Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 2700 Review
After we recently tested the new Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 2700X top models extensively, we are now looking at their "smaller" offshoots. The Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 2700 "non-X" models are supposed to particularly score with efficiency. With this, the new processors are targeted more for power saving systems that are still supposed to convince with a good system performance. Similar to the two high-performance models, the two non-X Ryzen models are benefiting from the new Zen+ micro-architecture in the 12-nm process. The improvement of the latencies in particular ensures a decent improvement of the IPC (Instructions Per Cycle). Compared to the old 14-nm process, an increase of up to 16% with the same power consumption is supposed to be possible in this half-step update.
Offering six and eight computing cores respectively, the Ryzen 5 2600 and the Ryzen 7 2700 have just as many cores as the flagships of the two series. Due to the lower TDP (65 watts), AMD reduces the clocks speeds and the maximum possible Turbo speed considerably. Both of the non-X CPUs have to make do without the XFR overclocking. In the Ryzen 7 2700, the basic clock speed is 3.2 GHz now, while the Ryzen 5 2600 clocks slightly higher at 3.4 GHz. The reason is easily found, since the two additional computing cores of the Ryzen 7 2700 force the manufacturer to not exceed the TDP of 65 watts.
Compared to the launch prices of last-years Ryzen generation, the Ryzen-2000 series models are much more affordable. At its market introduction, the Ryzen 5 2600 costs only 195 Euros (~$230; about $190 in the US), which seems quite justified. At 289 Euros (~$340; about $290 in the US), the Ryzen 7 2700 is slightly more expensive, but offers a better multi-thread performance than the Ryzen 5 2600.
In the boxed variant, both processors have received the corresponding cooler. For the Ryzen 5 2600, this is the Wraith-Stealth and for the Ryzen 7 2700, the slightly more voluminous Wraith-Spire which we already know from the Ryzen 5 2600X. There is a small difference only the visuals, with the boxed cooler of the Ryzen 7 2700 having an illuminated red ring and the AMD letters also being lit up in red.
Model | Cores - Threads | Basic Clock Speed | Turbo Speed | XFR Overclocking | L3-Cache | TDP | Launch Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ryzen R7 2700X | 8-16 | 3.7 GHz | 4.3 GHz | up to 7% | 16 MB | 105 Watt | 319 Euros (~$376) |
Ryzen R7 2700 | 8-16 | 3.2 GHz | 4.1 GHz | - | 16 MB | 65 Watt | 289 Euros (~$340) |
Ryzen R5 2600X | 6-12 | 3.6 GHz | 4.2 GHz | up to 7 % | 16 MB | 95 Watt | 225 Euros (~$365) |
Ryzen R5 2600 | 6-12 | 3.4 GHz | 3.9 GHz | - | 16 MB | 65 Watt | 195 Euros (~$230) |
Ryzen R7 1800X | 8-16 | 3.6 GHz | 3.7 GHz | 100 MHz | 16 MB | 95 Watt | 559 Euros (~$658) |
Ryzen R7 1700X | 8-16 | 3.4 GHz | 3.5 GHz | 100 MHz | 16 MB | 95 Watt | 439 Euros (~$517) |
Ryzen R7 1700 | 8-16 | 3.0 GHz | 3.7 GHz | 100 MHz | 16 MB | 65 Watt | 369 Euros (~$435) |
Ryzen R5 1600X | 6-12 | 3.6 GHz | 4.0 GHz | 100 MHz | 16 MB | 95 Watt | 280 Euros (~$330) |
Ryzen R5 1600 | 6-12 | 3.2 GHz | 3.6 GHz | 100 MHz | 16 MB | 65 Watt | 250 Euros (~$294) |
We are using the following systems for our benchmarks and tests:
- Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 Wifi (BIOS T2b, Default Settings, XMP 1 for DDR4-3400)
- MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC (BIOS 1.11T3, Default Settings, XMP 1 for DDR4-3400)
- Antec 1200 Watt power supply
- G-Skill Siper X DDR4-3400 storage kit 2 x 8 GB, set for DDR4-3400
- ADATA SP900 M.2 256 GB
- XFX AMD Radeon RX Vega 64
The motherboards, storage, and CPUs of those were provided by AMD.
Processor Benchmarks
During the benchmarks, the trend that is already indicated on paper is confirmed: The improved IPC ensures a significant optimization of the single core performance compared to the first Ryzen generation, and the multi-thread performance also benefits from the small but significant changes in the micro architecture. The two performance models (Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 2700X) clearly differentiate themselves from the Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 2700, while the Ryzen 7 2700 is superior to the Ryzen 5 2600X in the multi-thread applications due to the eight cores.
