5 ms·
I'd pit them against the i5. Look at the gaming benchmarks, the 1300X is better in some and worse in some other games, but in general on par. While being cheape
by onli 9y ago
I'd pit them against the i5. Look at the gaming benchmarks, the 1300X is better in some and worse in some other games, but in general on par. While being cheaper and overclockable. I would also be surprised if one could not overclock the 1200 close to the level of the 1500X, and then that $100 cpu will beat the 7400 and be on par with the 7500.
And in non-gaming performance looks even better.
Edit: Or maybe not. In http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3001-amd-r3-1300x-review-vs-7350k-intel-response/page-4 http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3001-amd-r3-1300x-revie... there is still a comfortable lead of the i5s over the overclocked 1300X, in that different game selection. I will have to wait to see what my meta-benchmark says.
- tpaschalis 9y agoWell, iirc Ryzen 5, gaming performancr got better some time after release, both due to developer optimization processes, and AMD's BIOS updates. i5s should (and probably will be) ahead of R3, but that's more R5's ballpark.
- onli 9y agoThat's sadly unlikely to happen again for the R3, as it is the same architecture as the R5. It will already profit from the prior optimizations. Maybe some gains where hyperthreading was assumed. I checked some benchmarks more by now and it really seems like your last sentence is right: The i5 is in R5s ballpark, the R3 can't reach it.