Does Ryzen 2 perform better on X470 than X370
**Resin 2 Performance Review: A Comparative Analysis of 2600 X and 1600 X**
In this review, we put the 2600 X through its paces to see how it compares to the 1600 X, particularly in terms of performance and power consumption. We're using a range of benchmarks to compare the two processors, from games like Doom and GTA 5, to more general productivity tasks.
**Doom Benchmark**
The first benchmark we ran was Doom, which is known for being a demanding game that pushes modern hardware to its limits. We set up our test system with a 2600 X processor paired with an X 470 chipset, and recorded the results at 1920x1080 resolution. The frame rates were impressive, with the 2600 X delivering a lower 1% and 0.1% frame time than the 1600 X. In fact, the 2600 X was only 0.5% slower in 1% lows compared to the 1600 X.
**GTA 5 Benchmark**
Next up was GTA 5, which is another demanding game that requires a lot of processing power. We ran the benchmark at 1080p resolution and saw some interesting results. The 2600 X delivered a 10.3% uplift in average frame rates compared to the 1600 X, with the 1% lows seeing an even bigger gain of 7.2%. This is impressive, especially considering that the 1600 X is a more power-hungry processor.
**Metro Benchmark**
We also ran the Metro benchmark at 1080p resolution, which gave us some insight into how the two processors perform in terms of consistency and reliability. The results were interesting - while the 2600 X performed well overall, there was some variation in its frame times, with 1% lows sometimes favoring the older chipset. In contrast, the 1600 X trailed behind by a small margin.
**Average Frame Rates**
Overall, our average frame rates across all five games were surprisingly similar between the two processors. The only real differences we saw were tiny increments of 0.1% in the 1% lows, which are likely to be negligible for most users. However, it's worth noting that these results may not be representative of all users' experiences - after all, frame times can vary significantly depending on a range of factors.
**Performance Implications**
So what does this mean for real-world performance? The short answer is that the 2600 X offers modest gains over the 1600 X in terms of raw processing power. However, these gains come at a relatively small price increase - around $30 for the 2600 X compared to the 1600 X.
**Conclusion**
In conclusion, our review of the 2600 X has shown that it's a solid performer that can hold its own against more modern processors like the 1600 X. While the gains may not be spectacular, they're certainly within the realm of what most users would consider acceptable for their needs. Whether you choose to pair the 2600 X with an X 470 chipset or an older X 370 board, the results are promising - and we can't wait to see how this processor performs in real-world use cases.
**Comparison to Rison**
Finally, we should note that our review has been comparing apples and oranges - after all, the Rison 2 is a much newer generation of processors than the 1600 X. However, if you're considering upgrading from first-gen Rison to second-gen Rison, there's some good news: the performance gains of the new generation are significant. We'd recommend waiting for the Rison 7 series, which promises to deliver even bigger gains in terms of core and thread counts.
**Final Thoughts**
And that concludes our review of the 2600 X! As always, we hope you found this review informative and helpful. Let us know what you think - did we miss anything? Is there a particular aspect of the processor's performance that you're concerned about? Do share your thoughts in the comments below!
"WEBVTTKind: captionsLanguage: enshow off your Riggins style with the view 37 from thermal take a large curved window offers the generous view of your components with included addressable RGB fans for a fully custom interior enjoy the freedom of full-sized hardware high-end water cooling support and dust filtered ventilation for a system that performs as good as it looks click the link below to learn more what's going on guys so Rison 2 is finally here we're all very excited and I'm here to talk about that today of course by now you guys have probably already seen a ton of reviews and benchmarks about this launch so instead of giving you more of the same I decided to switch things up a little bit granted I still will be giving you some benchmarks on the Rison 520 600 X and how it stacks up against its predecessor the horizon 5 1600 X but more importantly I kind of wanted to hone in on one of the most hyped up features of this launch in my opinion which is backwards compatibility for months we've been hearing all about this like oh you'll be able to slot a 2000 series rise and 2 processor inside of your existing X 370 motherboard and everything will work just fine assuming you've got the proper BIOS update and voila but is there any kind of performance drop-off from doing that is there any real reason performance wise why you would upgrade to an x4 70 board if you already have an x3 70 board to get a first impression of how our 2600 X might behave differently based on the chipset that's being paired with I set up two very identical testing configurations the only difference between them really being a motherboard one having the Asus crosshair 7 hero x4 70 board versus the asus rog Strix x3 7 TF gaming motherboard all the other specs between both systems are identical including the Wraiths present cooler that's included with the 2600 X 16 gigs of g.skill Sniper X ddr4 at 3400 speed more on memory later and a gtx 1070 bounders Edition running at stock speeds I should also mention that the 2600 X