The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza • Hacker News Board

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

#41

Post by hansvm » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:52 PM UTC

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.

I haven't looked at their newer offerings, but in years past that was definitely a problem that afflicted AMD -- having a fraction of the floating point execution units per core, creating AVX by adding an emulation layer over the existing SSE registers, etc. For a lot of use cases AMD could still be faster according to a wall clock (they weren't worse across the board -- those failings were used to purchase advantages in other chip features), but their peak flops were peanuts in comparison to the Intel offerings.

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

#42

Post by pornel » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

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.

When you optimize for maximum performance, leaving 11 cores idle is very sad.

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

#43

Post by leeter » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

tracer4201 wrote: post #5

I have a 5 year old Intel i7 CPU. Not to diverge too far from the topic, but would I have any reason to upgrade my CPU for gaming? I assume swapping my GTX 760 with a latest generation card would give me better gaming performance.

Unless you're streaming or doing something that is causing you to be CPU bound? Unlikely. At a minimum I'd wait for the Zen 3 parts at this point.

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

#44

Post by omni » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:55 PM UTC

tracer4201 wrote: post #5

I have a 5 year old Intel i7 CPU. Not to diverge too far from the topic, but would I have any reason to upgrade my CPU for gaming? I assume swapping my GTX 760 with a latest generation card would give me better gaming performance.

You'd be surprised how much better CPUs have gotten over the last five years. Even though the clocks might look roughly similar, overall performance has gone up by quite a bit. You probably only have 4 cores on a 2015 i7, too, and 8+ cores are standard now for high-end CPUs.

Whether it'll make an immediate difference to you is game-dependent, but if you play a lot of AAA titles I'd definitely look to upgrade soon.

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

#45

Post by makomk » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:56 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #22

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.

There's a hint as to why they didn't include the i3-9100F in the conclusion section: "Even with this, Intel's ability to provide enough stock of these low-end parts, depending on your location, is questionable as previously mentioned. Case in point: the company never even made it as far as sampling any of the 9th Generation i3 parts for review."

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

#46

Post by jeffbee » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:57 PM UTC

zrm wrote: post #31

jeffbee wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the problem with AMD's intentionally misleading marketing. The Ryzen 5 3400G is an APU with a Zen+ CPU. The CPU core that's actually good, that everybody wants, is the Zen2. The Zen+ is pretty slow. It has performance comparable to $99 Intel CPUs from last year.

Can you name this Intel CPU which is as fast, has an iGPU and costs $99? Zen2 is faster than Zen+, but Zen+ isn't that slow.

No, I think the nearest thing is probably the $140 Core i3-9100. But look at Anandtech's comparison of the Zen and Zen2: at the same clock speed and core count, Zen2 stomps all over Zen. It's a much slower CPU. https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2333?vs=2590

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

#47

Post by pedrocr » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:58 PM UTC

morsch wrote: post #34

SomeoneFromCA wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$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.

PCI Express cards based on NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 are available new for <40 EUR. Presumably there's a large clearance and used market with much lower prices. None of that is an option?

I looked at this exact thing yesterday and those are currently the best option. They're also passively cooled which is nice. Having to use NVIDIA is annoying because of the story around Linux support. I mostly worry about these being old new stock and having poor reliability because of that but maybe it's fine.

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

#48

Post by jeffbee » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:58 PM UTC

makomk wrote: post #45

jeffbee wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There's a hint as to why they didn't include the i3-9100F in the conclusion section: "Even with this, Intel's ability to provide enough stock of these low-end parts, depending on your location, is questionable as previously mentioned. Case in point: the company never even made it as far as sampling any of the 9th Generation i3 parts for review."

You can literally order this part for next-day delivery on Newegg. They are also, literally, on the shelf at Central Computer.

https://www.centralcomputer.com/intel-core-i3-9100f-3-6ghz-4...

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

#49

Post by jdsully » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:59 PM UTC

pornel wrote: post #42

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.

When you optimize for maximum performance, leaving 11 cores idle is very sad.

If your algorithm is already parallel then you go back to making each core do more work per cycle.

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

#50

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 07, 2020, 5:00 PM UTC

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.

[deleted]