Ryzen 5 1400 CPU by AMD Review

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.

We tested the Ryzen 5 1400, the most basic CPU from AMD’s new Ryzen 5 lineup. It has four cores, eight threads, 3.2 GHz base clock, 3.4 GHz turbo clock, TDP of 65 W, and uses the new AM4 socket. Check it out!
After several years, AMD finally launched a new generation of CPUs, based on a brand new architecture, called Zen, using the new AM4 socket. The first CPUs based on this new socket are called Ryzen 7 and they are high-end processors. AMD now launched the Ryzen 5 (mainstream) processors, and the Ryzen 3 (entry) models will be available soon.
There are, so far, four Ryzen 5 models: the Ryzen 5 1600X (6 cores, 4.0 GHz maximum clock), the Ryzen 5 1600 (6 cores, 3.6 GHz maximum clock), the Ryzen 5 1500X (4 cores, 3.7 GHz maximum clock,) and the Ryzen 5 1400 (4 cores, 3.4 GHz maximum clock). All of them have the SMT (Simultaneous Multi-Threading) technology, similar to Intel’s Hyper-Threading technology, which simulates two logic cores on each physical core.
Ryzen CPUs use the new AM4 socket, and are compatible with DDR4 memory. This means they are incompatible with “old” motherboards that use AM3+ and FM2+ sockets. They have no integrated video, but the AM4 socket supports integrated video, because future APUs that use this socket will have this feature.
These new CPUs are manufactured under 14 nm “FinFET” technology. These CPUs are build with “Core Complex” (CCX) modules, and each CCX has four cores. Each core has 128 kiB L1 cache and 512 kiB L2 cache, and each CCX has an 8 MiB L3 cache.
The Ryzen 5 1400 have two CCXs, with two disabled cores each, so its configuration is called 2+2. Its base clock is 3.2 GHz, and it can uses a core boost clock up to 3.4 GHz on up to two cores. There is also another clock rate named XFR, of 3.45 GHz, but AMD don’t let clear when this clock is actually enabled.
Ryzen CPUs have unlocked clock multiplier, which allows the user to overclocking it simply by changing the settings on the motherboard setup, if it uses one of the chipsets compatible with this feature (B350 e X370).
Besides that, Ryzen CPUs have a set of features called “SenseMI”, where the CPU detects and controls the clock in 25 MHz steps, according to several factors.
The Ryzen 5 1400 comes with the Wraith Stealth cooler, but the sample we received come alone, with no box or cooler.
The direct competitor of the Ryzen 5 1400 is the Core i3-7350K. So, we compared the Ryzen 5 1400 to the Core i3-7350K, and we also included in the comparison the Ryzen 5 1500X, the Ryzen 5 1600X, the Core i3-7100, the Core i5-7400, and the Core i5-7600K.
Figure 1 shows the Ryzen 5 1400 CPU.

Figure 1: the Ryzen 5 1400 CPU

As the Ryzen CPUs come with no integrated video, we used a GeForce GTX 1080 video card on all tests.
Let’s compare the main specs of the reviewed CPUs in the next page.
[nextpage title=”The Reviewed CPUs”]
In the tables below, we compare the main features of the CPUs included in our review.

CPU	Cores	HT/SMT	IGP	Internal Clock	Turbo Clock	Core	Tech.	TDP	Socket	Price
Ryzen 5 1400	4	Yes	No	3.2 GHz	3.4 GHz	Summit Ridge	14 nm	65 W	AM4	USD 170
Ryzen 5 1500X	4	Yes	No	3.5 GHz	3.7 GHz	Summit Ridge	14 nm	65 W	AM4	USD 190
Ryzen 5 1600X	6	Yes	No	3.6 GHz	4.0 GHz	Summit Ridge	14 nm	95 W	AM4	USD 250
Core i3-7100	2	Yes	Yes	3.9 GHz	–	Kaby Lake	14 nm	51 W	LGA1151	USD 120
Core i3-7350K	2	Yes	Yes	4.2 GHz	–	Kaby Lake	14 nm	60 W	LGA1151	USD 170
Core i5-7400	4	No	Yes	3.0 GHz	3.5 GHz	Kaby Lake	14 nm	65 W	LGA1151	USD 190
Core i5-7600K	4	No	Yes	3.8 GHz	4.2 GHz	Kaby Lake	14 nm	91 W	LGA1151	USD 240

Below you can see the memory configuration for each CPU.

