Performance in programs
Cinebench R15 is based on the Cinema 4D software. It is very useful to measure the performance gain obtained by the presence of several processing cores while rendering heavy 3D images. Rendering is an area where a bigger number of cores helps a lot, because usually this kind of software recognize several processors (Cinebench R15, for example, can use up to 256 processing cores).
We ran the CPU benchmark, which renders a complex image using all the processing cores (real and virtual) to speed up the process. The result is given as a score.
On Cinebench R15 CPU benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1600 was 64% faster than the Core i5-7600K.
On its current version, the well-known hardware identification software CPU-Z comes with a benchmarking tool, which measures CPU performance for one core and for all available cores.
On the single thread benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1600 was 7% slower than the Core i5-7600K.
On the multiple thread benchmark, the Ryzen 5 1600 was 8% faster than the Core i5-7600K.
Handbrake is an open-source video converting tool. We converted a Full HD, six-minute long .mov video file into an .MP4 file, using the “Fast 1080p30” output profile. The results below are given in seconds, so the lower the better.
On Handbrake, the Ryzen 5 1600 was 45% faster than the Core i5-7600K.
We used the DivX converter, a tool included in the DivX package, in order to measure the encoding performance using this codec. The DivX codec is capable of recognizing and using all available cores and the SSE4 instruction set.
We converted a Full HD, six-minute long .mov video file into an .avi file, using the “HD 1080p” output profile. The results below are given in seconds, so the lower the better.
On DivX encoding, the Ryzen 5 1600 was 25% slower than the Core i5-7600K.
Media Espresso is a video conversion program that uses the graphics processing unit of the video engine to speed up the conversion process. We converted a 1 GiB, 1920x1080i, 23,738 kbps, .mov video file to a smaller 320×200, H.264, .MP4 file for viewing on a smartphone. The results below are given in seconds, so the lower the better.
Here the Ryzen 5 1600 was 22% slower than the Core i5-7600K.
The best way to measure the performance of a CPU is by using real programs. The problem, of course, is to create a methodology that offers precise results. For Photoshop CC, we used a script named “Retouch Artist Speed Test,” which applies a series of filters to a standard image and gives the time Photoshop takes to run all of them. The results are given in seconds, so the less, the best.
In this test, the Ryzen 5 1600 performed similarly to the Core i5-7600K.
Another task where the CPU is very demanded is on file compacting. We ran a test compacting a folder with 8 GiB on 6.813 files to a file, using WinRAR 4.2. The graph below shows the time taken on each test.
On WinRAR, the Ryzen 5 1600 was 8% faster than the Core i5-7600K.