Ryzen 3 > Ryzen 5

[minervx]

Sorry for the clickbaity title.  In sheer dollar to performance, Ryzen 3 is better (for most people).

 

Yes, if you're utilizing all the cores and threads such as in professional 4K video editing or if you're gaming at over 120 frames per second, you probably will want a Ryzen 5 1600.  

 

But really, Ryzen 3 is more than enough for most people's gaming and content creation needs.  A lot of people tell themselves they're going to be professional editors and 3D renderers just to justify getting a beast processor, but most of them are just going to play Overwatch and browse the internet anyway.

 

The consumerism and hobbyist talk hyping up R5 and R7 have made the Ryzen 3 seem much weaker than it actually is.

 

[vanished]

-moved to CPUs-

[NewHopeTech]

People lie to themselves all the time to justify purchases. "Of course I'll totally use that second camera on my phone ALL the time!" "This lambo will finally make someone love me!", etc. That's the curse of the market.

 

May I add that you have Ryzen 5. I sense like you're mad that everyone else is buying your tier or better because you want to feel like you have superior tech. That's how this post comes off. OR you could be a "professional editor" or a "3D renderer" or you're gaming at 120 fps.

 

Also, if you're only gaming, you probably shouldn't be buying Ryzen anyways, let alone Ryzen 7.

[ARikozuM]

I need that R5-1600 for Photoshop and Lightroom...

[themctipers]

Just now, NewHopeTech said:

People lie to themselves all the time to justify purchases. "Of course I'll totally use that second camera on my phone ALL the time!" "This lambo will finally make someone love me!", etc. That's the curse of the market.

 

May I add that you have Ryzen 5. I sense like you're mad that everyone else is buying your tier or better because you want to feel like you have superior tech. That's how this post comes off. OR you could be a "professional editor" or a "3D renderer" or you're gaming at 120 fps.

 

Also, if you're only gaming, you probably shouldn't be buying Ryzen anyways, let alone Ryzen 7.

i think you should, just because it has good price/$ (before cannon lake), and it has cheaper motherboards, and future compatibility until 2020. 

ryzen 7 is for small youtubers, around 20k or so, ryzen 5 is for people who just sometimes mess with it and want it to run fast and oh yes all those cores, ryzen 3 for the mainstream gamer 

[Skanky Sylveon]

Don't worry, my workload can fully utilize all of the 12 cores that I have.

[minervx]

I utilize 5% of my R5-1600 on average daily workloads.  Maybe 30% at most while in-game.  The only time I've gotten over 50% was when I had a virus.

[NewHopeTech]

4 minutes ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

Don't worry, my workload can fully utilize all of the 12 cores that I have.

Don't lie to us we know that's just chrome. /s

[Skanky Sylveon]

1 minute ago, minervx said:

I utilize 5% of my R5-1600 on average daily workloads.  Maybe 30% at most while in-game.  The only time I've gotten over 50% was when I had a virus.

Most people that purchase a high core count processor are not buying it for gaming.

[rip]

8 minutes ago, minervx said:

I utilize 5% of my R5-1600 on average daily workloads.  Maybe 30% at most while in-game.  The only time I've gotten over 50% was when I had a virus.

But you don't own a Ryzen 3 to make a R3 > R5 conclusion don't you?

[minervx]

1 minute ago, rip said:

But you don't own a Ryzen 3 to make a R3 > R5 conclusion don't you?

 

i don't but i highly doubt, based on the footprint of my R5 1600, that i would even be close to maxing out the R3.  

[NewHopeTech]

1 minute ago, rip said:

But you don't own a Ryzen 3 to make a R3 > R5 conclusion don't you?

I feel like minervz really dug themselves into a hole with this one (pun intended)

[minervx]

5 minutes ago, NewHopeTech said:

I feel like minervz really dug themselves into a hole with this one (pun intended)

I know I'm not the most qualified person to make this statement, but it is a true statement.

 

Most gamers don't own a 144 Hz monitor.