CPU	L2 Cache	L3 Cache	Memory Support	Memory Channels
Ryzen 5 1400	4 x 512 kiB	2 x 4 MiB	Up to DDR4-2667	2
Ryzen 5 1500X	4 x 512 kiB	2 x 8 MiB	Up to DDR4-2667	2
Ryzen 5 1600X	6 x 512 kiB	2 x 8 MiB	Up to DDR4-2667	2
Core i3-7100	2 x 256 kiB	3 MiB	Up to DDR4-2400 or DDR3L-1600	2
Core i3-7350K	2 x 256 kiB	4 MiB	Up to DDR4-2400 or DDR3L-1600	2
Core i5-7400	4 x 256 kiB	6 MiB	Up to DDR4-2400 or DDR3L-1600	2
Core i5-7600K	4 x 256 KiB	6 MiB	Up to DDR4-2400 or DDR3L-1600	2

[nextpage title=”How We Tested”]During our benchmarking sessions, we used the configuration listed below. Between our benchmarking sessions, the only variable devicand was the CPU being tested, besides the motherboard, which had to be replaced to match the different CPUs.
Hardware Configuration

Motherboard (AM4): ASRock X370 Taichi
Motherboard (LGA1151): Gigabyte AORUS Z270X-Gaming 7
Memory: 16 GiB DDR4-3200, two Geil Dyna4 (GEX416GB3200C16D) 8 GiB memory modules configured at 3200 MHz
Boot drive: WD Blue 1,000 GiB SSD
Video Card: GeForce GTX 1080
Video Monitor: Philips 236VL
Power Supply: Corsair VS500

Operating System Configuration

Windows 10 Home 64-bit
NTFS
Video resolution: 1920 x 1080 60 Hz

Driver Versions

NVIDIA driver version: 381.65

Software Used

Error Margin
We adopted a 3% error margin. Thus, differences below 3% cannot be considered relevant. In other words, products with a performance difference below 3% should be considered as having similar performance.
[nextpage title=”PCMark 8″]
PCMark 8 is a benchmarking software that uses real-world applications to measure the computer performance. We ran three tests: Home, which includes web browsing, writing, light gaming, photo editing, and video chat tests; Creative, that includes web surfing, video editing, group video chat, video conversion, and gaming; and Work, which runs tasks such as writing documents, web browsing, spreadsheets, editing, and video chatting. Let’s see the results.

On the PCMark 8 Home benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 10% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

On the Creative benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1400 performed similarly to the Core i3-7350K.

On the Work benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 11% slower than the Core i3-7350K.
[nextpage title=”3DMark”]

3DMark is a program with a set of several 3D benchmarks. Fire Strike runs a “heavy” DirectX 11 simulation. Sky Diver also measures DirectX 11 performance, and is aimed on average computers. The Cloud Gate benchmark measures DirectX 10 performance, and the Ice Storm Extreme measures DirectX 9 performance and is targeted to entry-level computers, so we don’t ran it.

On Fire Strike, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 12% faster than the Core i3-7350K.

On the Sky Diver benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 5% faster than the Core i3-7350K.

On the Cloud Gate benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 33% faster than the Core i3-7350K.

[nextpage title=”Performance in programs”]

Cinebench R15

Cinebench R15 is based on the Cinema 4D software. It is very useful to measure the performance gain obtained by the presence of several processing cores while rendering heavy 3D images. Rendering is an area where a bigger number of cores helps a lot, because usually this kind of software recognize several processors (Cinebench R15, for example, can use up to 256 processing cores).
We ran the CPU benchmark, which renders a complex image using all the processing cores (real and virtual) to speed up the process. The result is given as a score.

On Cinebench R15 CPU benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 49% faster than the Core i3-7350K.

CPU-Z

On its current version, the well-known hardware identification software CPU-Z comes with a benchmarking tool, which measures CPU performance for one core and for all available cores.

On the single thread benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 11% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

On the multiple thread benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 47% faster than the Core i3-7350K.

Handbrake

Handbrake is an open-source video converting tool. We converted a Full HD, six-minute long .mov video file into an .MP4 file, using the “Fast 1080p30” output profile. The results below are given in seconds, so the lower the better.

On Handbrake, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 40% faster than the Core i3-7350K.

DivX

We used the DivX converter, a tool included in the DivX package, in order to measure the encoding performance using this codec. The DivX codec is capable of recognizing and using all available cores and the SSE4 instruction set.
We converted a Full HD, six-minute long .mov video file into an .avi file, using the “HD 1080p” output profile. The results below are given in seconds, so the lower the better.

On DivX encoding, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 18% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

Media Espresso

Media Espresso is a video conversion program that uses the graphics processing unit of the video engine to speed up the conversion process. We converted a 1 GiB, 1920x1080i, 23,738 kbps, .mov video file to a smaller 320×200, H.264, .MP4 file for viewing on a smartphone. The results below are given in seconds, so the lower the better.

Here the Ryzen 5 1400 was 19% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

Photoshop CC

The best way to measure the performance of a CPU is by using real programs. The problem, of course, is to create a methodology that offers precise results. For Photoshop CC, we used a script named “Retouch Artist Speed Test,” which applies a series of filters to a standard image and gives the time Photoshop takes to run all of them. The results are given in seconds, so the less, the best.

In this test, the Ryzen 5 1400 performed similarly to the Core i3-7350K.

WinRAR

Another task where the CPU is very demanded is on file compacting. We ran a test compacting a folder with 8 GiB on 6.813 files to a file, using WinRAR 4.2. The graph below shows the time taken on each test.

On WinRAR, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 12% slower than the Core i3-7350K.
[nextpage title=”Gaming Performance”]

Battlefield 1

Battlefield 1 (BF1) is a first person shooter launched in October 2016, base on the Frostbite engine. To benchmark using this game, we played the same misson on the campaign mode, in Full HD and graphic settings as “high”, measuring the framerate with FRAPS.
The results below are expressed in frames per second.

On Battlefield 1, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 31% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (or simply CS:GO) is a very popular FPS, launched in august 2012, that uses the Source engine, which is DirectX 9. We benchmarked it playing the “Inferno” map against bots, in Full HD and graphic settings as “high”, measuring the framerate with FRAPS.
The results below are expressed in frames per second.

On this game, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 24% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided is an action RPG with FPS elements, launched in August 2016, that uses the Dawn engine, being compatible with DirectX 12. We tested it using the benchmark included in the game, with DirectX 12 enabled, Full HD, and graphic options as “medium”.
The results below are expressed in frames per second.

On this game, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 26% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

Dirt Rally

Dirt Rally is an off-road racing game released in April 2015, using Ego engine. To measure performance using this game, we ran the performance test included in the game, in 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) resolution and image quality configured as “medium” and MSAA off.
The results below are expressed in frames per second (fps).

In this game,the Ryzen 5 1400 was 34% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

Doom

Doom is an FPS/horror/sci-fi game launched in May 2016, that used the id Tech 6 engine. We tested the performance in this game, with the API OpenGL with quality options “high” and FXAA on, measuring the framerate with FRAPS three times.
The results below are expressed in fps and they are the mean between the three collected results.

In this game, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 24% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

Grand Theft Auto V

Grand Theft Auto V, or simply GTA V, is an open-world action game released for PCs in April of 2015, using the RAGE engine. In order to measure the performance on this game, we ran the performance test of the game, measuring the framerate with FRAPS. We ran GTA V at Full HD, with all image quality set as “high” and MSAA off.

The results below are expressed in frames per second.

On GTA V, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 16% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

Hitman

Hitman is an action/stealth game, launched in March 2016, that uses a DirectX 12 compatible version of the Glacier 2 engine. To measure performance in this game, we ran the benchmark in it, measuring the framerate with FRAPS. We ran this game with DirectX 12 enabled, with image quality set as “high”.
The results below, in Full HD and 4K, are expressed in frames per second.

On Hitman, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 5% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

Mad Max

Mad Max is an open-world action game launched in September of 2015, using the Avalanche engine. In order to measure the performance using this game, we ran its intro, measuring the framerate with FRAPS three times. We ran the game with image quality set as “high”.

The results below are expressed in fps and they are the mean between the three collected results.

On Mad Max, all the CPUs performed similarly.

Rainbow Six Siege

Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Siege is a tactical FPS game launched in december 2015, using the AnvilNext engine, which is DirectX 11. In order to measure the performance using this game, we ran its built-in benchmark, in Full HD and with image quality set as “high”.

The results below are expressed in fps.

On this game, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 12% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

Rise of the Tomb Rider

Rise of the Tomb Rider is an adventure/action game launched in January of 2016, based on Foundation engine. In order to measure the performance using this game, we ran the benchmark included on it, using Full HD resolution and graphics quality set to “medium”.
The results below are expressed in frames per second.

On Rise of the Tomb Rider, the Ryzen 5 1400 was 49% slower than the Core i3-7350K.

The Witcher 3 – Wild Hunt

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is an open-world RPG released in May of 2015 and based on the REDengine 3 engine. In order to measure the performance on this game, we walked around at the first scene of the game, measuring the frame rate with FRAPS three times. We ran the game with image quality set to “ultra.”

The results below are expressed in fps and they are the mean between the three collected results.

On Rise of the Tomb Raider, all the CPUs performed the same way.

[nextpage title=”Overclocking”]
As we mentioned before, all Ryzen CPUs have unlocked clock multiplier, which means you can overclocking them just by changing its multiplier, as long as the motherboard has this feature.
Raising the core voltage to 1.35V, we were able to run the Ryzen 5 1400 at 3.9 GHz (100 MHz x 39) with tested stability on Prime95.
It may be possible to reach higher frequencies (even above 4.0 GHz) if you “play” with the available adjusts, as long as you have a good power supply, motherboard, and cooling system.
It is clear that the Ryzen 5 1400 has an excellent potential for overclocking. However, it is good to keep in mind that the overclock capability depends on pure luck, since two CPUs of same model can reach different maximum clocks.
[nextpage title=”Conclusions”]
The Ryzen 5 1400 CPU is, so far, the most inexpensive AM4 CPU (this title will be soon taken by Ryzen 3 CPUs, when they were launched). It means it is a mainstream model, focused on cost/benefit ratio. If we think about applications that use multiple threads simultaneously, it actually delivers a good performance for a decent price.
In games, things are a little different. It is fast enough to run all games decently, but it was a little slower than the Core i3-7350K and even to the Core i3-76100, which costs less. So, we can conclude the Ryzen 5 1400 hasn’t a good cost/benefit ratio for gaming.
However, we need to keep in mind its overclocking potential: the Ryzen 5 1400 suffers because of its low clock (3.2 GHz) but it can easily be set to work at 3.9 GHz (or close to this.) So, if you intend overclocking it, this CPU can be an excellent choice, taking benefit from the clock raise.