3300X vs 3500

[JustHunterM8]

I was checking out prices for CPU's in my area, and i realized that the 3300X is more expensive than the 3500 over here.
The 3300X is $150 and the 3500 is $131. Is the 3300X worth the extra bit of money over the 3500, or is the 3500 way better than the 3300X. Also which one has better streaming performance

[Dedayog]

https://www.bing.com/search?q=3300x+vs+3500+for+streaming&form=EDGTCT&qs=PF&cvid=28d263b3ae104745b8a78070707e3c6b&refig=b2d883ae63514cc986f55cc3726bbe7b&cc=US&setlang=en-US&plvar=0

 

Includes answers for gaming and then streaming a little lower.

[ImAlsoRan]

The 3500 has similar performance to a 2600. It has 6 cores, while the 3300X has 4. For streaming, I'd say the extra cores are more important.

[Nena Trinity]

Same, get the cheaper.

[MarvintheParrot]

the 3600 is definitely better for gaming and streaming, as it has 6 cores and 12 threads, compared to the 3300x, witch has only 4 cores and 8 threads. If you were using the PC for only gaming, then I guess that the 3300x would be a nice choice, however, the 3600 is an amazing PCU for gaming and streaming. While you could go with the last gen 2600, or the 1600 AF, I think that the 3600 is a great choice for your needs.

[JustHunterM8]

2 minutes ago, jsugarman2005 said:

the 3600 is definitely better for gaming and streaming, as it has 6 cores and 12 threads, compared to the 3300x, witch has only 4 cores and 8 threads. If you were using the PC for only gaming, then I guess that the 3300x would be a nice choice, however, the 3600 is an amazing PCU for gaming and streaming. While you could go with the last gen 2600, or the 1600 AF, I think that the 3600 is a great choice for your needs.

I was referring to the 3500 not the 3600

[Aragorn-]

In the reviews I saw at the launch, the 3500 seemed to really struggle compared to the 3600. The 3300x on the other hand seems to come very close to the 3600.

It's difficult. 6 real cores but no SMT, Vs 4 cores with SMT. IMO neither are really ideal for streaming.

I wonder if a 2600x would be a better option at a similar price?

[Haro]

8 minutes ago, Aragorn- said:

wonder if a 2600x would be a better option at a similar price?

No,no it won't 

 

6 hours ago, GuyRyzen said:

The 3300X is $150 and the 3500 is $131. Is the 3300X

3500. 

Smt will not be on the level of two extra physical cores 

[Aragorn-]

You say that, but here: https://www.techspot.com/review/1966-amd-ryzen-5-3500x/

We see the 3500x lagging the 1600x and especially the 2600x in almost every test. It just doesn't look like a great chip when a 2600x costs less.

[Haro]

1 minute ago, Aragorn- said:

We see the 3500x lagging the 1600x and especially the 2600x in almost every test. It just doesn't look like a great chip when a 2600x costs less.

If we're going by that 

The 1600 af is better than all of these then.

[Aragorn-]

Well yeah, thats what i was getting at. The lack of SMT seems to hurt the 3500, certain games showing really poor 1% lows for instance. Add streaming on top and i think it would really struggle. Quad cores are also a bit marginal these days and again, streaming will see them struggle a bit i suspect.

 

The 3300x shines in gaming because it has really strong single core performance (quite a bit better than the 3500 even), but only four cores helped along with SMT is really pushing things in modern titles, and the added load of streaming might well push it over the edge.

 

Hence i have a feeling that a 1600af/2600/2600x is probably the sensible minimum if you cant stretch to a 3600. The cores are slower, but having 6 of them and SMT i think will give a smoother more consistent end result. Ofcourse, availablilty and price comes into it and those are very region dependant.

[MarvintheParrot]

21 hours ago, GuyRyzen said:

I was referring to the 3500 not the 3600

So sorry! I totally read that wrong!  Yes, the 3500 is a good processor, however, I don't think it has hyper-threading, so it will be a bit slower, than say, the 3600 or the 3300x. For streaming, having the 6 cores will definitely be awesome, however, without hyper-threading, you are losing a lot of performance than you would have. If the R5 3600 is available in your area for the discounted price that I found it for (~$160 USD) the defiantly get that. BUT, if your GPU is good enough, then go with the R5 3500.