AMD Ryzen 3 3300X – when cheaper Matisse is not enough

Rendering and Geekbench

The duel of Ryzen 3 3100 and Intel Core i3-10100 processors showed that AMD can beat Intel in most tests at a lower price. However, the R3 3100 is not the only new model introduced by the manufacturer. The 3300X is more powerful, with higher clock speed and, coincidentally, it also sells for the same price as the Ci3-10100. In addition to significantly higher clock speed, it also has different CCD composition.

Rendering


Higher clock speed and a change in the internal structure of the processor were immediately reflected in the result of Cinebench R15. Compared to the 3100, you see a nice 12% increase in performance in single-core and 9% in multi-core. The 3300X’s lead over Intel is even bigger, 15 and 24%.



The newer version of Cinebench R20 shows the same difference as R15 among the new Ryzen 3 CPUs. The lead over Intel has changed slightly, an increase to 20% in single-core but a decrease to 19% in multi-core.


In a practical test of POV-Ray render, you can see that the 3300X is 8% faster than the 3100 and 21% faster than the 10100. This translates into almost 10 and 25 second differences.

Blender showed only a 3% difference between 3100 and 10100. The 3300X is another 11% or 49 and 63 seconds faster than both.

Geekbench


Geekbench 3 shows a 9% lead of the 3300X over the 3100 in both single and multi-core tests. Compared to Intel, it is up to 18 and 25% faster.



Although Geekbench 4 doesn’t really like AMD processors, the 3300X beats the other two processors in this test as well, 7–9% in single-core and 8–14% in multi-core.


The latest Geekbench 5 version shows a 12% lead over 3100 in single-core and 13% over 10100. Multi-core 5 and 14% in favor of 3300X.

The raw performance of the 3300X is very solid and the more than 10% increase in single-core compared to the 3100 is definitely not negligible. In multi-core, we saw up to a quarter higher performance compared to 10100 which is unprecedented at the same price of processors.

  •  
  •  
  •  
Flattr this!

AMD planning Radeon RX 9070 GRE: Cheaper RDNA 4 with 12GB VRAM?

When launching the Radeon RX 9070 and 9070 XT, AMD confirmed Radeon RX 9060 XT coming in the second quarter. That card is expected to use the Navi 44 chip with just 128-bit bus and 2048 shaders, leaving a large gap between it and the Radeon RX 9070. Lack of a 192-bit memory card also means no graphics that could offer an affordable option thanks to 12GB VRAM. It seems there’s a new SKU coming to fill this gap – the Radeon RX 9070 GRE. Read more “AMD planning Radeon RX 9070 GRE: Cheaper RDNA 4 with 12GB VRAM?” »

  •  
  •  
  •  

Gigabyte Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16G Review: Better Pick

Graphics cards from the latest generation are still pricey, but more affordable models have become easier to find in stores. The Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC is one of the more reasonably priced options. It uses the same cooling and board layout as the more powerful Gigabyte AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT Gaming OC, but thanks to lower power consumption, it runs cooler and quieter—making it a more compelling choice for many users. Read more “Gigabyte Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16G Review: Better Pick” »

  •  
  •  
  •  

Zen 5 desktop APU is coming to AM5 by the end of the year

It has been 8 months since AMD introduced the Ryzen AI 300 “Strix Point” to the market – these are the first APUs (monolithic low-power CPUs with relatively strong integrated GPUs) based on the Zen 5 architecture. Until now, it was unclear whether these CPUs would ever have a desktop version. However, reports have just emerged suggesting that processors featuring Zen 5 and improved integrated graphics are on the way. Read more “Zen 5 desktop APU is coming to AM5 by the end of the year” »

  •  
  •  
  •  

One comment Add comment

  1. Sorry you spent time on this.Can you find one for 120 dollars.Im starting to feel amd raging like intel used 2.Gak I should have stayed blue.Bought an a320 with a 3200g to see what the craz was about.Was not bad.I now have the 3200 in a gigabyte b550 and again not bad https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/33156011.Now i see the cheap cpu is no longer cheap.Iwish i had just gone 9400f.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *