AMD Ryzen 7 1700 in 2020: Benchmark vs. 3700X, 3900X, 10600K, & More

by birtanpublished on August 21, 2020

It's been about three years now since the release of Andy's first rise in CPUs and so today we're revisiting in more depth the risin seven 1,700 CPU which launched at $330 it came down pretty quickly to about three hundred dollars resting price and now the more likely

Replacement for it if you wanted a drop-in replacement would be a 3700 X which is about 275 bucks these days so we're looking at those this is following up on a revisit series that we've kept alive for a couple of years now and now

That the rise in series has finally gotten old by the standards of a revisit we're back to look at the 1700 before that this video is brought to you by gigabyte soros r-tx 20 atti extreme the RT x 20 atti extreme is built with a

Triple axial cooling solution and ready for anyone interested in intermediate GPU overclocking although it's also up for gaming out of the box the gigabyte 2080 TI can reach the higher performance range required to play games at frame

Rates at and beyond 144 FPS couples particularly well with games like Call of Duty warzone Rainbow six siege and other competitive FP assets gigabytes extreme is built to be a looker for system builders going for extra visual

Flair learn more at the link in the description below so for starters the Rison 7 1700 is an 8 core 16 thread part but it's had among the lowest of the clocks for and these rise in series so

That had a pretty big impact on its performance overall but it was also one of the CPUs where it was in the era of your really if you buy the X version you're just paying for something you could do manually through BIOS and

Overclock in a 1700 23.92 if you're really lucky 4.1 gigahertz was not too hard hours we could kind of do a 4.0 sometimes but ultimately it was most stable at 3.9 gigahertz all cord so we we've got numbers here today with that

OC applied as well and that was when to doing an all core only overclock on Rison had a pretty big impact on performance whereas now if you want a performance improvement you really need to start playing around with things like

Infinity fabric and memory tuning in our review of the Rison 7 1700 when it came out we called it rise ins champion saying that it was the best part it was the one that made the most sense in the rise in southern family the 1800 X we

Said in this really pissed a lot of people off but we said it was a colossal waste of money and that turned out to be pretty damn right because AMD couldn't get rid of those CPUs for its life it had to drop

The prices to basically 1,700 pricing and that's because the 1800 X you weren't getting more cores or anything like that you weren't getting more cash you were getting nothing for that CPU the 1700 was really where it was at

Because for that one you could spend 300 330 bucks and with a simple 5-minute overclock you ran at least the 1700 X levels of performance and with maybe a 10-minute overclock you're at 1800 X levels of performance so 1800 X at 500

Bucks was a massive waste of money and that that CPU didn't age very well in value now the 1700 was really good for value because again $300 part that competed directly with the 7700 K in things like

Production applications but fell behind significantly still a lot of gaming workloads so this was before and these architectural improvements where they slowly worked towards over the last three years a situation of where they

Were good enough for gaming and pretty damn close to a lot of Intel's parts that's changed a little bit with a 10-6 launch but back with a 1700 in the first gen of Rison it wasn't quite as close you were very clearly kind of going one

Way or the other you're doing more production work you buy to rise and you're doing more gaming you buy Intel and now it's comes in the middle a bit more and gotten more muddy as to which direction you should go with the

Purchase and you can check all of our reviews for more individual detail on what makes sense when for more information on that but let's get into the benchmarks for today we're running a three point nine all core OC no memory

Tuning or anything like that we don't do that for our standard o C's that's just for one-off pieces and 3.9 all core still got you a pretty big bump in performance if you can do a bit more cool but once you have 3.9 x to 100 or

200 megahertz you move the needle a bit but you'll be able to estimate the performance from here so hopefully this helps you figure out what makes sense for an upgrade pathway Shadow the Tomb Raider is first because of some

Interesting frame time data we'll look at a frame time plot after this one this was back the 1700 when overclocked in just the multiplier still works great even without delving into memory as is more worthwhile on the 3000 series

Of CPUs the r7 1700 stock performance plotted 112 FPS average with lows proportionally behind as compared to the rest of the CPUs on the chart the overclocked boosted us to 123 fps a gain of nine point seven percent ranking the

OC 1700 between the two 1600 AF results next to the 3100 OC result and behind the r3 3300 X which leads the 1700 OC results by 11% the 3700 X upgrade pathway would boost significantly up to 149 FPS average with lows also improved

Meaningfully to 106 one percent and ninety 10.1% and we'll look at those in a frame time plot in a moment the gain is 33% stock to stock against the 1700 the 10 600 K allows more Headroom if willing to give up the m4 platform into

A bigger system upgrade landing at 163 FPS average stock that said you'd be losing some cores and threads which will affect you in other non gaming applications potentially like blender that we'll look at later here's a frame

Time chart for shadow of the Tomb Raider as a reminder frame times show the empirical look at frame to frame playback of a game so this is an objective way to measure and represent the actual experience lower is better

With a hypothetical flat line sixteen point six 67 milliseconds metric representing 60 FPS constantly in this example the 3700 ax runs lower frame times as expected from the frame rates we saw but also has more condensed frame

To frame variation the 1700 has larger spikes when they do occur with greater excursions from frame and -1 they're both fine ultimately but that's why we see those differences in the lows that we saw in the previous chart the 3700 ax

Runs a much tighter ship three kingdoms campaign testing is next the 1700 plotted at 88 FPS average baseline boosting plus 13% from the 3.9 gigahertz all core overclocked again we sometimes could hold 4.0 gigahertz on these CPUs

Back of the day but this is first gen silicon and it wasn't as good as later launches so that was sometimes unstable the 1700 stocks core has it adjacent to a stock 1200 AF which remember is actually his n+ part with his n1 name so

It's a better and newer architecture the 1700 is also just behind the r3 3100 CPU at 92 FPS average with lows not appreciably different Intel's 8700 K from a few months after the 1700 aged better in gaming still marked as a chart

Leader but it was at least $60 more around the time of launch not bad for that kind of jump though and it was a huge blow and these rise in launch when it came out until Intel hit a major stagnation period hitman 2 is

Always interesting to us as a case study in CPU scaling will get newer games in a moment but this one has a wide performance range and not much of a GPU bottleneck concern the r7 1700 stock lands at 87 FPS average with the lowest

Comparable to its flanks I'll be it advantaged against the four core eight thread and four core four thread parts the 1700 outperforms the 1200 AF by about 28% stocks of stock so the cores help scaling more here than they do in

Some of the other games the 1700 OC results landed between the 1600 AF stock and OC entries at 99 FPS average and also positions it as nearly exactly tied to the new r3 3100 CPU at $100 the difference is within error for upgrade

Pathways the r7 3700 acts may make sense if you can keep your existing board especially allowing a gain of 19 percent against the 1700 OC or about 35 percent against the stock results for the 1700 overclock in the 3700 XCore doesn't do

Much in these games so we didn't include that number on the charts you really need to do some infinity fabric and memory tuning to have a meaningful gain with these newer CPUs which is fine just be prepared to do a bit more work the 10

600 K is another good option for someone purely gaming focused although it feels sort of bad to go 6 core 12 thread if you use those lost threads for anything at all like again blender tile-based renderer f1 2019 is next flawed at first

At 1080p and then at 1440p to show a performance imposition from the GPU this 1700 stock CPU ran at 125 FPS average marking it as just behind the 1600 AF and the r3 3100 the r3 3300 X jumps 36 percent against the 1700 to 238 FPS

Average benefiting from consolidated cache onto a single season yes while a 700 OC permits gains of 12% again stock that's parable to the previous two games the r7 3,700 acts would offer an upgrade path

Benefiting from at least an uplift of 36 percent in a CPU constrained scenario for this title the 10 600 K stock would further boost that to 48% gained versus the stock 1700 although it's obviously not a socketable just a drop in CPU

Upgrade so that is more or less a new system built here's the 1440p chart this one crushes some of the results down but the 1700 is almost entirely unaffected it's not fast enough to run into the newly imposed GPU limitation on the

Higher end results that we see as off the chart the 10 600 K 10 900 km 3700 X all grew closer together with minimal differences among them now that the GP limitation is limiting the frame rate if you expect to be at least partially GPU

Bound like here the 3710 600 K would drop to a gain of 24 percent stock to stock versus the 1700 rather than 36% and 48% results in the CPU bouncing area for a new game let's look at Red Dead Redemption 2 at medium settings this

Game imposes a GPU limitation at the high end of framerate and with high graphics it shows almost zero difference between the parts at medium we can get sort of a difference but it still gets crushed a bit at the top there are seven

1,700 runs at 96 FPS average stock which has it about tied with the AMD r3 3100 and the Intel i3 10100 CPU with 26 66 megahertz Ram which was tested as such because the B&H motherboards will be limited to that frequency the 1700 OC

