OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£95PassMark multi-core score:22412N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.4 GHzCPU socket:AM4TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X Review: Compare 74 technical specifications, 48 expert and video reviews and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
7.3/10

Overall score

Score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 72% of models
Score components

40%

6.7

Technical score

25%

8.6

Reviews score

25%

6.7

List score

10%

8.5

Sentiment score

▲Better than 72% of processors
8.1

Value for money

Value for money
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 90% of models
Score components

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

10

Price

★Better than 90%
6.7

Technical score

Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 63% of models
Score components

60%

6.5

Performance

18%

6.3

Architecture

10%

7.6

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.1

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 63%
8.6

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 95% of models

80%

8.3

Average grade

20%

9.8

Popularity

Grades by review (48)
21 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 12 estimated from the review. 27 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
★Better than 95%
6.7

List score

List score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (1)
List score: in 1 of 87 lists (1%)
▲Better than 89%
  • amd-ryzen-7-3700x
amd-ryzen-7-3700x
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

Based on 10 · 27

Efficient, great-value multi-core performer, though gaming opinions are split and overclocking headroom and upgrade prospects disappoint.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

Based on 172 owners sharing their experience in online comments

67%positive7%mixed26%negative

Owners praise its strong, efficient performance and long life, while gaming limits, heat, and setup problems remain recurring frustrations.

What owners dislike

  • Some owners report blue screens, freezes and boot loops after BIOS updates on certain B350, B450 and X470 boards, and some CPUs failed after several updates.13
  • Owners say it trails Intel chips such as the 9900K and 10700K in gaming and single-thread speed, with fewer frames and more 1% lows.11
  • Some owners report no display or a dead system on first boot, since the chip has no integrated graphics and needs a discrete GPU or a loaner to post.8
  • Owners report high temperatures, with the CPU reaching 80–95°C in games or under heavy load on some stock and prebuilt coolers.6
  • Some owners say the stock cooler's fan does not spin or the RGB ring and fan lighting turns off, and that software control of the lights sometimes fails.6
  • Some owners notice micro-stutters and frame-rate drops in certain games, with dips to around 180 fps and lower lows than on Intel chips.5
  • Owners find the stock cooler hard to mount, with the locking lever and hooks needing force, and one reports a broken pin from misalignment.5
  • Owners say the stock cooler's fan is loud and sometimes oscillates between high and low speeds, which some find annoying during normal use.4
  • Some owners find boost clocks fall short, with stock turbo staying near 4.0 GHz and all-core overclocks sometimes giving lower performance than stock.4

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

Technical score
Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 63% of models
Score components:

60%

6.5

Performance

18%

6.3

Architecture

10%

7.6

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.1

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

6.7
Reviews score
8.6
List score
6.7
Value for money
Value for money
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 90% of models
Score components:

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

10

Price

8.1
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
AM4
This processor uses the AM4 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 75.1% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Chipset
X570, B550, A520, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320, X300, A300
This processor supports X570, B550, A520, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320, X300, A300 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 78.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, RDRAND, RDSEED, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, RDRAND, RDSEED, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 99.7% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
N. of physical cores
8
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% of processors.
CPU threads
16
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 16 CPU threads, which is more than 69% of processors and equal to 14.6% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.4 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.4 GHz which is higher than that of 48.6% of processors and equal to that of 5.1% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 3.6 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x3.6 GHz which is higher than that of 81.4% of processors and equal to that of 1.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
22,412
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 22,412 in PassMark, which is higher than 75% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
7 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 7 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 70.4% of processors and equal to that of 10.5% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 7 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 7 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 55.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L3 cache
32 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 32 MB which is larger than that of 89% of processors and equal to that of 2.7% of processors.
L2 cache
4 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 4 MB which is larger than that of 53.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L1 cache
512 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 512 KB which is larger than that of 62.8% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
3,200 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 3,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 49.8% of processors and equal to 8.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-3200 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-3200 MHz, which is higher than that of 46.1% of processors and equal to 9.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
What reviewers say
TDP (Thermal design power)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 65 W which is higher than that of 68% of processors and equal to that of 17% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 65 W which is higher than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 17.4% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 95.4% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,412 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,412 vs 11,469
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 73.2% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (4,856 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    4,856 vs 2,804.5
  • 55.2% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,084 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,084 vs 5,209
  • 2.16x more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (4 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    4 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 28.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.6/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 95% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    9.8

    Popularity

    Grades by review (48)
    21 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 12 estimated from the review. 27 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.6 vs 6.7
  • 18.1% higher sentiment score
    8.5 vs 7.2
  • 11.7% better value for money
    AMD Ryzen 7 3700X has better value for money than the average processor (8.14 vs 7.3).
    8.14 vs 7.29
  • 2.63x cheaper
    AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is cheaper than the average processor (£95 vs £250).
    £95 vs £250
  • Broader instruction support
    This processor supports a broader instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, RDRAND, RDSEED, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, RDRAND, RDSEED, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (AM4 vs FP5).
    AM4 vs FP5
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
  • 95.4% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,412 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,412 vs 11,469
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 73.2% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (4,856 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    4,856 vs 2,804.5
  • 55.2% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,084 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,084 vs 5,209
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    8 vs 6
  • 49.9% faster classroom rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (509.9 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    509.9 vs 340.075
  • 2x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • 9% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,673 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,673 vs 1,535
  • 2.16x more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (4 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    4 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 3.56x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (32 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    32 MB vs 9 MB
  • 58.2% smaller die size
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (74 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    74 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 41.7% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (7 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    7 nm vs 12 nm
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Matisse vs Kaby Lake).
    Matisse vs Kaby Lake
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 7 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 7 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 33.3% larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (512 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    512 KB vs 384 KB
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4.0 vs 3.0
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • 5 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 14.1% lower list score
    List score
    6.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (1)
    List score: in 1 of 87 lists (1%)
    6.7 vs 7.8
  • 57.1% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (170.7 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    170.7 vs 398.015
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, SME, SEV vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, SME, SEV vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • 44.4% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • 14.1% lower list score
    List score
    6.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (1)
    List score: in 1 of 87 lists (1%)
    6.7 vs 7.8
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, SME, SEV vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, SME, SEV vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 57.1% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (170.7 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    170.7 vs 398.015
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 44.4% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
Extreme Graphics Tech
≈ estimated
02/06/2024
Hands-on review · gaming benchmarks and value for budget builds
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is an excellent budget CPU for 60 fps gaming, productivity and streaming, but not for high refresh.
9.0
Tech YES City
≈ estimated
09/11/2023
Hands-on review · game benchmarks and memory tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a good buy at its current low used price with a cooler included, though memory speed and GPU pairing limit it.
9.0
Nicolas11x12 English
≈ estimated
12/09/2019
Hands-on review · gaming, power and cooling tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is the better choice over the 3900X for most buyers, though its idle power draw keeps it from the top award.
8.0
Toasty Bros
≈ estimated
08/07/2019
Hands-on test · B450 board, Cinebench and two games
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X runs well on a B450 board, but watch the auto voltage and RAM support.
9.5
Paul's Hardware
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Launch review · benchmarks against Intel and Ryzen 2
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a clear win against Intel, with strong compute performance, efficiency and value.
9.0
Timmy Joe PC Tech
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Review · overclocking, gaming and Cinebench tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a strong all-round chip for gaming and everyday use, and good value at its price.
9.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Hands-on review · gaming, productivity and power efficiency tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is recommended for gaming and as a value pick, though Intel remains faster for top-end gaming.
9.5
Greg Salazar
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Hands-on review · gaming benchmarks and power tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is excellent value for gamers, with low power draw and cool temperatures, though its overclocking headroom disappoints.
7.0
Byte Size Tech
≈ estimated
05/07/2023
Q&A answer · gaming outlook and upgrade advice
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is still fine for 1080p gaming, but most owners should upgrade to a 5700X.
8.0
Dreamshottz
≈ estimated
31/10/2020
Timeline playback test · Premiere Pro at 1080p and 4K
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X handles 1080p editing smoothly, but 4K timelines need a stronger graphics card.
6.0
optimum
≈ estimated
26/04/2020
Comparison · 6 vs 8 cores in game benchmarks
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a better fit for video encoding than gaming, where the extra cost is better spent on a GPU.
9.0
KitGuruTech
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Hands-on review · gaming and productivity benchmarks
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a big step forward that closes most of the gaming gap with Intel and suits gamers who also edit.
More graded video reviews (2)
creator’s own scoreestimated by us

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
07/07/2019
Lab test · Mainstream desktop CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is the sensible eight-core choice for new gaming PCs, with a 36MB cache, but it needs its own graphics card.
9.0
hwcooling.net
≈ estimated
09/08/2021
Lab test · Efficiency comparison
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X uses far less power than Intel's Core i7-11700KF and is sometimes faster, but its lower clock speeds hold it back.
9.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
07/12/2022
Hands-on review · Benchmarks and gaming
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a strong multi-core chip that draws only 65W, but single-core speed trails Intel and it is now hard to find.
9.0
techspot.com
✓ explicit
07/07/2019
Lab test · Productivity and gaming
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X matches the Core i9-9900K in multithreaded productivity and draws less power, but trails Intel in gaming.
8.7
pcgamer.com
✓ explicit
29/07/2022
Lab test · Gaming and productivity
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is the sensible choice over the 3900X for most users, but Intel still leads in games if gaming is your top priority.
9.0
rockpapershotgun.com
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Gaming test · RAM speed comparison
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X trails Intel's Core i7-9700K in games with slow RAM, closes most of the gap with 3600MHz memory, and is strong in multicore work.
8.0
digitalfoundry.net
≈ estimated
21/07/2019
Lab test · Gaming and encoding
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is an efficient eight-core chip that beats Intel at video encoding, but gaming is mixed, with some games dipping below 60fps.
8.0
uk.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
07/07/2019
Lab test · Mainstream CPU
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is an efficient eight-core chip with a 65W rating and a bundled cooler, but it has no integrated graphics.
10
digitalcitizen.life
✓ explicit
26/07/2019
Hands-on test · Benchmarks and gaming
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a strong gaming chip that runs cool at 67W, though it trails the Ryzen 9 3900X in multi-threaded tasks.
8.8
chip.de
✓ explicit
23/08/2020
Lab test · Core i9 comparison
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X keeps pace with the Core i9-9900K in many tests and draws little power, but trails slightly in single-thread speed.
8.0
tomshardware.fr
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
Lab test · Chiplet design
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X handles heavy workloads well thanks to its new 7nm cores, but trails Intel in gaming and has slower memory access.
9.0
hardwarecooking.fr
≈ estimated
02/08/2019
Hands-on test · Desktop CPU benchmarks
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a strong eight-core chip for multi-core work, with gaming close to Intel, but it needs a separate graphics card.
9.0
magicpc.fr
≈ estimated
13/03/2020
Lab test · Overclocking and gaming
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X suits everyday gaming PCs, matching the Ryzen 9 3900X in games, but falls behind it in heavy rendering and encoding.
9.0
miroir-mag.fr
≈ estimated
29/11/2021
Full review · Upgrade advice
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X suits new builds wanting eight cores and PCIe 4.0, but it needs its own graphics card and gains little over the 2700X.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

  • Excellent price-to-performance ratio for both gaming and productivity tasks
  • Highly power-efficient with a low 65W TDP
  • Includes a capable and aesthetically pleasing Wraith Prism RGB stock cooler
  • Supports PCIe 4.0 for faster SSD and GPU bandwidth
  • Strong multi-threaded performance with 8 cores and 16 threads
  • Backward compatibility with many older AM4 socket motherboards
  • Large 36MB 'GameCache' (L3 cache) helps boost performance in many titles

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

  • Single-core performance occasionally lags behind competing Intel chips
  • No integrated graphics, requiring a dedicated GPU for any display output
  • Limited overclocking headroom as the chip often runs near its silicon limits
  • May require a BIOS update on older motherboards to be recognized
  • Stock cooler can become somewhat noisy under heavy sustained loads
  • Write speeds on a single-CCD design are halved compared to higher-end Zen 2 models

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is an 8-core, 16-thread desktop processor based on the 7nm Zen 2 architecture, featuring a 3.6 GHz base clock, a 4.4 GHz max boost, and a generous 36MB of total 'GameCache' (L2+L3). Its primary strengths include exceptional multi-threaded performance for productivity, high power efficiency with a low 65W TDP, and support for the fast PCIe 4.0 standard, all while including a capable RGB Wraith Prism cooler in the box. However, its main drawbacks are single-core performance that sometimes trails behind Intel's contemporary rivals, a lack of integrated graphics requiring a discrete GPU, and a split-chiplet L3 cache design that can introduce higher latency in some gaming scenarios compared to newer unified architectures.

Compare AMD Ryzen 7 3700X with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and other processors

No results found