AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF Review
| Category | Desktop | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
|---|---|---|
| Target | mid-range | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Socket Compatibility | AM4 | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Integrated Graphics | None | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Cooler Included | Yes | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Overclock Potential | 0 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Year | 2019 Model | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Price | 85 USD | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Number of Cores | 6 Cores | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Number of Threads | 12 Threads | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Core Frequency | 3.2 GHz | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Boost Frequency | 3.6 GHz | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Max Stable Overclock | 3.6 GHz | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Power Consumption | 65 W | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Manufacturing Process | 12 nm | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
| L3 Cache | 16 MB | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Maximum Supported Memory | 0 GB | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Price-Value Score | 100 % | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Speed Score | 54 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Productivity Score | 44 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Gaming Score | 82 % | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
| Max 1080p Bottleneck | 38 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Max 1440p Bottleneck | 19 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Max 4K Bottleneck | 9.5 % | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Overall Score | 43/100 | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
The Ryzen 5 1600 AF is one of AMD's mid-range Desktop processors. It was released in 2019 with 6 cores and 12 threads. With base clock at 3.2GHz, max speed at 3.6GHz, and a 65W power rating. The Ryzen 5 1600 AF is based on the Pinnacle Ridge 12nm family and is part of the Ryzen 5 series.
What this all means is that the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF is an absolute beast when it comes to multi-threaded workloads, especially at this price point. If you're counting on doing some video editing or compiling one hell of an Excel spreadsheet, you're going to see firsthand a performance boost with the Ryzen 5 1600 AF.
One of the nice things about the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF processors is that the retail boxed models come with a CPU cooler. So, you can pick something like the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF up for $85 and don’t need to spend any extra money on CPU cooling.
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF retail boxed processor comes with the traditional ‘pancake’ CPU cooler. Nothing fancy, but it gets the job done on this processor which is rated at 65W TDP. You do not need to have an aftermarket cooling solution unless you want to.
With Ryzen 5, AMD continues to innovate on its new architecture and 12nm process. Like Ryzen 5, AMD has engineered Ryzen 5 to operate on a AM4 chipset with all the modern amenities of computing. This includes support for DDR4 RAM, the fastest NVMe SSDs and Thunderbolt 3 ports.
Now the biggest question is can AMD’s Ryzen 5 processor play games? The answer is simply yes as it got a respectable gaming score of 82% in our benchmarks.
Regardless of those external factors, the Ryzen 5 1600 AF proves it has the chops to be your main gaming system and a just as effective media creation platform – two things that are becoming intrinsically connected in this age of live-streaming, eSports and uploading gameplay videos.
The Ryzen 5 1600 AF clocks up to 3.6Ghz just as it promises on the box, and with AMD’s software you can take one of the cores all the way up to 3.7GHz. However, don’t expect to get much beyond that without seriously upgrading your cooling solution and manually tweaking voltages behind the operating system level.
If you’ve been looking for an affordable, powerhouse CPU that both works and parties hard, this is it.
Although the 65W-rated cooler doesn't feature a copper base or the LEDs found on AMD's higher-end thermal solutions, it does handle Ryzen 5's heat output deftly enough to facilitate XFR-triggered frequencies. This gives you an extra 200 MHz. We were even able to overclock the Ryzen 5 1600 AF to 3.8 GHz within a reasonable temperature range. The fan also blows down onto the motherboard, which provide additional cooling around the socket. If you need more bling, AMD recently announced that it now offers the LED-equipped cooler separately.
Which GPU to Pick for AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF
Below is a comparison of all graphics cards average FPS performance (using an average of 80+ games at ultra quality settings), combined with the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF.