 

And most people in general aren't going to be doing heavy content creation loads.  We live in a time period where people have low attention spans and can pirate $5000 worth of programs without learning how to use them.  It's like people who buy a $200 VST plugin and don't really produce much music anyway

[Misanthrope]

For budget builds 4 core 4 thread chips will game fine within that limited budget (i.e. stay within the 1050ti limits at most).

 

But I think we're in kind of the middle of an "If you build it, they will come" situation right now: we're getting multiple core chips as mainstream chips just now before most software and games transitions into it but now that this will quickly become common place, they will.

 

So you can sort of make a future proofing argument if we know BF1 already can use more than 8 threads if they're available.

[NewHopeTech]

Just now, minervx said:

I know I'm not the most qualified person to make this statement, but it is a true statement.

 

Most gamers don't own a 144 Hz monitor.

 

And most people in general aren't going to be doing heavy content creation loads.  We live in a time period where people have low attention spans and can pirate $5000 worth of programs without learning how to use them.

I agree 100% that Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 are a bad buy for gamers, but I'd go a step further and say that Ryzen is a bad buy for gamers. At Microcenter an i5 cpu/mobo bundle is ~$10 more than an R5 bundle. I'm not saying Ryzen is horrible or anything, I love my 1700x, but I wouldn't have bought it if I only planned to game.

[Prox1ma]

I wonder, if the IPC of R3 the same as R5 & R7 i.e, are R5s & R7s just R3s with more cores and threads?

[Skanky Sylveon]

6 minutes ago, NewHopeTech said:

I agree 100% that Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 are a bad buy for gamers, but I'd go a step further and say that Ryzen is a bad buy for gamers. At Microcenter an i5 cpu/mobo bundle is ~$10 more than an R5 bundle. I'm not saying Ryzen is horrible or anything, I love my 1700x, but I wouldn't have bought it if I only planned to game.

An i3 would beat my 1920x when it comes to pure gaming.  Ryzen is a great platform, but I can't recommend it if all you do is just game.

13 minutes ago, minervx said:

And most people in general aren't going to be doing heavy content creation loads.  We live in a time period where people have low attention spans and can pirate $5000 worth of programs without learning how to use them.  It's like people who buy a $200 VST plugin and don't really produce much music anyway

Do you have statistics to back your claim up?

[minervx]

Ryzen 7 is a bad deal for gaming. 

 

Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 offer good performance to dollar for gaming compared to Intels.

[JoostinOnline]

Just now, minervx said:

Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 offer good performance to dollar for gaming compared to Intels.

Unless you can get your hands on a Coffee Lake CPU.

[Skanky Sylveon]

Just now, Ezilkannan said:

I wonder, if the IPC of R3 the same as R5 & R7 i.e, are R5s & R7s just R3s with more cores and threads?

I believe that the IPC is identical, you are just paying for more cores and more cache.

The cache can make a difference in some games however.

[NewHopeTech]

1 minute ago, minervx said:

Ryzen 7 is a bad deal for gaming. 

 

Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 offer good performance to dollar for gaming compared to Intels.

It would be nice if repeating things made them true.

[Guest lilbman]

33 minutes ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

Most people that purchase a high core count processor are not buying it for gaming.

Yet there's always that one tech noob that thinks that a 32 core processor will be better for gaming than something like a 7700K.  

[NewHopeTech]

1 minute ago, lilbman said:

Yet there's always that one tech noob that thinks that a 32 core processor will be better for gaming than something like a 7700K.  

Are you trying to tell me that Intel Phi isn't the best bang for the buck for gaming??

[rip]

31 minutes ago, minervx said:

 

i don't but i highly doubt, based on the footprint of my R5 1600, that i would even be close to maxing out the R3.  

So if you can tell everything based on speculations and guesses why did you not get a Ryzen 3 in the first place?

[Prox1ma]

8 minutes ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

I believe that the IPC is identical, you are just paying for more cores and more cache.

The cache can make a difference in some games however.

So for most titles, an R3 would perform similar to a R7? Is this the case for intel too (i5 and i7 are just i3s with more cores and threads)