Gets to a point where it's just behind the 3300 x stock and OC results which are within error of each other by the way at 114 FPS average the 10 600 K leads by 34% stock 2 OC of the 1700 and to see the higher-end rise in CPUs we

Need to look at the more GPU bound high test results that we have where we've run more CPUs through this particular game remember that we added medium to our read testing at the announcement of this methodology so medium isn't fully

Executed yet high settings the 1700 is mostly in the same spot it was below the GP bottleneck anyway so we're still bound by the CPU the results do get crushed together as expected and so the 3700 stock leads the 1700 stock by 18%

Or the 104 FPS OC result by just 6% the 10 600 K stock and OC results are obviously against the GP limit alongside the 9900 K and the 8700 K is about in the same place although a cpu choice obviously matters this 1080 P high

Reminder shows us that at some level the biggest upgrade might actually be your GPU it all depends on if you're going for ultra high frame rates for competitive titles or if you prefer higher graphics settings instead as a

Final comparative point the 1700 stock CPU is interestingly about equal with a 10 100 with 26 66 megahertz ram or the r3 3100 with the same Ram as the 1700 it's the frequency of the CPU that's holding us back the most the division 2

Is next for another game to look at the r-77 300 stock result is 147 FPS average with lows at 90 and 74 fps 1% is your 1% that lands the 1700 stock results at about the level of the r3 3100 stock once again but significantly ahead of

The four core for thread CPUs beneath it the r7 3700 ex isn't yet on this one but it be capped at the same 185 FES average frame rate anyway as the other AMD CPUs present with an art 730 700 X or an r5 3600 or even an r3 3300 X you can expect

About a 26% increase from stock 1700 or about 12 percent versus overclocked at 3.9 gigahertz the 10 600 K would max out the gains to 37% at to a 2 FPS average versus 1 46.7 FPS average stock to stock the top Intel results our GPU bound so

We can't see the difference between them we'll also look at GTA 5 which remains on our list for being a top 10 steam game the r7 1700 stock result is 77 FPS average with an overclocked boosting it to 14.7% 288 FPS average the stock 1700

Is therefore between the 1600 and 1200 AF because this game cares more about clocks and IPC than court and the overclocked results is about the same as the 3100 stock result the 3700 axon 3900 active both would offer an uplift of

About 42 percent plus or minus a little bit with the 10 600 K jaunting a cull percentage points further her production benchmarks are next which should be interesting for giving a better look at core and thread scaling over the years

As opposed to the weaker frequency scaling that we've seen far in the blender monkey heads render which is one of our custom-made scenes to stress CPUs the and the r7 1700 stock CP required 21 and a half minutes to

Complete the render overclocking it's a 3.9 gigahertz provided a time reduction of 15.3% which means if the intel i5 10 600 k stock cpu lands right between those two results although that 10 600 k would be an upgrade for gaming it's more

Of a side grade for this workload the OC to OC results of the 10 600 k vs the 1700 has them again close enough that'd be crazy to buy a new motherboard and CPU just for a 6.6% time reduction but obviously the gaming improvement is

Significant for the 10 600 k you really want to have that as the primary reason for a move to Intel from AM for if you were going to make a change versus other AMD CPUs the 3700 ax offers a significant time reduction of 35 percent

Against the stock 1700 or still 24 percent for the stock 3700 ax versus the overclocked 1700 that's a worthwhile upgrade for anyone doing this type of work regularly the GM logo render with blender is next this one changes the

Stack a little bit but not too much for the 1700 the 1700 stock completes this render in 26.1 minutes ranking it again between the two 1600 AF results but remember that the am the AF suffix as opposed to a e is as n + designation so

It's not Zen one despite the first generation naming scheme that's why we see that uplift its a core deficit yes but the architecture is improved on Zen plus the 8700 K still runs ahead of the 1700 just like it did

In the launch review of coffee lake and so it retains its positioning as a at the time good competitor to the 1700 the overclocked significantly boost performance again dropping 18% time required and positioning it a jacent to

The 10 600 K at 5 gigahertz the 3700 X would get a 21% time reduction versus the 21 point 3 minute results of the 1700 OC making it a good drop-in replacement for those who have boards with beta bios supporting the upgrade

And with VR M's that obviously support the upgrade Adobe Premiere video renders our next the r7 1700 our 1080p60 render in 5.6 minutes which has it between the overclocked 7700 K and 1600 AF that's good performance but

