1. Ryzen 3 3100 & 3300X: Budget Zen 2 Quad Cores2. Testing Methodology3. CPU Tests: Cinebench & Blender4. CPU Tests: 7-Zip & Handbrake x2645. Memory Tests: Memory Bandwidth and Latency6. Gaming 1: 3DMark, F1 2019, GTA V7. Gaming 2: RDR 2, SotTR, The Division 28. 1440p Gaming: F1 2019, SotTR, The Division 29. Technical: Power Draw, Efficiency, Temperatures10. Overclocking11. Closing Thoughts12. View All Pages

7-Zip

7-Zip compression has long been a strength for AMD’s Zen 2 architecture. Here, we see the Ryzen 3 3300X match the six-core Ryzen 5 1600 AF for the first time in our multi-threaded testing.

Unsurprisingly, the slower-clocked Ryzen 3 3100 drops off compared to its bigger brother. With that said, the £95 chip still manages to outshine the costlier Core i5-9400F and Core i7-7700K parts, albeit by a slim margin.

Decompression sees the 1600 AF put its extra threads to use to regain an 18% advantage versus the 3300X. Nevertheless, the budget Zen 2 chips offer up a performance increase of 9-19% over the venerable Core i7-7700K. That performance uptick for the cheap AMD parts increases to 15-25% versus the more expensive Core i5-9400F.

Handbrake

Ryzen 3 3300X outperforms the £25 more costly Core i5-9400F by 5% in our Handbrake x264 test. With that said, the £99 Ryzen 5 1600 AF overcomes its older Zen+ architecture with the brute force of a dozen processing threads to beat AMD’s new chip by 14%.

Looking at the cost-effective Ryzen 3 3100, we see the quad-core Zen 2 part roughly matching Intel’s Core i7-7700K mainstream flagship from the Kaby Lake era. That’s quite the change of tides in a little over three years.

Become a Patron!