AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT vs 9 3900XT
- CPU
- GPU
- SSD
- HDD
- RAM
- USB
100-100000277WOF
100-100000279WOF
VS
YouTube*NEW*
About
Real World Speed
Performance profile from 30,820 user samples
Benchmark your CPU here
16,922 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 97% Base clock 3.8 GHz, turbo 4.4 GHz (avg)
Worst Bench: 79% Base clock 3.8 GHz, turbo 4.2 GHz (avg)
Poor: 79%
Great: 97%
SPEED RANK: 97th / 1370
Gaming 89% Aircraft carrier |
Desktop 89% Aircraft carrier |
Workstation 102% UFO |
13,898 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 98% Base clock 4. 5 GHz, turbo 4.45 GHz (avg)
Worst Bench: 77% Base clock 3.9 GHz, turbo 1.35 GHz (avg)
Poor: 77%
Great: 98%
SPEED RANK: 101st / 1370
Gaming 88% Aircraft carrier |
Desktop 90% Aircraft carrier |
Workstation 90% Aircraft carrier |
Effective Speed Effective CPU Speed |
88.7 % | +1% | 88.1 % |
10 Mar21|HardwareLUXX Processor non grata: Rocket Lake-S… |
BFV 3% | 3 % | SotTR 6%, MetroEx 1%, Divis2 6% | |||
05 Nov20|Techpowerup AMD Ryzen 5 5800X Review |
1 % | FarC5 1%, BFV 2%, Rage2 0%, Witcher3 1%, Civ6 3%, ACO 3%, Sekiro 0%, Wolf2 0% | SotTR 0%, MetroEx 3% | |||
05 Nov20|Linustechtips Remember this day… — AMD Ryzen 500. .. |
1 % | GTAV 2%, SotTR 4%, F120 1% | MSFS20 0%, CSGO 1% |
Memory Avg. Memory Latency |
76.3 Pts | 76.4 Pts | +0% | |||
1-Core Avg. Single Core Speed |
141 Pts | 145 Pts | +3% | |||
2-Core Avg. Dual Core Speed |
277 Pts | 283 Pts | +2% | |||
4-Core Avg. Quad Core Speed |
541 Pts | +1% | 535 Pts | |||
8-Core Avg. Octa Core Speed |
1032 Pts | Slightly faster octa-core speed. +10% |
942 Pts |
Memory OC Memory Latency |
87.5 Pts | 88.9 Pts | +2% | |||
1-Core OC Single Core Speed |
151 Pts | 153 Pts | +1% | |||
2-Core OC Dual Core Speed |
297 Pts | 303 Pts | +2% | |||
4-Core OC Quad Core Speed |
582 Pts | 588 Pts | +1% | |||
8-Core OC Octa Core Speed |
1131 Pts | Slightly faster OC octa-core speed. +8% |
1051 Pts |
Market Share
Based on 57,950,389 CPUs tested.
See market share leaders
Market Share Market Share (trailing 30 days) |
0.03 % | 0.03 % | ||||
Value Value For Money |
68.9 % | 77.2 % | Better value. +12% |
|||
User Rating UBM User Rating |
55 % | 55 % | ||||
Price Price (score) |
€599 | €387 | Much cheaper. +35% |
Age Newest |
30+ Months | 29+ Months | +3% | |||
64-Core OC Multi Core Speed |
2220 Pts | Much faster OC 64-core speed. +45% |
1535 Pts | |||
64-Core Avg. Multi Core Speed |
2056 Pts | Much faster 64-core speed. +44% |
1426 Pts |
ADVERTISEMENT
The XT series of Ryzen CPUs barely outperform their cheaper X and non-X counterparts: 3600, 3600X, 3800X, 3900X. Outside of encoding workloads such as UserBenchmark 64-core, Cinebench, Blender-CPU and Handbrake-CPU the Ryzen architecture remains limited by relatively high latency and the associated gaming bottleneck (frame drops). Dedicated hardware such as NVENC or QuickSync remains far more efficient than CPU cores for encoding. CPU based encoding is akin to using hair clippers on a lawn. The best value CPU amongst the Ryzen range is the 3300X which is the first design to focus on delivering lower latency, and therefore better performance where users need it, rather than “Moar Coars”. Aside from the army of anonymous influencers on social media (reddit, forums, youtube etc.), users will be hard pressed to find rational arguments that favor the XT variants over their cheaper predecessors. [Jul ’20 CPUPro]
MORE DETAILS
The XT series of Ryzen CPUs barely outperform their cheaper X and non-X counterparts: 3600, 3600X, 3800X, 3900X. Outside of encoding workloads such as UserBenchmark 64-core, Cinebench, Blender-CPU and Handbrake-CPU the Ryzen architecture remains limited by relatively high latency and the associated gaming bottleneck (frame drops). Dedicated hardware such as NVENC or QuickSync remains far more efficient than CPU cores for encoding. CPU based encoding is akin to using hair clippers on a lawn. The best value CPU amongst the Ryzen range is the 3300X which is the first design to focus on delivering lower latency, and therefore better performance where users need it, rather than “Moar Coars”. Aside from the army of anonymous influencers on social media (reddit, forums, youtube etc.), users will be hard pressed to find rational arguments that favor the XT variants over their cheaper predecessors. [Jul ’20 CPUPro]
MORE DETAILS
Systems with these CPUs
Top Builds that include these CPUs
- Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI) (141)
- Asus ROG STRIX X570-E GAMING (106)
- Gigabyte X570 AORUS MASTER (76)
- Gigabyte X570 AORUS ELITE (60)
- MSI MPG X570 GAMING EDGE WIFI (MS-7C37) (60)
- MSI MAG X570 TOMAHAWK WIFI (MS-7C84) (53)
- Asus PRIME X570-PRO (49)
- MSI MAG B550 TOMAHAWK (MS-7C91) (132)
- Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI) (111)
- MSI MPG X570 GAMING EDGE WIFI (MS-7C37) (59)
- Asus ROG STRIX B450-F GAMING (58)
- Asus ROG STRIX B550-F GAMING (57)
- MSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS (MS-7C37) (50)
- Asus ROG STRIX B550-F GAMING (WI-FI) (46)
Custom PC Builder (Start a new build)
Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money.
CHOOSE A COMPONENT:
CPU GPU SSD HDD RAM MBD
Processor Rankings (Price vs Performance)
January 2023 CPU Rankings.
We calculate effective speed which measures real world performance for typical users. Effective speed is adjusted by current prices to yield a value for money rating. Our calculated values are checked against thousands of individual user ratings. The customizable table below combines these factors to bring you the definitive list of top CPUs. [CPUPro]
ADVERTISEMENT
Group Test Results
- Best user rated — User sentiment trumps benchmarks for this comparison.
- Best value for money — Value for money is based on real world performance.
- Fastest real world speed — Real World Speed measures performance for typical consumers.
How Fast Is Your CPU? (Bench your build)
Size up your PC in less than a minute.
Welcome to our freeware PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best upgrades.
UserBenchmark of the month
Gaming
Desktop
ProGaming
CPUGPUSSDHDDRAMUSB
How it works
- — Download and run UserBenchmark.
- — CPU tests include: integer, floating and string.
- — GPU tests include: six 3D game simulations.
- — Drive tests include: read, write, sustained write and mixed IO.
- — RAM tests include: single/multi core bandwidth and latency.
- — SkillBench (space shooter) tests user input accuracy.
- — Reports are generated and presented on userbenchmark.com.
- — Identify the strongest components in your PC.
- — See speed test results from other users.
- — Compare your components to the current market leaders.
- — Explore your best upgrade options with a virtual PC build.
- — Compare your in-game FPS to other users with your hardware.
