The latest Ryzen processors from AMD are coming in as low as $100 with quad-cores and SMT support.

Run into the new Ryzen 3 3100, set to toll only $100, it features 4 cores, viii threads and clocks between 3.6 and 3.nine GHz depending on the workload. For such an affordable processor it also features a rather large 18MB of cache. This part is rated for a 65 watt TDP and so you get the Wraith Stealth libation, a nice add-on at this price point.

Then we have the Ryzen 3 3300X which costs $120. Information technology's besides a four cadre, viii thread part, with the aforementioned cache, TDP and box libation. The core clocks are a bit higher, between 3.eight and 4.three GHz. Now you might think a x% increment in clock frequency is a bit weak for a xx% increase in price, but there'south more to it. The R3 3100 and 3300X feature a different topology. In other words, they are arranged differently within the core complex die.

As a quick refresher, the 3rd-gen Ryzen 'core chiplet die', or CCD for curt, contains two cadre complexes, often referred to as CCX's. Each CCX contains four cores, then a fully enabled CCD will contain a total of 8 cores, throw two of these together in i package and you get the Ryzen nine 3950X.

In the case of the R3 3100 and 3300X, both feature a single CCD, and just half the cores are agile, as these are quad-core processors. The Ryzen three 3100 features two active CCXs, each with 2-cores, four-threads and 8MB of L3 cache. In simple terms, AMD would call this a 2+ii configuration, and it means when using more than two cores there will be crosstalk between CCX modules which does increase latency.

The Ryzen 3 3300X, on the other hand, features a single active CCX and that means all four cores are housed in the same CCX. This reduces core-to-core latency and unifies the 16MB L3 enshroud for all cores and threads, which will translate into better multi-cadre operation. That being the case the 3300X could very well exist worth the actress $20.

As for the competition, right now the R3 3100 would battle against Intel'due south Core i3-9100F. The 9100F currently sells for simply $75, simply this is but a iv-cadre/4-thread part, which is leap to be brutal. The real match up volition be with Intel's upcoming Cadre i3-10100, a 4-core, 8-thread CPU that operates between iii.6 and 4.3 GHz with a cost tag of $122.

Then competing with the R3 3300X right now is the Core i5-9400F, which may exist an even tougher contest for Intel right at present. Recently the six-core, half dozen-thread Intel CPU has been priced around $150, which is a disbelieve over its original $180 MSRP. Information technology'll be interesting to run into how these 2 CPUs compare in terms of performance. The cheapest Core i5 Intel has coming with the Comet Lake series is the 10400 but that'southward a 6-core, 12-thread processor, and so it'll likely be a class above the R3 3300X.

Moving past these new Ryzen iii processors for a moment, AMD has also disclosed more data about their upcoming B550 chipset. The long awaited B550 will exist hither soon every bit boards are fix to get bachelor on mid June. The highlights include PCIe 4.0 support for graphics cards and NVMe storage.

To be clear, the chipset itself doesn't actually support PCIe 4.0, rather B550 motherboards do. There are no PCIe 4.0 lanes attached to the chipset, but AMD is assuasive B550 motherboards to apply the PCI 4.0 lanes from tertiary-gen Ryzen. Those PCIe lanes have been upgraded when compared to the B450 and X470 chipsets, whereas 400 series chipsets featured PCIe 2.0, B550 now gets PCIe 3.0, and so that's a pretty big deal.

B550 boards also now back up dual GPUs. Previously that feature was sectional to X470 and X570 boards. Not exactly an exciting improver, but we're certain someone volition find information technology useful.

In total, the B550 chipset supports four PCIe iii.0 lanes, with the option of two more PCIe iii.0 lanes or 2 additional SATA 6 Gbps ports. There are also 4 fixed SATA 6 Gbps ports, six USB 2.0 480 Mbps ports, two USB iii.0 5 Gbps ports, and two USB 3.1 10 Gbps ports. Rest assured, nosotros'll exist testing as many B550 boards every bit we can as they hit shelves on June 16th.

In the meantime, for today's review we'll be using the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Chief for all benchmarks, forth with 32GB of DDR4-3200 CL14 memory, so all 4 DIMM slots accept been populated. The exact same memory configuration has been used to exam the Intel CPUs using the Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra. Unless specified, all AMD and Intel CPUs have been cooled using the Corsair Hydro H150i Pro 360mm AIO liquid cooler. For the graphics card nosotros're using an RTX 2080 Ti.

