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is a sound choice that should stay useful for a good while.
6.0
Nicolas11x12 English
≈ estimated
20/04/2017
Hands-on benchmark test · gaming, rendering and CCX layout
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is decent for budget builds and rendering, but its quad-core CCX layout hurts gaming.
8.0
F7GOS
≈ estimated
15/04/2017
Hands-on review · gaming benchmarks and comparisons
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is a good budget chip, great for multitasking and upgrade paths, though weaker in single-threaded gaming.
4.0
The Gaming Assassin
≈ estimated
11/01/2025
Benchmark review · gaming performance in demanding titles
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is too weak for modern gaming, with unstable frame rates, so cheaper alternatives are the better choice.
4.0
Cheap Bastard
≈ estimated
23/02/2020
Hands-on review · 11 gaming benchmarks with slow RAM
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 loses performance with 2133MHz RAM, so skip that memory pairing.
5.0
Nicolas11x12 English
≈ estimated
31/08/2017
Comparison · stock and 4 GHz overclock benchmarks
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is faster than the Ryzen 3 1200 in productivity, but the cheaper chip is the better buy for budget builds.
8.0
WMD Tech
≈ estimated
23/08/2017
Hands-on review · benchmarks, overclock and gaming test
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is a sensible pick for a tight-budget build thanks to its strong multi-threaded performance.
8.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
24/04/2017
Head-to-head gaming test · 1400 vs 1500X benchmarks
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is a good budget gaming pick, though the 1500X is only slightly faster and overclocking needs a better cooler.
7.0
optimum
≈ estimated
21/04/2017
Head-to-head comparison · benchmarks, overclock and gaming tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is strong for rendering, encoding and multi-threaded games, while the i5 7500 is safer for pure gaming.
More graded video reviews (1)
creator’s own scoreestimated by us

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

6.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
07/07/2017
Hands-on review · Quad-core desktop
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is a good, eight-thread quad-core for general computing, but gamers and overclockers should choose the Ryzen 5 1500X.
6.0
bit-tech.net
≈ estimated
12/05/2017
Full review · Midrange quad-core
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 adds eight threads to a quad-core, but with half the cache and lower clocks than the 1500X, it's hard to recommend.
9.0
tweaktown.com
✓ explicit
12/06/2017
Benchmark test · Eight-thread quad-core
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 handles video encoding and other multi-core work well, though its memory tops out at 2133MHz in testing.
5.0
servethehome.com
≈ estimated
09/04/2017
Linux benchmarks · Server workloads
Verdict
The Ryzen 5 1400 is only a good pick for basic four-core Linux builds, since Intel chips with faster per-core speed often beat it.
9.0
techspot.com
✓ explicit
26/04/2017
Hands-on test · Quad-core Ryzen
Verdict
The Ryzen 5 1400 is a sensible quad-core pick for gamers on a tight budget, with 35GB/s memory bandwidth and clock speeds near 3.7GHz.
8.0
techpowerup.com
✓ explicit
29/05/2017
Overview · Design and clock speeds
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 offers four cores, eight threads and an unlocked multiplier, but its halved L3 cache and minimal XFR boost hold it back.
6.0
notebookcheck.net
≈ estimated
05/06/2017
Lab test · Synthetic benchmarks
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 edges out the Core i5-7600K in multi-threaded work, but trails the Core i7-7700K in single-threaded and encryption tests.
5.0
pcwelt.de
≈ estimated
18/05/2017
Lab test · Games and power
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 draws little power and has eight threads, but its halved cache and low clocks put it behind the Core i5-7400 in most games.
6.0
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
25/08/2017
Lab test · Encoding and games
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 handles video encoding well and keeps up with the smallest Intel Core i5 chips, but trails them a bit in games.
6.0
geektopia.es
≈ estimated
25/04/2017
Benchmark review · Game tests
Verdict
The Ryzen 5 1400 is a decent four-core chip for multi-thread work and graphic design, but Intel chips usually lead in games.
8.0
profesionalreview.com
✓ explicit
16/05/2017
Side-by-side test · Gaming
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 runs cool, uses little power and holds its own against 7th-generation Core i5 chips, with overclocking as a bonus.
8.0
xataka.com
≈ estimated
30/05/2017
Full review · Benchmarks and temperatures
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 keeps up with Ryzen 7 chips in everyday and web tasks, but falls behind in heavy multithreaded work and has little room to overclock.
8.0
tech.everyeye.it
≈ estimated
09/06/2017
Lab test · Gaming and overclocking
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is a cool, overclockable quad-core with eight threads, but its low clocks and small cache leave it behind Intel's Core i7-7700K in games.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 5 1400

  • Excellent value for money, especially when compared to contemporary Intel quad-core chips
  • Strong multi-threaded performance due to 4 cores and 8 threads (SMT)
  • Unlocked multiplier allows for easy overclocking to match higher-tier models like the 1500X
  • Good power efficiency and thermal performance under load
  • Smooth minimum frame rate performance in many gaming scenarios

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 5 1400

  • Weak single-core performance compared to Intel competitors from the same era
  • Significantly less L3 cache (8MB) compared to the Ryzen 5 1500X (16MB)
  • No integrated graphics, requiring a dedicated GPU for any display output
  • Lower stock clock speeds and lack of full XFR (Extended Frequency Range) support
  • Comes with a basic Wraith Stealth cooler instead of the more robust Wraith Spire found with higher models

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 5 1400 is a budget-oriented quad-core, eight-thread desktop processor built on the 14nm 'Zen' architecture for the AM4 socket. It features a base clock speed of 3.2 GHz, a max boost speed of 3.4 GHz, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache with a 65W TDP. Main characteristics include an unlocked multiplier for overclocking and bundled Wraith Stealth cooling. Pros include excellent multi-threaded performance for its price, energy efficiency, and solid value for entry-level gaming and multitasking. However, it suffers from relatively weak single-core performance compared to Intel rivals and has a significantly smaller L3 cache than other Ryzen 5 models like the 1500X.

Compare AMD Ryzen 5 1400 with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Ryzen 5 1400 and other processors

No results found