Still behind the follow-up 8700 k's result of 5.1 minutes the 8700 k was a firm response from intel and this is a reminder of that the 1700 OC completes in 4.7 minutes so it ends up between the 2700 stock and OC results while the 3700

AK stock results offers a time reduction of 32% versus the stock 1700 it's 19 percent reduced versus the overclocked 1700 the 3900 acts offers further returns albeit diminishing at this point these would be good drop ins if the

Board's vrm and BIOS can take either our premier 4k 60 render for youtube lens the 1700 and about the same spot it takes longer obviously but the scale and the hierarchical stack is about the same the 10 600 K and 1700 are about tied in

Both stock and OC results while the 3700 acts or 3900 acts offer meaningful uplift as does the 10 900 k 7-zip compression and decompression revisits our next we're starting with compression here this one is scored in millions of

Instructions per second or MIPS with higher being better the 1700 stock completed 51,000 MIPS which allows the 8700 K a slight lead from back in the day the OC pushes the 1700 to just under the tenth 600 k OC with the two

Functionally the same in this scoring but they are notably different in the decompression chart that will show next the 3700 acts for compression offers an upgrade pathway with 31% more MIPS or the 10900 K pushes 50% more that said

The 3900 acts of spending the amount of money you would spend on a 10 900k would make more sense than the 10 900 for this type of workload the 10 9 is just more interesting for gaming decompression is interesting since the difference between

The 1700 OC and 10 600 k OC expands so much in the compression chart the two were about the same and the 8700 k was also ranked above the 1700 stock cpu now though the 1700 has a significant lead over the 87 or K and a 10 600 K stock

CPUs the only upgrades that might make sense for heavy workloads here price – price would probably be the 3700 X or maybe a used or cheap 2700 will stop on our program code compiled benchmark for

Production workloads to save some time compiling chromium with Clancy Allen ninja measured in time to complete has the r7 1700 required in 149 minutes to finish the compile the 8700 K how it does this if you were an early buyer of

Intel's response you'd be in a fine position the 1700 a 3.9 gigahertz however is close to the 3600 stock CPU while the 3700 X offers an improvement in stock the stock performance of 39% if you've got the budget for a 3900 ax

Which recently has dropped in price although that might be demanding of a motherboard upgrade for a lot of people you'd be looking at a 57 percent reduction time required to complete this code just keep an eye out on vrm

Capabilities of your older generation boards well quickly look at power testing we didn't collect a 1700 stock number for power yet this year and our benches are now occupied with other work but we do at least have an updated 1700

OC number and since that's the one that gets closest to your upgrade pathways it's still interesting data at the EPS 12 volt cables and in blender all core the r7 1700 OC pulled 170 watts for its result we only want to point this number

Out because of the comparison to the 3700 X which pulled 85 watts at the EPS 12 volt cables while completing the render in 21 percent last time it's significantly more efficient now that's it for this one the 1700 has held on

Reasonably well in the what we call production application performance to non gain performance in our benchmarks it's doing obviously comparatively better than it did in gaming gaming the first launch of Rison really did kind of

Struggle it was okay and it got to a point where it was kind of good enough if you're willing to give up a lot of the gaming performance and if you really had a reason to go for say maybe more focus on blender or other applications

That were benefited by the thread count that's changed again look at the 2000 series and it was actually despite being a plus iteration on architecture it was pretty substantial uplift then 3000 series got more serious we're now a 3300

X is actually tremendous value for gaming and for a lot of use cases and r3 is enough for gaming and is kind of the quote we go with B 120 bucks for 30 300 X and a lot of these games today you're at 1,700 levels

Of performance or if you look at Intel you're at Intel i3 levels are performance sometimes pretty close to I 5 10 400 levels of performance depending on the memory settings for the 10 4 so 3300 X really shows how far name

These come at the price point because it's about a third the price of the 700 when it launched and yet is able to equate performance in game that's not true for production stuff but that's fine so one of the most interesting

Stats in here was the 7-zip performance where decompression so a big deviation in performance versus compression workloads where with decompression the 1,700 actually led the 8700 K and the 10 600 K by pretty meaningful significant

Amount but in compression they were mostly identical depend on which you know set up stock in overclock you were looking at so that was one of the more interesting numbers that we saw that we didn't do that type of tasking back

