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 1600X review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£55PassMark multi-core score:13003N. of physical cores:6CPU boost clock speed:4.0 GHzCPU socket:AM4TDP (Thermal design power):95 W

AMD Ryzen 5 1600X Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 39 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen 5 1600X
6.9/10

Overall score

Score
6.9/ 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–² Better than 55% of models
Score components

40%

5.0

Technical score

25%

8.5

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

8.7

Sentiment score

â–²Better than 55% of processors
7.8

Value for money

Value for money
7.8/ 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–² Better than 77% of models
Score components

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–²Better than 77%
5.0

Technical score

Technical score
5.0/ 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 61% of models
Score components

60%

4.5

Performance

18%

4.8

Architecture

10%

6.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.4

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

â–¼Worse than 61%
8.5

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.5/ 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
★ Better than 92% of models

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

9.7

Popularity

Grades by review (39)
28 reviews: 12 with a printed score, 16 estimated from the review. 11 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.
★Better than 92%
?

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-5-1600x
  • amd-ryzen-5-1600x
  • amd-ryzen-5-1600x
  • amd-ryzen-5-1600x
amd-ryzen-5-1600x
amd-ryzen-5-1600x
amd-ryzen-5-1600x
amd-ryzen-5-1600x
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 1600X

Based on 10 · 12

Reviewers praise its strong multi-core power and overclocking headroom, but many find gaming performance underwhelming.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the AMD Ryzen 5 1600X

Based on 166 owners sharing their experience in online comments

62%positive20%mixed18%negative

Owners value its strong, affordable performance, while overclocking limits and setup compatibility cause the most frustration.

What owners dislike

  • Going past about 4.0 GHz often needs much higher voltage, and some chips crash or fail stress tests even at 4.1 to 4.2 GHz.12
  • Some owners report no display, boot loops or the board not posting after building, often fixed by a BIOS update or replacing RAM.11
  • Some owners could not run RAM above 2133 to 2933 MHz, or saw failed overclock messages, until a BIOS update or a QVL-listed kit was used.9
  • Owners report needing about 1.4 V or more to reach 4.0 GHz, with stock voltage reaching 1.5 V on some boards and temperatures rising as a result.8
  • Some owners report frame rates falling below 144 fps at 1440p, and a clear CPU bottleneck in demanding games such as Warzone.5
  • Some owners report temperatures near 80 °C at startup or during long gaming sessions, even with AIO liquid coolers.5
  • Some owners say Ryzen Master and other monitoring tools show conflicting CPU temperatures, and the clock speed in Windows differs from the BIOS setting.5
  • Owners say a new AM4 cooler bracket or extra parts can add cost, and some felt the 1600X offered little gain over the cheaper 1600.5
  • Owners say single-thread scores trail Intel i5 chips, and the gap is hard to close even with a 4 GHz overclock.4
  • Owners say AMD dropped support for newer Ryzen chips on B350 boards, so upgrading the CPU later requires a new motherboard.3

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 5 1600X

Technical score
Technical score
5.0/ 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 61% of models
Score components:

60%

4.5

Performance

18%

4.8

Architecture

10%

6.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.4

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

5.0
Reviews score
8.5
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.8/ 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–² Better than 77% of models
Score components:

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.8
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
X570, B550, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320
This processor supports X570, B550, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 71.4% of processors and equal to that of 0.6% 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, BMI1, BMI2
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2 instruction sets, which is broader support than 80.8% of processors and equal to that of 3.3% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
N. of physical cores
6
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 6 CPU cores, which is more than 47.7% of processors and equal to 13.4% of processors.
CPU threads
12
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 12 CPU threads, which is more than 53% of processors and equal to 14.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4 GHz which is lower than that of 62.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.8% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 3.6 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 6x3.6 GHz which is higher than that of 68.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
13,003
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 13,003 in PassMark, which is higher than 53.3% 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
16 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 16 MB which is larger than that of 62% of processors and equal to that of 12.6% of processors.
L2 cache
3 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 3 MB which is larger than that of 48.6% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
L1 cache
576 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 576 KB which is larger than that of 72.7% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
Show more
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)
DDR4-2666 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-2666 MHz, which is lower than that of 59.8% of processors and equal to 7.8% of processors.
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)
95 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 95 W which is higher than that of 87.4% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
95 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 95 W which is higher than that of 87.6% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% 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 1600X 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.
    16 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.
  • 2 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    6 vs 4
  • 26.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.5/ 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
    ★ Better than 92% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    9.7

    Popularity

    Grades by review (39)
    28 reviews: 12 with a printed score, 16 estimated from the review. 11 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.
    8.5 vs 6.7
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 4 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • 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
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x3.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    6x3.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 26.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.5/ 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
    ★ Better than 92% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    9.7