The bulk of this benchmarking data has been gathered fresh over the past few weeks using the latest Windows x build 1909 and the latest available BIOS for each motherboard. Full disclosure: we ran out of time, and so couldn't exam all the CPUs nosotros wanted. For example, we tested all AMD CPUs we could just were unable to fit 1st-gen Ryzen iii parts on time.

As well, nosotros have included the directly competing Intel CPUs, but at that place are no college-end parts because of the aforementioned time constraints. The graphs include the Ryzen 7 3700X, for case, merely nosotros weren't able to include the Core i7-8700K. This wasn't done to make AMD CPUs look faster, Intel is faster for gaming at the loftier-finish, but we simply couldn't complete all benchmarks for this review. On a more than positive note, we will get a chance to include them all shortly in our upcoming 10th-gen Intel CPU review. With that out of the way, let's go to the results.

Benchmarks

Starting as usual with Cinebench R20 multi-cadre results, we see that the R3 3300X is able to border out the R5 1600 and comfortably trounce the 9400F past a x% margin. Also it was just 7% slower than the R5 2600.

The R3 3100 does well, too, matching the 9400F and making it almost l% faster than the Core i3-9100F.

The single core performance of the R3 3300X is very strong. Hither it was 19% faster than the 9400F. The R3 3100 hands outpaced the 9100F, chirapsia information technology past a xvi% margin.

Using 7-zip to measure compression performance we see that the R3 3300X is slightly ahead of the R5 1600 while the R3 3100 is slightly behind. Nonetheless, both hands vanquish the competing Intel parts and were even faster than the Core i7-7700K.

The decompression performance was just as impressive, here the R3 3300X was 24% faster than the 9400F while the R3 3100 was almost 70% faster than the 9100F.

Here's a look at AES performance with very stiff performance from these new quad-core processors. The R3 3300X was 21% faster than the 9400F and 37% faster than the 7700K, while the R3 3100 absolutely crushed the 9100F by almost l%.

The Ryzen three 3300X was 11% faster than the Core i5-9400F in the Blender Open up Information criterion and that saw it deliver similar operation Ryzen 5 1600. The R3 3100 dominates the 9100F, this time beating it past a 45% margin.

5-Ray is another rendering criterion where the R3 3300X does well, matching the R5 1600 to make it 13% faster than the 9400F. So we come across the R3 3100 beating the 9100F by a 38% margin.

The R3 3300X isn't able to match the R5 1600 in the Corona benchmark, simply it did beat the 7700K past a few percent and was 14% faster than the 9400F. Once again, the R3 3100 easily beat the 9100F, this time by a whopping 52% margin.

Code compilation performance for the Ryzen 3 3300X was first-class, basically matching the Ryzen 5 2600, which meant information technology was x% faster than the Core i5-9400F. The R3 3100 wasn't much slower than the 7700K and as such destroyed the 9100F past most a fifty% margin.

DaVinci Resolve Studio is a new addition to our benchmarking suite and hither nosotros see that the R3 3300X scored slightly higher in the Puget Systems' benchmark. It was 16% faster than the 9400F, and then well in line with the margins seen so far. The R3 3100 was too 57% faster than the Cadre i3-9100F.

Of grade, nosotros're still testing with Adobe Premiere Pro 2022 again the Puget Systems benchmark. The R3 3300X was 19% faster than the 9400F, while the R3 3100 was 42% faster than the 9100F. The 3300X was also ten% faster than the 3100, then non a huge margin in that location.

The Ryzen 3 3300X looks to be a slap-up value selection for those using Photoshop, here it scores 844 pts making information technology twenty% amend than the 9400F. The R3 3100 likewise outscored the 9100F by a 14% margin, so once more these new Ryzen 3 CPUs look to be great value options for Photoshop users on a tight budget.

Nosotros encounter similar margins when running the Puget Systems Lightroom Classic benchmark. Here the 3300X edged out the Core i7-7700K, making it eight% faster than the 9400F. Meanwhile the R3 3100 outscored the 9100F by a 15% margin.

The terminal productivity benchmark we ran was After Effects 2022 where the new Ryzen 3 processors do well, performing closely to the Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i7-7700K.

Power Consumption

A quick look at full organization power consumption shows the 3300X to be on par with the slightly lower clocked Ryzen 5 3600, while the R3 3100 dropped ability consumption past well-nigh 10%. Both used quite a bit more ability than the Intel alternatives, but then they were as well quite a bit faster.

