AMD EPYC 9374F vs AMD Ryzen 3 8300G Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data draws a clear line between these two processors. The AMD EPYC 9374F wins every head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database, taking all six Cinebench tests across the R15, R20, and R23 versions. The AMD Ryzen 3 8300G does not record a single win in the direct comparison set. That does not make the Ryzen 3 a poor processor in absolute terms, it simply occupies a different performance class.

The EPYC 9374F is built for sustained multi-threaded throughput. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 69,707 is the highest recorded figure in the comparison, and it maintains that dominance across every multi-core test. The Ryzen 3 8300G, with its four cores and eight threads, delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12,217, which is a capable result for a desktop part but falls far behind the 32-core EPYC part. The use case split is straightforward: the EPYC 9374F belongs in server and workstation environments where parallel workloads dominate, while the Ryzen 3 8300G suits desktop tasks that do not scale across dozens of cores.

Single-core performance tells a similar story, though the margin narrows slightly. The EPYC 9374F posts a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 9,841 compared to 1,724 for the Ryzen 3 8300G. That is a 470.8% advantage in the R23 single-core test, which reflects the EPYC's higher base clock of 3.85 GHz and its server-grade design. The Ryzen 3 8300G does have a higher boost clock at 4.90 GHz, but its lower base clock of 3.40 GHz and smaller cache hierarchy limit its peak single-thread output relative to the EPYC part.

The Ryzen 3 8300G does show strengths outside the Cinebench suite in the broader database. Its Passmark single-thread score of 3,778 and integer math score of 40,534 indicate solid desktop responsiveness, while the EPYC 9374F does not have Passmark records in the database for comparison. For users prioritizing everyday desktop tasks, the Ryzen 3 8300G provides a balanced package with integrated graphics, which the EPYC part lacks entirely. The EPYC 9374F has no integrated graphics, so any system built around it requires a discrete GPU, while the Ryzen 3 8300G includes Radeon 740M graphics.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use AMD's Zen 4 architecture, but they diverge sharply in every other architectural dimension. The EPYC 9374F is part of the EPYC 9004 series, codenamed Genoa, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 32 cores and 64 threads, with a transistor count of 52,560 million spread across 8 dies, each measuring 72 mm². The Ryzen 3 8300G belongs to the 8000 series, codenamed Phoenix2, built on a newer 4 nm process at TSMC. It uses a single 137 mm² die with 20,900 million transistors and offers 4 cores and 8 threads.

The cache hierarchy represents one of the largest architectural divides. The EPYC 9374F provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen 3 8300G matches the per-core L1 and L2 cache sizes at 64 KB and 1 MB respectively, but its shared L3 cache is only 8 MB. That 32x difference in L3 capacity directly influences the EPYC's ability to handle large working sets in server workloads.

Memory architecture differs just as dramatically. The EPYC 9374F uses a twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus with a peak bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s. The Ryzen 3 8300G uses a dual-channel DDR5 bus with a peak bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, which matters for reliability-sensitive workloads, though the EPYC's twelve-channel implementation provides far more aggregate throughput. PCIe connectivity also separates the two: the EPYC 9374F offers Gen 5 with 128 lanes from the CPU, while the Ryzen 3 8300G offers Gen 4 with 14 lanes from the CPU. That makes the EPYC part suitable for large-scale storage and accelerator fabrics, while the Ryzen 3 targets mainstream desktop expansion.

The process node difference is notable: the Ryzen 3 8300G uses a 4 nm process versus 5 nm for the EPYC 9374F. Despite the smaller node, the Ryzen 3 uses fewer transistors and a single die, reflecting its lower core count and simpler design. The EPYC's 8-die configuration with 52,560 million transistors is a chiplet-based server design optimized for scalability, while the Ryzen 3's monolithic 137 mm² die with 20,900 million transistors is a mainstream desktop part. The EPYC 9374F uses Socket SP5, while the Ryzen 3 8300G uses Socket AM5, and the two are not interchangeable in any system configuration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a consistent and overwhelming pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 9374F scores 7,026 against 1,231 for the Ryzen 3 8300G, a delta of 470.8%. The R15 single-core test shows the EPYC at 991 versus 173, a 472.8% advantage. These margins are nearly identical across all six tests, which suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific.

