Return of the Zen - 12nm Ryzen 5 1600 (AF) found in new batches

[williamcll]

It is found that new Ryzen 5 1600 are being built on the 12nm node rather than 14nm when it was first made. It is noted to be slightly faster than the original but not to the point of the Ryzen 5 2600, which boasts better clock and memory on the same node size.

Quote

AMD's first-gen Ryzen processors are selling at all-time low pricing, but it turns out that some of these chips are filtering out into the hands of enthusiasts with an unexpected surprise: The 12nm process, which is more efficient and faster than the original manufacturing process used with AMD's freshman Ryzen chips.The original Ryzen 5 1600 landed with six cores and twelve threads powered by the 14nm GlobalFoundries process, but a new "AF" version has appeared at retailers for a mere $85 and apparently comes with the 12nm Zen+ architecture. 

 

AMD's second-gen Ryzen processors debuted with the new 12nm die, and while the new process didn't offer smaller transistors or a new grounds-up architecture, it did bring performance and efficiency gains compared to the original Ryzen's 14nm LPP process. AMD tweaked the Zen architecture, which it dubbed Zen+, to support higher frequencies, more sophisticated multi-core boost rates, and faster memory/caches that together yielded a ~3% increase in instruction per cycle (IPC) throughput. All of these advances made the Ryzen 5 2600 a solid step forward over the 1600, and though it certainly isn't a given, it's logical to assume the AF versions of the Ryzen 5 1600 could benefit from some of those same advantages. 

 

First, you need to look no further than the box, or the chip itself, to spot a new AF model. The original 14nm Ryzen 5 1600 models (released in 2017) come with the YD1600BBAEBOX product identifier, while the new models (released circa November 2019) come with the YD1600BBAFBOX part number. 

As we can see in the picture above (posted by redditor u/_vogonpoetry to Imgur), the first line of code on the IHS of the processor now also ends in "AF" for the impacted parts. As you can see from the second image, which is of our original 1600 sample we received from AMD, the older version comes with "AE" at the end of the code. 

The "AF" identifier was originally thought to classify the chips as two different steppings of the 14nm Zeppelin die (B1 and B2, respectively), but common test utilities, like CPU-Z and HWInfo, identify these chips as 12nm parts. There is a chance that this is merely a mistake in the product identifier strings programmed into the chips, but we've reached out to AMD for official comment and will update as necessary.  Even though these chips come with the 12nm process, AMD has left the clock rates for the 1600 the same as before, so you don't get any top-line improvement there.

One redditor recently scored an AF model and put it to the test, noting: 

 

"Interestingly this CPU boosts to 3.7GHz, 100MHz higher than the normal 3.6 boost which I thought was weird so I went back and checked the old AE chip and it too boosted up to a 37x multiplier, but only very briefly. Under any load, even 1-2 cores, the old chip fell to 3.4GHz. But this new AF chip was able to sustain 3.7 for longer periods which is only 200 MHz lower than the real 2600. The stock all-core boost algorithm is also much improved, still boosting to 3.6 GHz under cinebench load which is quite a bit higher than the 3.4 of the "AE" 1600. I expected to see only the 3% IPC gains of the Zen+, but the actual performance is much better, and it scores a full 400 pts higher in R20. In CPU-Z we can see 12nm listed and Pinnacle Ridge, matching the 2600. Memory Latency is reduced as well thanks to Zen+'s IMC.Also interesting that Ryzen Master complained about the CPU being unsupported until I updated it. I was a few version out of date, but not that old... They must have had to add special support for this chip?" Now, that certainly doesn't mean that all of these AF revision 1600's will offer these same advantages, but it does bode well for enthusiasts willing to spend what we would consider a paltry sum for the very capable AF version of the Ryzen 5 1600. 

 

Naturally, we would expect the advantages of the faster process to crop up when overclocking, but from the redditors' experience, that is still very much up to the silicon lottery: The AF model wasn't able to hit the same overclocked clock speeds as the standard Ryzen 5 1600. The redditor also found they couldn't overclock the memory as effectively, but bear in mind that the lion's share of memory overclocking gains with the second-gen Ryzen models came from improvements made to trace routing on motherboards and tuned BIOS revisions, so your mileage may vary with a better motherboard. 

The newer AF models also come with the Wraith Stealth cooler, which is a lesser cooler compared to the Wraith Spire that came with the original 1600 models. 

 

All of this begs the question: Why has AMD suddenly introduced 12nm die to the first-gen Ryzen processors? There are several theories, with the most obvious being that these are, in fact, 14nm processors that have been mistakenly programmed to identify as 12nm. Another likely explanation is that these are simply Ryzen 5 2600 die that didn't make the cut for that class of chip due to frequency targets, but because they meet the criteria required for a 1600 model, it is simply more economical for AMD to use the die in the older chips. We expect to learn more about the capabilities of this apparent new revision as more chips land in the hands of enthusiasts. It will be interesting to see if AMD begins updating other first-gen Ryzen chips to the 12nm process. We've reached out to AMD for comment and will update as necessary. 

Source:https://www.tomshardware.com/news/thats-ryzen-af-some-old-amd-chips-might-be-getting-a-12nm-makeover

Thoughts: While I personally have no use for such a chip, this would be a great budget workstation for anyone that are incredibly money constrained. 

[Flying Sausages]

I thought Zen is 14 and Zen+ is 12?

[Froody129]

That is a lot of CPU for the money. Though it is budget today, just a couple years ago Intel charged big bucks for the same performance.

[GDRRiley]

if that is true, rip all of intels new i3s and i5s.