Ryzen 5 2600
Ryzen 7 2700
Performance Rating - Percent | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
Intel Core i7-8700K -2! | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X -3! | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X -4! | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 -6! | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X -1! | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 -5! |
Cinebench R15 | |
CPU Single 64Bit | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
CPU Multi 64Bit | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G |
Blender - v2.79 BMW27 CPU | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X |
wPrime 2.10 | |
32m | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
1024m | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X |
X264 HD Benchmark 4.0 | |
Pass 1 | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
Pass 2 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G |
WinRAR - Result | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 |
TrueCrypt | |
AES Mean 100MB | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
Twofish Mean 100MB | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
Serpent Mean 100MB | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G |
Geekbench 4.4 | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G |
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance Physics | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G |
* ... smaller is better
In the mobile segment, throttling is always a subject. In the desktop segment, this problem is almost not present anymore, since much better cooling units can be used. After unpacking the Ryzen 5 2600, we had our doubts whether the Wraith Stealth would be able to cool the processor effectively even under load. However, AMD proved us wrong, since the Ryzen 5 2600 and the Ryzen 7 2700 with the included cooling fan (Wraith-Spire) mastered the Cinebench-R15 multi-loop without any blunders worth mention.
Gaming Performance
A look at the synthetic benchmarks shows the two non-X Ryzens coming in behind the performance models. However, anyone looking at the chart more carefully will see that the Ryzen 5 2600 almost always moves ahead of the Ryzen 7 2700. We also saw the exact same thing during the gaming benchmarks. While the Ryzen 7 2700 is able to move ahead of the Ryzen 5 2600 overall, the single results show that the Ryzen 5 2600 performs better during gaming. First, this can be traced back to the missing multi-core support in games, and second, the basic clock speed of the Ryzen 5 2600 is slightly higher than the Ryzen 7 2700, which becomes a slight advantage during gaming.
In summary, we can say that both processors are suited for gaming, and due to the lower TDP, the distance to the two performance models is relatively small.
Both test systems are based on an AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, offering sufficient performance in this combination to display all the current games at 1080p with maximum details. Anyone wanting to play in UHD primarily has to select a medium Preset in order to be able to run smoothly, depending on the game.
Performance Rating - Percent | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) -2! | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) -2! | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) -3! | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) -2! | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile -2! | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile -2! | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) -1! |
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) |
Performance Rating - Percent | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile -43! | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) -38! | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) -42! | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) -42! | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) -42! | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 -35! | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) -33! |
BioShock Infinite | |
1280x720 Very Low Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
1366x768 Medium Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF) | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Rise of the Tomb Raider | |
1024x768 Lowest Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
1366x768 Medium Preset AF:2x | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
3840x2160 High Preset AA:FX AF:4x | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Battlefield 1 | |
1280x720 Low Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
1366x768 Medium Preset AA:FX | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
3840x2160 High Preset AA:T | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Battlefield 4 | |
1024x768 Low Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
1366x768 Medium Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
3840x2160 High Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Assassin´s Creed Origins | |
1280x720 Very Low Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
1920x1080 Medium Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
3840x2160 Ultra High Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark | |
1280x720 Lite Quality | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
1920x1080 Standard Quality | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
3840x2160 High Quality | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Star Wars Battlefront 2 | |
1280x720 Low Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
1920x1080 Medium Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) |
Deus Ex Mankind Divided | |
1280x720 Low Preset AF:1x | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
1366x768 Medium Preset AF:2x | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
3840x2160 High Preset AF:4x | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Far Cry Primal | |
1920x1080 Medium Preset AA:SM | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
3840x2160 High Preset AA:SM | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
For Honor | |
1280x720 Low Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
