[Doing More For Less] Ryzen 3 3100 and 3300X Reviews are up

[5x5]

Reviews are up, boys!

Thoughts? Ouch...

[Arika]

I want AMD to push harder in the mobile/laptop space, need to fill out that product stack

 

[5x5]

2 minutes ago, Arika S said:

I want AMD to push harder in the mobile/laptop space, need to fill out that product stack

 

Agreed - we need better adoption of the 4600U - 1KU pricing is super low so there's no excuse having a 400-500 USD laptop with less than six Zen 2 cores.

[Techstorm970]

@5x5 Yo, Jarrod'sTech did a great review, as well!

 

[NumLock21]

The price of those CPUs are awesome, I mean $100-$120 for a 4 core and 8 threads. If I were to build a new gaming PC with a $1,000 budget, would I

A) Go with one of these just released Ryzen 3, with a powerful graphic card

or

B) Go with a better CPU like Ryzen 5 3600, with a slightly less powerful graphic card

I don't know about you guys, I'll go with choice B, because it's the year 2020 and I just can't see gaming PCs still running on quad cores.

Now if I want the the powerful graphic card in option A with the powerful CPU in option B, I'll just pick cheaper parts in other areas, such as the PSU, from a Gold rate to a Bronze rated and that would save me around $30-40. Other parts can save me some too like a cheaper case and motherboard or using combo deals to bring in more discounts.

[Brooksie359]

36 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

The price of those CPUs are awesome, I mean $100-$120 for a 4 core and 8 threads. If I were to build a new gaming PC with a $1,000 budget, would I

A) Go with one of these just released Ryzen 3, with a powerful graphic card

or

B) Go with a better CPU like Ryzen 5 3600, with a slightly less powerful graphic card

I don't know about you guys, I'll go with choice B, because it's the year 2020 and I just can't see gaming PCs still running on quad cores.

Now if I want the the powerful graphic card in option A with the powerful CPU in option B, I'll just pick cheaper parts in other areas, such as the PSU, from a Gold rate to a Bronze rated and that would save me around $30-40. Other parts can save me some too like a cheaper case and motherboard or using combo deals to bring in more discounts.

I am thinking this is more for cheaper builds and not 1000 dollar budget builds. This would be great if you only had say 600 dollars to work with. 

[SkillTim]

What about Comet Lake-S? I've seen IPC numbers that leapfrog Zen 2. Zen 3 will leapfrog again in the next few months.

 

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i7-10700K-clears-5-GHz-and-performs-well-on-Geekbench-but-just-cannot-break-the-AMD-Ryzen-7-3800X-in-multi-core-testing.461921.0.html

[porina]

I didn't expect the split they did on the core configurations between the two models. For personal compute uses, that would swing things towards the 3300X as unified cache helps a LOT. It would be more interesting if they went the other way around, with 2+2 and full 32MB cache on a higher model.

 

I recognise that not everyone can be spendy, these do seem to be interesting for extreme limited budget builds. The overall performance isn't anything special, but it does so at a lower price point than we've seen. I still think the 3600 is still a better performance entry level. Actually, I know the 3500 doesn't officially exist in the west, but I think that would be better overall than either of these models. Probably costs more too...

 

And let's not forget the recently announced 10th gen Intel desktop CPUs have a return of HT across the board. The i3 range should be performance competitive, although still at some Intel price premium. I think it will be closer than people might expect from historic Intel.

[5x5]

13 minutes ago, SkillTim said:

What about Comet Lake-S? I've seen IPC numbers that leapfrog Zen 2. Zen 3 will leapfrog again in the next few months.

 

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i7-10700K-clears-5-GHz-and-performs-well-on-Geekbench-but-just-cannot-break-the-AMD-Ryzen-7-3800X-in-multi-core-testing.461921.0.html

An overclocked Intel 8-core leading Zen 2 by only 5% is kinda disappointing to be honest. Performance delta is even less if you compare an overclocked 10700K to an overclocked 3800X. Factor in the fact that cooling the i7 is much harder and it costs more and it's just a downhill slope. Especially since it took this long for Intel to catch up to AMD's products from last year.

[porina]

14 minutes ago, SkillTim said:

What about Comet Lake-S? I've seen IPC numbers that leapfrog Zen 2. Zen 3 will leapfrog again in the next few months.

Comet Lake is still derived from Skylake so we don't expect any IPC change. If it does better or not in a given case may come down to the configuration of the rest of the system. At best we wont see anything really new on Intel mainstream desktop until Rocket Lake, which one rumour is it will be a backport of Willow Cove to 14nm. So no process advancement, but it gets the 2nd beyond-Skylake architecture so has more of a fighting chance against Zen 3.

[SkillTim]

1 hour ago, porina said:

And let's not forget the recently announced 10th gen Intel desktop CPUs have a return of HT across the board

Celeron G59xx doesn't.

Don't get me wrong, Intel ARE doing us wrong by still being on 14nm for desktop chips.

After being an Intel fanboy for 20-something years, I'm definitely going AMD for my next build in 2022-ish. 5nm Zen 4 anyone?

[porina]

Just now, SkillTim said:

Celeron G59xx doesn't.

At least look roughly like for like here, Ryzen 3 to i3, and upwards. More recent Celeron/Pentium CPUs are usually crippled relative to even i3 e.g. lack of AVX support at least in the Skylake era made them much less interesting than similar i3 at the time.

 

Just now, SkillTim said:

Don't get me wrong, Intel ARE doing us wrong by still being on 14nm for desktop chips.

That is such an odd way to word it I don't even know how to respond to that...

 

Just now, SkillTim said:

After being an Intel fanboy for 20-something years, I'm definitely going AMD for my next build in 2022-ish. 5nm Zen 4 anyone?

The problem is being a fanboy. Companies will do better or worse than their competitors at different times. Even in the last 20 years, there have been at least two occasions when AMD were clearly ahead of Intel. One was around the time of the gigahertz race. The P3 ran out of steam and AMD cruised to and beyond 1 GHz. The other when arguably AMD first started the core wars, going to dual core before Intel did, even though Intel had hyper-threading.

 

People should work out what makes sense for them at the time, since not all use cases are equal, and not just be blindly leaded by fanboys of either side.

[DildorTheDecent]

I'd buy one of these for fun tbh.

[suicidalfranco]

so for the price of a used 6700k i can get a new motherboard and a 3300x that performs better than the 6700k... Well: boi

[EChondo]

9 hours ago, Arika S said:

I want AMD to push harder in the mobile/laptop space, need to fill out that product stack

 

Agreed. AMD needs to push the OEM's HARD.

 

It's absolutely embarrassing seeing these sub-par Ryzen laptops still occurring 3-4 years later.

[Curufinwe_wins]

8 hours ago, NumLock21 said:

The price of those CPUs are awesome, I mean $100-$120 for a 4 core and 8 threads. If I were to build a new gaming PC with a $1,000 budget, would I

A) Go with one of these just released Ryzen 3, with a powerful graphic card

or

B) Go with a better CPU like Ryzen 5 3600, with a slightly less powerful graphic card

I don't know about you guys, I'll go with choice B, because it's the year 2020 and I just can't see gaming PCs still running on quad cores.

Now if I want the the powerful graphic card in option A with the powerful CPU in option B, I'll just pick cheaper parts in other areas, such as the PSU, from a Gold rate to a Bronze rated and that would save me around $30-40. Other parts can save me some too like a cheaper case and motherboard or using combo deals to bring in more discounts.

These chips are bad buys. I love Zen2 in general, but no one should ever buy chips this cheap that also lack iGPUs. It almost completely defeats the primary benefit. The 3600 is just so much better of a buy if you plan on actually making a gaming PC when you look at full system price to perf with a dGPU. Likewise unless you are an xOC person, i3-F processors are simply not worth buying. Esp for Intel since Intel clearly values their iGPU at only 10 dollars or so. 

 

Now AMD for the love of all things holy, give us some desktop APUs with Zen2. Throw the 4700H onto a desktop package. I'll buy it at a 50-100 dollar premium over the 37/3800x. 

[Dabombinable]

4770K as well as 4790K & 5775C will continue to be heavily overpriced despite how good the 3100 and 3300X are. Which sucks (but soon won't be a consideration for me).

Now for a proper 3000 series APU with 4c/8t that'll utterly destroy my defunct A8 4555M (and probably Core m3-6Y30).

[SkilledRebuilds]

I was more akin to thinking a 6c6t and 6c12t APU could very well be real in the near future.

Once internally reconfigured, who knows when but I'm keen to see them.

[Brooksie359]

4 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

These chips are bad buys. I love Zen2 in general, but no one should ever buy chips this cheap that also lack iGPUs. It almost completely defeats the primary benefit. The 3600 is just so much better of a buy if you plan on actually making a gaming PC when you look at full system price to perf with a dGPU. Likewise unless you are an xOC person, i3-F processors are simply not worth buying. Esp for Intel since Intel clearly values their iGPU at only 10 dollars or so. 

