AMD Ryzen 5 1600 6c/12t Processor inc. Wraith Spire cooler £193 at Amazon.fr - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
349

AMD Ryzen 5 1600 6c/12t Processor inc. Wraith Spire cooler £193.00 at Amazon.fr

£193.00 @ Amazon France
Since the other cheap deal from Amazon.co.uk expired, I hope this may help a few folks looking for the cheapest option presently for this CPU. Purchased using one of the many fee free foreign curre… Read More
Uncommon.Sense Avatar
1w, 4d agoFound 1 week, 4 days ago
Since the other cheap deal from Amazon.co.uk expired, I hope this may help a few folks looking for the cheapest option presently for this CPU.

Purchased using one of the many fee free foreign currency cards, making sure you pay in € at the check out it is currently €234 + €5.82 shipping which works at at just under £204 at the time of writing.

It may be worth looking for a cheap Motherboard if you need one at the same time, if I find one I will add it here as an edit.

EDIT:
I've put together a quick build for anyone interested in a complete system, this is by no means the best system, or the cheapest system but gives you a good idea what sort of price you can build a 6c/12t machine for now. I've tried to include sellers that have P&P free, or inclusive even if the parts cost slightly more.

ASRock AB350M-HDV AMD Socket AM4 Motherboard - £66.02

Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 2x8GB 3000MHz DDR4 C15 - £114.99

Samsung 128GB Polaris NVMe M.2 80mm SSD - £67.49

Fractal Design Core 1100 Series Micro ATX Case - £29.99

Corsair VS550 ATX/EPS Vs Series 80 Plus PSU - £38.02

I've chosen not to add a graphics card, since everyone will have a different requirement, but have specified a 550W PSU, so it should be suitable for anything up to a GTX 1080Ti, there is also a few alternates for the case for £5 more with extra fans etc.

If you look at the total cost for this build (excluding the graphics card of your choice) it comes in at £485-£490, which is superb value considering the cheapest Intel 6 core CPU is £400 on it's own.

EDIT: Memory changed as other price had expired, swapped to Corsair LPX 3000 which is 100% compatible with Ryzen, pushes example system price up to £515+

EDIT: Grab one of these now if your were intending to buy down to €209.99 works out at only £180.90!!!! Postage included.

EDIT: As of Evening 20th April back up to €230 inc P&P - so that is approximately £193.
Uncommon.Sense Avatar
1w, 4d agoFound 1 week, 4 days ago
Options

All Comments

(81) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
may as well plump up the extra 17 quid and get the X with a better stock cooler, the 'max'.
3 Likes #2
powerbrick
may as well plump up the extra 17 quid and get the X with a better stock cooler, the 'max'.

You don't get a cooler with the 1600X, unfortunately.
#3
HotEURyzenDeals
#4
Uncommon.Sense
powerbrick
may as well plump up the extra 17 quid and get the X with a better stock cooler, the 'max'.
You don't get a cooler with the 1600X, unfortunately.
Sure that hippy off gamersnexus or was it ttl off oc3d said it came with the wraith Max.
2 Likes #5
powerbrick
Uncommon.Sense
powerbrick
may as well plump up the extra 17 quid and get the X with a better stock cooler, the 'max'.
You don't get a cooler with the 1600X, unfortunately.
Sure that hippy off gamersnexus or was it ttl off oc3d said it came with the wraith Max.

Happy to be proven wrong, but every review I have seen, read, and the sites selling them advertise it without a cooler, and the shipping weight is about 150g for the 1600X maybe they have two SKU's available? :)
1 Like #6
Uncommon.Sense
powerbrick
Uncommon.Sense
powerbrick
may as well plump up the extra 17 quid and get the X with a better stock cooler, the 'max'.
You don't get a cooler with the 1600X, unfortunately.
Sure that hippy off gamersnexus or was it ttl off oc3d said it came with the wraith Max.
Happy to be proven wrong, but every review I have seen, read, and the sites selling them advertise it without a cooler, and the shipping weight is about 150g for the 1600X maybe they have two SKU's available? :)
Thats the thing that makes the X slightly less worthwhile. Most places seem to be getting a comfortable 3.8/3.9 ghz on the Spire with the standard 1600, while the X seems to cap out generally at 4-4.15ghz on water. The lack of included cooler is the reason most places don't recommend the 1600x because of the extra cost (mainly associated with the need to buy a cooler) for relatively minor gains (5% on average I think I saw floating around).
1 Like #7
Should be able to get around 3.6-3.7GHz overclock on the R5 1600 even on cheap B350M boards, the more expensive X370 boards seem poor value paired with this considering all the Ryzen chips seem to hit a ceiling @4GHz.

Heat!
#8
ShroomHeadToad
Should be able to get around 3.6-3.7GHz overclock on the R5 1600 even on cheap B350M boards, the more expensive X370 boards seem poor value paired with this considering all the Ryzen chips seem to hit a ceiling @4GHz.
Heat!

Indeed, had I not needed the extra features of the ASRock Taichi I bought to go with the R7 1700, I would have gone with a much cheaper B350 board. Might buy a 1600 to see how it does in comparison, and if it will OC any better, than the 3.9/4.0GHz I can get on the 1700.
#9
Uncommon.Sense
ShroomHeadToad
Should be able to get around 3.6-3.7GHz overclock on the R5 1600 even on cheap B350M boards, the more expensive X370 boards seem poor value paired with this considering all the Ryzen chips seem to hit a ceiling @4GHz.
Heat!
Indeed, had I not needed the extra features of the ASRock Taichi I bought to go with the R7 1700, I would have gone with a much cheaper B350 board. Might buy a 1600 to see how it does in comparison, and if it will OC any better, than the 3.9/4.0GHz I can get on the 1700.

I think if you wanna overclock the ram you will need the overpriced x370 due to having the independent clock but not all have them, of course it's upto you to decide if it's worth it (Oc ddr) with the infinity fabric and all that it does make some strides in gaming, if we could see 4000/4200 it would be nice, reports of a 10% increase in SOME games with 3600 over 2400, also the quad chips don't seem to go past 2933 at the moment which is a little odd given they're all the same ccx's.

The straight up 1600 with cooler is the one for me if I was to buy but board prices are way to high for what they are, but the 1600 has the balance of threads core speed all the cache of the r7, the 65w tdp and the cooler it is the best package imho.

Edited By: revolver31 on Apr 15, 2017 16:37
#10
The SSD noted in the op is oem so no driver support and no rapid mode, if that matters to anyone.
#11
If you don't need the video output the ASRock AB350M AMD Socket AM4 Motherboard is a better option.
#12
alanbeenthere
The SSD noted in the op is oem so no driver support and no rapid mode, if that matters to anyone.
Yes indeed, but I've not had any issues from builds I've done, the other option is the Intel 600p 128GB SSD however it is quite a bit slower. Or many, many other options if you want something bigger or faster. :)

Edited By: Uncommon.Sense on Apr 15, 2017 18:01
2 Likes #13
alanbeenthere
The SSD noted in the op is oem so no driver support and no rapid mode, if that matters to anyone.

SM961 is a 960 EVO and will take 960 EVO drivers and FW via Magician.
#14
I paid £205 from Amazon UK :)
#15
GasGaGlide
I paid £205 from Amazon UK :)

How did you do this?
#16
DaveDesire
GasGaGlide
I paid £205 from Amazon UK :)
How did you do this?

It was on offer Monday for a few hours until they corrected the price.
#17
Yeah I got it straight away. Not like me to easily purchase but thankfully I knew the 1600 would be the best buy so I didn't mess around when they became available. I did wonder what happened.
#18
alanbeenthere
The SSD noted in the op is oem so no driver support and no rapid mode, if that matters to anyone.

Not true. Drivers for this SSD are available here. Have the 256gb version myself. Says Windows 7 drivers but they work perfectly well on Windows 10 :)
1 Like #19
I wouldn't pair a Ryzen CPU with slow DDR4 as recommended in the OP. oO

If you want to build a system that's going to last for a few years, it's an extra £35 for DDR4-3200 here: https://www.alza.co.uk/corsair-16-gigabytes-kit-ddr4-dram-vengeance-3200mhz-cl16-led-white-led-d4373304.htm

There are some tests where the difference is 10+% - and in gaming in particular, there are some cases where the difference is ~20% (slightly more even than with Intel CPUs). Better to spend the £35 today than be glaring angrily at your slow DDR4 in a couple of years, flagrantly aware that it's holding back your entire system in several areas, but understandably reluctant to spend £100+ to replace it.

