AMD Ryzen 3 1200 and 1300X review

Processors 199 Page 1 of 1 Published by

Click here to post a comment for AMD Ryzen 3 1200 and 1300X review on our message forum
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/103/103120.jpg
Sandy Bridge is still a player
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/270/270041.jpg
No wonder the i5's are going to become 6cores after this... it just got crushed by a chip half the cost... cheap quad cores are now a thing, great for people wanting to get into gaming on the entry level stuff
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/105/105757.jpg
Huge chunks of Intels i3 and i5 range are now redundant or soon will be when the APUs land as well.
data/avatar/default/avatar36.webp
Thanks HH! 🙂 Quite impressive for the price.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/216/216349.jpg
Very nice entry level gaming CPUs. Now people can make a mean gaming PC without having to spend a lot.
Huge chunks of Intels i3 and i5 range are now redundant or soon will be when the APUs land as well.
You can say the same regarding Ryzen R5 and R7 seeing that the gaming performance difference is not as big as the number of cores suggest... Intel is going to have to rearrange their pricing structure and lower their prices...
data/avatar/default/avatar22.webp
Great review, but it misses i3 in almost every benchmark and the idea is to compare R3 to i3. People tend to forget that one of the main benefits of the i3 is the integrated GPU. Ryzen doesn't have that, so I doubt Ryzen 3 will sell better than i3 in the near future (not just because of the IGP but because of Intels branding).
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/16/16662.jpg
Administrator
Yeah, Intel has always categorically refused to send out i3 procs for review. Can't help it. But I agree on the IGP, it's a bit of a miss in the segment.
data/avatar/default/avatar16.webp
Great review, but it misses i3 in almost every benchmark and the idea is to compare R3 to i3. People tend to forget that one of the main benefits of the i3 is the integrated GPU. Ryzen doesn't have that, so I doubt Ryzen 3 will sell better than i3 in the near future (not just because of the IGP but because of Intels branding).
APU's are coming to address that: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-apu-bristol-ridge-a-series-athlon,35096.html
data/avatar/default/avatar36.webp
No IGP same speed and cost as a G4560, G4560 is the winner.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/240/240605.jpg
AMD is shaking the CPU market really hard and thats good for us consumers. I have respect for AMD, rising from the ashes.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/237/237771.jpg
Wow some of the gaming improvements are impressive. R7 now officially back on my radar.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/246/246171.jpg
These performed better than I was expecting, but aside from home servers or 4K HTPCs, I don't really see the point in these. Whatever desktop needs these could fulfill, an APU would be a better fit. I have a feeling SMT is artificially disabled in order to justify their performance tier and price level. Here's what I think should've been done instead: Ryzen 5 would only have hex core and quad core CPUs with SMT, both CCXs, and all 16MB of L3. Ryzen 3 would be quad cores and dual cores with SMT, but utilize only 1 CCX (and as a result, would have to have 8MB of L3).
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/197/197287.jpg
These performed better than I was expecting, but aside from home servers or 4K HTPCs, I don't really see the point in these. Whatever desktop needs these could fulfill, an APU would be a better fit. I have a feeling SMT is artificially disabled in order to justify their performance tier and price level. Here's what I think should've been done instead: Ryzen 5 would only have hex core and quad core CPUs with SMT, both CCXs, and all 16MB of L3. Ryzen 3 would be quad cores and dual cores with SMT, but utilize only 1 CCX (and as a result, would have to have 8MB of L3).
I very much hope they do not make any dual-core Ryzens. No need to stunt the future any more then Intel already has.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/246/246171.jpg
I very much hope they do not make any dual-core Ryzens. No need to stunt the future any more then Intel already has.
A dual core Ryzen would be kind of stupid, but if that's all they've got left working on the silicon then it becomes a situation of "might as well make it; it's just going to be trashed otherwise". This is why single-core Semprons and Celerons have existed - I don't think either company really expects anyone to buy them, but it's better to spend a little extra on packaging and maybe return some profit than to just throw it away. Products like these are useful for embedded devices anyway, like cash registers and POS machines. However, AMD never mentioned dual cores in their roadmap. I guess they figured that the probability of them being able to make a dual core without something else also being too damaged (such as the memory controller, infinity fabric, or L3 cache) would be too low and not worth the investment. Anyway, a dual core with HT/SMT is still very usable by today's standards. Not good enough for power users, but they're just fine for grandma or a library PC. It wouldn't surprise me if AMD releases a dual core desktop APU.
data/avatar/default/avatar35.webp
yes, these processors are all threaded
Seems like a leftover statement from earlier Ryzen articles (in the Base Specs part of the review).
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/197/197287.jpg
Anyway, a dual core with HT/SMT is still very usable by today's standards. Not good enough for power users, but they're just fine for grandma or a library PC.
Personally, that's the problem right there. Not only is a dual-core not fine for a grandma or library PC or any PC (due to the fact of how many things are going on in the background of a modern PC) but the mentality behind "just fine" is the problem, in my opinion. The more and more people continue to say "Oh, well that person doesn't need much, so its understandable why they still produce (insert item here)" is exactly why companies go "Oh, so many people still use (insert item here), might as well not fully support anything else" This is why i really hope AMD is done with dual-core processors. If they aren't made, and if intel follows along, then maybe, just maybe, developers won't say "Well, 90% of our users only use dual-core, so lets not worry about letting it use, efficiently, anything more then 2 cores"
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/246/246171.jpg
Not only is a dual-core not fine for a grandma or library PC or any PC (due to the fact of how many things are going on in the background of a modern PC) but the mentality behind "just fine" is the problem, in my opinion.
Ok, I'll revise my statement: a dual core (with HT/SMT, mind you) is plenty sufficient for grandma or a library PC. A plain dual core without logical threads would be "just adequate", but you'd be pushing its limits and might get some hiccups once in a while. I assure you, it is easily feasible to have a snappy smooth experience on a 2c/4t CPU.
The more and more people continue to say "Oh, well that person doesn't need much, so its understandable why they still produce (insert item here)" is exactly why companies go "Oh, so many people still use (insert item here), might as well not fully support anything else"
I get that, and that's a valid point. But you have to keep in mind that up until a couple years ago, the average person couldn't afford a decent quad core, with or without HT. For some people here, getting an i5 was a big investment. Remember too that most PC sales are laptops or limited-functionality office PCs. Even today, most laptops are still dual cores, for efficiency reasons. Only now are developers actually taking a hard look at adding more threads to their tasks, because only recently has the average person had access to an abundance of threads.
data/avatar/default/avatar06.webp
Hi all Just a quick question. I've got i5 4690k overclocked to 4.6Ghz which I'm using mainly for gaming. I'm getting score of 709 in cinebench. Would Ryzen 3 1300x be a downgrade to my current system? I would rather not buy high frequency memory + motherboard + CPU... On the other hand, these processors seem awesome for those that are building from scratch. Thanks all!
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/268/268248.jpg
Hi all Just a quick question. I've got i5 4690k overclocked to 4.6Ghz which I'm using mainly for gaming. I'm getting score of 709 in cinebench. Would Ryzen 3 1300x be a downgrade to my current system? I would rather not buy high frequency memory + motherboard + CPU... On the other hand, these processors seem awesome for those that are building from scratch. Thanks all!
it might even be a slight downgrade ....at the very best it will be a side-grade so no personally i do not advice to pay for a new cpu +new motherboard + new ram keep your 4690 at 4.6 or aim for the 1600 mind you that even if you get the 1600 you will need a card like 1070 at least to see any meaningful difference in gaming or monitor a bit the used market some used 4770k or 4790k on reasonable price might be a good deal