was running at its stock out of the box frequencies during all of these tests now I began testing the X 470 platform first and I immediately noticed that EXIF r2 and precision boost 2 were hard at work taking all the cores all 6 cores to anywhere from 4,000 to 42 hundred megahertz and it was very consistent almost the entire time that we were that we were under load we were at those higher frequencies precision boost to can kinda be looked at like a sort of automatic built-in overclock that will scale your frequencies up as long as you're operating within the predefined boundaries that AMD is set for your thermal and power limits EXIF r2 works similarly but it takes a look at your thermal solution so if you have a big beefy cooler for example on your cpu EXIF r2 will take that thermal headroom into consideration and begin scaling up the frequency across all your cores not just one or two like we saw with first gen XF are seeing these features in action on the X 470 platform was pretty exciting but it made me equally concerned that I wouldn't get that same experience moving to X 370 so I fired that system up again with the exact same 2600 X CPU looked at the results side-by-side and lo and behold not much had really changed at all our frequencies across all cores on X 370 we're still in that four thousand to forty 200 megahertz range our voltages looked identical across the board which I guess should be an important reminder to all of us that EXIF r2 and precision boost to our technologies that are inherently built in to the Rison 2 processor they are interwoven into the Zen Plus core architecture rather than the chipset itself which is why the behavior was so similar on our 2600 expert guard list of the platform that we paired it with this should also mean and I haven't tested this fully but I'm assuming that this would also mean you could slot in a rise in 2 or 2000 series processor into a be 350 motherboard for example and still be able to take advantage of those technologies assuming that the motherboard manufacturer has provided the appropriate firmware update to allow those features to flourish of course at this point we've only looked at frequency and voltage and we still have to look at frame times and frame rates to see if Rison 2 really can live on X 370 just the same as it does on X 470 but before we dive into those numbers one to quickly talk about overclocking and memory so overclocking trying to overclock the 2600 X just didn't really work out for me I tried to push it to 4.3 gigahertz without touching the voltage because he never really had to touch the voltage much when manually overclocking first gen Rison so I tried the same approach here and it didn't work it besought it immediately and and for the record I tried 4.3 gigahertz because it was already peaking up to 4.2 Hertz I don't know if I just got a dud chip but from looking at some of the other reviews as well it just so happens that risin to doesn't have a whole lot of overclocking sealing there's not a ton of headroom here so don't expect any crazy manual overclocking gains on risin to four now unless you're talking about some serious cooling solutions like ln2 for example or maybe a custom loop now memory support and compatibility on risin to is far superior to what it was on Rison one where we had to take most of 2017 for enough BIOS updates to roll out before we could actually hit the rated speeds on our memory kits it was a total show for lack of a better term whereas Rison 2 is a completely different story here on launch day first day first attempt I was able to take our kit here - it's rated 30 400 megahertz speed which is fantastic now grad you still have to jump it at the UEFI and change your timings and set your voltage and your frequency so it's not quite as much of a turnkey solution as Intel's XMP for example but the Zen + core definitely makes the whole process of getting your memory up and running at its rated frequency a whole lot easier it's also worth pointing out that I was able to hit the thirty four hundred megahertz speed just as easily on our ROG Strix ex 370 F gaming motherboard with the 2600 ex further indicating that the enhanced memory support and compatibility is really thanks to the Zen + poor architecture rather than the X 470 chipset so at this point guys I think it's time that we take a look at the actual benchmarks in both gaming and productivity workloads to see how the 2600 X performs either on X 370 or X 470 if there really is a difference after all um additionally we're gonna be testing it against the 1600 X as I mentioned which will be tested on the same X 370 motherboard that we saw earlier so without further ado ladies and gentleman here are your benchmarks kicking off things with Cinebench the 2600 X on X 470 beats out the 1600 X in the single threaded test by 8 point 8 percent and the multi-threaded test by 7.1 percent when competing against itself in the older X 370 board the new chip gets an identical single threaded score and notably higher marks with the multi-threaded score perhaps due to BIOS and Driver maturity but it's hard to say for sure winning holding a fork a clip in handbrake risin to sano performance benefit on x4 70 vs x3 70 however it did render the file around 9% faster than the 1600 X in fire strike extreme the 2600 X on X 470 scores just point 6 percent higher overall than it does on the year-old chipset and only 1.5 percent higher than its predecessor things are looking very neck-and-neck so far maybe we'll see some serious gains and ashes of the singularity or not benchmark to 1920 by 1080 with DirectX 12 this demanding RTS shows identical performance across all three test subjects if that's the