Otherwise, a great little CPU for a workstation or a new budget gaming build. Those looking to upgrade a gaming system from an i5-K or better, however, may not find there to be much difference - and sometimes an i5-2500K can even pull ahead of the 1600X (and even the 1800X) in games like GTAV.
#20
I have an i5-4400 and a GTX1070 - would upgrading (I'd need a new motherboard and ddr4 ram too) have a noticeable impact on games? It doesn't really struggle with anything as far as I've noticed.
#21
I have the 256GB installed in my Asus ROG laptop using Windows NVME drivers. It's blisteringly fast.
#22
If you are trying to save money I'd recommend not getting an NVME drive. The specs look impressive but they are not noticeably faster than a normal SATA SDD for Windows or any of the programs and games I use.
1 Like #23
BetaRomeo
Uncommon.Sense
Whilst I agree that faster DDR4 is beneficial, most of the rest of your comment seems a bit ill thought out.
Said without a trace of irony. ;)
Uncommon.Sense
"If you want to build a system that's going to last for a few years" I'm pretty sure that the DDR4 won't get any slower that it was to start with, and won't just stop working.
I do apologise; in hindsight, I can see how my comment would have confused a non-native speaker.If you're building a system that you're hoping not to upgrade for many years to come. Hopefully that is easier for you to understand.
DDR4-2400 was as fast as DDR4-3200 a few years ago in the majority of real-world applications. For a couple of years, however, that's been increasingly not the case. Fast forward to today, and we can see dozens and dozens of real-world benchmarks where DDR4-2400 is further behind than ever. If I'm reading you correctly, you're suggesting that this trend is likely to reverse instead of continue? Please, do explain.
Uncommon.Sense
"Better to spend the £35 today than be glaring angrily at your slow DDR4 in a couple of years, flagrantly aware that it's holding back your entire system in several areas, but understandably reluctant to spend £100+ to replace it."
It's not £35, the RAM you recommend works out at £113+ with shipping, that's a whopping 42% more cost for a 10% speed boost, if you play games, not to mention that RAM prices will have peaked sometime in Q3 this year, and 12-18 months from now you'll be able to get 32GB of even faster DDR4 for the same cost.
~£80 for the DDR4-2400 you suggested, ~£115 for the DDR4-3200 I suggested. £35. (You do 115 - 80 to get that number.)
To continue the maths lesson, it's quite obviously not a "whopping 42% more cost". The entire system is faster, as the benchmarks to which I referred (indeed, the most useful benchmarks, I find) were testing the system as a whole, rather than just the RAM. For a £500 system, as you are trying to recommend, that's 7% more cost for 5-20% better system performance.
Although I like your idea of just buying a couple of DDR4 sticks with nothing to put them in. :D It's a lovely thought, and would validate your 42% figure, but I don't think you'll get very good performance that way. ;)

You win, I quit, the internets is all yours.
1 Like #24
Uncommon.Sense
BetaRomeo
Uncommon.Sense
Whilst I agree that faster DDR4 is beneficial, most of the rest of your comment seems a bit ill thought out.
Said without a trace of irony. ;)
Uncommon.Sense
"If you want to build a system that's going to last for a few years" I'm pretty sure that the DDR4 won't get any slower that it was to start with, and won't just stop working.
I do apologise; in hindsight, I can see how my comment would have confused a non-native speaker.If you're building a system that you're hoping not to upgrade for many years to come. Hopefully that is easier for you to understand.
DDR4-2400 was as fast as DDR4-3200 a few years ago in the majority of real-world applications. For a couple of years, however, that's been increasingly not the case. Fast forward to today, and we can see dozens and dozens of real-world benchmarks where DDR4-2400 is further behind than ever. If I'm reading you correctly, you're suggesting that this trend is likely to reverse instead of continue? Please, do explain.
Uncommon.Sense
"Better to spend the £35 today than be glaring angrily at your slow DDR4 in a couple of years, flagrantly aware that it's holding back your entire system in several areas, but understandably reluctant to spend £100+ to replace it."
It's not £35, the RAM you recommend works out at £113+ with shipping, that's a whopping 42% more cost for a 10% speed boost, if you play games, not to mention that RAM prices will have peaked sometime in Q3 this year, and 12-18 months from now you'll be able to get 32GB of even faster DDR4 for the same cost.
~£80 for the DDR4-2400 you suggested, ~£115 for the DDR4-3200 I suggested. £35. (You do 115 - 80 to get that number.)
To continue the maths lesson, it's quite obviously not a "whopping 42% more cost". The entire system is faster, as the benchmarks to which I referred (indeed, the most useful benchmarks, I find) were testing the system as a whole, rather than just the RAM. For a £500 system, as you are trying to recommend, that's 7% more cost for 5-20% better system performance.
Although I like your idea of just buying a couple of DDR4 sticks with nothing to put them in. :D It's a lovely thought, and would validate your 42% figure, but I don't think you'll get very good performance that way. ;)
You win, I quit, the internets is all yours.
Errr... I wasn't trying to "win" anything - I was simply pointing out the benefits of faster memory in order to help others here. After claiming I hadn't thought my comment through, you then went on to get your numbers wrong (twice), which completely undermined your attempt to correct me. That you got your numbers wrong is a fact, not an opinion.

