WEBVTT 00:00:00.760 --> 00:00:08.320 guys guys you won't believe where I've 00:00:03.880 --> 00:00:10.759 been or when I've returned from the far 00:00:08.320 --> 00:00:18.400 off time of Q3 2017 after the launches of AMD's ryzen 5 00:00:14.360 --> 00:00:21.359 and ryzen 3 and you don't want to know 00:00:18.400 --> 00:00:26.320 what happens between now and then but anyway that's not important right now 00:00:23.160 --> 00:00:27.279 what is important is I've brought back a 00:00:26.320 --> 00:00:35.680 little souvenir Welcome to our ear early 00:00:30.400 --> 00:00:38.799 preview of ryzen 3 and ryzen 00:00:42.000 --> 00:00:47.199 5 the Phoenix oour is a full-sized 00:00:45.320 --> 00:00:51.840 minimalistically designed keyboard complete with Cherry MX switches and a 00:00:49.520 --> 00:00:58.399 new white backlit variant check it out at the link 00:00:53.359 --> 00:01:02.039 below okay okay so I'm no do brown and I 00:00:58.399 --> 00:01:03.800 drive a Lambo not a DeLorean so we 00:01:02.039 --> 00:01:11.960 should just get this out of the way right now we don't actually have a ryzen 00:01:08.439 --> 00:01:17.159 5 or a ryzen 3 00:01:11.960 --> 00:01:20.040 chip or do we no no we don't this right 00:01:17.159 --> 00:01:26.840 here is our ryzen 7 1800x and what we're going to do is use 00:01:23.159 --> 00:01:30.119 our Motherboard BIOS to match the core 00:01:26.840 --> 00:01:34.399 counts and frequencies that AMD has 00:01:30.119 --> 00:01:37.439 announced and see how they might stack 00:01:34.399 --> 00:01:40.159 up you may have your doubts about this 00:01:37.439 --> 00:01:47.920 method but we've demonstrated in the past that it works shockingly well in 00:01:43.680 --> 00:01:50.320 this video here so which chips will we 00:01:47.920 --> 00:01:57.719 be testing then well aside from our ryzen 7 1800x and 00:01:53.600 --> 00:02:01.880 1700x as real world baselines and a core 00:01:57.719 --> 00:02:04.439 i7 7700 K to rep present the blue team 00:02:01.880 --> 00:02:12.800 we're taking the ryzen 5600x and 1400x and the ryzen 3 1200X 00:02:09.759 --> 00:02:16.959 Forest spin we'll be doing it all with 00:02:12.800 --> 00:02:20.000 our replacement ASUS crossair 6-based 00:02:16.959 --> 00:02:22.879 ryzen test bench and as for our GPU 00:02:20.000 --> 00:02:26.480 we'll be testing with our new FPS per dollar high performance King the GTX 00:02:25.400 --> 00:02:34.319 1080 TI now considering that the highest 00:02:29.200 --> 00:02:38.680 clocked r 5 CPU is still a 3.6 GHz base 00:02:34.319 --> 00:02:40.280 4 GHz boost chip the same as the 1800x 00:02:38.680 --> 00:02:46.440 we're pretty certain that we're not going to see any performance difference 00:02:42.680 --> 00:02:48.920 in single-threaded tasks with the 1600 X 00:02:46.440 --> 00:02:54.760 making it slower in multi-threaded workloads but potentially a wicked 00:02:51.760 --> 00:02:58.000 gaming chip there are some things to 00:02:54.760 --> 00:03:00.680 keep in mind with these tests as AMD's 00:02:58.000 --> 00:03:05.959 Precision boost is disable AED the moment a custom frequency is set we've 00:03:03.760 --> 00:03:12.519 had to lock the frequencies of our slower clocked virtual CPUs since 00:03:09.480 --> 00:03:14.519 Precision boost and xfr only kicked in 00:03:12.519 --> 00:03:19.360 in lightly threaded workloads in our testing we chose to split the difference 00:03:17.319 --> 00:03:27.400 between their base frequencies and maximum xfr clocks that is 3.75 GHz for 00:03:23.599 --> 00:03:30.400 the 1400x and 3.6 GHz for the 00:03:27.400 --> 00:03:32.400 1200X this clearly isn't 100 100% 00:03:30.400 --> 00:03:37.840 accurate particularly since that puts our lower end chips running at a higher 00:03:34.720 --> 00:03:39.680 base frequency while at full loads it 00:03:37.840 --> 00:03:45.280 should still give us a ballpark representation for our overall 00:03:42.439 --> 00:03:52.040 performance analysis across all of our tests finally we're uncertain at this 00:03:48.480 --> 00:03:56.120 time whether disabling cores on ryzen 00:03:52.040 --> 00:03:58.959 also disables extra cash so do keep that 00:03:56.120 --> 00:04:04.319 in mind with all that boring stuff out of the way now though let's kick it off 00:04:01.519 --> 00:04:10.680 with our gaming benchmarks today at 1080p since these are mid-range CPUs 00:04:07.799 --> 00:04:16.639 that we're simulating we see our virtual 1600x performing better in DSX mankind 00:04:14.560 --> 00:04:21.079 divided than the lower clocked but pricier 00:04:18.320 --> 00:04:27.680 1700x rise of the Tomb Raider shows us more of the same while for Honor shows 00:04:23.759 --> 00:04:29.919 our, 1400x also performing well with its 00:04:27.680 --> 00:04:34.960 higher base frequency sadly an artifact of our methodology 00:04:32.520 --> 00:04:41.880 since ryzen doesn't boost for that long at full load GTA 5 clearly will take all 00:04:39.479 --> 00:04:47.720 the course and Cycles it can get while Ghost Recon wildlands on the other hand 00:04:44.560 --> 00:04:50.240 shows only