case at 1920 by 1080 then the same is probably true at 1440p and sure enough it is riveting average FPS remains a total stalemate in battlefield 1 at 1080 along with 1% lows the only variation we really see here are the 0.1% lows clearly favoring X 370 over X 470 and it's worth noting these tests were run three times each and averaged out to ensure the numbers here are repeatable at 14:40 battlefield one performance is virtually the same regardless of the CPU or chipset with the 1600 X is lower 1% and 0.1% frame times falling within margin of error in Doom at 1920 by 1080 the 2600 X on X 470 slightly outperforms itself on X 370 by 2 point one percent in 1% lows and 5.4 percent in point one percent lows even on X 370 the new CPU edges out to 1600 X by around three percent overall these gains are nothing to write home about but at least their gains as you might expect there's little variation in this title at 14:40 as well mainly the 1% lows seeming a tad stronger with Rison - finally we see some arguably exciting performance gaps in GTA 5 at 1080 on X 470 the 2600 X sees a 10.3% uplift and average frame rates over the 1600 X and 7.2 percent in 1% lows again Rison 2 on X 370 keeps pace with the latest chipset and even beats its 0.1% lows by ten point four percent the gaps close back up at 1440 of course albeit with the 2000 series ahead by a small margin several trends begin to solidify here in Metro last night at 1080 when it comes to average FPS the 2600 ex could care less what chip said it's on but slight variation continues to occur in the 1% in point one percent lows sometimes favoring the old chipset sometimes the new meanwhile the 1600 ex trails closely behind at 1440 the point 1% lows appear to improve significantly as we climb the ladder but it's worth noting this benchmark tends to throw out inconsistent frame times in my experience so please approach these numbers with a grain of salt now here's a look at our frame rates at 1080 which have been averaged out across all 5 games as of now the chips that you choose to pair with a 2600 X has very little performance impact and assuming the same can be said for higher-end chips like the Rison 720 700 X this is potentially great news if you're looking to upgrade your 1000 series processor but want to keep your now generation old motherboard compared to the 1600 X the 2600 X on X for 70s saw marginal gains ranging from just 2 to 4% which is a tad disappointing very similar to the slight performance bumps that Intel's given us between generations however bear in mind that performance improvements can be had well after launch day as the platform matures let's hope that happens our 1440 averages shows strikingly similar results between the three setups with incremental 0.1% low gains for the 2600 X all other frame rates are clustered together as we become more GPU bound at the higher resolution summing things up here the 2600 X offers a modest performance bump over the 1600 X for a modest price hike of about $30 u.s. which i think is a pretty fair deal if you're building a new Rising 2 system from scratch then of course go with the X 470 chipset as that's the one that's intended for Rison 2 it's optimized for the architecture and so forth however you are not really losing out much at all in my opinion if you have an existing X 370 board and you want to pop a rise in to chip in there go ahead and do it it'll be fun assuming your motherboard has the latest firmware you'll still be able to take advantage of rising 2's higher clock speeds the smarter algorithms that can automatically tune up your frequencies like exif r2 and precision boost - and of course the greater memory compatibility and support finally if you're a first gen Rison 3 or Rison 5 owner looking to upgrade to 2nd gen Rison I would consider Rison 7 as that tier will give you access to higher core in thread counts which should hopefully deliver enough of a formants boost to make it worth your upgrade whereas going from first gen rising v to second gen rising v is probably not gonna do you much good but that's all I got for now guys let me know what you think of these results in the comments below and how is resin to stacking up to your expectations so far very curious to hear your thoughts guys toss a like on the video if you enjoyed it don't know why I just changed voices right there that was weird subscribe to the channel for more tech stuff coming at you really soon if you haven't already you can also check me out on floatplane if you'd like to watch all my videos without ads a week early I'll put a link for that in the description below until next time guys thank you so much for tuning in have a good one and I'll see you in the next videoshow off your Riggins style with the view 37 from thermal take a large curved window offers the generous view of your components with included addressable RGB fans for a fully custom interior enjoy the freedom of full-sized hardware high-end water cooling support and dust filtered ventilation for a system that performs as good as it looks click the link below to learn more what's going on guys so Rison 2 is finally here we're all very excited and I'm here to talk about that today of course by now you guys have probably already seen a ton of reviews and benchmarks about this launch so instead of giving you more of the same I decided to switch things up a little bit granted I still will be giving you some benchmarks on the Rison 520 600 X and how it stacks up against its predecessor the horizon 5 1600 X but more importantly I kind of wanted to hone in on one of the most hyped up features of this launch in my opinion which is backwards compatibility for months we've been hearing all about