AMD EPYC 9274F vs AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE and the AMD EPYC 9274F occupy opposite ends of the processor spectrum, yet both are built on the same fundamental Zen 4 architecture. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE is a 4-core, 8-thread desktop part with a 35 W TDP, while the EPYC 9274F is a 24-core, 48-thread server processor with a 320 W TDP. The database records for these two CPUs show a complete sweep in benchmark results, with the EPYC 9274F winning all six head-to-head comparisons. This analysis walks through the recorded measurements, specification gaps, and architectural choices that separate a compact desktop chip from a dual-socket server workhorse.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data shows a consistent pattern of dominance for the AMD EPYC 9274F across all six recorded Cinebench tests. The largest relative gap appears in the multi-core tests, where the EPYC 9274F outperforms the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE by 80.1% in every measured multi-core workload. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 9274F scores 6338 against 1260 for the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE. The R20 multi-core test shows 26411 versus 5254, and R23 multi-core records 62884 versus 12511. These deltas are identical at 80.1%, reflecting the massive thread-count advantage of the 24-core EPYC part over the 4-core desktop processor.

Single-core results follow the same pattern, though the absolute scores are lower. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the EPYC 9274F scores 894 versus 177 for the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE, a difference of 80.2%. The R20 single-core test shows 3728 versus 741, an 80.1% gap, and R23 single-core records 8877 versus 1766, again an 80.1% difference. The consistency of these deltas across both single and multi-core tests indicates that the EPYC 9274F holds an advantage in raw per-core performance as well as in total throughput. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has a higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz compared to the EPYC 9274F's 4.30 GHz, yet the EPYC still wins every single-core test by a wide margin, suggesting that its larger L3 cache and higher base clock of 4.05 GHz contribute to superior sustained single-thread performance in the recorded benchmarks.

The database also shows the average benchmark scores for both processors. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has an average benchmark score of 18505, while the EPYC 9274F records 18189. This places the Ryzen part slightly ahead in the overall average, despite losing every head-to-head Cinebench test. The explanation lies in the fact that the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has additional PassMark benchmarks recorded in the database, including data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single thread tests. The EPYC 9274F only has Cinebench entries. The Ryzen's average is boosted by its PassMark single-thread score of 3828 and its multithread score of 14403, among others. The EPYC 9274F's average of 18189 is computed solely from its six Cinebench results, which are all substantially higher than the Ryzen's corresponding scores.

Both processors sit at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs in the database. This means that despite the EPYC 9274F winning all head-to-head tests, both parts rank at the same percentile level when compared to the broader universe of recorded processors. The nearest rivals for the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE include the Intel Core i5-13420H with an average score of 18511 and a delta of 0%, the Intel Core i3-14100F at 18519 with a delta of -0.1%, the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18380 with a delta of 0.7%, and the Intel Core 7 360 at 18374 with a delta of 0.7%. The EPYC 9274F's nearest rivals are the Intel Core 5 315 at 18188 with a delta of 0%, the Intel Core i7-9700 at 18180 with a delta of 0%, the Intel Core i7-1365U at 18177 with a delta of 0.1%, and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U at 18176 with a delta of 0.1%. These rival comparisons show that the EPYC 9274F's average score is nearly identical to several consumer and mobile processors, which is notable given its server-class specifications.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the AMD EPYC 9274F is the superior processor in every recorded head-to-head benchmark. Any workload measured by Cinebench R15, R20, or R23, whether single-core or multi-core, will see an 80% or greater performance advantage with the EPYC 9274F. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE does not win a single comparison in the head-to-head table. For users who rely on Cinebench-style rendering or similar compute workloads, the EPYC 9274F is the only choice from this pairing.

The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE, however, offers its own advantages that are not captured in the head-to-head Cinebench tests. The database records show it has a 35 W TDP versus the EPYC 9274F's 320 W, making it suitable for compact desktop systems with modest cooling requirements. It also includes integrated Radeon 740M graphics, while the EPYC 9274F has no integrated graphics. The Ryzen part uses the AMD Socket AM5 platform, while the EPYC 9274F requires the AMD Socket SP5 server platform. These platform differences mean the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE targets desktop users who need a low-power processor with built-in graphics, while the EPYC 9274F targets server and workstation deployments where raw multi-core throughput and massive memory bandwidth are paramount.

The average benchmark scores place the two processors nearly at parity, with the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE at 18505 and the EPYC 9274F at 18189, a difference of roughly 316 points. This suggests that for a mix of workloads beyond Cinebench, including the PassMark tests recorded for the Ryzen part, the two processors are much closer in overall capability. The EPYC 9274F's 24 cores and 48 threads provide immense parallel processing power, but the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE's higher boost clock and efficient architecture deliver competitive single-thread performance in the PassMark single-thread test, where it scores 3828. The EPYC 9274F does not have a recorded PassMark single-thread score, so a direct comparison in that metric is not possible.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9274F has 24 cores and 48 threads. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for both processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has a TDP of 35 W. The AMD EPYC 9274F has a TDP of 320 W.

Q: Which processor supports more memory channels?

A: The AMD EPYC 9274F supports twelve-channel memory, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE supports dual-channel memory. Both support DDR5 and ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The AMD EPYC 9274F has a memory bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE includes integrated Radeon 740M graphics. The AMD EPYC 9274F does not have integrated graphics.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has an average benchmark score of 18505. The AMD EPYC 9274F has an average benchmark score of 18189.

Specification Differences

The core count is the most obvious difference. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9274F has 24 cores and 48 threads. Clock speeds also differ significantly. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The EPYC 9274F has a higher base clock of 4.05 GHz but a lower boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The TDP is another major divider, with the Ryzen part rated at 35 W and the EPYC part at 320 W.

Sockets are entirely different. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE uses AMD Socket AM5, while the EPYC 9274F uses AMD Socket SP5. The memory bus differs, with the Ryzen supporting dual-channel and the EPYC supporting twelve-channel. Memory bandwidth follows suit, with the Ryzen at 83.2 GB/s and the EPYC at 460.8 GB/s. PCIe support also diverges: the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE supports Gen 4 with 14 lanes (CPU only), while the EPYC 9274F supports Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The Ryzen includes integrated Radeon 740M graphics, whereas the EPYC has no integrated graphics. The market segment is listed as Desktop for the Ryzen and Server/Workstation for the EPYC. The EPYC 9274F has a launch MSRP of $3060, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on AMD's Zen 4 architecture, but they use different codenames and process nodes. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE uses the Phoenix2 codename and is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The AMD EPYC 9274F uses the Genoa codename and is fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The transistor counts reflect the scale difference. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has 20,900 million transistors on a die size of 137 mm². The EPYC 9274F has 52,560 million transistors spread across 8 dies, each measuring 72 mm².

Cache hierarchies are similar at the L1 and L2 levels, with both processors offering 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache is where the EPYC 9274F pulls far ahead. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the EPYC 9274F has 256 MB of shared L3 cache. This 32-fold difference in L3 capacity is a key factor in the EPYC's superior single-core benchmark results, despite its lower boost clock. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE belongs to the 8000 series and the Ryzen 3 generation with Zen 4 (Phoenix) architecture, while the EPYC 9274F belongs to the EPYC 9004 series and the EPYC generation with Zen 4 (Genoa) architecture.

The production status for both is listed as Active. Release dates differ, with the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE released on 2024-04-15 and the EPYC 9274F released on 2022-11-09. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The part numbers are 100-000001189 for the Ryzen and 100-100000794 for the EPYC.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9274F wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark. It is the clear choice for multi-core rendering workloads, as demonstrated by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 62884 versus 12511 for the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE. The EPYC also wins single-core Cinebench tests, with an R23 single-core score of 8877 versus 1766. Its twelve-channel memory bus and 460.8 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for memory-intensive server workloads, and its 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide extensive I/O connectivity. The 256 MB L3 cache is a significant advantage for workloads that benefit from large on-chip caches.

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE wins in areas not covered by the head-to-head Cinebench tests. Its 35 W TDP makes it suitable for low-power desktop systems, and its integrated Radeon 740M graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic display scenarios. The AM5 socket gives it access to a mainstream desktop platform. In the PassMark tests recorded in the database, the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE shows strengths in specific workloads: its data compression score is 162623, data encryption is 9224, extended instructions is 12313, floating point math is 25258, integer math is 40348, multithread is 14403, physics is 857, random string sorting is 20134, and single thread is 3828. These scores, combined with its average benchmark score of 18505, which is higher than the EPYC 9274F's 18189, indicate that the Ryzen part is competitive in a broader mix of everyday computing tasks.

The choice between these two processors comes down to platform and workload. The EPYC 9274F is built for server and workstation environments where multi-core throughput, memory bandwidth, and PCIe capacity are critical. The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE is built for desktop systems where power efficiency, integrated graphics, and a mainstream socket matter more. The data does not show a single winner across all possible uses, but for any Cinebench-based rendering workload, the EPYC 9274F is decisively ahead.