Within minutes of this unrealistic, pre-release, result appearing on userbenchmark, AMD’s marketing machinery declared a 20% victory over the 12900K whilst simultaneously slandering userbenchmark via hundreds of “news” outlets and thousands of supposedly disinterested twitter, reddit, forum and youtube accounts. Buying new AMD products is like buying used cars: it takes time, experience and a taste for sales hype. It’s difficult for consumers to make rational choices because AMD completely dominates “news” and social media channels. Ten years ago, when AMD was the underdog, this type of marketing was understandable. Today, with a capitalization of $150 Billion USD, it’s disrespectful to AMD's own users. Even with Intel's marketing department permanently asleep at the wheel, If these practices continue, Ryzen may eventually end up in the same state as Radeon. Following a series of overhyped releases, consumers have little interest in the Radeon brand. The combined market share for all AMD’s (discrete) Radeon RX 5000 and 6000 GPUs (Jun ’22 Steam stats) is just 2%. Meanwhile, Nvidia’s RTX 2060 alone accounts for 5%. If Zen 4 actually delivers anywhere near a 57% real-world single core uplift, we will bow down, call AMD king, and commit seppuku! AMD’s new architecture is, once again, optimized to shine in specific benchmarks. Realistically, even if Zen 4 only catches Intel's 12th gen. (Alder Lake) in a handful of real-world scenarios, it will be a big step forward for AMD. A few weeks after Zen 4 (est. Sep 27), Intel’s 13th gen. (Raptor Lake) is scheduled to launch. Smart shoppers will do well to wait until then, before considering a purchase. Despite AMD’s Neanderthal marketing techniques, it’s hard not to admire the speed of their technical progress. AMD-Raptor-4 and Intel-Zen-13 would be better fitting product names. [Jul '22CPUPro]
The 3700X is a $320 USD 8-core, 16-thread mid-range Ryzen 3000 series CPU. Out of the box, the 3700X, 3600X and 3600 achieve similar quad core speeds but the 16 threaded 3700X is 30% faster at multi-core computations than the 12 threaded 3600X. Comparing the 3700X to Intel’s i7-9700K shows that, when overclocked, the 3700X is 26% faster at 64-core computations but 13% slower for gaming and desktop (sub eight core performance). Unlike lower end Ryzen 3000 SKUs, the 3700X comes with a half decent cooler but AMD should not have bothered since a $20 aftermarket cooler is still quieter, easier to change, and better at cooling. With a Gammaxx 400 cooler we were able to maintain a 43.25x OC during our EFps tests. We had to use a fixed clock OC (rather than Offset/PBO) to avoid significant frame drops in Fortnite. With strong single-core scores, the 3700X should offer very strong gaming performance but in reality it is let down by its memory controller, which, although significantly improved over previous Ryzen iterations, still has limited bandwidth and high latency. The heavily hyped 3700X, paired with a 2060S, offers real world gaming performance comparable to the $80 USD entry level 4-core, 4-thread Intel Core i3-9100F. At $320 USD, the 3700X offers reasonable value to full time media encoders but general desktop users, gamers and even streamers should look elsewhere. Streaming with dedicated hardware such as NVENC or a separate stream PC will nearly always result in fewer dropped frames. The 3700X severely bottlenecks a 2070S: gamers should investigate the 9600K, which is both cheaper and faster. [Jul '19CPUPro]
We calculate effective speed which measures real world performance for typical users. Effective speed is adjusted by current prices to yield a value for money rating. Our calculated values are checked against thousands of individual user ratings. The customizable table below combines these factors to bring you the definitive list of top CPUs. [CPUPro]
Welcome to our PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best value for money upgrades.