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]
AMD’s Ryzen 5 3600 is a 6-core, 12-threaded processor which succeeds the Ryzen 5 2600 improving upon it by 13% in terms of overclocked performance. The 3600 is in competition with Intel’s 6-core i5-9600K. AMD continues to push the multi-core performance envelope: benchmarks show that the 3600 has a 27% overclocked 64-core lead over the 9600K but that the i5-9600K leads by 14% on single to hex core workloads which translates to 10% higher EFps in most of the today’s top games (e.g. PUBG, GTAV and CSGO). Additionally, the 3600's memory controller, although significantly improved over previous Ryzen iterations, still has limited bandwidth and high latency which adversely impacts gaming. Weaknesses in memory architecture are not readily picked up by CPU benchmarks but they are apparent whilst gaming. Cheaper CPUs such as the 9400F deliver better gaming performance in nearly all of today’s popular games. At $190 USD, the 3600 offers good value for purely workstation tasks such as film production but 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 masterfully hyped Ryzen 3600 may well be the best CPU for multimedia producers on a tight budget but in today's market there are faster and less expensive alternatives for gamers, streamers and general desktop users. [Jun '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 freeware 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 upgrades.