Frequently Asked Questions
Best User Rated
-
Intel Core i5-13600K
-
Intel Core i5-12400F
-
Intel Core i9-13900K
-
Intel Core i7-12700K
-
Intel Core i5-12400
-
Intel Core i5-12600K
-
AMD Ryzen 5 5600X
-
AMD Ryzen 5 3600
-
Intel Core i3-12100F
-
Intel Core i5-11600K
-
Intel Core i7-13700K
-
Intel Core i5-9600K
About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube
Feedback
AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT and Ryzen 7 3800XT review: microevolution
A year to the day after releasing its landmark 3rd-gen Ryzen desktop CPUs, AMD has released a trio of new ‘XT’ processors that take advantage of manufacturing improvements to hit higher clock speeds. Two chips, the Ryzen 5 3600XT and Ryzen 9 3900XT, get a 100MHz frequency boost, while the Ryzen 7 3800XT is 200MHz faster than its ‘X’ equivalent. Otherwise, the models are more or less identical — the same core counts, cache sizes and overall architecture. We’ve been testing the Ryzen 7 and 9 models for the past week, and we think that they’re a definite boon for anyone planning a Ryzen build — but perhaps not for the reasons you’d expect.
Before we get into the results of our content creation and game testing, let’s briefly set the scene. One of the most critical things to know about these new models is that they are a supplement to the existing third-gen Ryzen lineup, rather than a (partial) replacement. That means that the older models — 3600X, the 3800X and the 3900X — will stay on the market, at least for the immediate future. While both the ‘X’ released a year ago and the ‘XT’ models releasing now actually share exactly the same recommended retail price, the original processors have naturally become cheaper over time, so in actuality there’s a sizeable gap between the two lines. Here’s how things currently shape up, as of early July 2020:
Model | UK price | US price |
---|---|---|
AMD Ryzen 5 3600X | £205 | $225 |
AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT | £250 | $250 |
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X | £280 | $330 |
AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT | £400 | $400 |
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X | £410 | $420 |
AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT | £500 | $500 |
So in the UK, there’s a £45 premium in the case of the 3600XT, £120 (!) for the 3800XT and £90 for the 3900XT. Things are a bit different in the US, where the price differentials look to be closer to $25 for the 3600XT, $70 for the 3800XT and $80 for the 3900XT. These margins will fluctuate over time, especially just after the initial launch period, so be sure to check the current prices yourself if you’re trying to decide between an ‘X’ or an ‘XT’. Fundamentally though, the question remains the same: how much is an extra 100 or 200MHz worth? What extra performance can a clock speed bump of this size provide?
Let’s begin to answer that by briefly discussing our test setup, before we start looking at some content creation results and then move into the gaming benchmarks. We tested each processor on our standard Windows 10 installation, updated to the most recent version (2004) to ensure that all of the latest security fixes and CPU topology awareness improvements are in place. The most recent AMD chipset drivers were also installed. Each app and game we tested was installed to fast NVMe storage, in this case the XPG Spectrix S40G.
We performed the bulk of our AMD testing on the venerable Asus ROG Crossfire 7 X470 motherboard, with additional testing on two new B550 boards: the premium Asus ROG Strix B550-F Gaming Wi-Fi and the more mid-range Asus TUF B550M-Plus Wi-Fi. We’ll discuss B550 in more detail later in this review, but suffice it to say that choosing a platform that supports PCIe 4. 0 and a future generation of AMD Zen 3 processors makes a lot of sense if you want to keep your options open for easy CPU, GPU and storage upgrades down the line.
For our Intel chips, we used the high-end MSI MPG Gaming Carbon Wifi and the ultra-premium Asus ROG Maximus 12 Extreme motherboards for our 10th-gen testing, with our ninth-gen results on the Asus ROG Maximus 11 Extreme.
Caption
Attribution
We have also evolved our cooling setup since our last review, with the XT processors getting the benefit of AiO cooling from the Alphacool Eisbaer Aurora 240. We didn’t experience any thermal throttling with our previous setup, AMD’s excellent Wraith Prism air cooler pegged at 100 per cent fan speed, but this provides a more apples-to-apples comparison with our Intel parts which have historically been paired with a Gamer Storm Castle 240mm AiO. Thanks to Overclockers and Alphacool for supplying the new AiOs.
