Ryzen 4000 Mobile CPUs offer benchmark busting multi-core performance on the go, but marketing hype aside, it’s unclear how this will translate to real world performance. Sixteen threads are great for beating benchmarks including UserBenchmark 64-core, Cinebench, Blender-CPU and Handbrake-CPU but gamers need performance in the games that they actually play. At launch, the top GPU available in a 4000 series laptop is the RTX 2060. Since the GPU is largely responsible for overall gaming performance, the Ryzen 4000 laptops will offer mid tier gaming performance at best. Pairing stronger GPUs would be suboptimal because the Zen gaming bottleneck becomes increasingly severe with more powerful GPUs. Streamers and media producers, who may have historically benefited from high core counts, are better off using the GPU (NVENC or QuickSync) for encoding. Leading media creation applications including both DaVinci Resolve and Adobe Premiere Pro are largely GPU bound. With low power consumption and high core counts, the 4000 range, on paper at least, is a perfect fit for the datacenter. AMD should focus on delivering a platform that offers performance where end users actually need it rather than targeting inexperienced gamers with the same old "moar cores" mantra. From a gamer’s perspective, the best feature of the 4000 series laptops is the absence of the equally hyped 5000 series GPUs. Prospective gaming laptop buyers will find lower latency (and therefore better gaming) CPUs combined with faster GPUs at similar price points. [Mar '20CPUPro]
Early Q3 of 2019 sees the release of the new Ryzen 5 3600X: a hex-core, 12-thread processor. AMD are releasing five new CPUs based on their latest Zen 2 microarchitecture which delivers approximately 13% better IPC than the previous 12nm Zen+. For workstation builds the 3600X is viable, however, the $200 USD Ryzen 5 3600 represents a far better value proposition. The additional $40 USD for the 3600X basically buys a better cooler (Spire vs Stealth). This allows for an extra 200 MHz of extra base and boost clock: 3.8 / 4.4 GHz on the 3600X vs 3.6 / 4.2 GHz on the 3600, this translates to approximately 2% higher overclocked performance for 20% more money. Neither of the stock coolers on the 3600 or 3600X are as effective as a $20 USD aftermarket cooler such as the Gammaxx 400. The 3600 with a Gammaxx 400 outperforms the 3600X with a Spire cooler and when both use a Gammaxx 400 they are more or less identical. The 3600X SKU is basically a marketing gimmick designed to milk unsuspecting consumers. Comparing the 3600X to Intel’s overclocked flagship i5-9600K shows that although the 3600X has 29% faster 64-core speed, it is around 11% worse for gaming (sub eight core performance). Additionally, the 3600X's memory controller, although significantly improved over previous Ryzen iterations, still has limited bandwidth and high latency which can also impact gaming. The arrival of Zen 2 marks the end of the "Sandy Bridge (i5-2500K)" era, Intel can no longer rely exclusively on their single-core advantage to dominate the market, they must also compete on price. [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.