Gaming Benchmarks

We'll start with Battlefield V using the DX11 API for testing gaming operation. Here the R3 3300X performed uncommonly well, coming in just behind the R3 3600. With 152 fps on average it was vii% faster than the 9400F, but 24% faster than comparing the one% low data.

The R3 3100 also performed well, at least relative to its competition. Although it but matched the average frame charge per unit of the 9100F it was significantly faster when comparing one% low functioning, delivering 41% more than performance and that'due south going to lead to a much smoother and noticeably better gaming experience.

Pushing the resolution upwards to 1440p introduces a slight GPU clogging and although the 7700K hitting the lead when looking at the average frame charge per unit, the i% low result was still well downward on the R3 3300X. The aforementioned goes for the 9400F which managed to match the average fps result of the 3300X, merely was 22% slower when looking at the i% low result. The R3 3100 as well does well providing much better i% low performance when compared to the 9100F.

Moving on to Far Cry New Dawn, here we accept a title that'due south known non to play particularly well with Ryzen CPUs, at least relative to the Intel competition. The R3 3300X is still able to match the 9400F, though the R3 3100 does fall behind the 9100F. Still overall performance was good and certainly very smooth.

Jumping up to 1440p doesn't alter too much given how CPU limited we were at 1080p, so the margins are all very similar, though the R3 3300X does jump just ahead of the 9400F.

Gears 5 Tactics is a new championship and this is the offset fourth dimension we've tested using the game. Hither the AMD CPUs look very competitive as the R3 3300X edged out the 7700K, making information technology 12% faster than the 9400F. The R3 3100 besides does well, matching the average frame rate of the 9100F only beating its one% low result by a 14% margin.

The results showtime to come together at 1440p and we encounter very lilliputian difference between near of the CPUs tested, the R5 1600 is the only processor that noticeably drops away from the pack.

Adjacent up we have Tom Clancy'due south Rainbow Six Siege using the new Vulkan implementation. We come across a rather wide gap betwixt the 3300X and 3100, with the more expensive quad-cadre getting a 15% faster average frame rate and xx% faster one% low operation.

The 3300X also managed to match the 2700X. That meant it was a lilliputian slower than the 7700K for average frame rates, yet yet 13% faster when looking at the i% lows. Information technology was as well 30% faster than the 9400F when looking at the same information. The R3 3100 managed to match the R5 2600, with average frame rates comparable to the 9100F, simply 38% faster when comparing the 1% low information.

Jumping up to 1440p starts to introduce a GPU bottleneck, especially when looking at average frame charge per unit performance. Still the 3300X and 3100 practice well, beating the competing Intel CPUs when looking at the 1% low information.

Ghost Recon Breakpoint was also tested using the Vulkan API and hither we see the Ryzen 3 3300X roughly matching the 2700X, 3600 and 3700X. While information technology was faster than the 9400F past a modest margin for the 1% depression result, it was also slightly slower when comparing the average frame rate. And then we see the R3 3100 clearly losing out to the 9100F.

The margins mostly shut up at 1440p with negligible differences. For example, the 9400F was ix% faster than the 3300X when comparing the boilerplate frame rate, only slightly slower for the 1% low.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider makes the 3300X look skillful, allowing for 102 fps on average. This is slightly faster than the 7700K and 9400F, chirapsia the Core i5 processor by a 10% margin. The 3100 also impressed, at to the lowest degree relative to the 9100F.

The margins go narrower at 1440p, but even then the R3 3100 is conspicuously much better than the 9100F thanks to an absolutely massive 59% increment in 1% low functioning.

The last game in our roundup, Red Dead Redemption two sees the R3 3300X able to match the 7700K, making it slightly faster than the 9400F. Interestingly, the R3 3100 is only able to roughly match the 3400G and was even slightly worse than the 9100F when comparing ane% low performance.

The 3300X remained stiff at 1440p, basically matching the R3 3600 and R7 3700X. Meanwhile the R3 3100 was roughly on par with the 3400G.

Putting It All Together

That's a ton of graphs, so let's effort and summarize though note we'll be focusing on the gaming numbers start. Productivity is just as important but performance there will vary a lot depending on the workload, so you're best off individually analyzing the data that'south relevant to your use instance.

Looking at gaming results from 7 games, here nosotros encounter that the 3300X is comparable to the 2700X on average and the older Core i7-7700K CPU. It was also 4% faster than the 9400F for the average frame rate, but 13% faster when comparing 1% lows. When compared to the inexpensive 1600 AF you're looking at a xvi% boost on average.

