AMD Ryzen 7 3700X Is on Sale for an All-Time Low $260

By Paul Alcorn
published

8 cores, 16 threads, lowest price yet

(Image credit: Micro Center)

AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X CPU is selling for $260 at Micro Center (opens in new tab), which is the lowest price we've ever seen for this CPU.  

Powered by Zen 2, AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X features eight 7nm CPU cores (opens in new tab)and 16 threads (opens in new tab). Those cores run at a 3.9 GHz base clock (opens in new tab) and boost up to 4.4 GHz within the chip's 65W TDP envelope.

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X : was $329, now $260 @ Micro Center (opens in new tab)

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X : was $329, now $260 @ Micro Center (opens in new tab)
The Ryzen 7 3700X boasts AMD's Zen 2 microarchitecture paired with the 7nm process. Our testing shows it offers tremendous performance across eight cores and 16 threads. 

View Deal (opens in new tab)

In our AMD Ryzen 3700X review (opens in new tab), we determined that the returned gaming frame rates were around 20% higher than its direct predecessor, the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X (opens in new tab). This discounted CPU also provided great productivity performance, often matching or exceeding its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-9700K (opens in new tab). Plus, on rendering and encoding tasks, AMD's chip usually came out ahead.

The Ryzen 7 3700X is also on sale at Amazon for $274.49 (opens in new tab).

Paul Alcorn
Paul Alcorn
Deputy Managing Editor

Paul Alcorn is the Deputy Managing Editor for Tom's Hardware US. He writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage and enterprise hardware.

Topics
Deal
12 Comments Comment from the forums
  • WildCard999
    Excellent price, may be about that time to head to Microcenter to replace my 2600.
    Reply
  • InvalidError
    Got to make room on store shelves for the 3600-3800 XT.
    Reply
  • gg83
    This makes the i5-10600 less appealing right? Especially with cheaper mother boards.
    Reply
  • Makaveli
    The 3700X is listed with 3800X base clocks.

    8 Cores, 16 Threads @3.6GHz / 4.4Ghz
    vs
    8 Cores, 16 Threads @3.9GHz / 4.5Ghz
    Reply
  • purepremiumpulp
    gg83 said:
    This makes the i5-10600 less appealing right? Especially with cheaper mother boards.
    I just got a b450 tomahawk max for $114 this week to go with a $274 3700X
    Reply
  • watzupken
    gg83 said:
    This makes the i5-10600 less appealing right? Especially with cheaper mother boards.
    Yes for me. The 3700X is an octa core processor, and unlocked in case you want to squeeze more performance with a budget B450 board. The i5 10600 is a hexa core processor and locked from overclocking, which unfortunately at this point can only be bundled with a Z490 board (since the budget boards are still not available for sale). Between the 2, you need to also consider the bundled cooler, AMD Wraith Prism vs the super cost cut Intel stock cooler. The latter means you likely need to invest more money to get a better cooler to allow the processor to actually run at the upper end of the boost clockspeed. Performance wise, Intel is pretty much faster in games and not by much if you go above 1080p. In all other metrics, AMD pretty much outperforms it (except for a few single core focused scenarios). So from an all rounder standpoint, I feel AMD is the better deal.
    Reply
  • mdd1963
    Darn good price!!!!!!

    Were I currently shopping...I'd hit it!
    Reply
  • cykaqE
    watzupken said:
    Yes for me. The 3700X is an octa core processor, and unlocked in case you want to squeeze more performance with a budget B450 board. The i5 10600 is a hexa core processor and locked from overclocking, which unfortunately at this point can only be bundled with a Z490 board (since the budget boards are still not available for sale). Between the 2, you need to also consider the bundled cooler, AMD Wraith Prism vs the super cost cut Intel stock cooler. The latter means you likely need to invest more money to get a better cooler to allow the processor to actually run at the upper end of the boost clockspeed. Performance wise, Intel is pretty much faster in games and not by much if you go above 1080p. In all other metrics, AMD pretty much outperforms it (except for a few single core focused scenarios). So from an all rounder standpoint, I feel AMD is the better deal.
    Basically what this means for me is that if you are looking to get the best bang for your buck, AMD is your choice in this scenario. However, if you don't mind spending more money to get higher single-core performance, Intel is your choice. I can only see the 10600 or 10600k being a choice for gamers wanting a high-end gaming PC.
    Reply
  • JaSoN_cRuZe
    Imagine the price drop when Zen 3 hits the shelves, 8 cores will soon be replacing all mid range PC builds which are currently build on 6 cores.

    I will be comparing the performance of the alleged 4600 vs 3700x to see if it is really worth the glory before deciding between Zen 2 or Zen 3
    Reply
  • drivinfast247
    cykaqE said:
    Basically what this means for me is that if you are looking to get the best bang for your buck, AMD is your choice in this scenario. However, if you don't mind spending more money to get higher single-core performance, Intel is your choice. I can only see the 10600 or 10600k being a choice for gamers wanting a high-end gaming PC.
    More like a few more FPS while playing a few games at 1080p low settings.
    Reply