| Graphics Card | Price | Cost Per Frame | Avg 1080p | Avg 1440p | Avg 4K |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 24GB | $ 1,599 | $ 6.5 | 245.3 FPS
|
245.3 FPS
|
173.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 3.5 | 228.9 FPS
|
228.9 FPS
|
162.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX 24GB | $ 999 | $ 4.5 | 221.4 FPS
|
217.3 FPS
|
140.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB | $ 1,199 | $ 5.6 | 212.6 FPS
|
212.4 FPS
|
150.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti 12GB | $ 799 | $ 3.9 | 204.3 FPS
|
204 FPS
|
144.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT 20GB | $ 899 | $ 4.5 | 201.3 FPS
|
197.6 FPS
|
127.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 24GB | $ 1,499 | $ 7.8 | 191.1 FPS
|
184.2 FPS
|
122.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT 16GB | $ 1,099 | $ 6 | 182.9 FPS
|
179.6 FPS
|
115.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 24GB | $ 1,999 | $ 11.1 | 179.9 FPS
|
179.7 FPS
|
127.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 16GB | $ 999 | $ 5.6 | 179.1 FPS
|
173.7 FPS
|
113.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 16GB | $ 649 | $ 3.8 | 168.6 FPS
|
163.5 FPS
|
107.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 4.8 | 166.6 FPS
|
163.8 FPS
|
113.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 10GB | $ 699 | $ 4.2 | 166.5 FPS
|
160.6 FPS
|
107 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 12GB | $ 599 | $ 3.7 | 160.8 FPS
|
156.7 FPS
|
109.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti 10GB | $ 599 | $ 4.2 | 142.9 FPS
|
138.9 FPS
|
94.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 16GB | $ 579 | $ 4.3 | 133.6 FPS
|
129.5 FPS
|
84.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 3.9 | 127.4 FPS
|
122.9 FPS
|
81.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN RTX 24GB | $ 2,499 | $ 21.4 | 117 FPS
|
116.5 FPS
|
78.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB | $ 1,299 | $ 11.4 | 113.9 FPS
|
113.4 FPS
|
76 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT 12GB | $ 479 | $ 4.3 | 112.4 FPS
|
109.8 FPS
|
71 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB 8GB | $ 399 | $ 3.6 | 110.6 FPS
|
109.2 FPS
|
75 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti 8GB | $ 399 | $ 3.8 | 104.4 FPS
|
103.3 FPS
|
70.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8GB | $ 699 | $ 6.8 | 103.3 FPS
|
101.9 FPS
|
68 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 4 | 99.7 FPS
|
97.8 FPS
|
64.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN V 12GB | $ 2,999 | $ 30.3 | 99.1 FPS
|
98.6 FPS
|
67.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 8GB | $ 299 | $ 3 | 99 FPS
|
98.3 FPS
|
67.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7600 8GB | $ 269 | $ 2.7 | 98.9 FPS
|
97.2 FPS
|
63.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 8GB | $ 699 | $ 7.2 | 97.7 FPS
|
95.3 FPS
|
63 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT 8GB | $ 379 | $ 4 | 93.6 FPS
|
91.4 FPS
|
59.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB | $ 759 | $ 8.3 | 91.6 FPS
|
90.9 FPS
|
60.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8GB | $ 499 | $ 5.5 | 91 FPS
|
87.8 FPS
|
58.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon VII 16GB | $ 699 | $ 7.8 | 89.8 FPS
|
87.1 FPS
|
57.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN Xp 12GB | $ 1,199 | $ 13.4 | 89.8 FPS
|
87.8 FPS
|
59.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 4.6 | 87.4 FPS
|
84.8 FPS
|
55.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 5.8 | 86.2 FPS
|
82 FPS
|
55.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 8GB | $ 200 | $ 2.3 | 86.2 FPS
|
84.8 FPS
|
58.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 12GB | $ 329 | $ 3.8 | 85.6 FPS
|
82.8 FPS
|
55.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 8GB | $ 400 | $ 4.9 | 81.6 FPS
|
76.3 FPS
|
50.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5700 8GB | $ 349 | $ 4.4 | 80.1 FPS
|
77.8 FPS
|
50.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8GB | $ 499 | $ 6.4 | 77.8 FPS
|
74.3 FPS
|
48.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB | $ 350 | $ 4.6 | 76.8 FPS
|
70.2 FPS
|
45.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB | $ 279 | $ 3.7 | 75.6 FPS
|
72.7 FPS
|
47.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 295X2 4GB | $ 1,499 | $ 20.6 | 72.9 FPS
|
68.7 FPS
|
48 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB | $ 499 | $ 6.9 | 72.7 FPS
|
70.6 FPS
|
46.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 8GB | $ 409 | $ 5.7 | 72.1 FPS
|
68.9 FPS
|
45 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti 6GB | $ 249 | $ 3.5 | 70.5 FPS
|
66.9 FPS
|
44.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB | $ 999 | $ 14.3 | 70.1 FPS
|
66.2 FPS
|
43.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB | $ 279 | $ 4.1 | 68.5 FPS
|
65.5 FPS
|
42.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB | $ 399 | $ 5.9 | 68.1 FPS
|
66 FPS
|
43.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8GB | $ 399 | $ 6 | 66.3 FPS
|
62.8 FPS
|
40.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 6GB | $ 229 | $ 3.5 | 64.6 FPS
|
61.8 FPS
|
40.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB | $ 649 | $ 10.6 | 61 FPS
|
58 FPS
|
37.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 6GB | $ 220 | $ 3.6 | 60.8 FPS
|
58.1 FPS
|
38 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 590 8GB | $ 279 | $ 4.8 | 57.7 FPS
|
53.6 FPS
|
34.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB | $ 649 | $ 11.7 | 55.4 FPS
|
55.1 FPS
|
37 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4GB | $ 160 | $ 3 | 53 FPS
|
50.5 FPS
|
33 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB 8GB | $ 199 | $ 3.8 | 52.5 FPS
|
48.7 FPS
|
31.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 4GB | $ 549 | $ 10.5 | 52.3 FPS
|
49.1 FPS
|
32.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB | $ 229 | $ 4.5 | 51.2 FPS
|
47.4 FPS
|
30.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 Nano 4GB | $ 649 | $ 12.9 | 50.4 FPS
|
49.2 FPS
|
32.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK 6GB | $ 999 | $ 20.5 | 48.8 FPS
|
45.5 FPS
|
31.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 FURY 4GB | $ 549 | $ 11.5 | 47.6 FPS
|
46.4 FPS
|
30.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB 6GB | $ 254 | $ 5.3 | 47.5 FPS
|
44.4 FPS
|
29.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB 4GB | $ 169 | $ 3.6 | 47.1 FPS
|
43.7 FPS
|
27.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 390X 8GB | $ 429 | $ 9.4 | 45.8 FPS
|
44.5 FPS
|
29.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 3GB | $ 170 | $ 3.8 | 45.1 FPS
|
42.2 FPS
|
27.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 4GB | $ 329 | $ 7.4 | 44.3 FPS
|
41 FPS
|
28 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB | $ 400 | $ 9.3 | 43.1 FPS
|
41.4 FPS
|
27.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 390 8GB | $ 329 | $ 7.7 | 42.8 FPS
|
40.6 FPS
|
25.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB | $ 169 | $ 4 | 42.2 FPS
|
40.1 FPS
|
25.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4GB | $ 149 | $ 3.7 | 40.4 FPS
|
38.3 FPS
|
24.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB | $ 179 | $ 4.7 | 37.7 FPS
|
35.9 FPS
|
23.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 380X 4GB | $ 229 | $ 7.2 | 31.7 FPS
|
29.9 FPS
|
19.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 285 2GB | $ 249 | $ 8.7 | 28.5 FPS
|
26.9 FPS
|
16.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 380 2GB | $ 199 | $ 7.1 | 28.2 FPS
|
26.6 FPS
|
16.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB | $ 169 | $ 6.1 | 27.8 FPS
|
26.4 FPS
|
17.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB | $ 279 | $ 10.1 | 27.6 FPS
|
26.3 FPS
|
16.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 2GB | $ 199 | $ 7.3 | 27.2 FPS
|
25.6 FPS
|
16.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | $ 169 | $ 7.1 | 23.7 FPS
|
22.2 FPS
|
14.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 560 4GB | $ 99 | $ 4.5 | 21.9 FPS
|
20.3 FPS
|
13.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 2GB | $ 159 | $ 7.4 | 21.5 FPS
|
19.9 FPS
|
13.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R7 370 2GB | $ 149 | $ 7.1 | 21.1 FPS
|
18.7 FPS
|
12.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R7 265 2GB | $ 149 | $ 7.1 | 20.9 FPS
|
18.1 FPS
|
12.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 460 4GB | $ 140 | $ 7.2 | 19.4 FPS
|
18 FPS
|
11.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB | $ 149 | $ 8 | 18.7 FPS
|
15.5 FPS
|
10.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 550 2GB | $ 79 | $ 5.2 | 15.3 FPS
|
14.3 FPS
|
9.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 2GB | $ 79 | $ 5.4 | 14.6 FPS
|
13.6 FPS
|
8.4 FPS
|
Intel Vs AMD: Which CPU is Best?
Jul 12, 2020 - A rivalry for the ages, and a question often asked and wondered about. Whenever you want to build or upgrade your PC, you have to make a decision: Buy an Intel or AMD processor?
Impact of RAM Size and Speed on Gaming Benchmarks
Jul 5, 2020 - Does RAM size and speed affect your gaming performance? should you invest in a high performance RAM kit? Find out here.
Who Is Lilith and What Terrifies Us About This Diablo Demon?
Jul 24, 2023 No evil entity is more scary than Lilith herself, shrouded in darkness.
Why You Should Always Buy a Mid-to-High-Range Gaming PC?
Jun 23, 2020 - Mid- and high-range builds perform very well for their price, and are better than the entry-level in terms of power, longevity, and reliability, and they offer more bang for your buck especially when looking at their price-by-year advantage.
Should you buy a Pre-Built PC or a Custom PC?
