add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube
ozzietheostrich
  • 2 months ago

Part Number: YD1600BBAFBOX

Manufacturer Product Page: https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-5-1600

Retailer Link: https://www.centrecom.com.au/amd-ryzen-5-1600-65w-am4-processor

This 1600 is actually an updated version kept quiet by AMD which is 12nm architecture instead of the old 14nm but the product page is the same with a tiny clause.

Comments

  • 2 months ago
  • 3 points

It's been covered here already several times the product page note is known and has been shown multiple times to be wrong it isn't a 1600 and has different compatibility.

With almost no manufacturers showing compatibility they have it hidden until it can be verified.

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/8HqBD3/amd-ryzen-5-1600-12nm-32-ghz-6-core-processor-yd1600bbafbox

Rough spot for a CPU when the only official listing is in a note on another CPU and that is known to be wrong.

Motherboard manufacturers don't support it.

It's like AMD doesn't want anyone using or buying it.

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

Wait so are you saying that it doesn't work in any motherboard?

  • 2 months ago
  • 2 points

No it has been shown to work on motherboards with the proper BIOS version but the motherboard manufacturers don't acknowledge the part and the only official note on it is wrong.

Like I posted above AMD is keeping this as quiet as possible like they don't want it to sell.

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

Rumors I've read are that original Zen manufacturing has stopped at 14 nm, and AMD had existing contracts for R5 1600, so they spun it up again as a 1600 AF, just reusing 12nm 2600 (since redesigning 1600 from 14nm to 12nm would likely be extremely costly).

So it should work wherever original 1600s worked.

  • 2 months ago
  • 2 points

So it should work wherever original 1600s worked.

Nope as confirmed by the mods here, reviewers, AMD sources to reviewers, and myself it only works on boards that have second generation BIOS, and even then it can cause issues with the very first versions of the BIOS's.

Which is why everyone knows that AMD lied in the official note on this part.

(since redesigning 1600 from 14nm to 12nm would likely be extremely costly).

2600 is a 1600, AMD never changed the Zen silicon only the process and firmware used.

It also isn't a 2600 with 1600 firmware since then it would report itself as a 1600 14nm not as a 12nm.

There's been a bit of quiet discussion about this part since it started showing up last summer months before that note even appeared. AMD's and board partners lack of acknowledgement of the part have only increased the confusion on it.

It really is like they don't want this part to sell.

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

I've got 3 of them now. They work on any B450 and X470 board out of the box, A320, B350, and X370 with Pinnacle Ridge BIOS, and any of the X570 boards that have a double sized BIOS chip out of the box though it would be dubious to pair with expensive X570.

I currently have one running on an X370, B450, and X470. It runs at way lower voltages per clock than my 14nm 1600, and I was able to clock it to 4500MHz with 1.45v easily.

  • 2 months ago
  • 5 points

Ummm 1.45v is way past the max for 12nm silicon and your likely to lose your chip soon because of that.

AMD lowered max voltage to 1.4v and there are a too many dead and degrading chips on the market to back that up.

You may see voltages like that on stock usage but stock clocks alter voltages way faster then tracking software can read to keep things from burning out unlike overclocks which are constant.

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 2 months ago
  • 3 points

That is you. Advising others to kill their system when they may not be able to afford replacing it as most who are looking at budget chips really isn't smart.

  • 2 months ago
  • 2 points

A lot of people forget that one of the things people look for in a product is reliability. Some people want their things to last.

  • 2 months ago
  • -2 points

I never advised anyone to overclock anything. You assume much. Just because I hold the HWBOT record for that CPU doesn't meam I run it hard 24/7. But either way, an $85 CPU will be long be obsolete before 1.45v kills it.

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

Well, just don’t blame us if your rig kicks the bucket.

  • 2 months ago
  • 3 points

Keep it polite or don't comment on this site.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube