Unigine and UL Benchmarks
Superposition from Unigine is a DX12 based benchmark. We test with the 720P LOW preset as this removes all but the most basic GPU loading, and all of the FPS performance comes from the CPUs ability to push frames to the GPU. This test is far more efficient and speed based rather than being highly threaded.
Here we see the 3300X take a spot right behind the 9900K, which surprises me a bit as it tops out at around 4340MHz on boost versus the 9900K, which can boost up to 5GHz. Once again, the 3100 falls a bit behind due to its clock speed deficiency.
PCMark is a benchmark from UL and tests various workload types to represent typical workloads for a PC. Everything from video conferencing, image import, and editing, along with 3D rendering, are tested.
First up is the main score, this is a cumulation of all of the proceeding results, which once again places the 3300X directly trailing the 9900K and the 3900X. This is not bad company to be in at a $120 price point. The 3100 falls back, trailing the 7700K.
Next up is essentials, which shows the 3100 gain some ground besting the 7700K and the 2600X. The 3300X holds second place now, but the 9900K drops behind not just the 3300X but the 3600X and 3900X as well.
Next up is productivity, and here we see the 3300X jump to the top of the chart beating the 3900X by a razor-thin margin. It is repeatable, though, so I will take it. The 3100 holds lower mid-space beating out the Zen+ based CPUs and equivalent to a 3600X.
Lastly, for the PCMark tests, we have the Digital Content Creation section, which takes advantage of thread counts. Here we see all the higher core count parts beating our Ryzen 3 options. The 7700K is still behind the 3300X, but also the 2600X, which, while Zen+ it still has 50% more cores and threads than the 3300X. The 3100 still holds its own vs. the 3400G, but everything else pulls steadily ahead of it.
3DMark Firestrike shows a synthetic performance measure for gaming level performance. Here we have the main score and the CPU score. The main score has our two Ryzen 3 models trailing the 7700K overall. Moving to the physics (CPU) score, we see that the 7700K falls back in line, as we would expect behind the 3300X.
Moving to the graphics sub scores and we see that the 9900K shows better graphical performance, and that helps explain why it beat out the 3300X. The overall score considers platform performance as a whole, and some platforms can push a bit more graphical performance, whether it be via efficiencies in the bus itself or form their clock speed.
In the combined score, we get to see how the CPU and Graphics performance combines to give a result and further proof of the still relevant 7700K/Z270 platform.
3DMark Time Spy
Time Spy is another 3DMark test variant, but this one is for DX12 based systems. This test can be quite stressful, and since its an entirely different load, you may be surprised to see how the results shuffle when compared to Firestrike.
Here we see the 3100 and 3300X sitting toward the bottom once again, but this time, both steadily beat out the 7700K platform. When moving to the CPU score, we see that the 7700K beats both CPU's which means that we see a difference in the graphics performance, which we will look at next.
Here we see that the efficiency of the new Ryzen 3 chips to push frames to the GPU shows well here. The 3300X and 3100 only fall behind the higher core count Ryzen chips, while the others fall behind them.
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]