3840x2160 High Preset AA:T AF:8x | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Ghost Recon Wildlands | |
1280x720 Low Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
3840x2160 Very High Preset AA:T AF:8x | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Kingdom Come: Deliverance | |
1280x720 Low Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
1920x1080 Medium Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
3840x2160 Ultra High Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
The Division | |
1280x720 Low Preset AF:1x | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
1366x768 Medium Preset AF:4x | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
3840x2160 High Preset AF:8x | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
The Witcher 3 | |
1024x768 Low Graphics & Postprocessing | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
1366x768 Medium Graphics & Postprocessing | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Watch Dogs 2 | |
1280x720 Low Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
1366x768 Medium Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
3840x2160 High Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
F1 2017 | |
1280x720 Ultra Low Preset | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
3840x2160 Ultra High Preset AA:T AF:16x | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Far Cry 5 | |
1280x720 Low Preset AA:T | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
1920x1080 Medium Preset AA:T | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | |
3840x2160 Ultra Preset AA:T | |
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop) | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 | |
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 |
Ryzen 5 2600
low | med. | high | ultra | 4K | |
BioShock Infinite (2013) | 278.7 | 259.7 | 229.8 | 160.5 | |
Battlefield 4 (2013) | 199.9 | 200 | 200 | 133.1 | 68.3 |
The Witcher 3 (2015) | 283.7 | 210.3 | 125.4 | 73.3 | 45 |
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 263.8 | 184.4 | 112.3 | 94 | 46.1 |
Far Cry Primal (2016) | 129 | 115 | 103 | 94 | 44 |
The Division (2016) | 204.9 | 170.6 | 114.8 | 92.9 | 44.6 |
Deus Ex Mankind Divided (2016) | 123.9 | 117.4 | 96.1 | 50.5 | 32.8 |
Battlefield 1 (2016) | 197.6 | 182 | 145.5 | 127.1 | 53.8 |
Watch Dogs 2 (2016) | 110.6 | 100.4 | 88.8 | 65.2 | 33.2 |
For Honor (2017) | 278.3 | 153.9 | 146.5 | 115.6 | 43.5 |
Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017) | 111.1 | 86.9 | 83.3 | 52.2 | 33.8 |
F1 2017 (2017) | 208 | 187 | 171 | 121 | 50 |
Assassin´s Creed Origins (2017) | 67 | 64 | 63 | 57 | 31 |
Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2017) | 198.3 | 169.2 | 145.8 | 104.6 | 35.3 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 141.5 | 82 | 56.7 | 25.4 | |
Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018) | 131.1 | 111.6 | 85.2 | 65 | 22.2 |
Far Cry 5 (2018) | 118 | 103 | 99 | 94 | 39 |
Ryzen 7 2700
low | med. | high | ultra | 4K | |
BioShock Infinite (2013) | 281.5 | 243.5 | 219.4 | 156.6 | |
Battlefield 4 (2013) | 199.6 | 199.7 | 199.8 | 137.2 | 69.5 |
The Witcher 3 (2015) | 285.1 | 209.8 | 120.6 | 69.4 | 44.8 |
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 253.2 | 184.5 | 111.5 | 94.7 | 40.3 |
Far Cry Primal (2016) | 115 | 104 | 94 | 87 | 46 |
The Division (2016) | 211.3 | 167.8 | 113.6 | 94 | 44.2 |
Deus Ex Mankind Divided (2016) | 120.9 | 113.3 | 99.1 | 52.1 | 34 |
Battlefield 1 (2016) | 196.2 | 182.4 | 153.5 | 136 | 58.5 |
Watch Dogs 2 (2016) | 104.9 | 94.4 | 86.8 | 66.3 | 33.6 |
For Honor (2017) | 227.2 | 161.4 | 158 | 122.7 | 46.3 |
Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017) | 118.9 | 85.1 | 81.6 | 53.5 | 38.6 |
F1 2017 (2017) | 209 | 196 | 174 | 127 | 53 |
Assassin´s Creed Origins (2017) | 70 | 65 | 64 | 59 | 32 |
Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2017) | 199.1 | 147.5 | 128.4 | 110.4 | 37.1 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 133.4 | 82.4 | 55 | 25.2 | |
Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018) | 134 | 116.2 | 90.9 | 68.3 | 32 |
Far Cry 5 (2018) | 114 | 100 | 96 | 96 | 39 |
Application Performance
In contrast to the gaming benchmarks, in the application benchmarks the order is as it should be, meaning that the Ryzen 7 2700 fares better here overall, achieving a good advantage to the Ryzen 5 2600. The two additional cores and thus the four additional threads just have more impact here than in the gaming benchmarks. We like the performance of the two non-X Ryzens despite everything, since you can arrange a well-performing and at the same time efficient system at only 65 watts. At a launching price of 195 Euros (~$230) for the Ryzen 5 2600, this is the clear price-performance winner here.
PCMark 10 - Score | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G |
PCMark 8 | |
Work Score Accelerated v2 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
Creative Score Accelerated v2 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
Home Score Accelerated v2 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | |
Intel Core i7-8700K | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G |
Temperatures
For the stress test, we are using the included fan, which has already some heat conducting paste applied to it coming from the factory. We already saw during the Cinebench-R15 multi-loop, that both cooling fans are capable to cool the processors effectively. However, when looking at the temperatures closer, it quickly becomes clear that the Wraith-Stealth has considerable trouble to keep the Ryzen 5 2600 within its limits. During the load test, the Ryzen 5 2600 heats up to 83 °C (181 °F). This does not give much room to the user, so some good case ventilation should be necessary to prevent unexpected shutdowns in order to keep the processor from heat death. We were able to easily cause a shutdown in an attempt at overclocking.
The included cooling fan of the Ryzen 7 2700 offers a larger cooling surface and thus also lower temperatures during load. At a good 63 °C (145 F°), the Ryzen 7 2700 remains significantly cooler than the Ryzen 5 2600.
Anyone thinking of buying the Ryzen 5 2600 should consider whether it would not make more sense to use a more powerful cooling unit.
