Introduction
The power consumption values are based on the sensor values provided by the power supply of the MSI motherboard. For the measurements, we used a special low-pass filter that filters away short-term power peaks or drop-offs, as well as an adjusted calculation of the average values. While the detail of the individual view lasts exactly two minutes, all bar graphics are based on the full 15 minutes that we needed for the nearly accurate determination.
Individual view of Ryzen 3
First, we looked at the two new CPUs with the respective curve curves over a sufficiently long period of time in order to exclude or exclude possible sporadic measurement errors and a disproportionate weighting of fluctuations from the outset. minimize diminuwork. The direct comparison between the Ryzen 3 1300X and the 1200 is very small and is only due to the different clock.
The Ryzen 3 1300X only needs significantly more at full load, although the differences are still quite moderate and are almost in direct proportion to the additional performance.
Comparison of the power consumption of all CPUs
Let's take a look at all ryzen models tested so far in the Idle. The difference between all models is extremely small and can only be made after approx. 15 minutes reasonably reliable. However, you don't notice any real differences between AMD's four-, six- and 8-cores, so we can only repeat the assumption that no complete electrical separation has been made on the partially disabled models.
To what extent this could lead to a later activation of deactivated areas (which AMD this time certainly unintentionally unwanted) is of course to be left out. We rather suspect that the manufacturer has put a stop to this and has somehow secured itself.
Even with the rather single-threaded AutoCAD, the differences are quite small, only the Ryzen 3 1200 can save a little more because of the significantly lower clock.
Only at larger loads do the larger Ryzen models move away a bit, whereby the Ryzen 3 1200 is again the most economical CPU and works closer to the Sweet Spot due to the very low clock speed.
The Ororloop is similar, with the Intel Core i5-7400 being slightly more economical for the first time. However, the differences are marginal.
Intermediate conclusion
The image we have already received in the previous Ryzen reviews has been confirmed and condensed once again. The fact that the Ryzen 3 models are not significantly more economical in the loadless and partial load range leaves two conclusions in the end: First, the chip quality is not so much worse in the end, that it necessarily results in a lower efficiency and thus also a higher power consumption. Secondly, the deactivation of sub-areas does not bring any real increase in efficiency, which rather suggests a permanent supply of power to the areas deactivated ex works.
The power consumption values of all Ryzen CPUs tested so far are acceptable to good and – except for the almost loadless condition – are very good in the race when compared with equivalent Intel CPUs. The efficiency is not really worse, as long as one can assume that Ryzen is optimally operated by the respective software (including the operating system).
- 1 - Einführung und Übersicht
- 2 - 3DMark, VRMark
- 3 - AotS: Escalation, Battlefield 1
- 4 - GTA V, Hitman (2016)
- 5 - Shadow of Mordor, Project Cars
- 6 - Far Cry Primal, Rise of the Tomb Raider
- 7 - The Witcher 3, Civilization VI
- 8 - Workstation-Benchmarks
- 9 - Temperaturen und Lautstärke (Boxed Kühler)
- 10 - Leistungsaufnahme im Detail
- 11 - Zusammenfassung und Fazit
Kommentieren