[porina]

So is the short version, these are essentially 2600s that failed their grade and got remarked as 1600s? Kinda makes sense to use up what otherwise would end up in the bin.

 

37 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

if that is true, rip all of intels new i3s and i5s.

Maybe the i3, but the i5 will be going against 3600. Anyone who cares about performance would look at Zen 2 models which are much better. The 1600 today isn't really a performance choice, but something you might look at if you're on a very limited budget.

[GDRRiley]

Just now, porina said:

So is the short version, these are essentially 2600s that failed their grade and got remarked as 1600s? Kinda makes sense to use up what otherwise would end up in the bin.

 

Maybe the i3, but the i5 will be going against 3600. Anyone who cares about performance would look at Zen 2 models which are much better. The 1600 today isn't really a performance choice, but something you might look at if you're on a very limited budget.

still but 90 or 95% of the performance for 1/2 the cost?

[porina]

3 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

still but 90 or 95% of the performance for 1/2 the cost?

What are you comparing with that now? Even if we go new 1600 vs 3600, for some light uses maybe it'll be close but gaps will grow under more challenging loads.

[Doobeedoo]

Hmm well, cool really. 

[Bitter]

Hmmmm this seems like a much better value than a 2600 for the upcoming build for my friend. I'm going to keep an eye on this!

 

Is this happening with other Zen models too or just this one model?

[aliasdred]

Quote

If that is true, rip all of intel  new i3s and i5s.

 

I fixed that for you @GDRRiley

[dgsddfgdfhgs]

specwise is closer to a 2600 than a 1600

[amdorintel]

we need prices to compare value

[schwellmo92]

18 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

still but 90 or 95% of the performance for 1/2 the cost?

The 3600 is almost 50% better multi-core and 40% better single-core in Cinebench vs 1600. It is 25%~ faster in Adobe Premiere, and in gaming workloads about 20%~ faster. They draw the same power. The 1600 is closer to 75% of the performance of a 3600.

[williamcll]

2 hours ago, dgsddfgdfhgs said:

specwise is closer to a 2600 than a 1600

Price wise however you could get this instead: https://www.price.com.hk/product.php?p=433005

[dgsddfgdfhgs]

11 minutes ago, williamcll said:

Price wise however you could get this instead: https://www.price.com.hk/product.php?p=433005

USD85 to HKD1100...whatever

anyway most ryzen 2000 is out of stock in hk

[amdorintel]

8 minutes ago, dgsddfgdfhgs said:

anyway most ryzen 2000 is out of stock in hk

why is that? because of the riots?

[williamcll]

15 minutes ago, dgsddfgdfhgs said:

USD85 to HKD1100...whatever

anyway most ryzen 2000 is out of stock in hk

Which makes no sense because 3600 is still readily available. Are the goons at SSP trying to scam me again?

[dizmo]

Stupid, and confusing for consumers. 

 

[SkyHound0202]

Probably it's the fallout of AMD amending Wafer Supply Agreement with GlobalFoundries back in January 2019.

 

The main point in the amendment, I quote:

Quote

WHEREAS, as a matter of convenience and without waiving any of their respective rights, the Parties wish to merge the remaining obligations of the Sixth Amendment such that except as expressly agreed to the contrary herein, the Original WSA and this Seventh Amendment shall set forth all of the obligations among them with respect to AMD’s purchase of Products to be manufactured by FoundryCo;

 

WHEREAS, the Parties wish to set forth their agreement with respect to certain purchase commitments, pricing and other terms of the Agreement primarily regarding MPU Products, GPU Products and Chipset Products manufactured using any Process Nodes larger than the 7nm Process Node during the period commencing on January 1, 2019 and continuing through March 1, 2024 (the “New Period”), and to remove all future obligations of AMD and FoundryCo with respect to any Process Nodes smaller than or equal to the 7nm Process Node;

Basically, AMD is ditching GF in favor of TSMC for 7 nm and beyond, but they still have to fulfill the "above 7nm" (i.e., 14 & 12 nm) WSA with GF somehow.

 

That's why the opt to move mid tier 1st gen 14 nm Ryzen products to 12 nm, freeing the existing 14nm line; and used the freed 14 nm slot to manufacture low-end Athlon 3000G.

 

Which I would say it's a smart move, since a mature mass-production-ready manufacturing node (GF 12/14 nm) is still better than a struggling new node (Intel 10 nm) or a congested high-demand node (TSMC 7 nm)

[Boats2020]

Picked it up on Amazon 2 days ago for $85, now they are $104. It will be replacing the Ryzen 3 2200G on ASRock B450 Pro board and RX 570 8GB GPU.

[williamcll]

Steve made a video about it. 

 

[Bitter]

Bought one for my friends budget gaming build, seems like too good a deal to pass up for 99% a 2600 at a discount brand new. I have a Wraith Spire to put on top of it so there should be ample cooling!

 

Oh yea, it's back in stock for $85 just without prime shipping.

[CTR640]

CPU Wars: Rise of the Ryzen

[rcmaehl]

This is cool AF

[Boats2020]

I replaced the Ryzen3 2200G with Ryzen5 1600 AF. Overall I'm happy with the $85 upgrade.

 

I'm not sure if the Cinebench R20 score 2217 on the first attempt is the limit for my PC (No overclocking) I'll run few more tests to see if I can get a higher Cinebench score and tinker with OC. 

 

 

 

AMD Ryzen5 1600AF

AMD Wraith Prism Cooler 

ASRock B450Pro4

Corsair DDR4 2666MHz 16GB

MSI RX-570 8GB

SAMSUNG 860 EVO SSD 500GB

SEASONIC FOCUS GOLD 450W PSU

PHANTEKS P400S