Temperatures - CPU Temperature Prime95 | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 |
Noise Emissions
While the fans included in the box are very quiet during idle operation, they are clearly noticeable during load. We did not notice any intermittent revving up. The operation of the smaller Wraith-Stealth was slightly louder than the Wraith-Spire of the Ryzen 7 2700. This can be traced back to the significantly smaller cooling surface.
Both cooling systems do their job well, but those who like silence will not be happy with the included cooling fans. We definitely recommend a different cooling alternative to them. AIO liquid cooling systems offer good heat conduction at a low noise level.
Power Consumption
At 64 and 63 watts respectively without any load, the test system combined with the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 does not consume much less than the two performance models. But under load, the difference in the power requirements becomes visible. During the Cinebench-R15 multi-loop, we are measuring an average of 149 watts for the Ryzen 5 2600, with the Ryzen 7 2700 being close behind with 143 watts. Compared to the two faster Ryzen (5 2600X and 7 2700X), it becomes clear here that the non-X models are geared towards energy efficiency.
However, during gaming the difference in the power consumption turns out considerably smaller. During "The Witcher 3," both systems together with the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 are using less than 400 watts. This was not possible with the Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 2700X.
Power Consumption | |
Cinebench R15 Multi (external Monitor) | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X (Idle: 74.3 W) | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | |
1920x1080 The Witcher 3 ultra (external Monitor) | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X (Idle: 74.3 W) | |
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 2700 |
* ... smaller is better
Overclocking
Even though the Ryzen 5 2600 and the Ryzen 7 2700 are trimmed for efficiency, AMD also delivers those two processors with a multiplier that can be selected freely. To test this, we overclocked both processors to 4.0 GHz in order to see how the two models handle this. For stable operation, we also had to raise the Voltage to 1.375 V. However, it should become clear to everyone that this defeats the real purpose of the processors.
During the test, both processors benefited from the increased clock speed. But the negative side effect is a significantly increased power consumption. At almost 240 watts during the Cinebench-R15 multi-loop, the non-X models use almost as much power as the Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 2700X. Another problem turned out to be the included cooling fan of the Ryzen 5 2600, which already did not shine during regular operation. During the overclocking, the Wraith-Stealth was unable to cool the Ryzen 5 2600 effectively. After a short time, the Ryzen Master tool showed a CPU temperature of 105 °C (221 °F) and shortly after that, the system turned itself off. For longer time periods, safe operation is not possible here.
The Wraith-Spire of the Ryzen 7 2700 fares slightly better, heating up to 93 °C (199 °F) during the overclocking. But this cannot be recommended for longer time periods either.
In summary, we would recommend against overclocking the Ryzen 5 2600 and the Ryzen 7 2700. When doing that, all the positive characteristics of the two processors are getting lost. Anyone who absolutely wants to overclock should grab a Ryzen with the "X" in its name.
Verdict
AMD has optimized the Zen architecture in many areas, which ensures a decent performance increase overall. The new Zen+ architecture offers a significantly better IPC. Not only the new flagships are profiting from that, but also the energy efficient Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 2700 processors. At a TDP of 65 watts, the two CPUs offer a good performance. Anyone who wants to create an energy efficient system but not do without performance is well-served throughout by the new Ryzen models.
While in the direct comparison, the Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 2700X we recently tested offer a slightly better performance, the price-performance crown goes to the Ryzen 5 2600, since the price at market introduction is more than fair at 195 Euros (~$230).
With the Zen+ architecture, AMD catches up to the Coffee-Lake processors. This will please the end users in particular, since competition is known to be good for business. With its improvements of the Zen architecture, AMD was able to significantly improve the single-core as well as the multi-core performance. The Ryzen 5 2600 and the Ryzen 7 2700 are completing the new series well, and AMD is offering two very energy efficient yet fast processors with these CPUs.
The new Ryzen CPUs do not necessarily require a motherboard with the new X470 chip set. But in order to use all the new features, it should best be a current motherboard based on an X470 chip set. Anyone who still has a motherboard with the X370 chip set should make sure that it has the most current BIOS. During the purchase, the known hardware shops also offer a BIOS-update service.
Overall, the two Ryzen processors convince us both in terms of their performance as well as their power consumption. While it naturally makes sense to include a cooling unit, the Wraith-Stealth offers only a performance that is barely sufficient, and AMD should have equipped the Ryzen 5 2600 with the Wraith-Spire as well.
Now there only remains the question which processor is best suited for what user. In the test, the Ryzen 7 2700 was able to beat the more affordable Ryzen 5 2600 only in multi-thread applications. In all the other comparisons, both processors were at the same level. Anyone who wants to build a gaming system should take a closer look at the Ryzen 5 2600. Due to its higher basic clock speed, it was able to perform significantly better than the Ryzen 7 2700 in most gaming benchmarks. Moreover, its price of 195 Euros (~$230) is also a good purchase argument.