On average the 3300X is comparable to the 2700X and the older Core i7-7700K. It was also just 4% faster than the 9400F for the boilerplate frame rate, simply xiii% faster when comparing 1% low data. When compared to the 1600 AF you're looking at a 16% heave on boilerplate.

The Ryzen 3 3100 was on par with the beloved 1600 AF for gaming. Against the 9100F, we saw a marginal two.5% proceeds in average frame rates, but saw a big 21% jump when looking at the all-important 1% low data.

Taking the 1% low data, here's a look at toll per frame operation. We've included the 1600 AF at the $85 price although right at present information technology's selling for effectually $150 -- it'due south not worth buying at $150 -- but nosotros wanted to include it for reference at the highly desirable $85 price as here it was a go to option for pretty much everyone.

The Core i3-9100F ranks well here due to its super-depression $75 toll, but there are a few caveats. The 9100F suffers poor i% low performance in a number of modernistic titles that leads to stuttery frame rates and therefore a poor gaming experience. Also, information technology has a poor upgrade path and we're testing it on an expensive Z390 motherboard with high performance memory. Then exterior of gaming it gets annihilated.

The poor 1% depression functioning in demanding titles tells usa you should avoid the 9100F if y'all care about gaming performance. For but $25 more the R3 3100 is a substantial upgrade, offering 21% better one% depression performance on average, or much more that, for example in Battlefield V, where that margin more than doubled.

And nevertheless, if yous can justify letting go of some other $20, the Ryzen iii 3300X seems like the way to go, although in terms of price per frame they are identical. When it comes to the Cadre i5-9400F, the 3300X is the obvious choice: it's faster, cheaper and it'due south available on a better platform.

What Nosotros Learned

We think it's fair to say the new Ryzen 3 3100 and 3300X CPUs are the new undisputed upkeep champions. Not only is the 3300X cheaper than the 9400F, information technology also offers superior application and gaming performance. It'south available on a ameliorate platform, supporting up to 16 cores, and can be paired with a $70 B450 motherboard without memory restrictions.

The same applies to the R3 3100 when compared to the 9100F. The Ryzen 3 processor provides better and more than consequent gaming performance with worlds better awarding performance. Granted, the Cadre i3 processor is $25 cheaper simply entry-level Z390 boards cost $thirty more, so the CPU saving is eliminated if you want to run the memory above DDR4-2400, and running at that speed will reduce operation drastically from what's shown here.

If these new Ryzen 3 CPUs are the new "undisputed budget champions," the lingering question is, for how long? Before long the Core i3-10100 will exist on the scene, coming in at $122 with 4 cores and 8 threads. Looking at the spec sheet, the 10100 volition exist a few hundred MHz slower than the 7700K, and carry 25% less L3 cache. If nosotros judge based on that solitary, the i3-10100 will be a few frames on average slower than the R3 3300X in games, while Ryzen 3 should exist comfortably faster in most applications. We'll just have to wait and see how that 1 plays out, merely at a guess information technology looks like AMD has positioned the new Ryzen 3 parts very well.

Something that nosotros'd yet to bear on is overclocking. Both Ryzen 3 parts are unlocked, merely they might besides be locked, specially the 3300X, considering out of the box they appear to be pushed to the max. With PBO+Auto OC enabled, performance can be boosted by 2%, while manually overclocking the 3300X we couldn't improve functioning at all. The 3100 saw high single digit gains, but that was it. For those wondering, the Ryzen iii 3100 maxes out at an all-cadre overclock of 3.9 GHz and the 3300X at iv.two GHz. We had very petty time to play around with overclocking, just based on our limited testing, it does appear as though in that location's no existent headroom.

For those tossing up between the Ryzen iii 3100 and 3300X, nosotros'd personally get the 3300X for the college quality silicon and the meliorate optimized core configuration every time. Those ii things solitary make information technology worth the extra $20 expense, then on top of that you get superior out of the box operation. Both CPUs will go on sale afterward this month on the 20th and motherboards already flashed with a BIOS supporting 3rd-gen Ryzen processors won't need to be updated.

Shopping Shortcuts:
  • AMD Ryzen 3 3300X on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen three 3100 on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen five 3600 on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen seven 3700X on Amazon
  • AMD Radeon RX 5700 on Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 2070 Super on Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 2060 Super on Amazon