Amd infinity fabric & ram overclock for ryzen 3 3100 vs. R3 3300x (benchmarks)
video description
Date: 2020-05-11
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
David
i'm super impressed with the 3300x for sure, but the real eye opener is how well the oc'd 7700k still hangs in there. that ladies and germs is why we oc'ing evangelist keep telling all you crybabies to overclock your chips, especially if you're on an intel platform. buyers of the 7700k who overclocked were treated to at least a year of bleeding edge performance, and then continuing to have several years of near top level gaming performance. the real drawback to an intel platform is the zero upgrade path. personally i switched over to ryzen from an oc'd 6700 as soon as zen was available, and i've been perfectly pleased with the switch. that said, going amd didn't really quell the upgrade itch given how big of an improvement each iteration of zen has been. r5 1600x to 2600x to a 3600. if i'd stayed intel from back then, i'd still have equal or better than 3600 performance today. that's why i'm so disappointment with amd's decision to lock b450 owners out of upgrading to 4000 series chips. cmmon amd you just killed any reason i had to stick to your platform.
reply
i'm super impressed with the 3300x for sure, but the real eye opener is how well the oc'd 7700k still hangs in there. that ladies and germs is why we oc'ing evangelist keep telling all you crybabies to overclock your chips, especially if you're on an intel platform. buyers of the 7700k who overclocked were treated to at least a year of bleeding edge performance, and then continuing to have several years of near top level gaming performance. the real drawback to an intel platform is the zero upgrade path. personally i switched over to ryzen from an oc'd 6700 as soon as zen was available, and i've been perfectly pleased with the switch. that said, going amd didn't really quell the upgrade itch given how big of an improvement each iteration of zen has been. r5 1600x to 2600x to a 3600. if i'd stayed intel from back then, i'd still have equal or better than 3600 performance today. that's why i'm so disappointment with amd's decision to lock b450 owners out of upgrading to 4000 series chips. cmmon amd you just killed any reason i had to stick to your platform.
reply
Андрей
I have a question. People keep talking about that CCX-to-CCX latencies as if a core from one CCX is taking data from another CCX's L3 cache. But in that case shouldn't the so-called cross-CCX latency be lower than RAM latency, since data path is physically shorter and L3 is faster? But all the reviews show that cross-CCX latency is equal to RAM latency. Moreover, making it behave this way on a proper multi-chip (TR) is a real pain, since the core needs to call for 16 different L3 chunks to get some data. So is there actually any cross-CCX data transfer? Or split L3 cache is simply increasing the number of RAM data calls, hence the performance difference? In this case, if you overclock IF, but downclock RAM, the gap between 3100 and 3300 should stay the same. If not, 3100 should get a bit closer to 3300.
reply
I have a question. People keep talking about that CCX-to-CCX latencies as if a core from one CCX is taking data from another CCX's L3 cache. But in that case shouldn't the so-called cross-CCX latency be lower than RAM latency, since data path is physically shorter and L3 is faster? But all the reviews show that cross-CCX latency is equal to RAM latency. Moreover, making it behave this way on a proper multi-chip (TR) is a real pain, since the core needs to call for 16 different L3 chunks to get some data. So is there actually any cross-CCX data transfer? Or split L3 cache is simply increasing the number of RAM data calls, hence the performance difference? In this case, if you overclock IF, but downclock RAM, the gap between 3100 and 3300 should stay the same. If not, 3100 should get a bit closer to 3300.
reply
Mark
Given I'm looking to upgrade to a 3300X, I'm not seeing many CPU comparisons with 3-4 year old CPUs from the same class. Would be useful to know if the upgrade is worth it from Skylake I5s (the only CPU you needed for gaming)/ I3s, or earlier CPUs. Certainly I'm not going to upgrade to this coming from an I7 7700K, it's good it is included so you know not to do that (lol) and needed to have it there for reference, but you then have to go back and find old reviews comparing 3/4/6 series I3s/I5s to the I7 7700K to get a potential relative performance gain. Sure, you could just call that research and due diligence any new buyer should do, but I would have thought that scenario is more likely to be the norm for people upgrading rather than the exception? Don't tempt people to go to UserBenchmark :)
reply
Given I'm looking to upgrade to a 3300X, I'm not seeing many CPU comparisons with 3-4 year old CPUs from the same class. Would be useful to know if the upgrade is worth it from Skylake I5s (the only CPU you needed for gaming)/ I3s, or earlier CPUs. Certainly I'm not going to upgrade to this coming from an I7 7700K, it's good it is included so you know not to do that (lol) and needed to have it there for reference, but you then have to go back and find old reviews comparing 3/4/6 series I3s/I5s to the I7 7700K to get a potential relative performance gain. Sure, you could just call that research and due diligence any new buyer should do, but I would have thought that scenario is more likely to be the norm for people upgrading rather than the exception? Don't tempt people to go to UserBenchmark :)
reply
Choralone422
Long story short, get the 3300X period. The 3100 isn't a bad chip, but it really only exists as a way for AMD to make use of partially failed CCX's. Which isn't a bad thing but it does hinder its performance due to extra latency of the 2+2 design. The 3300X is an excellent gaming chip for the money. Sure there's other CPUs that perform better than it on the whole but it's pretty much unmatched in its price class! I'm just afraid that it's going to end up selling for much higher than its MSRP due to its popularity.
