AMD EPYC 7282 vs AMD Ryzen 3 3200G Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a complete sweep for the AMD EPYC 7282 across every shared test in the database, with the Ryzen 3 3200G failing to secure a single head-to-head victory. The most striking pattern is the consistency of the margin: across both Cinebench versions and both single-core and multi-core workloads, the EPYC 7282 leads by margins ranging from 330.1% to 333.3%. This uniformity suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7282 scores 2581 against the Ryzen 3 3200G's 600, a delta of 330.2%. The single-core R15 result tells a similar story: 364 versus 84, a 333.3% advantage. Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC 7282 produces 10758 multi-core points compared to 2501, and 1518 single-core points versus 352, deltas of 330.1% and 331.3% respectively. The latest R23 run shows the EPYC 7282 at 25616 multi-core and 3616 single-core, while the Ryzen 3 3200G manages 5955 and 840, representing 330.2% and 330.5% leads.

What is particularly notable is that the EPYC 7282's single-core advantage is nearly as large as its multi-core advantage. This is unexpected given the Ryzen 3 3200G's higher base and boost clocks, which should theoretically narrow the gap in lightly threaded workloads. The data indicates that the EPYC 7282's Zen 2 architecture delivers substantially higher instructions per clock than the Zen+ based Ryzen 3 3200G, outweighing the clock frequency disadvantage.

The aggregate benchmark picture reinforces this divide. The EPYC 7282 holds an average benchmark score of 7409, placing it in the 63rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-9990XE at 7415 (0.1% ahead) and the Intel Core i9-9980XE at 7398 (0.2% behind), showing the EPYC 7282 sits in a cluster of high-end HEDT and workstation parts. The Ryzen 3 3200G, by contrast, averages 6931, also at the 63rd percentile, but its nearest rivals are a different class entirely: the Intel Core i9-9960X at 6938 (0.1% ahead), the Intel Core i5-3470 at 6906 (0.4% behind), and the Intel Pentium Gold G6400 at 6969 (0.5% ahead). Both CPUs land at the same percentile rank, but the EPYC 7282's raw average score is 478 points higher, a gap that reflects the very different performance tiers these chips occupy despite their identical percentile placement.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core rendering workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7282 wins decisively in every multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core it scores 25616 versus 5955, a 330.2% advantage. The R20 multi-core result shows 10758 against 2501, a 330.1% lead, and R15 multi-core shows 2581 versus 600, a 330.2% margin.

Q: Does the Ryzen 3 3200G have any single-threaded advantage?

A: No. Despite having a higher base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.00 GHz, the Ryzen 3 3200G loses every single-core benchmark. The EPYC 7282 leads by 333.3% in Cinebench R15 single-core, 331.3% in R20 single-core, and 330.5% in R23 single-core.

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The EPYC 7282's average score of 7409 places it within 0.2% of the Intel Core i9-9980XE and 0.1% behind the Intel Core i9-9990XE. The Ryzen 3 3200G's average of 6931 puts it within 0.4% of the Intel Core i5-3470 and 0.1% behind the Intel Core i9-9960X.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7282 supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G does not. This aligns with the EPYC's server/workstation market segment.

Q: What are the memory channel configurations?

A: The EPYC 7282 uses an eight-channel memory bus with a recorded memory bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s. The Ryzen 3 3200G uses a dual-channel memory bus, and the database does not record a memory bandwidth figure for it.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Ryzen 3 3200G includes Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics. The EPYC 7282 has no integrated graphics, which is typical for its server/workstation segment.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent different generations of AMD design philosophy. The EPYC 7282 is built on the Zen 2 architecture with the codename Rome, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Ryzen 3 3200G uses the older Zen+ architecture with the codename Picasso, manufactured on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This process node difference, 7 nm versus 12 nm, is a primary driver of the performance disparity observed in the benchmarks.

The transistor counts and die sizes tell a complementary story. The EPYC 7282 packs 7,600 million transistors across a dual-die configuration of 2x 74 mm². The Ryzen 3 3200G contains 4,940 million transistors on a single 210 mm² die. The EPYC's chiplet design, enabled by Zen 2, allows it to scale transistor density and core count more efficiently than the monolithic Picasso die.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The EPYC 7282 allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 32 MB of L3 per die and a total of 64 MB of L3. The Ryzen 3 3200G provides 96 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, but only 4 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's 64 MB total L3 is 16 times larger than the Ryzen 3 3200G's 4 MB, a factor that heavily influences multi-threaded and cache-sensitive workloads.

The PCI Express implementation also marks a generational divide. The EPYC 7282 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes available from the CPU alone. The Ryzen 3 3200G is limited to PCIe Gen 3. This places the EPYC 7282 in a different connectivity class, appropriate for server platforms with many expansion devices.

Both processors support DDR4 memory, but the memory controllers differ. The EPYC 7282 operates an eight-channel memory bus with 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Ryzen 3 3200G runs a dual-channel configuration with no bandwidth figure recorded. The EPYC supports ECC memory; the Ryzen 3 3200G does not. The EPYC 7282 also lacks integrated graphics, whereas the Ryzen 3 3200G includes Radeon Vega 8.

The market segments reflect these architectural choices. The EPYC 7282 targets server and workstation deployments, while the Ryzen 3 3200G is a desktop part. The EPYC 7282 is socketed for AMD Socket SP3, the Ryzen 3 3200G for AMD Socket AM4. The EPYC's multiplier is locked, while the Ryzen 3 3200G has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ in the database record.

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7282 | AMD Ryzen 3 3200G |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 16 | 4 |

| Threads | 32 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.80 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 120 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | AMD Socket AM4 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Zen+ |

| Codename | Rome | Picasso |

| Generation | EPYC (Zen 2 (Rome)) | Ryzen 3 (Zen+ (Picasso)) |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 7,600 million | 4,940 million |

| Die Size | 2x 74 mm² | 210 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (per die), 64 MB total | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 85.3 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3 |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Radeon Vega 8 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Launch MSRP | $650 | Not recorded |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

The Verdict

The benchmark data offers no ambiguity: the AMD EPYC 7282 outperforms the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G in every measured category. Across all six shared Cinebench tests, the EPYC 7282 leads by margins between 330.1% and 333.3%. The only recorded Ryzen 3 3200G wins come in the 3DMark and PassMark suites, but those tests are not shared with the EPYC 7282 in the head-to-head dataset, so no direct comparison exists for those workloads.

The EPYC 7282 is the clear choice for workloads that demand raw computational throughput. Its 16 cores and 32 threads, combined with 64 MB of L3 cache and eight-channel memory bandwidth, position it for server and workstation tasks where parallel scaling is the priority. Its 120 W TDP and server socket reflect a platform designed for sustained heavy loads rather than power efficiency or compact desktop builds.

The Ryzen 3 3200G serves a fundamentally different purpose. Its 65 W TDP, unlocked multiplier, and integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics make it a desktop-oriented processor for systems where a discrete GPU is not required. Its higher base and boost clocks, 3.60 GHz and 4.00 GHz respectively, do not translate into benchmark wins against the EPYC 7282, but they matter in the context of its own platform class. The database places it in the same 63rd percentile as the EPYC 7282, though with a lower average score of 6931 versus 7409.

The deciding factor is market segment. A buyer building a server or workstation should select the EPYC 7282, which offers a launch MSRP of $650 and delivers more than four times the multi-threaded performance of the Ryzen 3 3200G in Cinebench tests. A desktop user seeking a processor with integrated graphics, an unlocked multiplier, and lower power consumption should select the Ryzen 3 3200G, accepting that its computational ceiling is far below the EPYC 7282's. The data does not support any scenario where the Ryzen 3 3200G outperforms the EPYC 7282 in the shared Cinebench workloads, so the choice comes down to platform requirements rather than performance expectations.