WPrime, SuperPi, Cinebench, and AIDA64
WPrime is first up and being a multi-threaded benchmark. We know it will scale with any CPU we throw at it. You can manually set the number of workers or threads you want to allocate to the calculation, which we did the total thread count for each CPU to ensure we measure the maximum performance the CPU can offer.
The 32M test is the shorter one and shows how each CPU performs with a quick burst multi-core loading. Here we see the 3100 and the 3300X surround the 7700K with the 3300X taking the win over the 7700K.
The 1024 test is the longer version and can take form as short as under half a minute up to several minutes depending on thread count and frequency of the CPU being tested. Here we see once again the 3100 and 3300X surrounding the 7700K, while the 3300X beats it outright, we see that the $100 3100 holds its own here.
SuperPi is a much older test, but it's worth including as it is a single-threaded computation workload that really can show in granular detail differences in the computational ability of the silicon being tested. One thing to note is that this is an aging application that tends to favor intel architecture, so don't be surprised when you see much better results by some chips, as those same chips you will see get beaten in other tests.
Here we see that the 7nm efficiency is as good as the previous flagship 2700X loses to the 3300X. The 3300X is even close to catching the 3600X in this single-threaded test. The 3100 with its significantly lower out of the box clock speed and die configuration shows the impact here as well.
Cinebench is a long-standing render benchmark that has been heavily relied upon by both Intel and AMD to showcase their newest platforms during unveils. The benchmark has two tests, a single-core workload that will utilize one thread or 1T. There is also a multi-threaded test which uses all threads or nT of a tested CPU
First up is the multi-core test, where we can see that it is more of the same with the 3100 and 3300X surrounding the 7700K. AMD claimed that the 7700K was a target and that the 3300X can beat it, and thus far, this has proven true.
Moving to single-threaded and things tighten up a bit. Here we see the 3300X jump ahead of not only the 7700K but the 8700K as well. The 3100 pulls ahead of all three of the Zen+ (12nm chips) in the grouping.
Memory read performance is up first for Aida. Here we see that our two chips do well here only being matched or beaten by its fellow 7nm brethren.
Moving to memory write, and we see the impact of a single CCD chip crop up. This is something we observed during the early reviews for Ryzen 3000, since adding the I/O die with the 7nm chiplets, having a CPU with a single chiplet will half your memory write performance. This will likely never show its face in everyday use, but it is worth noting.
The memory copy performance once again is strong here. The 3300X and 3100 come neck and neck with the 9900K and 8700K. The 3900X is a more potent overall chip, takes the haloed spot.
Memory latency is an area where intel shines. AMD tends to have higher overall latency in general, but in testing, it has not caused any abhorrent behavior in testing or usage. One thing worth noting is that the 3300X has the best latency we have seen from an AMD AM4 CPU thus far.
Aida's AES test likes threads, and it shows. Much to my surprise, the 3300X and 3100 both perform well in this test, even besting the 8700K. However, the 9900K with twice the thread count and higher clock speed pushes ahead here.
For FPU testing, we have 32-bit single-precision first. Both the 3100 and 3300X beat the 7700K but fall a bit behind the higher thread count 8700K, 9900K, and others.
Now with the next level, we have the 64-biot double-precision test. Here we see the 3300X gobble up the 2700X by a sliver of margin. The 7700K stays behind both the 3100 and 3300X.
Lastly, we have 80-bit extended precision, and this one squeezes the chips a bit, with the 7700K falling further behind. The 8700K is within striking distance of the 3300X, but overall the higher thread count holds off the two Ryzen 3 chips.
Last updated: May 7, 2020 at 04:01 pm CDT
- Page 1 [Introduction, Specifications, and Pricing]
- Page 2 [CPU, New Tech, Packaging, and Test Setup]
- Page 3 [WPrime, SuperPi, Cinebench, and AIDA64]
- Page 4 [Handbrake, Blender, POV-Ray, CoronaRender, 7-Zip, and WebXPRT]
- Page 5 [Unigine and UL Benchmarks]
- Page 6 [Gaming Benchmarks]
- Page 7 [Storage Performance]
- Page 8 [Clocks, Overclocking, Thermals, and Power Consumption]
- Page 9 [Final Thoughts]