 

Now AMD for the love of all things holy, give us some desktop APUs with Zen2. Throw the 4700H onto a desktop package. I'll buy it at a 50-100 dollar premium over the 37/3800x. 

I disagree. If you are on a tight budget a CPU like this could be a good option. I mean yeah a 3600 is better but it is also significant more expensive and tha price difference can be a big difference in what dedicated gpu you can afford. Also you have to take into account that there are times where you will get more performance when going for the cheaper r3 cpu and a better gpu. I mean what is the point of having an r5 3600 vs an r3 if it makes 0 performance impact because your GPU isn't powerful enough? 

[Dabombinable]

4 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

I disagree. If you are on a tight budget a CPU like this could be a good option. I mean yeah a 3600 is better but it is also significant more expensive and tha price difference can be a big difference in what dedicated gpu you can afford. Also you have to take into account that there are times where you will get more performance when going for the cheaper r3 cpu and a better gpu. I mean what is the point of having an r5 3600 vs an r3 if it makes 0 performance impact because your GPU isn't powerful enough? 

It's price is actually rather interesting, as it's difficult to choose between the 1600AF, 2600, 3100 and 3300x since they are all so close.

[5x5]

23 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

It's price is actually rather interesting, as it's difficult to choose between the 1600AF, 2600, 3100 and 3300x since they are all so close.

Personally, I'd say it's either the 120$ 3300X or the 1600AF for 85$. The 3100 is hard to justify and the 2600 is dead in the water.

[Curufinwe_wins]

5 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

I disagree. If you are on a tight budget a CPU like this could be a good option. I mean yeah a 3600 is better but it is also significant more expensive and tha price difference can be a big difference in what dedicated gpu you can afford. Also you have to take into account that there are times where you will get more performance when going for the cheaper r3 cpu and a better gpu. I mean what is the point of having an r5 3600 vs an r3 if it makes 0 performance impact because your GPU isn't powerful enough? 

This is already assuming there is no benefit to more than 4 cores today, which simply isn't true. Even at the midrange.  

 

On a really tight budget I'd recommend even less than these (either used market or the 1600AF and a much cheaper motherboard). But comparing a 1000 dollar full system price with a 3300x and waiting till you can afford the extra 100 dollars for a 3600... you will almost instantly get back that extra 10% in gaming, and obviously ludicrously more than 10% in most other things.

[Fatih19]

22 hours ago, huilun02 said:

And make NUCs out of those mobile processors as well

AMD needs to make their version of Intel's NUCs.  Use some of that Microsoft and Sony money!

[Fatih19]

18 hours ago, porina said:

Comet Lake is still derived from Skylake so we don't expect any IPC change. If it does better or not in a given case may come down to the configuration of the rest of the system. At best we wont see anything really new on Intel mainstream desktop until Rocket Lake, which one rumour is it will be a backport of Willow Cove to 14nm. So no process advancement, but it gets the 2nd beyond-Skylake architecture so has more of a fighting chance against Zen 3.

I don't think so. Zen 3 advantage over Zen 2 is not necessarily on IPC or frequency (although there are rumor of decent boost on them), it's the fact that it'll have 8 core per CCX which will results in lower latency for Ryzen 3, 5, & 7. We already see the advantages that the 3300X (which has the core all in one CCX) has over the 3100 when compared clock-for-clock.

[porina]

2 minutes ago, Fatih19 said:

I don't think so. Zen 3 advantage over Zen 2 is not necessarily on IPC or frequency (although there are rumor of decent boost on them), it's the fact that it'll have 8 core per CCX which will results in lower latency for Ryzen 3, 5, & 7. We already see the advantages that the 3300X (which has the core all in one CCX) has over the 3100 when compared clock-for-clock.

I think for most casual users that will be less important than the claim IPC increase, and if there's clock on top of that, even better. Personally I'd love to have the 8 core minimum unit. Right now, I have to treat my 3700X as if it were two 4 core CPUs, with limited bandwidth, to get the most out of it. I can't use it as a high performance 8 core as I would with Intel. Basically the CCX reconfigure is a catch up move for AMD which helps in some use cases, like they finally had some half reasonable AVX performance with Zen 2. What we currently have from AMD allows them to be scaleable in some ways, but not others. Great if all you run is Cinebench, but doesn't apply to everything.