The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and 3100 CPU Review: A Budget Gaming Bonanza
by Dr. Ian Cutress on May 7, 2020 9:00 AM ESTCPU Performance: Encoding Tests
With the rise of streaming, vlogs, and video content as a whole, encoding and transcoding tests are becoming ever more important. Not only are more home users and gamers needing to convert video files into something more manageable, for streaming or archival purposes, but the servers that manage the output also manage around data and log files with compression and decompression. Our encoding tasks are focused around these important scenarios, with input from the community for the best implementation of real-world testing.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Handbrake 1.1.0: Streaming and Archival Video Transcoding
A popular open source tool, Handbrake is the anything-to-anything video conversion software that a number of people use as a reference point. The danger is always on version numbers and optimization, for example the latest versions of the software can take advantage of AVX-512 and OpenCL to accelerate certain types of transcoding and algorithms. The version we use here is a pure CPU play, with common transcoding variations.
We have split Handbrake up into several tests, using a Logitech C920 1080p60 native webcam recording (essentially a streamer recording), and convert them into two types of streaming formats and one for archival. The output settings used are:
- 720p60 at 6000 kbps constant bit rate, fast setting, high profile
- 1080p60 at 3500 kbps constant bit rate, faster setting, main profile
- 1080p60 HEVC at 3500 kbps variable bit rate, fast setting, main profile
7-zip v1805: Popular Open-Source Encoding Engine
Out of our compression/decompression tool tests, 7-zip is the most requested and comes with a built-in benchmark. For our test suite, we’ve pulled the latest version of the software and we run the benchmark from the command line, reporting the compression, decompression, and a combined score.
It is noted in this benchmark that the latest multi-die processors have very bi-modal performance between compression and decompression, performing well in one and badly in the other. There are also discussions around how the Windows Scheduler is implementing every thread. As we get more results, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
WinRAR 5.60b3: Archiving Tool
My compression tool of choice is often WinRAR, having been one of the first tools a number of my generation used over two decades ago. The interface has not changed much, although the integration with Windows right click commands is always a plus. It has no in-built test, so we run a compression over a set directory containing over thirty 60-second video files and 2000 small web-based files at a normal compression rate.
WinRAR is variable threaded but also susceptible to caching, so in our test we run it 10 times and take the average of the last five, leaving the test purely for raw CPU compute performance.
AES Encryption: File Security
A number of platforms, particularly mobile devices, are now offering encryption by default with file systems in order to protect the contents. Windows based devices have these options as well, often applied by BitLocker or third-party software. In our AES encryption test, we used the discontinued TrueCrypt for its built-in benchmark, which tests several encryption algorithms directly in memory.
The data we take for this test is the combined AES encrypt/decrypt performance, measured in gigabytes per second. The software does use AES commands for processors that offer hardware selection, however not AVX-512.
249 Comments
View All Comments
destorofall - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link
you sound butthurt0ldman79 - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link
Heaven forbid his data set of God knows how many CPU doesn't include the one you want to see...Damn, you really should demand a refund.
LMonty - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link
You should really file a complaint, buddy. Gotta fight for your rights. ;Pjimbo2779 - Sunday, May 10, 2020 - link
What has happened to the comments section here. Can we go back to just ignoring the ignoramus'. It often means they just go away.psychobriggsy - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link
It was mentioned that Intel didn't even send these CPUs out for review, and that they're hard to obtain because Intel isn't making many of them.However, a few more data points would be nice. I think Ian needs to set up a system test datacentre like Phoronix so the rebuilding is kept to a minimum!
twizzlebizzle22 - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link
AMD must have sent the 7700k or specified it's use. I've noticed every review using that specific CPU. AMD aiming for the used market upgraders it seems.amrnuke - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link
I believe that's the last Intel chip that was 4C/8T as well, right? Seems a fair comparison, I guess if AMD really think that's the market.Anyway, TechPowerUp went ahead and lined up the 3300X against a bunch of other relevant chips (https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-3-330... It's 1% slower than the 3600 at 720P gaming, 16.5% slower than the 9900K at 720P gaming.
CPU tests show the 4C/8T 3300X holding up well to the 6C/6T 8600K and 9400F. It pretty well trounces the 9100F.
The 3100 beats the 9100F by 14% in CPU tests.
schujj07 - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link
720p gaming isn't even relevant. If these were iGPU tests then sure, but even a GTX 1050 can do better than 720p gaming.supdawgwtfd - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link
Are you stupid?To test CPU performance you run lower resolution to ensure the CPU is the bottleneck
Your comment is not relevant.
schujj07 - Saturday, May 9, 2020 - link
Hence why most review sites use 1080p. 720p benchmarking on modern hardware is akin to Quake 3 benchmarking at 640x480 resolution back in 2000. All you end up seeing are crazy high numbers that don't mean anything. We see it all the time that CPU A is faster at 720p but then slower at 1080p?