this like oh you'll be able to slot a 2000 series rise and 2 processor inside of your existing X 370 motherboard and everything will work just fine assuming you've got the proper BIOS update and voila but is there any kind of performance drop-off from doing that is there any real reason performance wise why you would upgrade to an x4 70 board if you already have an x3 70 board to get a first impression of how our 2600 X might behave differently based on the chipset that's being paired with I set up two very identical testing configurations the only difference between them really being a motherboard one having the Asus crosshair 7 hero x4 70 board versus the asus rog Strix x3 7 TF gaming motherboard all the other specs between both systems are identical including the Wraiths present cooler that's included with the 2600 X 16 gigs of g.skill Sniper X ddr4 at 3400 speed more on memory later and a gtx 1070 bounders Edition running at stock speeds I should also mention that the 2600 X was running at its stock out of the box frequencies during all of these tests now I began testing the X 470 platform first and I immediately noticed that EXIF r2 and precision boost 2 were hard at work taking all the cores all 6 cores to anywhere from 4,000 to 42 hundred megahertz and it was very consistent almost the entire time that we were that we were under load we were at those higher frequencies precision boost to can kinda be looked at like a sort of automatic built-in overclock that will scale your frequencies up as long as you're operating within the predefined boundaries that AMD is set for your thermal and power limits EXIF r2 works similarly but it takes a look at your thermal solution so if you have a big beefy cooler for example on your cpu EXIF r2 will take that thermal headroom into consideration and begin scaling up the frequency across all your cores not just one or two like we saw with first gen XF are seeing these features in action on the X 470 platform was pretty exciting but it made me equally concerned that I wouldn't get that same experience moving to X 370 so I fired that system up again with the exact same 2600 X CPU looked at the results side-by-side and lo and behold not much had really changed at all our frequencies across all cores on X 370 we're still in that four thousand to forty 200 megahertz range our voltages looked identical across the board which I guess should be an important reminder to all of us that EXIF r2 and precision boost to our technologies that are inherently built in to the Rison 2 processor they are interwoven into the Zen Plus core architecture rather than the chipset itself which is why the behavior was so similar on our 2600 expert guard list of the platform that we paired it with this should also mean and I haven't tested this fully but I'm assuming that this would also mean you could slot in a rise in 2 or 2000 series processor into a be 350 motherboard for example and still be able to take advantage of those technologies assuming that the motherboard manufacturer has provided the appropriate firmware update to allow those features to flourish of course at this point we've only looked at frequency and voltage and we still have to look at frame times and frame rates to see if Rison 2 really can live on X 370 just the same as it does on X 470 but before we dive into those numbers one to quickly talk about overclocking and memory so overclocking trying to overclock the 2600 X just didn't really work out for me I tried to push it to 4.3 gigahertz without touching the voltage because he never really had to touch the voltage much when manually overclocking first gen Rison so I tried the same approach here and it didn't work it besought it immediately and and for the record I tried 4.3 gigahertz because it was already peaking up to 4.2 Hertz I don't know if I just got a dud chip but from looking at some of the other reviews as well it just so happens that risin to doesn't have a whole lot of overclocking sealing there's not a ton of headroom here so don't expect any crazy manual overclocking gains on risin to four now unless you're talking about some serious cooling solutions like ln2 for example or maybe a custom loop now memory support and compatibility on risin to is far superior to what it was on Rison one where we had to take most of 2017 for enough BIOS updates to roll out before we could actually hit the rated speeds on our memory kits it was a total show for lack of a better term whereas Rison 2 is a completely different story here on launch day first day first attempt I was able to take our kit here - it's rated 30 400 megahertz speed which is fantastic now grad you still have to jump it at the UEFI and change your timings and set your voltage and your frequency so it's not quite as much of a turnkey solution as Intel's XMP for example but the Zen + core definitely makes the whole process of getting your memory up and running at its rated frequency a whole lot easier it's also worth pointing out that I was able to hit the thirty four hundred megahertz speed just as easily on our ROG Strix ex 370 F gaming motherboard with the 2600 ex further indicating that the enhanced memory support and compatibility is really thanks to the Zen + poor architecture rather than the X 470 chipset so at this point guys I think it's time that we take a look at the actual benchmarks in both gaming and productivity workloads to see how the 2600 X performs either on X 370 or X 470 if there really is a difference after all um additionally we're gonna be testing it against the 1600 X as I mentioned which will be tested on the same X 370 motherboard that we saw earlier so without further ado ladies and gentleman here are your benchmarks kicking off things with Cinebench the 2600 X on X 470 beats out the 1600 X in the single threaded test by 8 point 8 percent and the multi-threaded test by 7.1 percent when competing against itself in the older X 370 board the new chip gets an identical single threaded score and notably higher marks with the multi-threaded score perhaps due to BIOS and Driver maturity but it's hard to say for sure winning holding a fork a clip in handbrake risin to sano performance benefit on x4 70 vs x3 70 however it did render the file around 9% faster than the 1600 X in fire strike extreme the 2600 X on X 470 scores just point 6 percent higher overall than it does on the year-old chipset and only 1.5 percent higher than its predecessor things are looking very neck-and-neck so far maybe we'll see some serious gains and ashes of the singularity or not benchmark to 1920 by 1080 with DirectX 12 this demanding RTS shows identical performance across all three test subjects if that's the case at 1920 by 1080 then the same is probably true at 1440p and sure enough it is riveting average FPS remains a total stalemate in battlefield 1 at 1080 along with 1% lows the only variation we really see here are the 0.1% lows clearly favoring X 370 over X 470 and it's worth noting these tests were run three times each and averaged out to ensure the numbers here are repeatable at 14:40 battlefield one performance is virtually the same regardless of the CPU or chipset with the 1600 X is lower 1% and 0.1% frame times falling within margin of error in Doom at 1920 by 1080 the 2600 X on X 470 slightly outperforms itself on X 370 by 2 point one percent in 1% lows and 5.4 percent in point one percent lows even on X 370 the new CPU edges out to 1600 X by around three percent overall these gains are nothing to write home about but at least their gains as you might expect there's little variation in this title at 14:40 as well mainly the 1% lows seeming a tad stronger with Rison - finally we see some arguably exciting performance gaps in GTA 5 at 1080 on X 470 the 2600 X sees a 10.3% uplift and average frame rates over the 1600 X and 7.2 percent in 1% lows again Rison 2 on X 370 keeps pace with the latest chipset and even beats its 0.1% lows by ten point four percent the gaps close back up at 1440 of course albeit with the 2000 series ahead by a small margin several trends begin to solidify here in Metro last night at 1080 when it comes to average FPS the 2600 ex could care less what chip said it's on but slight variation continues to occur in the 1% in point one percent lows sometimes favoring the old chipset sometimes the new meanwhile the 1600 ex trails closely behind at 1440 the point 1% lows appear to improve significantly as we climb the ladder but it's worth noting this benchmark tends to throw out inconsistent frame times in my experience so please approach these numbers with a grain of salt now here's a look at our frame rates at 1080 which have been averaged out across all 5 games as of now the chips that you choose to pair with a 2600 X has very little performance impact and assuming the same can be said for higher-end chips like the Rison 720 700 X this is potentially great news if you're looking to upgrade your 1000 series processor but want to keep your now generation old motherboard compared to the 1600 X the 2600 X on X for 70s saw marginal gains ranging from just 2 to 4% which is a tad disappointing very similar to the slight performance bumps that Intel's given us between generations however bear in mind that performance improvements can be had well after launch day as the platform matures let's hope that happens our 1440 averages shows strikingly similar results between the three setups with incremental 0.1% low gains for the 2600 X all other frame rates are clustered together as we become more GPU bound at the higher resolution summing things up here the 2600 X offers a modest performance bump over the 1600 X for a modest price hike of about $30 u.s. which i think is a pretty fair deal if you're building a new Rising 2 system from scratch then of course go with the X 470 chipset as that's the one that's intended for Rison 2 it's optimized for the architecture and so forth however you are not really losing out much at all in my opinion if you have an existing X 370 board and you want to pop a rise in to chip in there go ahead and do it it'll be fun assuming your motherboard has the latest firmware you'll still be able to take advantage of rising 2's higher clock speeds the smarter algorithms that can automatically tune up your frequencies like exif r2 and precision boost - and of course the greater memory compatibility and support finally if you're a first gen Rison 3 or Rison 5 owner looking to upgrade to 2nd gen Rison I would consider Rison 7 as that tier will give you access to higher core in thread counts which should hopefully deliver enough of a formants boost to make it worth your upgrade whereas going from first gen rising v to second gen rising v is probably not gonna do you much good but that's all I got for now guys let me know what you think of these results in the comments below and how is resin to stacking up to your expectations so far very curious to hear your thoughts guys toss a like on the video if you enjoyed it don't know why I just changed voices right there that was weird subscribe to the channel for more tech stuff coming at you really soon if you haven't already you can also check me out on floatplane if you'd like to watch all my videos without ads a week early I'll put a link for that in the description below until next time guys thank you so much for tuning in have a good one and I'll see you in the next video\n"