Jun 11, 2020 - Pre-built systems are an attractive option for those who are less concerned with the minute details of every component in their build. Building your own PC is the best solution for those who want full control over every aspect of their build. It provides the most thorough customization options, from the CPU to the fans and lighting.
How to use CPUAgent To Find The Right CPU
Jun 2, 2020 - How to find the Right CPU? Whether you’re building or upgrading a PC, the processor matters a lot. CPUAgent is the right tool to help you find and choose the right CPU for your needs.
RTX 3070 with 10600k vs 3700x Bottleneck Comparison
Sep 03, 2020 - Save your CPU money and invest it in a powerful GPU instead. So, which affordable yet powerfulrt CPU strikes the best performance-price balance with the NVIDIA RTX 3070?
10600K vs 3600X: Battle of the mid-range CPUs
May 23, 2020 - The best performance to price value mid-range cpus are here. Find out more in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i5-10600K vs Ryzen 5 3600X's capabilities.
10700K vs 3700X: Specs, 80+ Game Benchmarks, Bottleneck, and Streaming Analysis
May 22, 2020 - Which one is worth it, Core i7-10700K or Ryzen 7 3700X? Find out in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i7-10700K vs Ryzen 7 3700X's capabilities.
13900K vs 3900X: Specs, 80+ Game Benchmarks, Bottleneck, and Streaming Analysis
May 21, 2020 - 10 cores vs 12 cores. Top-of-the-line very high-end cpus duke it out.
2500K vs 3570K vs 4670K vs 6600K vs 7600K vs 8600K vs 9600K vs 10600K: Should you consider upgrading?
May 21, 2020 - In this massive comparison across 8 generations of Intel Core i5 series CPUs, we explore the performance improvements by generation and whether it is reasonable or not to upgrade to Intel's latest.
Critics Reviews
The original 14nm Ryzen 5 1600 was a great deal at a little over $100 and the Ryzen 5 2600 was killer at $120, but the Ryzen 5 1600 AF blows them both out of the water at just $85. That is, as ...
The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF is a good processor. The R5 1600 won one of our Best CPUs awards for 2017, but this isn’t a 2017 part – it’s sort of a 2018 Zen+ part, but it was released in 2019.
Le processeur est livré avec le cooler "wraith stealth" même que le ryzen 5 2600. Cela parce qu'on a ici le Ryzen 5 1600 "AF" une version du Ryzen 5 1600 "AE" ( Se voit sur la boîte du processeur ) mis à jour avec une architecture 12nm améliorée. On a des performances qui sont équivalentes au Ryzen 5 2600 stock.
In this review, we're looking at AMD's new Ryzen 5 1600 AF processor, which is a 2nd Gen Ryzen CPU (with 1st Gen naming) to replace the R5 1600. Sponsor: Lian Li O11 Dynamic XL (Newegg https ...
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF Review Disclosure: We get a small commission when you purchase products via our Amazon links, this doesn’t cost you anything extra, it’s a cut that comes out on Amazon’s ...
In this review, we're looking at AMD's new Ryzen 5 1600 AF processor, which is a 2nd Gen Ryzen CPU (with 1st Gen naming) to replace the R5 1600. Sponsor: Lian Li O11 Dynamic XL (Newegg https://geni.us/KmQGR) AMD somewhat silently released a new CPU -- the AMD Ryzen 5 1600…
Al igual que la versión original, el AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AF ofrece 6 núcleos, que a su vez ofrecen 12 hilos.Estos parten de una frecuencia base de 3.20 GHz para alcanzar los 3.60 GHz en el modo Boost, 200 MHz extras frente a la versión original.Ofrece además, un total de 2 x 8 MB de caché L3, así como 6 x 512 KB de caché L2 y 6 x 32 KB + 6 x 64 KB de caché L1, por lo que ofrece un reparto ...
The original 14nm Ryzen 5 1600 was a great deal at a little over $100 and the Ryzen 5 2600 was killer at $120, but the Ryzen 5 1600 AF blows them both out of the water at just $85.That is, as long as you can get it. The CPU seems to be readily available in the United States, but it’s not sold everywhere.
Ryzen 5 1600 af o R3 3300x? Hola que tal. Tengo un 3200g y estoy por actualizar. Estoy entre un 1600 Af y un 3300x, ambos tienen buen precio actualmente y tienen una diferencia de mil pesos. Estuve mirando diferencias pero me confundieron un poco. Si bien uno tiene mas nucleos que el otro, parece que para jugar, sirve el 3300x a pesar de que ...
The Ryzen 5 1600 features a 3.2 GHz base clock rate compared to the "X" model's 3.6 GHz, and it also incurs a similar 400 MHz deficit to the dual-core Precision Boost frequency.