The Ryzen 7 1700X is just about $60 cheaper than its flagship Ryzen 7 1800X stablemate, yet offers achingly similar performance. So that it medicine perfect exemplory case of AMD’s new Zen architecture, offering massive multi-threaded grunt for chump change, right? Well, that is determined by whether you’re pleased to continue overclocking a bargain-priced Ryzen 7 1700 instead… Now this black friday & Cyber Monday will give you amazing discounts, deals, offers.

Get AMD Ryzen 7 1700X in Amazon (Black Friday, Cyber Monday 2020)

Check Prices in All Stores AMD Ryzen 7 1700X [Black Friday & Cyber Monday 2020]

In terms of gaming these are the very best CPUs for your rig.

Really although $300(£258) 1700X actually makes me wonder more why AMD released the 1800X to begin with. It appears if you ask me all it provides over this more wallet-friendly version is a 200MHz clockspeed bump which can be ironed out with a straightforward BIOS tweak.

There was minimal need for them release a the eight-core Ryzen chips with three only-very-slightly-different versions when historically AMD have released new pieces in pairs. AMD’s general practice for the graphics side of the business enterprise has been to make a brand new GPU and create two products from that one slice of silicon. They create one top-end with all the current beans and another slightly cheaper, slightly cut-down version. And it’s a tactic which includes served them well. It’s also how they’re stacking the Ryzen 5 release too.

But the straight 65W Ryzen 7 1700 in addition has got itself some impressive CPU chops too, making choosing between that which 1700X rather tricksy…

Hit the jump links to leap to the section you wish most.

AMD Ryzen 7 1700X benchmarks
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X performance
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X specs
The 1700X has fundamentally the same dual-CCX design as the other two octa-core Ryzen CPUs. It’s also using the same 14nm production process as others and slots neatly in to the same AM4 motherboard platform, as all good AMD chips should to any extent further. Right, AMD? Right?

We’ve already covered the Zen architecture inside our initial Ryzen 7 1800X review so if you wish some extra details be sure out. But in the event that you can’t really be bothered, suffice to state AMD been employed by some silicon wonders to create such affordable eight-core processors.

The middle-child of the octa-core range still includes simultaneous multi-threading (SMT) enabled, which means you get eight full cores, splitting out into 16 logical cores for all that parallel computational grunt. Additionally you still get the entire 20MB complement of aggregated L3 and L2 cache and the same 20 lanes of PCIe 3.0 throughput. Both this and the flagship Ryzen are also sporting 95W TDPs too.

Where things differ is very only in the stock clockspeed of the Ryzen 7 1700X. The 1800X runs at 3.6GHz base and 4GHz turbo/boost, as the 1700X is 200MHz behind at 3.4GHz and 3.8GHz respectively.

Well, that and the price…

AMD Ryzen 7 1700X benchmarks
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X performance
Once again it’s the straight CPU performance which makes the Ryzen 7 1700X really stick out, and most especially using its eight-core multi-threaded chops. At stock clocks it inevitably benchmarks behind the quicker 1800X, but nonetheless well out before either the eight-core or six-core Intel chips we’ve tested compared. Only the 10-core Intel Core i9 7900Xis in a position to top either the eight core Ryzens in CPU tests, and that’s an even more expensive chip. That’s true in both Cinebench rendering and X264 encoding tests.

The comparison with the Core i7 8700K is arguably more important as it’s closer in cost to the Ryzen 7 1700X, however in multi-threaded applications the excess two cores and four threads of the AMD chip give it a decent performance lead.

Obviously the memory bandwidth is off the Intel pace, because of the AM4 platform’s struggle at managing to fill its four DIMM slots with high speed memory and the actual fact it’s only with the capacity of operating in dual-channel mode instead of the X99 setup’s quad-channel memory support.

Like its other Ryzen brethren it’s also just a little flaky on the storage performance too. It’s possibly right down to the hyperlink between memory speed, the Infinity Fabric and the PCIe bus speed, however the 4K random performance on our speedy Samsung 960 EVO NVMe drive is sadly without comparison to either the Intel X99 or Z270 platforms.

And, of course, we come to gaming. Just like the R7 1800X, though way more as a result of the slower clockspeeds, the single-threaded performance of the 1700X is off the pace of Intel Core architecture. During the last year gaming performance has evened out for Ryzen, and therefore the AMD chips really aren’t that far behind Intel.

Against the almost similarly-priced 8700K the 1700X is merely under 23% slower inside our Civ VI and Total War benchmarks, but is an impression quicker in GTA V and almost has parity inside our DX 12 Tomb Raider and Vulkan Doom tests. The Hitman test, though, does show that sometimes CPU power doesn’t total a hill of beans for some game engines – they’re about the GPU and nothing else, but there is nearly performance parity over the board.

Of course my benchmarks are created to highlight relative CPU performance in gaming, weighting responsibility more on the processor compared to the graphics card by testing at 1080p where it shouldn’t be over-stressing the GPU. You can, obviously, hide those performance distinctions by running games at higher resolutions, where in fact the GPU becomes almost solely in charge of your frame rate. But that’s kinda like when you hide a lump of human excrement under your insufferable housemate’s butter, you understand, the main one who puts their own labels on everything in the fridge. They don’t know any thing about the shit beneath the surface until it’s too late. Only this time around I’d be knowingly hiding poo in my benchmarking butter.

But almost more interesting compared to the Intel vs. AMD gaming debate may be the relative performance of the Ryzen octa-core chips themselves. There is nearly nothing between your Ryzen 7 1700X and the 1800X, except in the solitary Vulkan-based Doom benchmark. The slight drop in clockspeed has really done nothing to differentiate both CPUs.

It’s the same story with the overclocking performance, regardless of the slightly higher maximum overclock we squeezed out of our 1800X sample. The only issue here’s that this is where in fact the cheaper 65W Ryzen 7 1700 starts to create its occurrence felt. Our straight 1700 couldn’t quite stretch to 4GHz stably with basic overclocking, nonetheless it was still very close in performance conditions to both 1700X and the 1800X. I’m beginning to wonder what those XFR-based ‘X’ suffixes are actually worth.

Have a look at Amazon US, Newegg, Amazon UK and Overclockers for pricing.
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X verdict
Before I started testing this chip I was half-expecting to call out the Ryzen 7 1700X as the unnecessary middle child of AMD’s new octa-core range, however the more I think about any of it it’s the 1800X that starts to look essentially irrelevant.

The 1700X is a genuinely impressive chip, with serious multi-threaded performance and a hefty price delta between it and the flagship Ryzen processor. Its gaming performance continues to be behind the Intel competition, however when it’s almost the same price as the i7 6800K picking between your two becomes a whole lot tougher.

You truly are then purely trading multi-threaded performance against gaming, but if you’re into both then suddenly the Ryzen starts to look a lot more tempting. I’ll wager the amount of gamers who enjoy just a little light 3D rendering or encoding while they play Mass Effect Andromeda is pretty small, likewise the quantity of pro-streamers who absolutely must use CPU-based encoding instead of either the Nvidia or AMD GPU streaming is most likely relatively small too. But with the Ryzen chip you’ll manage to chew through whatever CPU-intensive tasks you’re waiting on more speedily compared to the Intel and make contact with gaming without other things chasing system resources.

The sticking point for everybody else though includes the Ryzen 7 1700. With a straightforward wave of the overclocking wand you can push the much cheaper chip up to almost identical degrees of processing and gaming performance as either the 1800X or 1700X. EASILY were searching for a fresh high core count CPU I’d oftimes be looking at the non-X chip instead, but I’m pleased to risk running my silicon overclocked under water-cooling. But if you’re not, the Ryzen 7 1700X is an excellent little chip for content creators who prefer to game privately.