Wednesday, October 4th 2017

AMD Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X CPUs Found With 8 Working Cores

Reports have surfaced around the Web that some users are finding their recently-purchased AMD Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X CPUs, which normally would have six cores (and 12 threads, with Simultaneous mutlithreading) actually have eight working cores (and 16 threads) out of the box. Unlike AMD's decade-old Phenom series, in which some dual and triple-core processors could be unlocked to fully functioning quad-cores via a BIOS feature offered on some motherboards, these Ryzen CPUs require no special BIOS setting. The processors still run at the stock advertised clock speeds, and retain the 1600's 576kb of L1 cache. But with the extra cores available, the 1600 series processors are basically on par performance-wise with the corresponding Ryzen 7 1800 series CPUs. This is an incredible value for lucky AMD users, as the 1800X retails for nearly twice the price of the 1600X.

And lucky these users are, as reports so far indicate that most, if not all of the unlocked CPUs come from the same batch of silicon, manufactured between September 4th and September 10th in Malaysia. This may indicate a quality control issue at this specific AMD factory. Alternatively, AMD could be bolstering its stock of Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X CPUs to meet the higher demand of the mid-range chip, by labeling 1700 and 1700X CPUs as 1600 and 1600X respectively. Whatever the reason, it is definitely a welcome surprise to fortunate AMD users. If you have already purchased a Ryzen 5 1600 or 1600X recently, simply checking CPU-Z or looking at your windows task manager will reveal whether you are one of the recipients of an unlocked chip. If you are looking to buy such a CPU however, perhaps second-hand, a Reddit user known as "Rigred" claims he has deciphered the serial numbers corresponding to this batch of processors, allowing prospective buyers to verify that the chip is actually one of the unlocked few.
Sources: WCCFtech, techradar, Rigred
Add your own comment

64 Comments on AMD Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X CPUs Found With 8 Working Cores

#26
biffzinker
"Durvelle27 said:
Ehhhhh need further proof

That's all the proof I need, what more could you ask for?
Posted on Reply
#27
Dave65
They better send those back right away, doesn't match what is on the box:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
Posted on Reply
#28
Durvelle27
"biffzinker said:

That's all the proof I need, what more could you ask for?
That’s not enough proof
Posted on Reply
#29
Dave65
WOW, some of these comments make you really wonder about some people:kookoo:
Posted on Reply
#30
JackOne
"Vayra86 said:
Why is this such a hot topic... lol

Nothing new here.
I don't remember something like this happened before. A CPU sold as XX core count and then having more cores? Afaik never happened before, this is new. Unlocking cores is something different.
Posted on Reply
#31
saikamaldoss
"Hood said:
Why don't you just enjoy your 1800x, bashing Intel with imagined scenarios won't make your CPU run any better, it just makes you sound like another rabid AMD fan in denial. Seriously, enough already, it doesn't make you sound cool or more informed. Being proud of your build is great, don't water it off with useless crap that just alienates people. Try to take the high road and rise above the average fanboy (both sides should chill out, all this stuff does is make "normal" people think all PC enthusiasts are crazy). You prefer AMD, I like Intel, so what? We all like PCs that perform well for our needs, and we all have plenty of common ground to discuss.
I am not happy about intel pricing and when I get a chance to poke them... Why not ? I like intel products. But as a company, I hate them for milking people big time. Anyway... sorry if I have offended you in anyway.
Posted on Reply
#32
Prima.Vera
RFLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL @ AMD's beyond crap quality control!! :roll::roll::roll::roll::roll:
Posted on Reply
#34
ratirt
I think the stock for 1800 and 1700 is quite big but the best sales 1600 holds at the moment. They crippled good 1700's and 1800's and sell them as 1600's :) Nice :D Wonder if I should get one 1600 and get lucky with 8c/16t :)
Posted on Reply
#35
punani
If its true, it smells of "publicity stunt" a long way. This will boost sales for sure.

I am VEEERY sceptical to it being a mistake from AMD.
Posted on Reply
#36
biffzinker
"Durvelle27 said:
That’s not enough proof
What kind of proof?
Posted on Reply
#37
laszlo
"punani said:
If its true, it smells of "publicity stunt" a long way. This will boost sales for sure.

