The AMD Ryzen 5 2500X and Ryzen 3 2300X CPU Review
by Ian Cutress on February 11, 2019 11:45 AM ESTCPU Performance: Office Tests
The Office test suite is designed to focus around more industry standard tests that focus on office workflows, system meetings, some synthetics, but we also bundle compiler performance in with this section. For users that have to evaluate hardware in general, these are usually the benchmarks that most consider.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
PCMark 10: Industry Standard System Profiler
Futuremark, now known as UL, has developed benchmarks that have become industry standards for around two decades. The latest complete system test suite is PCMark 10, upgrading over PCMark 8 with updated tests and more OpenCL invested into use cases such as video streaming.
PCMark splits its scores into about 14 different areas, including application startup, web, spreadsheets, photo editing, rendering, video conferencing, and physics. We post all of these numbers in our benchmark database, Bench, however the key metric for the review is the overall score.
PCMark likes a lot of single threaded performance, and the quad-core Core i3 matches the eight-thread AMD, with the quad-thread AMD just slightly behind.
Chromium Compile: Windows VC++ Compile of Chrome 56
A large number of AnandTech readers are software engineers, looking at how the hardware they use performs. While compiling a Linux kernel is ‘standard’ for the reviewers who often compile, our test is a little more varied – we are using the windows instructions to compile Chrome, specifically a Chrome 56 build from March 2017, as that was when we built the test. Google quite handily gives instructions on how to compile with Windows, along with a 400k file download for the repo.
In our test, using Google’s instructions, we use the MSVC compiler and ninja developer tools to manage the compile. As you may expect, the benchmark is variably threaded, with a mix of DRAM requirements that benefit from faster caches. Data procured in our test is the time taken for the compile, which we convert into compiles per day.
In our compile test, the higher thread count of the 2500X gives it a good lead over the other two comparison points, although the 2300X is only slightly behind the Core i3 here.
3DMark Physics: In-Game Physics Compute
Alongside PCMark is 3DMark, Futuremark’s (UL’s) gaming test suite. Each gaming tests consists of one or two GPU heavy scenes, along with a physics test that is indicative of when the test was written and the platform it is aimed at. The main overriding tests, in order of complexity, are Ice Storm, Cloud Gate, Sky Diver, Fire Strike, and Time Spy.
Some of the subtests offer variants, such as Ice Storm Unlimited, which is aimed at mobile platforms with an off-screen rendering, or Fire Strike Ultra which is aimed at high-end 4K systems with lots of the added features turned on. Time Spy also currently has an AVX-512 mode (which we may be using in the future).
For our tests, we report in Bench the results from every physics test, but for the sake of the review we keep it to the most demanding of each scene: Cloud Gate, Sky Diver, Fire Strike Ultra, and Time Spy.
GeekBench4: Synthetics
A common tool for cross-platform testing between mobile, PC, and Mac, GeekBench 4 is an ultimate exercise in synthetic testing across a range of algorithms looking for peak throughput. Tests include encryption, compression, fast Fourier transform, memory operations, n-body physics, matrix operations, histogram manipulation, and HTML parsing.
I’m including this test due to popular demand, although the results do come across as overly synthetic, and a lot of users often put a lot of weight behind the test due to the fact that it is compiled across different platforms (although with different compilers).
We record the main subtest scores (Crypto, Integer, Floating Point, Memory) in our benchmark database, but for the review we post the overall single and multi-threaded results.
65 Comments
View All Comments
shticktical - Thursday, February 14, 2019 - link
Ian, why don't you include idle power consumption? And not just in this article, in all CPU reviews? System's usually spent 95% time idling. That would be very interesting to know and compare. Thank you!Ian Cutress - Friday, February 15, 2019 - link
Idle power consumption varies very wildly when you're talking about zero CPU load, and can be influenced more by the motherboard/system than the CPU itself. You can check the data in Bench regardless:https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2183
RSAUser - Sunday, February 17, 2019 - link
Still disappointed that Anandtech cannot use a simple bar chart plugin like canvasjs in 2019.Would love the ability to add information on hover like the current market price, or MSRP, or make it so it fetches the price from the amazon or newegg api.
This is especially relevant in these charts where you're adding intel processors that are completely out of the price league of the CPU being reviewed and you're not adding the current price to the chart.
Using a JS library to render the HTML would make those charts mobile responsive.
fadsarmy - Monday, June 10, 2019 - link
How does a 65W cpu (Ryzen 5 2600) draw 77.97W?