Cinebench R20 multi-core records 29,276 for the EPYC 9374F and 5,131 for the Ryzen 3 8300G, a 470.6% delta. The R20 single-core test shows 4,133 versus 724, a 470.9% gap. Cinebench R23 multi-core delivers the largest absolute margin: 69,707 for the EPYC against 12,217 for the Ryzen 3, again a 470.6% delta. The R23 single-core test closes the set at 9,841 versus 1,724, a 470.8% advantage.

The consistency of these deltas, all hovering near 470%, indicates that the EPYC 9374F's advantage scales uniformly across both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench workloads. That is unusual, as many high-core-count processors show a smaller single-core advantage. The EPYC's 3.85 GHz base clock, combined with its Zen 4 architecture and massive 256 MB L3 cache, allows it to outperform the Ryzen 3 even in single-thread tests despite the Ryzen 3's higher 4.90 GHz boost clock. The Ryzen 3 8300G's lower base clock of 3.40 GHz and smaller 8 MB L3 cache likely contribute to this gap.

In the broader database context, the EPYC 9374F has an average benchmark score of 17,693 and sits at the 71st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-1255U with an average score of 17,656 and a delta of 0.2%, the Intel Core i3-13100F at 17,653 with a 0.2% delta, and the Intel Core i3-14100T at 17,648 with a 0.3% delta. The Ryzen 3 8300G has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 18,169 and sits at the 72nd percentile. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U at 18,176 with a 0% delta, the Intel Core i7-1365U at 18,177 with a 0% delta, and the Intel Core i7-9700 at 18,180 with a -0.1% delta.

These percentile figures reveal that the EPYC 9374F and Ryzen 3 8300G occupy similar positions in the overall CPU distribution, despite their massive head-to-head differences. The EPYC's average score of 17,693 places it just behind the Ryzen 3's 18,169, which is a consequence of the different benchmark suites included in each processor's record. The EPYC's data set includes only Cinebench and Geekbench tests, while the Ryzen 3 includes a broader Passmark suite that boosts its average.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9374F has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 8300G has 4 cores and 8 threads. That is an 8x difference in core count and thread count.

Q: How large is the L3 cache difference?

A: The EPYC 9374F has 256 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ryzen 3 8300G has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC's L3 cache is 32 times larger.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD EPYC 9374F and the AMD Ryzen 3 8300G support ECC memory. However, the EPYC uses a twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ryzen 3 uses a dual-channel bus with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 8300G includes Radeon 740M integrated graphics. The AMD EPYC 9374F has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete graphics card.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The EPYC 9374F is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the Ryzen 3 8300G is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Ryzen 3 uses a smaller process node.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC 9374F has an average benchmark score of 17,693 and sits at the 71st percentile of all CPUs. The Ryzen 3 8300G has an average benchmark score of 18,169 and sits at the 72nd percentile. The Ryzen 3 has a slightly higher average score despite losing all head-to-head Cinebench tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field recorded in the database. Core count: 32 for the EPYC 9374F versus 4 for the Ryzen 3 8300G. Thread count: 64 versus 8. Base clock: 3.85 GHz for the EPYC versus 3.40 GHz for the Ryzen 3. Boost clock: 4.30 GHz for the EPYC versus 4.90 GHz for the Ryzen 3, giving the Ryzen 3 a higher peak frequency. Thermal design power: 320 watts for the EPYC versus 65 watts for the Ryzen 3, a 255-watt difference that reflects the EPYC's server power envelope.

Socket: The EPYC 9374F uses AMD Socket SP5, while the Ryzen 3 8300G uses AMD Socket AM5. Architecture: both use Zen 4, but the EPYC is codenamed Genoa while the Ryzen 3 is codenamed Phoenix2. Process node: 5 nm for the EPYC versus 4 nm for the Ryzen 3, both fabricated by TSMC. Transistor count: 52,560 million for the EPYC versus 20,900 million for the Ryzen 3. Die size: the EPYC uses 8 dies of 72 mm² each, while the Ryzen 3 uses a single 137 mm² die.

Cache: both have 64 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, but L3 differs at 256 MB shared for the EPYC versus 8 MB shared for the Ryzen 3. Memory support: both support DDR5, but the EPYC uses a twelve-channel bus with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ryzen 3 uses a dual-channel bus with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe: the EPYC offers Gen 5 with 128 lanes from the CPU, while the Ryzen 3 offers Gen 4 with 14 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics: the EPYC has none, while the Ryzen 3 includes Radeon 740M. The launch MSRP for the EPYC 9374F is $4850, and the launch MSRP for the Ryzen 3 8300G is $176.