1600 vs 1600X Ryzen, what's the difference? and ram speed?

[wdodge0912]

So what's the difference really? is the 1600 just a downclocked 1600X with a cooler added into the box? I plan to re-use my H60 or go with a H100 (haven't decided yet) but if I overclock, would they be the same? i might still go with the 1600x just because of the higher stock clocking, and it has X after, so it makes it better

 

Also when I'm looking at Ram, from what I've read, faster ram is better for the Ryzen CPUs. I was planning on getting the MSI B350 Tomahawk, but then I read that the ram speed is limited on the Ryzen. I want to get G.SKill Ripjaws V 16gb (8gbx2) F4-3200C16D-16GVK 3200 ram. would this ram run at that speed or lower, being limited because of the CPU? I also heard there were a few boards that have been able to get the higher speeds, like the Gigabyte GA-AX370-Gaming K7, due to baseclock overclocking. is this what would be needed to be able to use that ram @ 3200?

 

I'm not sure if i'm asking the ram question correctly, i doubt i conveyed what I'm trying to get at exactly

[Guest]

Go with the 1600 since it's a downclocked 1600x. You may have lower oc headroom though. I would recommend a mobo with some VRM heatsinks, like the B350 Tomahawk. RAM speeds can be hit or miss, maybe take a look at the Gskill Flare Ryzen Optimised RAM, since they tend to do better. 3200 shouldn't be a problem though.

[wdodge0912]

Does the 3200 ram work at 3200 on the tomahawk? I just don't want to get expensive ram if I'm not going to get the performance gain that the higher speeds give to the ryzen 5s.

 

I know the board says it works with 3200, but does ryzen keep it clocked that high?

[wdodge0912]

14 hours ago, FTL said:

Go with the 1600 since it's a downclocked 1600x. You may have lower oc headroom though. I would recommend a mobo with some VRM heatsinks, like the B350 Tomahawk. RAM speeds can be hit or miss, maybe take a look at the Gskill Flare Ryzen Optimised RAM, since they tend to do better. 3200 shouldn't be a problem though.

I'm probably gonna go with the 1600x as I'm not very knowledgeable on overclocking, I was only able to get my fx8300 up to 3.6ghz overclock from 3.3. Being that it starts at a 3.6 instead of 3.2, I would have a better OC

[sgloux3470]

The only difference between the 1600 and 1600x is silicon lottery.

 

I would really strongly recommend just getting the 1600.  Almost all Ryzen chips so far can hit 3.7 GHz on all cores and you probably don't even need to manually adjust the voltage.  The 1600X will only net you 100 MHz extra speed.  My 1600 hits 3.9 Ghz at 1.36v no problems, although 4.0 GHz wants more voltage than I want to give it.  Most Ryzen chips will hit 3.7-3.9 GHz with reasonable voltage, which is faster than the stock 1600X.

 

As for memory, it's all variable right now.  There will be further updates that will fix this, but for now you are better off assuming that you won't hit 3200 MHz.  Personally, I was able to hit 2933 MHz no problems but 3200 MHz won't post regardless of what I tweak. (And with post times being so shit, I haven't bothered to spend a ton of time trying different tweaks.)

 

It is possible that in the future this will change depending on how aggressive AMD's binning becomes.  But right now it seems that there are plenty of high quality silicon being "downgraded" to lower end chips to meet sales demand.  The FX8300 series went through something similar, where all newer 8320 and 8350 chips overclocked way worse than the 8370, 9370 or 9590 counterparts late in its life despite the early production chips reaching great clockspeeds.

 

[ArcticSalad]

3 hours ago, sgloux3470 said:

The only difference between the 1600 and 1600x is silicon lottery.

 

I would really strongly recommend just getting the 1600.  Almost all Ryzen chips so far can hit 3.7 GHz on all cores and you probably don't even need to manually adjust the voltage.  The 1600X will only net you 100 MHz extra speed.  My 1600 hits 3.9 Ghz at 1.36v no problems, although 4.0 GHz wants more voltage than I want to give it.  Most Ryzen chips will hit 3.7-3.9 GHz with reasonable voltage, which is faster than the stock 1600X.

 

As for memory, it's all variable right now.  There will be further updates that will fix this, but for now you are better off assuming that you won't hit 3200 MHz.  Personally, I was able to hit 2933 MHz no problems but 3200 MHz won't post regardless of what I tweak. (And with post times being so shit, I haven't bothered to spend a ton of time trying different tweaks.)

 

It is possible that in the future this will change depending on how aggressive AMD's binning becomes.  But right now it seems that there are plenty of high quality silicon being "downgraded" to lower end chips to meet sales demand.  The FX8300 series went through something similar, where all newer 8320 and 8350 chips overclocked way worse than the 8370, 9370 or 9590 counterparts late in its life despite the early production chips reaching great clockspeeds.