Three years ago and we did our original review so the 1700 is still a pretty good cpu it's fine and we liked it when it came out it was something it was the first time we can really start recommending AMD so the 1800 X didn't do

Anything for us but the 1700 was the one that we ended up recommending a lot for various types of builds like streaming and gaming for example as one of the more popular reasons up until the 87 or K came out when Intel really came back

Strong with some counter to AMD's Rison but Intel lost that grip up until now really with the 10 series after the 8700 K that was kind of their one shot and then they didn't have much left in the tank to come back and fight AMD for

Another couple of years so that's it for this one hopefully this helps with making some selections the 3700 X if you can do a drop-in replacement at 270 box means you're probably spending a little less that you did on the 1700 originally

But in some instances you're getting something like 30% performance off lift and it can be a bit more or a bit last to play on where the GQ bottlenecking is in games and production applications at scales based on the application how much

It likes thread count so 3700 X if you do dropping is a good choice otherwise you start looking at sweet concerns with motherboards so 3900 X dropped in price a lot it might actually be a feasible purchase obviously big uplift in non

Gaming applications Gaming it doesn't really matter that much for the 3700 ear about the same whole performance so non-gaming you might want a 39 but for something like that when you're increasing core count

You need to look at some maybe build Zoid coverage or some of our coverage about motherboard vrm capabilities because now you're increasing the vrm power requirements and it might not be capable of handling 239 so just be

Careful about that otherwise go check your motherboard vendors BIOS page and see if they have a beta bios for 3003 support if they do you're good to go if not do some research you might have to buy a 22,000 series or you might have to

Buy different motherboard at which point it's worth considering Intel's new options as well because I need building a whole new computer so that's it for this one thanks for watching subscribe for more as always

You can get a store doc here in his next – stop that – helps out directly or patreon.com slash gamers Nexus and we'll see you all next time

Related Videos

because the Atari VCS is definitely something that's coming out we need to do a teardown on one to get some perspective and Atari if you don't know it&...
Hey how's it going guys Jack I'm out here with the toasty rose and today we're going to be doing a four hundred and fifty dollar PC that any of you ...
The biggest rule in testing coolers is to never trust anything don't trust the numbers don't trust the software don't trust the firmware and definit...
Hey what's up guys Jack and Matt here with the toaster brothers and today we're gonna be finding out if this 350 dollar laptop can game this is gonna be...
Everyone welcome back to another episode of ask GN sorry I'm not doing the intro with snowflake for this one we're flying to Taiwan and we need to get t...
Everyone welcome back to another hardware news recap for the week we are in Taipei right now working on a factory tour series and we actually have a point for y...
Hey how's it going guys Jack and Matt here with the toaster bros and today we're gonna be doing our first 20 20 thousand dollar gaming PC but guess what...
Coursers a 500 has been an embarrassing show of performance for the company's first revisit to air cooler isn't a long time but the upside is that it ma...
When I received the thread Ripper 3990 X on loan from a yet unnamed youtuber we quickly threw together an extreme overclocking stream and got the CPU to about f...
Every one so we're in Taiwan right now we're doing our factory tour series and while we were out here we stopped by Lian Lee's offices and they want...
Hey what is up guys Jack and Matt here with the wait what do you do it on sex you back your desk back to your desk sorry about that okay hi Jack and Matt here w...
We thought we'd found the limits of viewer interest when he posted our tour of a screw factory last year as poor Freight it was more of a screw shop than a ...
Everyone welcome back to another hardware news recap for the week we're in Taiwan where we venture outside to film things that's always a nice change of...
Hey how's it going guys Jack and Matt here with the toasty rose and today we're gonna be doing a 350 dollar gaming PC build it's gonna be really awe...
out of all the factory tours we've done until today we'd never gotten an opportunity to see how water blocks and open-loop cooling components like fitti...
Paints is one of the chief processes to dial in for product manufacturing and today's tour will bring us to a taiwanese factory replete with a mix of automa...
hey what's up guys Jack I'm Matt here with the tasty bros and today we're gonna be showing you our 2020 CES recap live from our CES Airbnb but befor...
except you can't wipe your ass with it well I mean we're going to take a gamble on the YouTube D monetization system and talk about the impact of corona...
everyone we're closing out our trip in Taipei for our factory tourists we have a lot of factory footage live already and we have more coming to the the chan...
hey what's up guys Jack and Matt here with the Thai stereos and today we're gonna be finding out is a six hundred dollar laptop worth it in 2020 it'...