Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 127 posts

Re: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

#21

Post by ccffpphh »

jdsully wrote: post #15
gambiting wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Many games are pegged to one or two cores only That hasn't been the case for a looong time. But to answer your question, they are much faster than anything from Intel at comparable pricing: https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-amd-r... "The results here are immediately interesting. Despite costing less than every other CPU represented, the 3100 manages to tie the Core i5 9600K in single-core perf…

I have a Ryzen 3900X, and also an i5 for software development. With unoptimized code the Ryzen is pretty close to the i5. But when you start to really optimize it becomes obvious the i5 has more execution resources and is faster single threaded.

Is this including SPECTRE, etc. mitigations?

Re: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

#22

Post by jeffbee »

hellogoodbye wrote: post #2

Intel can't match this performance to price ratio

Maybe but we can't tell from this article which should have compared against the $75 Core i3-9100F or maybe the $160 Core i5-9400F, instead of filling their graphs full of unavailable, ancient Intel parts like the 4th-gen core i7 that launched in 2014, and then listing the 2014 MSRP as if that was a relevant point of comparison.

Re: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

#23

Post by jeffbee »

ccffpphh wrote: post #21
jdsully wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a Ryzen 3900X, and also an i5 for software development. With unoptimized code the Ryzen is pretty close to the i5. But when you start to really optimize it becomes obvious the i5 has more execution resources and is faster single threaded.

Is this including SPECTRE, etc. mitigations?

Why would anyone enable speculative execution mitigations on a computer used to build software?

Re: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

#24

Post by gautamcgoel »

gambiting wrote: post #6

So I was recently looking at those as options for a very low budget video editing PC for someone, and yes, AMD destroys intel in raw CPU performance for the same price, however in those low-budget applications Intel has an upper hand - integrated GPU. With AMD you either have to go with the super crappy 3400G, which is a really poor CPU(but also very cheap), or for literally anything else + a dedicated GPU(which incr…

I totally agree. A lot of these CPU review articles are aimed at gamers and hence ignore integrated graphics entirely, since it's assumed you'll go out and buy a nice discrete graphics card.

Re: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

#25

Post by Exmoor »

gambiting wrote: post #6

So I was recently looking at those as options for a very low budget video editing PC for someone, and yes, AMD destroys intel in raw CPU performance for the same price, however in those low-budget applications Intel has an upper hand - integrated GPU. With AMD you either have to go with the super crappy 3400G, which is a really poor CPU(but also very cheap), or for literally anything else + a dedicated GPU(which incr…

I think this is why you mostly see these cheap articles called out as being ideal for gaming rigs where you're highly likely to be adding a dedicated GPU anyway. Even a low end card like a $120 RX 570 is going to be 600+% faster than the built in Intel GPU: https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-UHD-Graphics-630...

Even for video editing the math might change a bit since modern video editing apps can leverage GPU for rendering.

That said, I agree with the folks who say that AMD releasing desktop chips built on Zen 2 with built in GPU cannot come fast enough.

Re: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

#26

Post by bane »

gambiting wrote: post #6

So I was recently looking at those as options for a very low budget video editing PC for someone, and yes, AMD destroys intel in raw CPU performance for the same price, however in those low-budget applications Intel has an upper hand - integrated GPU. With AMD you either have to go with the super crappy 3400G, which is a really poor CPU(but also very cheap), or for literally anything else + a dedicated GPU(which incr…

There's an important market segment though that these will suit well. People on budgets doing upgrades of cheap systems. They'll likely continue to use their old video card, which will probably be better than Intel's integrated GPU, but will swap out the motherboard and CPU (and maybe RAM).

When I was much younger, and on much more of a budget, these "computers of theseus" were my main rigs for a long time. The meta-game was to try to see how few parts you had to swap out from piecemeal upgrade to piecemeal upgrade.

Re: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

#27

Post by SomeoneFromCA »

Exmoor wrote: post #25
gambiting wrote: post #6

So I was recently looking at those as options for a very low budget video editing PC for someone, and yes, AMD destroys intel in raw CPU performance for the same price, however in those low-budget applications Intel has an upper hand - integrated GPU. With AMD you either have to go with the super crappy 3400G, which is a really poor CPU(but also very cheap), or for literally anything else + a dedicated GPU(which incr…

I think this is why you mostly see these cheap articles called out as being ideal for gaming rigs where you're highly likely to be adding a dedicated GPU anyway. Even a low end card like a $120 RX 570 is going to be 600+% faster than the built in Intel GPU: https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-UHD-Graphics-630... Even for video editing the math might change a bit since modern video editing apps can leverage GP…

$120 is sensitive amount of money for someone who wants to use a machine only for development. I am wondering why AMD would manufacture ultra low end potato cards which would cost like $35, only for office use. That would boost the sales big time.

Re: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

#28

Post by SomeoneFromCA »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #13
gambiting wrote: post #6

So I was recently looking at those as options for a very low budget video editing PC for someone, and yes, AMD destroys intel in raw CPU performance for the same price, however in those low-budget applications Intel has an upper hand - integrated GPU. With AMD you either have to go with the super crappy 3400G, which is a really poor CPU(but also very cheap), or for literally anything else + a dedicated GPU(which incr…

Yes, the article expresses some surprise that the new Ryzen 3 chips are based on binned Ryzen 5/7 3000's, rather than on the new and exciting Ryzen Mobile 4000's which do have integrated graphics and are benchmarking very well. Hopefully some Ryzen Mobile based desktop chips are coming soon too.

Hopefully some inventive friends from Aliexpress retrofit these mobile cpus for AM4 socket, like they did with mobile i7s.

Re: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

#29

Post by blattimwind »

Exmoor wrote: post #25
gambiting wrote: post #6

So I was recently looking at those as options for a very low budget video editing PC for someone, and yes, AMD destroys intel in raw CPU performance for the same price, however in those low-budget applications Intel has an upper hand - integrated GPU. With AMD you either have to go with the super crappy 3400G, which is a really poor CPU(but also very cheap), or for literally anything else + a dedicated GPU(which incr…

I think this is why you mostly see these cheap articles called out as being ideal for gaming rigs where you're highly likely to be adding a dedicated GPU anyway. Even a low end card like a $120 RX 570 is going to be 600+% faster than the built in Intel GPU: https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-UHD-Graphics-630... Even for video editing the math might change a bit since modern video editing apps can leverage GP…

For modern video editors (aka "not Adobe") the CPU barely matters at all. I suspect "content creation needs strong CPU" is held up largely by Adobe, while more modern systems ditched CPUs for heavy lifting a long time ago or never used CPU for these purposes in the first place.

Re: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza

#30

Post by taway555 »

bzb3 wrote: post #17
hyperbovine wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that was not your original premise. "Many" games are not single core. Rather, a few old classics that refuse to die are.

https://store.steampowered.com/stats/Steam-Game-and-Player-S... Probably most games on that list don't use all cores. So yeah not "many" but "most". Thanks for the correction.

Please provide sources for core usage for each of the games referenced in your list.
Post reply on HN