 

Question: How are the temperatures on that 1600 at 3.9GHz? I'm debating whether or not to grab the 1600 and overclock it to 4.0GHz or get the 1600x. Do you think I'll get better temperatures running the 1600 at 4.0 or the 1600x at 4.0? I have the be quiet! Dark Rock 3 and I ordered an AM4 mounting kit that should arrive any time soon.

 

Edit: Just going to add. I could order the 1600x off of DirectCanada for only $20 CAD more than the 1600.

[sgloux3470]

1 hour ago, Shadow6767 said:

Question: How are the temperatures on that 1600 at 3.9GHz? I'm debating whether or not to grab the 1600 and overclock it to 4.0GHz or get the 1600x. Do you think I'll get better temperatures running the 1600 at 4.0 or the 1600x at 4.0? I have the be quiet! Dark Rock 3 and I ordered an AM4 mounting kit that should arrive any time soon.

 

Edit: Just going to add. I could order the 1600x off of DirectCanada for only $20 CAD more than the 1600.

With a Corsair H100i it peaks at around 70 C running Intel Burn Test and the Aida64 stress test running for 5 minutes peaks at around 64 degrees but it takes a lot longer than that for a water loop to max out.  During most usecases (stuff that isn't maxing out all 6 cores) temps are much lower than that.

 

 

If one of them is able to run at the same clock speed with less voltage, it will run slightly cooler.  I doubt you'd really notice the difference unless the silicon lottery deals you a really rare hand though.  The 1600X is more likely to be a better chip, but really I would expect them to be nearly identical.  

[wdodge0912]

17 hours ago, sgloux3470 said:

The only difference between the 1600 and 1600x is silicon lottery.

 

I would really strongly recommend just getting the 1600.  Almost all Ryzen chips so far can hit 3.7 GHz on all cores and you probably don't even need to manually adjust the voltage.  The 1600X will only net you 100 MHz extra speed.  My 1600 hits 3.9 Ghz at 1.36v no problems, although 4.0 GHz wants more voltage than I want to give it.  Most Ryzen chips will hit 3.7-3.9 GHz with reasonable voltage, which is faster than the stock 1600X.

 

As for memory, it's all variable right now.  There will be further updates that will fix this, but for now you are better off assuming that you won't hit 3200 MHz.  Personally, I was able to hit 2933 MHz no problems but 3200 MHz won't post regardless of what I tweak. (And with post times being so shit, I haven't bothered to spend a ton of time trying different tweaks.)

 

It is possible that in the future this will change depending on how aggressive AMD's binning becomes.  But right now it seems that there are plenty of high quality silicon being "downgraded" to lower end chips to meet sales demand.  The FX8300 series went through something similar, where all newer 8320 and 8350 chips overclocked way worse than the 8370, 9370 or 9590 counterparts late in its life despite the early production chips reaching great clockspeeds.

 

As it stands, with ram speed, will the msi tomahawk get to the 2933 speed or would I need a board like the gigabyte gaming k7 that has the stuff to change the baseclock, an external clock generator.

[sgloux3470]

3 hours ago, wdodge0912 said:

As it stands, with ram speed, will the msi tomahawk get to the 2933 speed or would I need a board like the gigabyte gaming k7 that has the stuff to change the baseclock, an external clock generator.

I would think so, especially with the latest bios.  It still depends a little on your chips silicon, since the memory controller is on the CPU.  

 

Personally I wouldn't touch a BCLK over lock with a 10ft pole.  It's meant for extreme overclocking and I would expect it to cause more issues than it helps.

[saultube44]

People here don't have much clue what they're writing about, consult Linus videos on YouTube, the X is a a turbo speed, an slef overcloacking that allows going beyond it's factory frequency, for the CPU and you should get it if you can afford it, and they're better build for frequency tolerance, looks like some people advice 1600 because they couldn't get the 1600X or better CPU, consult technical info before buying, you can always go to amd.com

[Emberstone]

6 hours ago, saultube44 said:

looks like some people advice 1600 because they couldn't get the 1600X or better CPU

That's just plain false. It's a matter of, "why pay extra for similar or the same performance?" It is NOT a matter of people telling others to buy a lower-end CPU just because they can't afford a better one, and don't want people buying ahead of them.

 

The reason I have a 1600X is because I bought it shortly after the R5 launch, and wanted to be guaranteed better baseline performance over a 1600 since the overclocking capabilities weren't yet understood. But nowadays, we know that the 1600X really isn't any different than a 1600. I've heard of 1600X's not hitting 4.0 GHz on all cores with less than 1.425v, and I've heard of 1600s hitting 4.1 GHz with less voltage.

[cowpker4life]

For memory if you get Samsung bdie you should be able to do 3200 just fine. G.skill was saying the x cpu's seem to allow for higher memory speeds more often then non x it is mentioned in one of the gamernexus computex videos. But you should get 3200 just fine and if going for a high end mobo for ryzen the x370 taichi is by far the best for vrms.