While motherboards and coolers changed, the remainder of our open air test rig has stayed the same, complete with G.Skill’s gorgeous Trident Z Royal 3600MHz C16 RAM, an 850W Gamer Storm power supply and the Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Founders Edition card.
Right — with that preamble out of the way, let’s get into the content creation results. We tested the two XT processors sampled to us against a selection of recent chips from both Intel and AMD in two scenarios: rendering a 3D scene in professional graphics package Cinema 4D, simulated by Cinebench R20, and encoding one of Patreon-quality videos into both h.264 and h.265 (HEVC) using the open source Handbrake video transcoder app.
Cinebench tests both single and multi-threaded performance, and often proves a good predictor of trends we’ll see in the later gaming results. What stands out here is the boost to single-core performance in each of the XT models we tested, with scores of around 540 — that’s five per cent faster than the 514 we recorded for the 3900X and 3950X, the previous best single-core competitors from AMD. That pushes the 3800XT and 3900XT very close to the best Cinebench single thread result we’ve ever recorded, a score of 545 by the Core i9 10900K.
When it comes to multi-threaded performance, we see slightly higher scores from the XT models, but the advantage is much more modest — we recorded a score of 7101 for the 3900XT and 7032 for the 3900X, a difference of only about one per cent. The 3800XT gets a larger +200MHz boost compared to its predecessor, but it’s still in the same ballpark (5164) as another eight-core CPU, the 3700X (4730).
CB R20 1T | CB R20 MT | HB h.264 | HB HEVC | HEVC Power Use | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ryzen 9 3950X | 514 | 9249 | 64.73fps | 25.59fps | 296W |
Ryzen 9 3900XT | 538 | 7101 | 51.91fps | 20.49fps | 221W |
Ryzen 9 3900X | 514 | 7032 | 51.80fps | 20.29fps | 228W |
Ryzen 7 3800XT | 540 | 5164 | 37. 14fps | 15.83fps | 177W |
Ryzen 7 3700X | 494 | 4730 | 35.05fps | 14.67fps | 152W |
Ryzen 5 3600X | 490 | 3705 | 27.54fps | 11.81fps | 149W |
Ryzen 3 3300X | 503 | 2577 | 18.89fps | 8.25fps | 120W |
Ryzen 3 3100 | 449 | 2328 | 17.32fps | 7.44fps | 118W |
Ryzen 7 2700X | 408 | 3865 | 27.31fps | 10.04fps | 224W |
Ryzen 5 2600 | 399 | 2810 | 20.39fps | 7.09fps | 130W |
Core i9 10900K | 545 | 6337 | 45.55fps | 19.43fps | 268W |
Core i5 10600K | 493 | 3587 | 26.40fps | 11.84fps | 177W |
Core i9 9900K | 520 | 5090 | 37.87fps | 16.22fps | 266W |
Core i7 9700K | 486 | 3759 | 28. 77fps | 13.12fps | 171W |
Core i5 9600K | 450 | 2603 | 20.70fps | 9.46fps | 132W |
Looking at the Handbrake results, where we’re transcoding an MP4 video to h.264 and HEVC using the Production Standard preset and CRF 18 quality setting, it’s a similar story with minor but measurable increases across the board. So, for tasks like rendering or transcoding where you’re using all the cores and threads at your disposal, the advantage in hitter higher frequencies seems subtle. This suggests that content creators will be better off with the cheapest chip that has the number of cores and threads you want — ie the 3600 for six cores, the 3700X for eight and the 3900X for twelve.
We also measured power consumption in these tests, but as promised the new XT models didn’t draw any more power at the wall than their predecessors — indeed, the 3900XT drew slightly less, which is great to see.
So it’s a bit of a wash between ‘X’ and ‘XT’ for content creation, but what about gaming? To find out, let’s take a look at how each chip performs in some of our favourite games, tested at 1080p, 1440p and 4K.