Tuesday, April 21st 2020

AMD Announces 3rd Gen Ryzen 3 Quad-Core Desktop Processors and AMD B550 PCIe 4.0 Chipset

Today, AMD announced the newest additions to the 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen desktop processor family, the AMD Ryzen 3 3100 and AMD Ryzen 3 3300X processors and AMD B550 Chipset for Socket AM4 designed for 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen desktop processors with over 60 designs in development. Taking advantage of the AMD world-class portfolio of technologies, these new Ryzen 3 desktop processors bring the groundbreaking "Zen 2" core architecture to business users, gamers, and creators worldwide, leveraging Simultaneous Multi-Threading (SMT) technology for increased productivity. With double the threads, twice the bandwidth, and a wide selection of motherboards in development the AMD B550 chipset and Ryzen 3 desktop processors deliver the ideal processing solution from top to bottom.

"Games and applications are becoming more and more demanding, and with this, users are demanding more from their PCs," said Saeid Moshkelani, senior vice president and general manager, client business unit. "AMD is committed to providing solutions that meet and exceed those demands for all levels of computing. With the addition of these new Ryzen 3 desktop processors we are continuing this commitment with our mainstream gaming customers. We've taken performance up a level, doubling the processing threads of our Ryzen 3 processors to propel gaming and multitasking experiences to new heights."
AMD Ryzen 3 3100 and AMD Ryzen 3 3300X
Continuing to demonstrate its leadership in the consumer desktop space, the AMD Ryzen 3 3100 and AMD Ryzen 3 3300X represent the fastest ever AMD Ryzen 3 desktop processors, bringing world class desktop performance to mainstream gamers. They also stand for AMD's commitment to improving CPU performance and technologies for consumers by enabling SMT on a Ryzen 3 desktop processor for the very first time.

The processors take advantage of 18 MB Cache, delivering dramatic memory latency reduction, translating directly to smoother, faster gaming performance for high framerates in CPU-heavy games. Further, with four cores, eight threads, and AMD SMT technology, the new Ryzen 3 processors provide incredible multitasking performance and responsiveness that consumers need.

The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 offers:
  • Up to 20% gaming performance than the competition
  • Up to 75% creator performance than the competition
AMD B550 Chipset
The new B550 chipset for socket AM4 is the latest addition to the AMD 500 Series chipset family with support for the industry-leading AMD Ryzen 3000 Series desktop processors. The upcoming B550 motherboards are the only mainstream modern chipset with compatibility for PCIe 4.0, unlocking twice the bandwidth of B450 motherboards for high-speed, high-power performance in gaming and multitasking.

Availability
The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 and AMD Ryzen 3 3300X are expected to be available from leading retailers and etailers worldwide beginning May 2020. AMD B550 motherboards are expected to be available beginning June 16, 2020 from ODM partners including ASRock, ASUS, Biostar, Colorful, GIGABYTE, and MSI at leading retailers and etailers.
Add your own comment

83 Comments on AMD Announces 3rd Gen Ryzen 3 Quad-Core Desktop Processors and AMD B550 PCIe 4.0 Chipset

#76
Midland Dog
ValantarGiven that Zen 2 has a ~7% IPC advantage over Skylake, which again was ~15% above Haswell clock for clock, some quick and dirty napkin math tells us a 3.9GHz Zen 2 chip should be about on par with a 4.8GHz Haswell chip. At, I would guess, 1/4-1/3 the power consumption. About where progress ought to be, in other words - a low end $100 chip matching a heavily overclocked premium chip from a few years before. If Intel had been left to their own devices, we'd still be paying $300 for 4c8t chips at this performance level.
amd is always fast until u bench it. thread for thread cache for cache sandy bridge is faster
ARFThis is brutal :nutkick:

If these are as fast as Core i7-7700K under normal conditions, then in gaming the Core i7-7700K might perform faster. We all know Ryzen's achilles heel - it's gaming.

Look at Core i5-4690K vs Core i5-7600K:





I agree with the point that these are highly unimpressive SKUs.
hey finally someone with a brain
Posted on Reply
#77
Mussels
Freshwater Moderator
apoklyps3couldn't care less about NVMe.
1% real world performance when compared to SATA in gaming and most regular workloads.
try these 150GB game installs, i sure as hell see faster load times between my NVME system and my SATA one (i also load a ton faster than everyone else in my gaming group in ARK)
Posted on Reply
#78
apoklyps3
Musselstry these 150GB game installs, i sure as hell see faster load times between my NVME system and my SATA one (i also load a ton faster than everyone else in my gaming group in ARK)
placebo
at this time nvme provides 0 to 2% real world performance advantance compared to SATA. It's a proven fact.
but keep "playing" those benchmark applications.
Posted on Reply
#79
Mussels
Freshwater Moderator
apoklyps3placebo
... the two machines are side by side and i initiate login at the same time, since i play with my son.
It's hardly a placebo.

I get the feeling you may not be worth talking to.
Posted on Reply
#80
apoklyps3
I see, disagreeing that 4 seconds is alot faster than 6 seconds makes me wrong.
Ok.
Posted on Reply
#81
Valantar
Midland Dogamd is always fast until u bench it. thread for thread cache for cache sandy bridge is faster
While I think I understand what you're trying to say (that Zen and its derivatives generally perform better in productivity/compute than gaming), that statement literally makes no sense. How can something "be fast until you bench it"? You can't know if it's fast until you bench it. Also, the IPC numbers I mentioned are based on actual IPC testing, i.e. a wide range of benchmarks (for the Zen 2 v. CFL/SKL IPC test AnandTech ran the full SPEC2006SPEED test suite) on a single core/thread at normalized clock speeds. I would call that "benching it", wouldn't you? No, it's not a gaming benchmark, but that's entirely besides the point. Intel generally overperforms vs. AMD in gaming applications compared to general compute benchmarks, though at best at a high single digit percentage when looking at Zen 2. (It's also worth mentioning that despite the IPC deficit the tested 9900K achieved overall higher scores across the majority of the benchmark suite compared to the 3700X it was compared to thanks to its higher clock speeds - it's the sum of IPC x clock speed that matters in the end, after all.) So, of course, we could take my statement of
Valantara 3.9GHz Zen 2 chip should be about on par with a 4.8GHz Haswell chip
and subtract 5-10% to account for Intel's lead in gaming loads, making it instead "a 3.9GHz Zen 2 chip should be about on par with a 4.32-4.56GHz Haswell chip." Not that big of a difference, eh? Still faster than the vast majority of Haswell chips out there, let alone Sandy Bridge. And that statement is meant to imply at the same core and thread count in case that wasn't obvious, as IPC is thread count agnostic.

Also, saying something is faster "thread for thread, cache for cache" is rather meaningless for three reasons:
1: IPC denominates single-threaded performance normalizing for clock speed, so a chip with lower IPC can't be faster thread for thread.
2: Cache isn't variable (unless you're using a 286 or something similar with cache chips on the motherboard), so what's the point of attempting to normalize for cache?
3: Not taking clock speeds into account for a comparison like that makes it utterly meaningless. Sandy Bridge is able to stay somewhat relevant only thanks to its OC ability - at stock even Zen (1) beats it soundly. But even a 5GHz Sandy Bridge chip is easily beaten even in gaming by a Zen 2 chip with the same number of cores and threads at significantly lower clock speeds.
Posted on Reply
#83
EasyListening
gasolinaer the ryzen 3500x 6c/6t 32mb cache is a bit lower than the 2600 in term of overall performance , and both oced the 2600 beat the 3500x easily. Pricing the 2600 is 110$, 3500x 140$ base on taobao , while this 3100 is 99$ and 3300 is 120$ ? i would pick the the 2600 oc it to 4.2 or 4.3 , so far it's hard for ryzen 3000 to reach 4.5 and ryzen 4000 would just add 100 to 200mhz more .
Terrible pricing to be honest the 3100 should be 80$ and 3300 100$ would be more reasonable , i have both the 3500x from taobao and the 2600/2600x . Gladly i sold the 3500x
2600 has double the lanes of 3500X. I would have gotten a 3600 and OC'd that. Why didn't you? I don't understand what you are complaining about.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Sep 26th, 2024 23:54 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts