metagamer:

Based on a made up chart. Talk about jumping to conclusions. Let's use our brains, if possible. If that chart is true, the takeaway is this. it's faster than the 2700x it's slower than the 7700k I don't see how Intel are losing here. lol

I dont know why everyone is jumping on @Undying 's post here as though its some sort of anti-intel post. All he did was post an interesting viewpoint. No one is saying intel is currently at r3 levels of performance for their top tier cpus.... We all want technology to advance, if every 3 years the "used to be top end" is now near the bottom, i say thats great.

Aura89:

I dont know why everyone is jumping on @Undying 's post here as though its some sort of anti-intel post. All he did was post an interesting viewpoint. No one is saying intel is currently at r3 levels of performance for their top tier cpus.... We all want technology to advance, if every 3 years the "used to be top end" is now near the bottom, i say thats great.

I still think it's more interesting that it is faster in Cinebench than the 2700x than the the fact that it's slower than the 7700k if I'm honest.

I think the price of this 3300X CPU may have been overlooked a just little bit in this discussion. If one assumes that the more permanent components of a new system are pretty much everything aside from the CPU and graphics card, I definitely think there is a place for something like the 3300X. The worst possible scenario, gaming-wise, would likely be pairing it with an upper-tier GPU for 1080p. Obviously, you'd run the risk of leaving some of your inherent graphics performance, "on the table." But, unless someone insisted on either running multiple applications simultaneously while gaming, and/or was a complete, total, and flaming frames-per-second junkie, even that worst-case scenario shouldn't prevent someone from still having a pretty satisfying gaming experience. My mention of the CPU being one of two most likely replaced items in the lifetime of a system assumes that, since we are dealing with Socket AM4, there will be alternatives available for the owner to move from the 3300X to something more robust when that time arrives. Recall we are talking $120, here; about the price of just two AAA games. (If you can find two worth purchasing.) It's too soon to be certain, but this seems like an excellent entry-point for someone just getting into PC gaming, or someone on a rather tight budget who still wants an escape plan to a more upscale CPU in the future.

Celcius:

I think the price of this 3300X CPU may have been overlooked a just little bit in this discussion. If one assumes that the more permanent components of a new system are pretty much everything aside from the CPU and graphics card, I definitely think there is a place for something like the 3300X. The worst possible scenario, gaming-wise, would likely be pairing it with an upper-tier GPU for 1080p. Obviously, you'd run the risk of leaving some of your inherent graphics performance, "on the table." But, unless someone insisted on either running multiple applications simultaneously while gaming, and/or was a complete, total, and flaming frames-per-second junkie, even that worst-case scenario shouldn't prevent someone from still having a pretty satisfying gaming experience. My mention of the CPU being one of two most likely replaced items in the lifetime of a system assumes that, since we are dealing with Socket AM4, there will be alternatives available for the owner to move from the 3300X to something more robust when that time arrives. Recall we are talking $120, here; about the price of just two AAA games. (If you can find two worth purchasing.) It's too soon to be certain, but this seems like an excellent entry-point for someone just getting into PC gaming, or someone on a rather tight budget who still wants an escape plan to a more upscale CPU in the future.

How dare you speak that kind of logic. 3950X or bust! 😛