    Popularity

    Grades by review (39)
    28 reviews: 12 with a printed score, 16 estimated from the review. 11 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.
    8.5 vs 6.7
  • 20.8% higher sentiment score
    8.7 vs 7.2
  • 4.55x cheaper
    AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is cheaper than the average processor (£55 vs £250).
    £55 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.
  • 2 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    6 vs 4
  • 4 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x3.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    6x3.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • More advanced Turbo Core
    This processor has a more advanced Turbo Core version than the average processor (3 vs 2).
    Precision Boost 1
    3 vs 2
  • 13.4% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (13,003 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    13,003 vs 11,469
  • 50% larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (576 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    576 KB vs 384 KB
  • 77.8% larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (16 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    16 MB vs 9 MB
  • 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.
    16 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.
  • 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
  • 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.
  • 26% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,136 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,136 vs 1,535
  • 23.3% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (376 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    376 vs 490
  • 2.11x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (95 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    95 W vs 45 W
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 9.1% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 14.3% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,191 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,191 vs 2,558
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, 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
  • 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
  • 26% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,136 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,136 vs 1,535
  • 23.3% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (376 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    376 vs 490
  • 9.1% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 14.3% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,191 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,191 vs 2,558
  • 60.5% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (134.3 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    134.28 vs 340.075
  • 21.9% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (310.8 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    310.8 vs 398.015
  • 8.6% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (4,761 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    4,761 vs 5,209
  • 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
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, 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
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR4-2666 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR4-2,666 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 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.
  • 2.11x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (95 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    95 W vs 45 W
  • 2.11x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (95 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    95 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

Video reviews

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

7.0
Adrian's Tech Base
≈ estimated
12/09/2026
Hands-on review · game, synthetic and emulation tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is a great budget chip, but it is best bought with a B-series board, not on its own.
6.0
ShagadelicMike
≈ estimated
14/01/2026
Hands-on review · gaming tests and CPU bottleneck check
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is still fine for simple games, but demanding titles need a newer processor.
9.0
Thermal Grease Monkey
≈ estimated
11/11/2025
Hands-on test · five games at 1080p with GTX 1660 Super
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X handles most games well, though demanding titles need lower settings or overclocking.
9.0
PhilsComputerLab
≈ estimated
25/10/2019
Budget build test · game benchmarks and value comparison
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X delivers strong 1080p gaming with no overclocking needed, which makes it good value.
9.0
TechteamGB
≈ estimated
03/05/2017
Hands-on review · performance, overclocking and temperature tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X delivers strong performance for the price, but RAM compatibility and overclocked temperatures need attention.
8.0
Hardware Canucks
≈ estimated
14/04/2017
Build and test · gaming and rendering with RX 480
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X makes a solid base for a gaming PC, with strong multi-threaded performance and good value.
8.0
PC Perspective
≈ estimated
11/04/2017
Full review · benchmarks against Core i5 and gaming tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X offers excellent value and multi-threaded performance, but Intel still leads in 1080p gaming.
5.0
Hardware Canucks
≈ estimated
13/11/2020
Upgrade comparison · benchmarks against newer Ryzen 3000 and 5000 chips
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is dated, with weak memory bandwidth, but upgrading to a newer Zen chip is worth it despite the cost.
9.0
Tech YES City
≈ estimated
11/04/2017
Comparison · against the i5-7600K in games and productivity
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is strong in productivity and pairs well with mid-range graphics cards.
7.0
Blunty
≈ estimated
11/04/2017
Short review · overclock and gaming tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is a sound choice with the stock cooler, though overclocking gains in games are small.
9.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
11/04/2017
Hands-on review · productivity and gaming benchmarks, overclocking
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is strong for productivity at its price, with gaming close to Intel's i5.
Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