Still, I guess HUKD would be better off without someone who is so quick to "win" what they see as a personal (?) Internet argument (rather an offer of advice to help potential consumers) that they'll do it with completely wrong figures, rather than thinking through their comment to make it accurate and helpful. So, bye. :)
#25
Does seem as if Ryzens benefit unusually from faster ram - saw a suggestion it was due to some internal interconnect on the chip being matched to external ram speed.

Shame ram prices have spiked so much, I really need 64gb.
#26
bouttime2
I have the 256GB installed in my Asus ROG laptop using Windows NVME drivers. It's blisteringly fast.

NVME is a bit of a weird one, they always score stupidly high for seq work, and maybe 1.5x faster than a decent SATA SSD for random work (which is much more typical work load).

RE drivers, install the Samsung driver, you'll get a further uplift.
#27
Optimus_Toaster
If you are trying to save money I'd recommend not getting an NVME drive. The specs look impressive but they are not noticeably faster than a normal SATA SDD for Windows or any of the programs and games I use.


My NVME M.2 ssd has 6 times faster read speeds than my Sata ssd. And 4 times better writes.
#28
My nvme sm951 was a pain to get working with windows 7 (won't use 8.1 or 10) but once I did, man its fast, it boots (8 sec) a few seconds faster than my 840 evo, snappy on web browsing esp when loading up heavy loaded hd picture web sites, it's the dogs baws, but it does get expensive buying high capacity drives, also my sm951 (256gb nvme) does get a bit toasty at high speed sustained, it's faster than the consumer 960 I believe, and to make sure I didn't throttle on heavy use I just bought some small 5/6mm solid copper heatsinks with thermal clue, and no issues, it's awesome although one thing is, it's a cheesy green pcb with copper heatsinks so not the best looking M.2 but fast did I mention fast. oO
#29
arfster
Does seem as if Ryzens benefit unusually from faster ram - saw a suggestion it was due to some internal interconnect on the chip being matched to external ram speed.
Shame ram prices have spiked so much, I really need 64gb.
From what I can gather while the benefit is good - its only good given RAM never really mattered before. Currently the performance gain is less than the price increase. Thats also not considering the ballache people have had getting systems with higher speed RAM to post! At the end of the day while better RAM helps, you're probably still better off spending the money you save not going for it on another component where the benefits would be greater. Or just pocketing the cash.
#30
BetaRomeo
Uncommon.Sense
BetaRomeo
Uncommon.Sense
Whilst I agree that faster DDR4 is beneficial, most of the rest of your comment seems a bit ill thought out.
Said without a trace of irony. ;)
Uncommon.Sense
"If you want to build a system that's going to last for a few years" I'm pretty sure that the DDR4 won't get any slower that it was to start with, and won't just stop working.
I do apologise; in hindsight, I can see how my comment would have confused a non-native speaker.If you're building a system that you're hoping not to upgrade for many years to come. Hopefully that is easier for you to understand.
DDR4-2400 was as fast as DDR4-3200 a few years ago in the majority of real-world applications. For a couple of years, however, that's been increasingly not the case. Fast forward to today, and we can see dozens and dozens of real-world benchmarks where DDR4-2400 is further behind than ever. If I'm reading you correctly, you're suggesting that this trend is likely to reverse instead of continue? Please, do explain.
Uncommon.Sense
"Better to spend the £35 today than be glaring angrily at your slow DDR4 in a couple of years, flagrantly aware that it's holding back your entire system in several areas, but understandably reluctant to spend £100+ to replace it."
It's not £35, the RAM you recommend works out at £113+ with shipping, that's a whopping 42% more cost for a 10% speed boost, if you play games, not to mention that RAM prices will have peaked sometime in Q3 this year, and 12-18 months from now you'll be able to get 32GB of even faster DDR4 for the same cost.
~£80 for the DDR4-2400 you suggested, ~£115 for the DDR4-3200 I suggested. £35. (You do 115 - 80 to get that number.)
To continue the maths lesson, it's quite obviously not a "whopping 42% more cost". The entire system is faster, as the benchmarks to which I referred (indeed, the most useful benchmarks, I find) were testing the system as a whole, rather than just the RAM. For a £500 system, as you are trying to recommend, that's 7% more cost for 5-20% better system performance.
Although I like your idea of just buying a couple of DDR4 sticks with nothing to put them in. :D It's a lovely thought, and would validate your 42% figure, but I don't think you'll get very good performance that way. ;)
You win, I quit, the internets is all yours.
Errr... I wasn't trying to "win" anything - I was simply pointing out the benefits of faster memory in order to help others here. After claiming I hadn't thought my comment through, you then went on to get your numbers wrong (twice), which completely undermined your attempt to correct me. That you got your numbers wrong is a fact, not an opinion.

Still, I guess HUKD would be better off without someone who is so quick to "win" what they see as a personal (?) Internet argument (rather an offer of advice to help potential consumers) that they'll do it with completely wrong figures, rather than thinking through their comment to make it accurate and helpful. So, bye. :)

YThe thing is by your logic of the ram effects the whole system and therefore doesn't equate exactly to a 42% price increase would be like saying "well for only 50% more I can get a 1700 but its not really 50% more because the whole system is faster".

You wont get anywhere near that 42% performance gain even if you'll roughly get what you're stating taking the whole cost into account. The issue is the system isn't slow to start with. Most would be better off upgrading something else - £35 might be enough to increase someones budget allowing a 1070 vs a 1060 for example. Although I will agree RAM is one of the few things worth spending extra on. Seeing as we've not long moved onto DDR4 I doubt we'll move onto a new standard for awhile.
#31
alexmurphy01
I have an i5-4400 and a GTX1070 - would upgrading (I'd need a new motherboard and ddr4 ram too) have a noticeable impact on games? It doesn't really struggle with anything as far as I've noticed.


I would have said not enough to justify the huge outlay. I have an i5 750 and rx480 and it's not really causing me any problems so you should be fine
#32
slayermatt
arfster
Does seem as if Ryzens benefit unusually from faster ram - saw a suggestion it was due to some internal interconnect on the chip being matched to external ram speed.
Shame ram prices have spiked so much, I really need 64gb.
From what I can gather while the benefit is good - its only good given RAM never really mattered before. Currently the performance gain is less than the price increase. Thats also not considering the ballache people have had getting systems with higher speed RAM to post! At the end of the day while better RAM helps, you're probably still better off spending the money you save not going for it on another component where the benefits would be greater. Or just pocketing the cash.

Mrrm, fair point.

I'd like to see some proper in-depth breakdowns. For example, my area is machine learning, which involves lots of transfers in and out of ram, and all cores being maxxed out. My guess is that scenario will benefit disproportionately.
#33
I suspect this would incur custom fees?
1 Like #34
Mo786
I suspect this would incur custom fees?

You suspect wrong, it's coming from France and until we are no longer in the EU all of the V.A.T. and duty is already paid at the point of purchase. :)
#35
Uncommon.Sense
Mo786
I suspect this would incur custom fees?
You suspect wrong, it's coming from France and until we are no longer in the EU all of the V.A.T. and duty is already paid at the point of purchase. :)

Thank you :D

temptation to buy has now gone up ten fold
#36
arfster
slayermatt
arfster
Does seem as if Ryzens benefit unusually from faster ram - saw a suggestion it was due to some internal interconnect on the chip being matched to external ram speed.
Shame ram prices have spiked so much, I really need 64gb.
From what I can gather while the benefit is good - its only good given RAM never really mattered before. Currently the performance gain is less than the price increase. Thats also not considering the ballache people have had getting systems with higher speed RAM to post! At the end of the day while better RAM helps, you're probably still better off spending the money you save not going for it on another component where the benefits would be greater. Or just pocketing the cash.
Mrrm, fair point.
I'd like to see some proper in-depth breakdowns. For example, my area is machine learning, which involves lots of transfers in and out of ram, and all cores being maxxed out. My guess is that scenario will benefit disproportionately.
Yeah, there definitely needs to be more testing done to find the limits. Far too much isn't known.
#37
Just a heads up. This seems to have been sent from Amazon UK and not Amazon FR. :)
#38
dem0nx
Just a heads up. This seems to have been sent from Amazon UK and not Amazon FR. :)

That's great news, since it means you can reclaim the postage if you are a Prime member. :)
#39
Price has gone up €10
2 Likes #40
HangTime
Price has gone up €10

Thanks, but showing as €209.99 - mega price drop!!!

Bump the thread if possible instead of making a new one?

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!