Core i3 10100 vs. Core i5 10600K vs. Ryzen 3 3300X Linux Gaming Benchmarks

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Core i3 10100 vs. Core i5 10600K vs. Ryzen 3 3300X Linux Gaming Benchmarks

Last month on Phoronix were 350+ benchmarks of the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X vs. Intel Core i3 10100, including a number of Linux gaming performance tests. Following that I also ran some tests with the Core i5 10600K tossed in for those that may be weighing between the Ryzen 3 / Core i3 vs. Core i5 for gaming. Here are those additional data points...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Core-i3-i5-Ryzen-3-3300X-Gaming

[xpander]

What Was the GPU used? AMD reports stupidly all the names and doesn't say exact model. Also while i know its probably more likely real life situation that those budget CPUs (i3 10100 and ryzen 3 3300X) are paired with midrange GPUs, it wont really show the real CPU performance for games. Would have been nice to pair it to 2080Ti to remove most of the GPU bottlenecks, to get the real picture of CPU performance.

[vladpetric]

I propose the following law of nature, based on repeated observations:

As Phoronix forum discussions grow longer, the probability of someone calling somebody else a fanboy approaches 1

I'd like to call this the Larabel Law.

[Michael]

What Was the GPU used? AMD reports stupidly all the names and doesn't say exact model. Also while i know its probably more likely real life situation that those budget CPUs (i3 10100 and ryzen 3 3300X) are paired with midrange GPUs, it wont really show the real CPU performance for games. Would have been nice to pair it to 2080Ti to remove most of the GPU bottlenecks, to get the real picture of CPU performance.

RX 590 to, yes, be real-world for this quick one page article focused on 1080p gaming...

[caligula]

So, Intel provides less than 4% more power, but one needs to pay over 100% extra? Nice.

[milkylainen]

I'm not buying this as a CPU benchmark for either manufacturer.
There is no way a 14nm CPU draws HALF the power vs a 7nm CPU while providing approximately the same performance.
It's like a double fault in the wrong direction.

If 14nm drew more power and provided the same performance that would be ok.
If 14nm drew similar power and provided the same performance would be fishy, but in the realm of general fubars.
If 14nm drew LESS power and provided the same performance something is seriously wrong.

Something has a serious bottleneck somewhere.

[schmidtbag]

I'm not buying this as a CPU benchmark for either manufacturer.
There is no way a 14nm CPU draws HALF the power vs a 7nm CPU while providing approximately the same performance.
It's like a double fault in the wrong direction.

If 14nm drew more power and provided the same performance that would be ok.
If 14nm drew similar power and provided the same performance would be fishy, but in the realm of general fubars.
If 14nm drew LESS power and provided the same performance something is seriously wrong.

Something has a serious bottleneck somewhere.

The chipset is X570, that's why the power draw is so high.

[M@GOid]

The chipset is X570, that's why the power draw is so high.

Personally I prefer at-the-wall measuring, since those number are all theoretical.

Also, the I3 and R3 with bottom of the barrel mobos, since that is what the poor like me tend to use.

[skeevy420]

Nice to know that there really isn't much of a performance difference in regards to games between AMD's budget and Intel's mid-range CPUs to justify the new Intel premium.

Any chance of some current AMDGPU vs Pro results?

[skeevy420]

I propose the following law of nature, based on repeated observations:

As Phoronix forum discussions grow longer, the probability of someone calling somebody else a fanboy approaches 1

I'd like to call this the Larabel Law.

I think Larabel Law #2 should be

As Phoronix forum discussions increase by one post, the probability of someone discussing the opposite technology increases by an extra 50%.