Of course, that's when running games at 1080p with the fastest current GPU available. That makes the 9700K 10 percent than the 3700X, while the 9900K is 9 percent faster. ![]() What about Intel and its Core i7-9700K and Core i9-9900K? The 9700K actually tops the overall gaming performance chart-yup, Hyper-Threading isn't always beneficial for games. That's well within margin of error, and that's with an RTX 2080 Ti at 1080p move up to 1440p or 4K, or downgrade to a slower GPU, and the gap would almost completely disappear. Out of ten games tested, the 3700X and 3900X are pretty much tied, with the 3900X hanging on to a scant 0.5 percent lead in framerates. Besides the memory, I used a Gigabyte Aorus NVMe Gen4 2TB SSD for the main drive (another part of the AMD review kit), with a GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Founders Edition graphics card. It's the blessing and curse of increased competition.Īll of AMD's third-gen parts were tested in the MSI MEG X570 Godlike board (with similar results from Asus and Gigabyte boards). stock, and AMD's CPUs might get an extra 200-300MHz, which just isn't that exciting. Intel's Core i9-9900K might get an extra 400MHz vs. The days of massive gains via overclocking your CPU are largely behind us now. It's still only 200MHz extra at best, which means less than a 5 percent improvement, and often in the 1-3 percent range. You sacrifice boost clocks for higher all-core clocks, though with the 3700X there's at least a bit more gain from enabling Precision Boost Overdrive. That's because it generally doesn't help much. Every PC is on equal footing as much as possible, in other words.Īs with other Ryzen CPUs, I didn't do extensive overclocking tests on the Ryzen 7 3700X. That's sort of overclocking, and potentially helps AMD CPUs more than Intel chips, but this is the lightest/easiest form of overclocking around and all modern CPUs have easily handled the higher memory speeds. It's just not how I do things), all CPUs are tested with high speed DDR4-3200 CL14 memory, with XMP memory profiles enabled. Unlike some other sites (and I'm not faulting their testing protocols. Imagine an hour-long or more video, that’s a decent amount of time saved with the faster Ryzen 7 5800X.All of the benchmarks that follow were done running the latest Windows update, with updated drivers and BIOS firmware. Transcoding video is definitely faster on the Ryzen 7 5800X, a full minute is shaved off, or 14% faster transcoding performance for video. Lastly, we used HandBrake to transcode a video on the CPU in H.264. Turning on PBO adds just a little bit more performance. The Ryzen 7 5800X is a whopping 30% faster in V-Ray CPU performance producing 11,759 vsamples compared to the Ryzen 7 3700X at 9,021 vsamples. V-Ray 5 is another great example of how much faster Zen 3 is at rendering compared to Zen 2. We even see PBO make it just a bit faster in victor. These are all significant performance improvements for rendering. ![]() In victor we see the Ryzen 7 5800X render the scene 21% faster than the Ryzen 7 3700X. In the pavillon_barcelona scene, the Ryzen 7 5800X renders it 20% quicker than the Ryzen 7 3700X. In the classroom scene, the Ryzen 7 5800X renders it 21% quicker than the Ryzen 7 3700X. Both CPUs have the same core and thread count, so it is exciting to see that the Ryzen 7 5800X is 22% quicker at rendering the bmw27 scene in Blender. The less time it takes to render, the fastest it is, and the better you’ll be. Remember, here we are looking for the lowest result. Similar to previous single-core testing, turning on PBO actually does make a bigger difference for performance, up 2% here. ![]() Single-core Cinebench R23 performance is up 22% with the Ryzen 7 5800X versus the Ryzen 7 3700X. This is impressive considering both have the same core and thread count. In Cinebench R23 multi-core performance the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X is up 25% in performance compared to the Ryzen 7 3700X.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |