AMD EPYC 7H12 vs AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G and AMD EPYC 7H12 occupy opposite ends of the processor spectrum, yet both sit at the 71st percentile in the benchmark database. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is a 4-core desktop chip on AMD Socket AM5, while the EPYC 7H12 is a 64-core server processor on Socket SP3. Their average benchmark scores are remarkably close — 17278 for the desktop part versus 17120 for the server chip — but that similarity ends the moment you look at workload-specific results. The data shows two chips designed for entirely different jobs, and the benchmark results make those roles unmistakable.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 7H12 wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the database, and it does so by a nearly uniform margin. Across all six Cinebench tests — R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core — the EPYC 7H12 beats the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G by approximately 79%. The exact deltas are -79.1% or -79.2% in every case, meaning the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G scores roughly one-fifth of the EPYC 7H12’s output on each test.

The multi-core gap is the most dramatic. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7H12 scores 59188 against the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G’s 12359. That is a 4.8x difference in raw throughput. The R20 multi-core test tells the same story: 24858 for the EPYC versus 5190 for the Ryzen. Even in R15 multi-core, which is a lighter workload, the gap remains consistent — 5965 versus 1245. The EPYC 7H12’s 64 cores and 128 threads simply overwhelm the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G’s 4 cores and 8 threads in anything parallel.

Single-core results follow the same pattern, though the magnitude is surprising. The EPYC 7H12 scores 8355 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G manages 1744. That is still a 79.1% delta in the EPYC’s favor. The same holds in R20 single-core (3509 versus 732) and R15 single-core (842 versus 175). The EPYC 7H12’s lower clock speeds — 2.60 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost — are more than offset by its architectural efficiency and massive cache. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G’s 4.90 GHz boost clock cannot overcome the EPYC’s 256 MB of shared L3 cache.

Looking at the nearest rivals puts these scores in context. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G’s average score of 17278 places it just 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i5-12450H and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core i5-11400F. The EPYC 7H12’s average of 17120 is 0.3% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U and 0.3% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7573X. Both chips are mid-pack performers in the aggregate, but that is where the similarity ends. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G’s aggregate is built on strong single-threaded results, while the EPYC 7H12’s aggregate is carried by its multi-threaded dominance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations of AMD’s Zen architecture. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G uses Zen 4 on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the Phoenix2 codename. The EPYC 7H12 uses Zen 2 on a 7 nm TSMC process, with the Rome codename. This generational gap shows in transistor density: the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G packs 20,900 million transistors into a 137 mm² die, while the EPYC 7H12 fits 3,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die. The newer process node gives the desktop chip a significant density advantage.

Core counts could not be more different. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has 4 cores and 8 threads. The EPYC 7H12 has 64 cores and 128 threads — a 16x increase in cores and threads. Cache configurations follow the same trajectory. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The EPYC 7H12 has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3. That 256 MB L3 cache is 32 times larger than the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G’s entire L3 allocation.

Memory support is a fundamental split. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G uses DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The EPYC 7H12 uses DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite using older memory technology, the EPYC 7H12 delivers 2.5x the memory bandwidth thanks to its eight-channel configuration. Both chips support ECC memory, which is expected given their respective markets. PCIe support also differs: the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes from the CPU, while the EPYC 7H12 offers Gen 4 without a lane count specified in the data.

The integrated graphics situation is one-sided. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G includes a Radeon 740M iGPU, while the EPYC 7H12 has no integrated graphics at all. This is a meaningful difference for desktop users who want a system without a discrete GPU, but irrelevant for server workloads. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is also a desktop-market part with a 65 W TDP, while the EPYC 7H12 is a server/workstation part with a 280 W TDP. Both have locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7H12 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, so its advantages are clear and comprehensive. Any multi-threaded workload that can scale across cores will massively favor the EPYC 7H12. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 59188 is nearly five times the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G’s 12359. That translates directly to rendering, scientific computing, virtualization, and database workloads. The 128 threads and 256 MB of L3 cache make it a server-class workhorse. The eight-channel DDR4 memory bus delivering 204.8 GB/s further reinforces this position for memory-bandwidth-hungry tasks.

The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G does not win a single head-to-head benchmark, so its case rests on what the data does not show in the direct comparison. Its 4.90 GHz boost clock is the highest clock speed between the two, and its 4 nm Zen 4 architecture is significantly newer. The Radeon 740M integrated graphics give it a capability the EPYC 7H12 lacks entirely. For a desktop user, the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G provides a complete platform on AMD Socket AM5 with DDR5 support. Its average benchmark score of 17278 is actually 0.9% higher than the EPYC 7H12’s 17120, which suggests that in mixed or lightly threaded workloads, the newer desktop chip holds its own despite the core-count deficit.

The passmark results for the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G — which the EPYC 7H12 does not have — show where the desktop part excels. It scores 3550 in single-thread performance, 37292 in integer math, and 23374 in floating-point math. The EPYC 7H12 has no passmark entries in the data, so these numbers are only useful as a reference point for the Ryzen’s capabilities. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G’s 71st percentile ranking among all CPUs is identical to the EPYC 7H12’s, which reflects how far desktop processors have come.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 7H12 has 64 cores and 128 threads. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: How much faster is the EPYC 7H12 in multi-core workloads?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7H12 scores 59188 versus the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G’s 12359. The delta is -79.1%, meaning the Ryzen scores about 21% of the EPYC’s result.

Q: Does either chip have integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G includes a Radeon 740M integrated GPU. The AMD EPYC 7H12 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What memory types do they support?

A: The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC 7H12 supports DDR4 with an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has an average benchmark score of 17278, while the EPYC 7H12 scores 17120. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is 0.9% higher on average.

Q: What are their socket types?

A: The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G uses AMD Socket AM5. The EPYC 7H12 uses AMD Socket SP3.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification category. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the EPYC 7H12 has 64 cores and 128 threads. Base clocks are 3.40 GHz for the Ryzen and 2.60 GHz for the EPYC. Boost clocks are 4.90 GHz and 3.30 GHz, respectively. TDPs are 65 W versus 280 W. The Ryzen uses AMD Socket AM5; the EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3.

Architecture is Zen 4 on a 4 nm TSMC process for the Ryzen, versus Zen 2 on a 7 nm TSMC process for the EPYC. Transistor counts are 20,900 million versus 3,800 million, and die sizes are 137 mm² versus 74 mm². Cache hierarchies differ substantially: the Ryzen has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. The EPYC has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 256 MB shared L3.

Memory support is DDR5 dual-channel for the Ryzen with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth, versus DDR4 eight-channel for the EPYC with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe is Gen 4 for both, but the Ryzen specifies 14 lanes from the CPU while the EPYC does not specify a lane count. The Ryzen includes a Radeon 740M iGPU; the EPYC has none. Market segments are Desktop for the Ryzen and Server/Workstation for the EPYC. Release dates are 2024-04-15 for the Ryzen and 2019-09-17 for the EPYC.

The Verdict

The data points to one processor for massively parallel server workloads and another for general desktop use. The AMD EPYC 7H12 is the clear choice for any workload that scales across cores. Its 64 cores and 128 threads deliver 59188 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 4.8x the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G’s result. The 256 MB L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth make it a server powerhouse. The 280 W TDP and SP3 socket are appropriate for that role.

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is the right pick for a desktop system where single-threaded responsiveness, integrated graphics, and modern platform features matter. Its 4.90 GHz boost clock is the highest of the two, and the Radeon 740M iGPU eliminates the need for a discrete graphics card. The 4 nm Zen 4 architecture is two generations newer than the EPYC’s Zen 2. Its average benchmark score of 17278 edges out the EPYC 7H12’s 17120, confirming that it is not outclassed in general-purpose computing.

The 79% delta in every head-to-head benchmark makes the comparison one-sided, but that is a reflection of intended use. No desktop user should buy a 280 W server chip, and no server administrator should deploy a 4-core desktop part. The EPYC 7H12 wins every benchmark in this comparison because it is designed to. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G wins the desktop platform argument because it is the only one of the two that is a desktop platform. Choose the EPYC 7H12 for cores, threads, and memory bandwidth. Choose the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G for clock speed, integrated graphics, and a modern AM5 platform.