10
techradar.com
✓ explicit
11/04/2017
Hands-on test · Gaming performance
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is a fast six-core chip for gaming and video encoding that runs cool, but overclocking past 4.1 GHz is tricky.
9.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
28/04/2017
Benchmark review · Midrange six-core
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X handles general computing well for its class, but Intel chips still deliver noticeably higher frame rates at 1080p gaming.
7.0
servethehome.com
≈ estimated
12/04/2017
Linux benchmarks · Six-core CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X handles Linux compression and compiling well, though it needs kernel 4.10 or newer and a separate cooler.
9.0
popzara.com
≈ estimated
05/05/2017
Review · Six-core productivity chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is a fast multi-core chip for productivity, with overclocking headroom, but Intel still leads slightly in games.
9.5
techspot.com
✓ explicit
11/04/2017
First look · Six-core processor
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X offers six cores and 12 threads for multi-core work, but stock settings leave little headroom.
9.5
cgmagonline.com
✓ explicit
11/04/2017
Hands-on test · Gaming performance
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X suits gaming and content creation, matching the 1800X's single-core speed, but Intel still leads in gaming.
8.0
arstechnica.com
≈ estimated
08/05/2017
Full review · Six-core midrange chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is a stable, capable six-core chip, but Intel's chips still win in single-thread speed and 1080p gaming.
9.0
techadvisor.com
✓ explicit
14/04/2017
Benchmark review · Core i5 rival
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is the better pick for rendering, encoding and multi-core work, while the Core i5-7600K still games a little better.
9.0
pcwelt.de
≈ estimated
11/04/2017
Benchmark test · Six-core processor
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X handles processor-heavy tasks and 4K gaming well, but is slower in some Full HD games.
5.8
computerbild.de
✓ explicit
11/04/2017
Lab test · Mid-range processor
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X nearly matches Intel's Core i7-7700K in speed and uses little power, but it has no built-in graphics.
7.0
igorslab.de
≈ estimated
11/04/2017
Benchmark test · Gaming focus
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X does well in strategy games like Civilization IV, but trails in GTA V at stock speed.
9.0
pcgameshardware.de
≈ estimated
12/04/2017
Benchmark test · Gaming CPU comparison
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is a six-core chip that edges Intel's Core i5-7600K in gaming averages, but needs fast memory to get the most out of it.
9.0
chip.de
≈ estimated
30/04/2017
Lab test · Desktop CPU review
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is a six-core chip that beats every Intel consumer CPU tested, just behind the Ryzen 7 1700, but has no built-in graphics.
9.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
11/04/2017
Lab test · Overclocking and power
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X reaches 4.1 GHz when overclocked, but draws up to 219 W, so undervolting is a useful way to cut that back.
9.0
tomshardware.fr
≈ estimated
11/04/2017
Benchmark test · Six-core chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is a six-core chip that beats Core i5s in heavy multi-threaded work but trails them in programs that use few cores.
6.0
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
11/04/2017
Lab test · Six-core rendering
Verdict
The Ryzen 5 1600X is a six-core chip that comes close to the Ryzen 7 1700 overall, with fast rendering and encoding but weaker gaming.
7.0
ginjfo.com
✓ explicit
11/04/2017
Lab test · Gaming and multitasking
Verdict
The Ryzen 5 1600X comes close to the Ryzen 7 1800X and suits gamers who also run multi-threaded tasks, though Intel's Core i7-7700K still wins in games.
8.0
01net.com
≈ estimated
18/05/2017
Gaming test · Midrange comparison
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is the best of its line, solid for Full HD and 1440p gaming and content creation, though serious gamers still favor Intel.
8.4
profesionalreview.com
✓ explicit
11/04/2017
Lab test · Overclocking and temperatures
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X goes head-to-head with Intel's i7-7700K, but its overclocking and boost gains are modest.
9.0
muycomputer.com
≈ estimated
12/04/2017
Lab test · Six-core chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is a six-core chip that stays fast in single-thread work and pulls clearly ahead in multi-threaded apps.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 5 1600X

  • Excellent multi-threaded performance for the price, often outperforming more expensive Intel quad-core chips in productivity tasks
  • Great value for workstations, specifically for video rendering, encoding, and file compression
  • Unlocked multiplier and XFR (Extended Frequency Range) allow for easy automated and manual overclocking
  • Features 6 cores and 12 threads, providing better future-proofing and multitasking than contemporary 4-core competitors
  • Strong performance in modern games that are optimized to utilize more than four cores

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 5 1600X

  • Does not include a stock cooler in the box, requiring an additional purchase of an aftermarket cooling solution
  • Single-threaded performance and clock speeds lag behind equivalent Intel 'K' series processors
  • 1080p gaming performance is generally lower compared to Intel's contemporary mid-range offerings
  • Limited overclocking headroom, often hitting a wall around 4.0 GHz to 4.1 GHz
  • Higher power consumption at idle compared to some competing platforms

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 5 1600X is a high-performance desktop processor featuring 6 physical cores and 12 threads based on the 14nm Zen architecture. It operates at a base clock speed of 3.6 GHz with a 4.0 GHz precision boost and can reach up to 4.1 GHz via Extended Frequency Range (XFR) technology. The chip includes a massive 16MB of L3 cache, supports dual-channel DDR4 memory, and has a 95W TDP. Main pros include exceptional multi-threaded performance that rivals more expensive Core i7 CPUs in productivity tasks like rendering and its fully unlocked multiplier for easy overclocking. However, notable cons include its lack of an included stock cooler and slightly lower single-core performance compared to same-generation Intel counterparts, which can result in lower frame rates during high-refresh 1080p gaming.

Compare AMD Ryzen 5 1600X 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 1600X and other processors

No results found