Is the Ryzen 3 3300X Better Value than the Ryzen 5 3600?

I have both of them, and both do their respected jobs great!
The 3600 is on my main rig with 16gb 3200mhz ram, a b350 mobo and an 5700XT, doing a lot of multitasking and gaming.
The 3300X is on my secondary rig with 16gb 3200mhz ram, a a320m mobo, and a GTX 960 4gb, it is used to game with friends coming over 90% of the time and it works great on that regard.
So yeah if you multitask or do light renders/encoding/streaming get the 3600, if you just do general things or game get the 3300X.
Both great and snappy cpus.
 
it can even use 50 threads. That alone doesn't mean it would run better than on a 6 cores CPU.
Multithreading doesn't just mean to share the execution on the cores available.
TW3 doesn't run better on your 3900X than on a 8C/8T i7-9700K, for instance.
it runs noticeably better than my 8700K for sure, Especially during late game end turn. It cut end turn time in half. What I want to emphasize is: gaming industry is quick to catch up when the title require lots of cpu to compute the next moves. With current console expansion to higher core count, new game engine will likely to take advantage of the cores.

PS: I envy you because you have the money to buy both cpus and test them all out.
 

ruddevil

Posts: 22   +42
Would anyone here recommend a R5 3500 (6C/6T) over the R3 3300X? In my market, the 3500 can be bought for $125 while the latter cost $150.
 

Mr Majestyk

Posts: 432   +361
The article is interesting, as usual, but the results are meaningless. The Ryzen 5 3600 is dirty cheap today, so there is no reason to look to something else if you are in this budget range.
I can’t understand how anyone would quibble over say $50 in the overall cost of a PC build, given it should last you at least 3 years. I’m hanging out for 4600, too close to Zen 3 for me and well worth waiting another 3-4 months, when we will also be seeing next gen GPUs too. Readying for a next gen build around Xmas.
 
Interesting findings and interesting conclusions.

Over the years, I have learnt not to buy a computer "for future upgrading". I have found out that it is best to set a budget and buy the best you can with that budget. Then use it for 3 or 4 years before buying another completely new computer. Upgrading an old computer will always be a compromise!

So, if I have the budget for a R3 3300X now and can't get that extra amount for a R5 3600, I would go ahead and get it. It does not pay to future proof too much. In 3-4 years, I can have a Zen 4 or Zen 5 core computer to play with!
 

Jyrkz

Posts: 116   +91
Ill be building a pc with 3300x ,5700xt , x570 and then upgrading to zen3 and better gpu when both of them are out :) all the way team red :D
 

Rjmachine

Posts: 53   +29
It will take years before games will become really multi threading, and I’m not even sure it will happen in this generation. Single core performance will stay very relevant for gaming in my opinion.
Nah, there's tons of games that scales well with more cores. 4c/4t has been causing stutter for years at this point in many games. Even 6c/6t and 4c/8t has started doing stutter and fps dips (newer battlfield games, big mp battles, much lower minimum fps using these).

Crysis 3 from 2013 scales very well with core count, for example. It scales well past 6 cores, 7 and a half year old game... Theres many games today that can put a quad core to it's knees when looking at minimum fps - especially when paired with a decent gpu.

Next gen consoles gets 8c/16t meaning multi plat aaa games will start requiring at least 6c/12t on pc (considering consoles generally have 1-2 reserved cores, for os and background stuff - recording etc). 8c/16t for (gaming) pc's will be the sweet spot for years to come. 6c/12t will do "fine" in most games tho. Less will/can cause issues. More than 8c/16t is not needed.

I'd never even consider using a quad core chip in a gaming rig these days. Pay the few peanuts more and get R5 3600 / i5-10400 or R5 3600X / 10600K.
 
Last edited:

Irata

Posts: 787   +1,077
TechSpot Elite
I can’t understand how anyone would quibble over say $50 in the overall cost of a PC build, given it should last you at least 3 years. I’m hanging out for 4600, too close to Zen 3 for me and well worth waiting another 3-4 months, when we will also be seeing next gen GPUs too. Readying for a next gen build around Xmas.
Thing is, you can always add another $50 to get a nicer GPU, CPU, mainboard, case, memory...but a few bucks here and a few bucks there quickly adds up. In the end you will need to set a budget and get the best parts combination for that budget.

As for the rest of your post, totally agree. With current prices and next gen consoles, CPU and GPU coming up in a few months, waiting is the sensible option if your system is still doing its job. And even if you are not getting the newest parts. current CPU and GPU may get a lot cheaper.
 

Gus Fring

Posts: 52   +9
What's great about both the 3300X and the 3600 (all the Ryzen processors really) is the clear upgrade path available. The ability to swap in up to 16 cores with the 3950X is amazing, with the 4000 series Ryzen's still to come. I was fortunate enough to grab a 3600X on sale for $169 at Microcenter. Knowing I can drop in a Zen 3 chip once the 3600X feels tired is very reassuring.
Under what scenario is someone skimping on their CPU now ($130?), and then in the market for a 16 core monster? assuming that their PSU mobo will run it properly? It'll be all quantum and Bitcoin in 5 years, I tells ya!
 
Under what scenario is someone skimping on their CPU now ($130?), and then in the market for a 16 core monster? assuming that their PSU mobo will run it properly? It'll be all quantum and Bitcoin in 5 years, I tells ya!
My daughter bought a ryzen 5 3600 a while ago for some light gaming and lightroom then she suddenly wants to go into streaming and stuffs, so she seek out a 3900X because she now has to do encoding, uploading and rendering in the background while gaming.
My other kid wanted a gaming PC but he ran out of money (yes, they have to work to buy their own things), so he settle with a ryzen 5 like his sister and plan to get the 12 cores later for his blender projects.

Unforeseen / unrealized needs or planned needs with really tight budget are the scenarios.
I myself used to have a 8700K, and planned to upgrade into 9900K later.
 

Jerry in WA

Posts: 84   +79
If you are building a new gaming rig right now, you do not want to go quad core, especially when a 6 core is well within the budget range. As someone who just came off of a 4790K, what these benchmarks don't show you are lag spikes. The low FPS range gives an incomplete picture. The actual experience is more dramatic. Some newer games want 6-8 cores. 4 just isn't cutting it anymore.

It's only going to get worse when the new consoles release. All of those games will be written to take advantage of multi-cores and those core hungry games will funnel back to PC.

The 3300X is clearly a great CPU value, and for most gaming, it will be fine. But it's already goign to struggle with some games now and more later. Seems prudent to spend $40-$70 more for a solid CPU. Cheap out on the case instead. ;)
 

Rjmachine

Posts: 53   +29
If you are building a new gaming rig right now, you do not want to go quad core, especially when a 6 core is well within the budget range. As someone who just came off of a 4790K, what these benchmarks don't show you are lag spikes. The low FPS range gives an incomplete picture. The actual experience is more dramatic. Some newer games want 6-8 cores. 4 just isn't cutting it anymore.

It's only going to get worse when the new consoles release. All of those games will be written to take advantage of multi-cores and those core hungry games will funnel back to PC.

The 3300X is clearly a great CPU value, and for most gaming, it will be fine. But it's already goign to struggle with some games now and more later. Seems prudent to spend $40-$70 more for a solid CPU. Cheap out on the case instead. ;)
100% Agree. Buying a quadcore even with SMT today is not a clever decision especially considering that next gen consoles launch in a few months with 8C/16T.

Last time we saw a core/thread requirement on PC gaming, was when current gen consoles launched in 2013'ish. 4C/4T started to get in trouble back then.

Now it's 4C/8T CPU's time to feel the exact same thing.

6C/12T is minimum today and 8C/16T will do better in the long run. More than 8C/16T won't be needed for maaany years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dimitrios

CBTex

Posts: 85   +142
Under what scenario is someone skimping on their CPU now ($130?), and then in the market for a 16 core monster? assuming that their PSU mobo will run it properly? It'll be all quantum and Bitcoin in 5 years, I tells ya!
I'm saying the flexibility is what is enticing. Maybe games become more multi-threaded. Maybe they are doing more rendering.

If they have a b450 or up, they should be good. The 3950x draws less than 100w more than a 3300. Even a 650w PSU would be more than enough.
 

Rdmetz

Posts: 96   +41
What's great about both the 3300X and the 3600 (all the Ryzen processors really) is the clear upgrade path available. The ability to swap in up to 16 cores with the 3950X is amazing, with the 4000 series Ryzen's still to come. I was fortunate enough to grab a 3600X on sale for $169 at Microcenter. Knowing I can drop in a Zen 3 chip once the 3600X feels tired is very reassuring.
It's also what kills your resale value and why my buddy and his $500 1800x couldn't get $150 when he tried to sell it last month but my $350 7700k sold at the same time for $300. Both bought in 2017 who REALLY made the smart choice?

I'll stick to the side that gives me the most out of my parts when I buy them AND when I sell them.
 

Rdmetz

Posts: 96   +41
100% Agree. Buying a quadcore even with SMT today is not a clever decision especially considering that next gen consoles launch in a few months with 8C/16T.

Last time we saw a core/thread requirement on PC gaming, was when current gen consoles launched in 2013'ish. 4C/4T started to get in trouble back then.

Now it's 4C/8T CPU's time to feel the exact same thing.

6C/12T is minimum today and 8C/16T will do better in the long run. More than 8C/16T won't be needed for maaany years.
Reviewers on YouTube kept pushing i5's way past then all the way up to like to the 8th gen or later. I knew that they may have been OK before that after about 2015 buying one was a terrible idea even if reviewers couldn't see the righting on the wall. I did amd went with the 7700k for the last 3 years and loved it! Now I've sold it for 86% of what I paid for it and invested that into a cpu that (with the launch or the next gen gpu's + the cards of 2-4 years from now) will be blowing away their recommended chips of today (3600) like the old i5 days. 10900k will he the dominate chip for a long while and only replaced by its successor its value will grow as its performance lead pushes up the resolution stack with newer and newer gpu's and in 2022-2023 with the gpu's of those days it will be well ahead (15-30%) of the rest of today's chips even with 1440p or 4k benchmarks.

And when the time comes just like with my 7700k and almost all Intel cpu I'll be able to turn around and resale it on the used market for a large portion of what I paid and reinvest that same money into an even more powerful version for next to nothing compared to the cost of I had to sell off old ryzen parts no body wants or will pay anything for.

I mean why would they when they're much better of buying the newer parts already released (gotta LOVE that upgradability!) especially when it makes your $500 cpu worth less than a $200 one.
 

Rdmetz

Posts: 96   +41
Interesting findings and interesting conclusions.

Over the years, I have learnt not to buy a computer "for future upgrading". I have found out that it is best to set a budget and buy the best you can with that budget. Then use it for 3 or 4 years before buying another completely new computer. Upgrading an old computer will always be a compromise!

So, if I have the budget for a R3 3300X now and can't get that extra amount for a R5 3600, I would go ahead and get it. It does not pay to future proof too much. In 3-4 years, I can have a Zen 4 or Zen 5 core computer to play with!
With ryzen it's completely pointless all their parts lose so much value so quickly you might as well just by what you need for the next 6 to 8 months and plan to upgrade as often as possible. It's the only way you're getting anything back out of the parts you bought.
 
Last edited:

Rdmetz

Posts: 96   +41
I would still say that 3600 is best bang for the buck. Great performance plus it should age better than 3300X. Though on small budget, 3100 and 3300X or 2600 will all do the trick. Provided they are in stock. I personally would pass on i3, because it lacks cheap upgrade path. Intel CPUs retain value much longer than AMD. So future upgrade to 4000 series or even higher end 3000 would be much cheaper. While i5s and i7s will cost a lot more.

Though personally, if you can wait. Wait for Ryzen 4000, they are coming this year, they should have single CCX design, which helps gaming, since there is no CCX to CCX penalty. And B550 boards might become cheaper, or at least "budget" versions might become available. Putting budget in quotes, because right now they are taking X570 prices... I don't care about quality, B550 is supposed to be budget and it is anything but that. And I would almost suspect board partners are intentionally holding back budget stock, so they can sell more high end.
Like you said Intel hold their value better therefor they sell for more much later and in turn make the cost of your next upgrade even less than if you had been amd from the beginning and upgraded.

I sold my 7700k for $300 after paying $350 meanwhile my friend tried to sell his $500 1800x and couldn't get $150 we both got the 3 years out of our systems (though I had the better gaming which is all either of us do) and in the end I end up with a 10900k for a lot less than he ends up with a 3900 or heck even a 3600.
 

SethNW

Posts: 19   +13
Like you said Intel hold their value better therefor they sell for more much later and in turn make the cost of your next upgrade even less than if you had been amd from the beginning and upgraded.

I sold my 7700k for $300 after paying $350 meanwhile my friend tried to sell his $500 1800x and couldn't get $150 we both got the 3 years out of our systems (though I had the better gaming which is all either of us do) and in the end I end up with a 10900k for a lot less than he ends up with a 3900 or heck even a 3600.
Yes, except I wasn't talking about high end, i3 doesn't retain value even nearly as well as i7. On high end things change. And back in the day of first gen, no one was recommending 1800X anyway. It was way overpriced compared to 1700 and 1700X, plus gaming wise, it really wasn't worth going for anything above 1600 on AMD. Though 1600 vs 7600k, 1600 ended up aging better. But above 2600 even with Ryzen 2000, 2700 just wasn't worth it. 3000 brought stuff much closer though. And yes, on high end better used market selling prices are worth considering. Though they often go against lower initial prices on Ryzen, provided you are looking at reasonable parts for purpose. But 7700k aged really well thanks to Hyperthreading. Plus used market depends on person to person, some are better at selling there than others and some just lack patience or just aren't confident with selling on used market.
 
What version of the Radeon 580 is being used? 4GB or 8GB? There's a big difference.

About me: I have the classic i5 2500k and Radeon 580 8GB version. Thinking about upgrading to one of these Ryzen chips.
 

Strawman

Posts: 295   +180
Like you said Intel hold their value better therefor they sell for more much later and in turn make the cost of your next upgrade even less than if you had been amd from the beginning and upgraded.

I sold my 7700k for $300 after paying $350 meanwhile my friend tried to sell his $500 1800x and couldn't get $150 we both got the 3 years out of our systems (though I had the better gaming which is all either of us do) and in the end I end up with a 10900k for a lot less than he ends up with a 3900 or heck even a 3600.
Who would buy an 7700k for 300$ when for that money you can buy a better CPU with a freaking mobo on top of that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HardReset

Shadowboxer

Posts: 912   +543
I think it’s been about 10 years now that I have read comments from users assuring everyone that games will soon care more about cores than IPC.

I definitely think multithreading is the future but I don’t think games are going to need all that much compute. We found with DX12 which improved multithreading that it just reduced the CPU overheard rather than make big core count CPUs have much of an advantage. I don’t think there is that much data for a big core count CPU to chew through.

Personally I don’t want to have to buy some expensive huge core count CPU to feed my graphics card. Hopefully this R3 3300X is the beginning of a trend where gamers start spending less on their CPUs to feed their GPUs.
 

loki1944

Posts: 415   +269
Nah, there's tons of games that scales well with more cores. 4c/4t has been causing stutter for years at this point in many games. Even 6c/6t and 4c/8t has started doing stutter and fps dips (newer battlfield games, big mp battles, much lower minimum fps using these).

Crysis 3 from 2013 scales very well with core count, for example. It scales well past 6 cores, 7 and a half year old game... Theres many games today that can put a quad core to it's knees when looking at minimum fps - especially when paired with a decent gpu.

Next gen consoles gets 8c/16t meaning multi plat aaa games will start requiring at least 6c/12t on pc (considering consoles generally have 1-2 reserved cores, for os and background stuff - recording etc). 8c/16t for (gaming) pc's will be the sweet spot for years to come. 6c/12t will do "fine" in most games tho. Less will/can cause issues. More than 8c/16t is not needed.

I'd never even consider using a quad core chip in a gaming rig these days. Pay the few peanuts more and get R5 3600 / i5-10400 or R5 3600X / 10600K.
I call bs. Get 0 0 stutter with 4c8t or 6c12t in games including Battlefield V, RDR2, Breakpoint etc. What causes stuttering is stuff like denuvo+VM protect on older CPUs. I've got i7 920, 870, 930, 960, 980X, 4770K, 6850K, and 7800X.
 

Gus Fring

Posts: 52   +9
I'd never buy less than 6C/12T today. Next gen consoles will be having 8C/16T meaning 6C/12T will be bare minimum for PC going forward unless you're a casual gamer or play old games.
Thsi tired old trope gets trotted out like the dead horse it is flogging.
You can still play most games 95%, on a four core machine, its the graphics card which makes the biggest difference, as evidenced here (see graphs)