the i7 7700 K's 00:04:47.720 --> 00:04:56.320 single-threaded performance pulling away with a measurable lead Doom gives the 00:04:53.520 --> 00:05:02.080 7700k a much more significant lead with the ryzen series making a pretty linear 00:04:59.120 --> 00:05:07.680 slope at after that and finally like GTA 5 Crisis 3 shows again a thirst for 00:05:04.840 --> 00:05:14.160 everything with our 1200 X falling far behind thanks to its mere four cores and 00:05:10.919 --> 00:05:16.560 four threads moving on to synthetics 3D 00:05:14.160 --> 00:05:21.000 Mark shows our ryzen platform generally outperforming the 00:05:18.240 --> 00:05:27.479 7700k until we get all the way to our quad course and the same is true of szip 00:05:24.080 --> 00:05:31.160 where even our 1600x outperforms its 00:05:27.479 --> 00:05:34.039 more expensive Intel rival PC Mark is 00:05:31.160 --> 00:05:39.759 another highlight for AMD the 1600 X's performance is close to the 1800x and 00:05:37.039 --> 00:05:45.759 another instance where our methodology benefited our 1400x in a way that won't 00:05:42.759 --> 00:05:47.840 quite hold true in the real world the 00:05:45.759 --> 00:05:54.000 1600x again pulls ahead in the single-threaded Y cruncher test but our 00:05:50.720 --> 00:05:57.400 multi-threaded test brings us closer to 00:05:54.000 --> 00:06:00.000 a kind of linear slope cinebench 2 shows 00:05:57.400 --> 00:06:06.400 us fairly predictable results and except for the i7 which only beats the much 00:06:02.800 --> 00:06:09.960 cheaper quadcore ryzen chips rounding 00:06:06.400 --> 00:06:11.680 our test out ASUS realbench shows us its 00:06:09.960 --> 00:06:16.160 preference for clock speed for image editing thread count on encoding and a 00:06:14.240 --> 00:06:20.000 combination of the two in heavy multitasking with our benches stacking 00:06:18.560 --> 00:06:24.160 up accordingly but to put all of that 00:06:22.199 --> 00:06:33.639 performance stuff in the appropriate perspective we need to look at pricing 00:06:28.560 --> 00:06:38.080 at24 9 the 1600x seems to hit the sweet 00:06:33.639 --> 00:06:41.160 spot with its 1800x like performance in 00:06:38.080 --> 00:06:46.720 everything but our most multi-threaded 00:06:41.160 --> 00:06:49.919 benchmarks the 1400x at 169 seems like a 00:06:46.720 --> 00:06:53.000 really solid value too considering its 00:06:49.919 --> 00:06:55.120 thread parody with our i7 and decent 00:06:53.000 --> 00:07:04.400 scoring which lands it at the top of the pack for performance per dollar the 00:06:58.520 --> 00:07:06.639 1200X rumored at 149 is uh well AMD's 00:07:04.400 --> 00:07:12.639 marketing is all about thread count and with only four ryzen just isn't pulling 00:07:09.720 --> 00:07:18.360 quite as much weight however at that price it's actually our second best 00:07:15.599 --> 00:07:24.720 performer per dollar placing it in an excellent position for a budget CPU and 00:07:22.280 --> 00:07:30.199 if you've watched our ryzen OC guide you're probably thinking that this one 00:07:27.240 --> 00:07:35.240 is actually much closer to the ath XP 2500 plus than the 00:07:32.639 --> 00:07:41.440 1700x and you wouldn't necessarily be wrong though something our 8 core 00:07:38.560 --> 00:07:47.520 processor cannot simulate is how hot these chips will run or how well they'll 00:07:44.240 --> 00:07:50.440 overclock so that all remains to be 00:07:47.520 --> 00:07:54.759 seen so with all of that said then we have to stress again that this isn't an 00:07:52.759 --> 00:07:59.840 exact measurement in particular our 1400x and 1200X scores are likely 00:07:58.000 --> 00:08:05.759 suffering from the loss of PR ision boost but taken with a grain of salt 00:08:03.680 --> 00:08:11.560 these results should paint a pretty clear and pretty exciting picture one 00:08:08.759 --> 00:08:17.520 that we can't wait to verify against the real 00:08:12.840 --> 00:08:21.000 deal Zotac magnus1 series is one of the 00:08:17.520 --> 00:08:26.919 smallest VR ready gaming PCs available 00:08:21.000 --> 00:08:28.960 measuring at just 8.27 by7 by 2.45 in 00:08:26.919 --> 00:08:33.640 it's quiet while operating and it's light we at less than 8 lb making it 00:08:31.440 --> 00:08:39.919 genuinely portable you can even get it with an NVIDIA GTX 00:08:35.919 --> 00:08:43.760 1070 to go along with its skylet Core i5 00:08:39.919 --> 00:08:47.600 6400t its dual HDMI 2.0 ports and its 00:08:43.760 --> 00:08:49.640 compatibility for high-speed NVMe ssds 00:08:47.600 --> 00:08:55.440 you can learn more at the link in the video description and get your 00:08:53.080 --> 00:08:59.680 own so thanks for watching guys if this video suck dislike but if it was good 00:08:57.720 --> 00:09:04.200 then like it get subscribed for more videos like it and check out the link to 00:09:01.720 --> 00:09:08.399 where to buy the stuff we featured in the video description also down there is 00:09:06.640 --> 00:09:13.880 a link to our merch store and our community Forum which you should totally 00:09:10.880 --> 00:09:13.880 join