reply
Long story short, get the 3300X period. The 3100 isn't a bad chip, but it really only exists as a way for AMD to make use of partially failed CCX's. Which isn't a bad thing but it does hinder its performance due to extra latency of the 2+2 design. The 3300X is an excellent gaming chip for the money. Sure there's other CPUs that perform better than it on the whole but it's pretty much unmatched in its price class! I'm just afraid that it's going to end up selling for much higher than its MSRP due to its popularity.
reply
wildeasage
All that fast, expensive, highly-tweaked memory giving a (very typical) few-percentage-point improvement should really drive home to people how INSANE an improvement you get when you spend just 20 extra on a 3300x versus 3100. The value proposition of that extra 20 is insane. They re giving you so much more juice for just 20 bucks. Do yourself a favor, don t go for the 3100. It s tempting to cheap out, but in 3 or 4 years you re gonna be glad you spent that long-gone 20 on something lasting.
reply
All that fast, expensive, highly-tweaked memory giving a (very typical) few-percentage-point improvement should really drive home to people how INSANE an improvement you get when you spend just 20 extra on a 3300x versus 3100. The value proposition of that extra 20 is insane. They re giving you so much more juice for just 20 bucks. Do yourself a favor, don t go for the 3100. It s tempting to cheap out, but in 3 or 4 years you re gonna be glad you spent that long-gone 20 on something lasting.
reply
something1random23
By comparing 3200c14 to 3666c16, the latency difference is almost nothing. I'm assuming that's why the margins are so small. Zen benefits much more from latency improvements than bandwidth, especially at such low core counts. Would have been good to throw in a lower speed memory that most buyers of these chips will end up with, as well as tightening the timings on that 3666 OC to the cl14 that B-Die is more than capable of.
reply
By comparing 3200c14 to 3666c16, the latency difference is almost nothing. I'm assuming that's why the margins are so small. Zen benefits much more from latency improvements than bandwidth, especially at such low core counts. Would have been good to throw in a lower speed memory that most buyers of these chips will end up with, as well as tightening the timings on that 3666 OC to the cl14 that B-Die is more than capable of.
reply
8SH0CK8
Guys I'm losing braincells, I'm trying to build my first PC by myself but info online keep confusing me, if i want a budget pc used both for gaming (1080, i don't even care much about graphics, i want fps) and productivity like Photoshop and other stuff like music/video production programs what cpu should i get? 1600af, 2600 (is it literally the same as 1600af?) or those new 3000 ones? And do they work on a B450M?
reply
Guys I'm losing braincells, I'm trying to build my first PC by myself but info online keep confusing me, if i want a budget pc used both for gaming (1080, i don't even care much about graphics, i want fps) and productivity like Photoshop and other stuff like music/video production programs what cpu should i get? 1600af, 2600 (is it literally the same as 1600af?) or those new 3000 ones? And do they work on a B450M?
reply
Lucian
Steve's Nexus: I have the latest version of Ryzen Master, but I don't have the Infinity Fabric settings on/in it... What gives???? Why??? Is it a CPU Feature or a Motherboard Feature?? I currently have an X370 Motherboard, and the 2700X...... Do I need to upgrade both of them, to get that, or will the CPU be enough? I want to get the 3950X for my beast AsRock X370 Motherboard... Please teach me, oh great one!!
reply
Steve's Nexus: I have the latest version of Ryzen Master, but I don't have the Infinity Fabric settings on/in it... What gives???? Why??? Is it a CPU Feature or a Motherboard Feature?? I currently have an X370 Motherboard, and the 2700X...... Do I need to upgrade both of them, to get that, or will the CPU be enough? I want to get the 3950X for my beast AsRock X370 Motherboard... Please teach me, oh great one!!
reply
TheEchelon1619
Meh, don't sell yourself short on the 3100 reviews. The 3100 is going to be gangbusters in developing countries. Every bit of performance you can squeeze out the better and it's nice to know where to spend your cash. As for the 1600AF, if you know where to shop and are willing to wait a month you can easily grab a 2600 for around 100, I think a lot of folks forget the 2600 exists.
reply
Meh, don't sell yourself short on the 3100 reviews. The 3100 is going to be gangbusters in developing countries. Every bit of performance you can squeeze out the better and it's nice to know where to spend your cash. As for the 1600AF, if you know where to shop and are willing to wait a month you can easily grab a 2600 for around 100, I think a lot of folks forget the 2600 exists.
reply
David
I'm not sure what is the artificial separation you mention. The only part about this product segmentation I see as artificial is the R3 3100 not getting the full 32MB of L3 cache from both CCXs it has enabled. From the frequencies it seems like the 3300X chips had one really good CCX (better than either on the 3100 or 3600) and another highly defective one.
reply
I'm not sure what is the artificial separation you mention. The only part about this product segmentation I see as artificial is the R3 3100 not getting the full 32MB of L3 cache from both CCXs it has enabled. From the frequencies it seems like the 3300X chips had one really good CCX (better than either on the 3100 or 3600) and another highly defective one.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
