AMD Ryzen 3 5300G Review: Best Value CPU You Probably Can't Buy

Irata

Posts: 1,809   +3,043
Wouldn‘t it have been better to do the dGPU tests with e.g. a 6700XT ? I am quite positive nVidia‘s missing hardware scheduler / driver overhead issue will affect the performance of a quad core + dGPU combo very noticeably.

The good old gamer did a test with a 10100 + 6700 XT combo and alluded to this CPU not reaching anywhere near the same results with an nVidia based graphics card and you yourselves did the same test with the same results earlier, so imho it‘s odd that you chose this combo.

Speaking of the 10100 - I’ve seen it for below $100, so including it in the comparison / benchmarks would have been a good idea.

Last thing: Interestingly, Micro Center has the 3300x in stock - no idea where they got it from as for all purposes this CPU does not exist, but in case anyone wants one:

https://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?N=4294822457+4294966998&Ntt=Ryzen+3300x
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,043   +870
“Best Value CPU” in the headline is a stretch. You can’t buy it and if you could it’s a Ryzen 5000 series part so it would probably come at a premium over its competitors like all the other 5000 series components.

AMD are no longer the value manufacturer. They cater only to the premium end now..
 

BSim500

Posts: 869   +2,018
Nice bump over the 3400G, but if you can't buy it then it's no 'replacement' for anything. And based on the Ebay markup of 4000 series APU's (which were also OEM-only), if this ends up +£160, then it's not a particularly good deal vs either the 5600G or buying an i3-10100F + used 1050Ti. Just a shame AMD have completely abandoned budget gamers.
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,043   +870
Nice bump over the 3400G, but if you can't buy it then it's no 'replacement' for anything. And based on the Ebay markup of 4000 series APU's (which were also OEM-only), if this ends up +£160, then it's not a particularly good deal vs either the 5600G or buying an i3-10100F + used 1050Ti. Just a shame AMD have completely abandoned budget gamers.
They only catered to the budget gamers before because the premium gamers were buying from their competitor. Now AMD are the premium they don’t need these budget users anymore. Both companies are just trying to get as much dollar out of the market for themselves as possible.
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 883   +1,679
Wouldn‘t it have been better to do the dGPU tests with e.g. a 6700XT ? I am quite positive nVidia‘s missing hardware scheduler / driver overhead issue will affect the performance of a quad core + dGPU combo very noticeably.

Whats a 6700XT?

Some kind of GPU?

Who makes that, because I havent seen it on Nvidia marketing materials, you know, the one that that dictates what should be said or done and creates the army of drones that we have today. ;-)

That out of the way, I wonder and wish that AMD would make APUs that have insane GPUs as a way to replace the low and entry level market.

A proper gaming oriented GPU. Lots of graphics cores with perhaps 6 CPU cores. Some kind of variant of the SOC's used in consoles.

I know that by design, they will always be limited by the memory bus, but I think it could be doable.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,809   +3,043
Whats a 6700XT?

Some kind of GPU?

Who makes that, because I havent seen it on Nvidia marketing materials, you know, the one that that dictates what should be said or done and creates the army of drones that we have today. ;-)

That out of the way, I wonder and wish that AMD would make APUs that have insane GPUs as a way to replace the low and entry level market.

A proper gaming oriented GPU. Lots of graphics cores with perhaps 6 CPU cores. Some kind of variant of the SOC's used in consoles.

I know that by design, they will always be limited by the memory bus, but I think it could be doable.
In terms of iGPU, I am still hoping for a Zen CPU with separate CPU + GPU chiplets. That may make offering a strong iGPU cheaper.
 

Tantor

Posts: 215   +413
"As discussed in our review, the R7 5700G doesn't make sense at the rather high $360 asking price"

Actually, the R7 5700G makes sense for substantial parts of the gaming market. That $360 price point gets you a fast 8 core and decent integrated graphics. Some people don't want to cram a discrete graphics card into their mini-itx cases.

I'm not sure why Techspot keeps ignoring that fact.
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 883   +1,679
In terms of iGPU, I am still hoping for a Zen CPU with separate CPU + GPU chiplets. That may make offering a strong iGPU cheaper.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.

One chiplet with say 6 CPU cores and the other with one beefy RDNA2 or 3 GPU, that can provide some decent 1080p performance.

Then leave the 1440 and 4K market to dGPU's. Made by Nvidia of course. :cool:
 

meric

Posts: 328   +341
I appreciate the hard work you put in this article and benchmarks, I like the quality of techspot reviews but would it be not better to include some 3100/3300x benchmarks just for information? You mentioned them a couple of times and I was expecting to see them in charts.
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,043   +870
The fact that you can get a 5600X at £200 in the U.K. right now makes the APUs a bit unappealing for me. In a lot of CPU tests the 5600X was faster than the 5700G and it also has PCIe4 where these APUs do not. I would much rather have a 5600X and a 1050ti or something similar than a 5700G by itself.
 
Last edited:

jpuroila

Posts: 389   +236
"As discussed in our review, the R7 5700G doesn't make sense at the rather high $360 asking price"

Actually, the R7 5700G makes sense for substantial parts of the gaming market. That $360 price point gets you a fast 8 core and decent integrated graphics. Some people don't want to cram a discrete graphics card into their mini-itx cases.

I'm not sure why Techspot keeps ignoring that fact.
Probably because if your focus is on GAMING, the 5700G really does make no sense - as you can see from this article, the 5600G gives you virtually the same gaming performance, especially if you're using the iGPU. Of course, if you have a mixed workload and want to do some 3d modeling or video editing on a budget while also having a capable GPU for running older/less demanding games, then the 5700G is an interesting value proposition.
 

Gus Fring

Posts: 66   +19
Nice bump over the 3400G, but if you can't buy it then it's no 'replacement' for anything. And based on the Ebay markup of 4000 series APU's (which were also OEM-only), if this ends up +£160, then it's not a particularly good deal vs either the 5600G or buying an i3-10100F + used 1050Ti. Just a shame AMD have completely abandoned budget gamers.
I imported a 4650G for £180 all-in (inc heatsink... ooh) which I think is a fanatastic price ... basically eqiuv to 5600g for quite a bit less money. just need the energy to get it and running. Fits nicely in a asrock deskmini with the amd heatsink shroud shucked off. general htpc use...
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,843   +4,503
"As discussed in our review, the R7 5700G doesn't make sense at the rather high $360 asking price"

Actually, the R7 5700G makes sense for substantial parts of the gaming market. That $360 price point gets you a fast 8 core and decent integrated graphics. Some people don't want to cram a discrete graphics card into their mini-itx cases.

I'm not sure why Techspot keeps ignoring that fact.
Except it doesnt.

If you want to do gaming, then the 5600g offers near identical performance. If you want to game with a budget dGPU, then ditto, the 5700g doesnt make that much of a difference for the price. If you want it just as a budget CPU upgrade, its also worthless, as the 3600, 3700, and even the 5600x can be had for a lower price and offer superior performance.

The only time it makes sense is if you want to built a hockey puck PC and want to do 3d modeling on it for some reason.

I