I am VEEERY sceptical to it being a mistake from AMD.
is on purpose off course ; put yourself in amd's place - they "forget" to disable a few cores ..knowing this will surface on web fast and people will start buying this cheap version of zen...but i bet they didn't expect that someone will point exactly the batch # so fast .... therefore is not a lottery anymore is like searching the needle in a haystack ....

looking forward to see intel similar "mistake"....in my dreams maybe...
Posted on Reply
#38
jaw shwaa
Honestly ,I've been waiting for something like this to happen.
Posted on Reply
#39
uuuaaaaaa
"ASOT said:
NEVERMIND, u dont get it ))) .... is just mistake in process factory and thats not right and good.

Edit: uuuaaaaaa ty but no need since i dont have one,cheers
Yes ofc it is a mistake, but the Ryzen yields can be so good that they may be forced to disable two perfectly good and functional cores to meet the 1600 and 1600X specs (the demand is high for these cpus). In other words, Ryzen yields are so good that they do not pump out enough defective cpus to meet the demand of R5 1600/1600X. Some of those fully functional dies destined to be 1600/1600X may have slipped into the retail boxes before fusing the extra cores, which is a mistake on the factory side.
Posted on Reply
#40
TheDeeGee
Didn't the same thing happen in the past with lower end GPUs?
Posted on Reply
#41
Tomgang
Come on just be glad if you got more cores than advatised.

I can under stand complaning if you got 4 cores and payed for 6 cores.

Its just like cars. Some has more power than advetized and others has a bit less. That is not uncomen.
Posted on Reply
#42
Vya Domus
"Prima.Vera said:
RFLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL @ AMD's beyond crap quality control!! :roll::roll::roll::roll::roll:
No way this is a quality control issue. You can't leave cores enabled by "mistake" , not like this , the cache still corresponds to the 6c part. If this is true it was done intentional , the manufacturing/binning process that is.
Posted on Reply
#43
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
"Prima.Vera said:
RFLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL @ AMD's beyond crap quality control!! :roll::roll::roll::roll::roll:
Ummm, it's quality control. I would call getting 8 cores instead of 6 for the price of 6 some damn good quality there. Crap quality control would be getting 4 cores when you should have 6 for the price of 6.
Posted on Reply
#44
Durvelle27
"biffzinker said:
What kind of proof?
Benchmarks
CPUz

Something that shows performance and actual can back up the 2 extra cores
Posted on Reply
#45
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
"Durvelle27 said:
Benchmarks
CPUz

Something that shows performance and actual can back up the 2 extra cores
Since there are so many examples where we can see more cores in the OS but, not be able to use them. :kookoo:
Posted on Reply
#46
Durvelle27
"Aquinus said:
Since there are so many examples where we can see more cores in the OS but, not be able to use them. :kookoo:
All I see is Task Manager which can easily be manipulated and miss respsented

Until we see some one with a 1600 that has the magical 2 cores and run some test and show verifiable proof I won’t believe it.
Posted on Reply
#47
uuuaaaaaa
"Durvelle27 said:
All I see is Task Manager which can easily be manipulated and miss respsented

Until we see some one with a 1600 that has the magical 2 cores and run some test and show verifiable proof I won’t believe it.
Supposedly there are some pictures at the wccftech article showing HWinfo64, a CPU-Z benchmark and a screen photograph showing cinebench, poor quality pictures tho... I agree that further evidence is needed.

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-cpus-8-working-cores-spotted-wild/
Posted on Reply
#49
lexluthermiester
"ASOT said:
NEVERMIND, u dont get it ))) .... is just mistake in process factory and thats not right and good.

Edit: uuuaaaaaa ty but no need since i dont have one,cheers
No, it's clearly YOU who "don't get it". Let it go. Just let it go.
"Durvelle27 said:
Ehhhhh need further proof
Why? If you don't believe it, don't believe it. It's like the bios trick to enable the fourth core on the old AMD three core models. Many didn't want to believe until motherboard makers actually made official bios updates to do it.
Posted on Reply
#50
lexluthermiester
"biffzinker said:

That's all the proof I need, what more could you ask for?
This is so actually funny in that awesome sort of way!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment