AMD FX-8350 vs AMD Ryzen 3 1300X Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X and AMD FX-8350 represent two distinct eras of AMD desktop processors, separated by a fundamental shift in architecture philosophy. The Ryzen 3 1300X is a 4-core, 4-thread part built on the modern Zen architecture, while the FX-8350 is an 8-core, 8-thread processor from the Piledriver generation. Benchmark data shows the Ryzen 3 1300X holds a decisive advantage in every recorded head-to-head test, despite the FX-8350 having double the core count and higher clock speeds. The Ryzen 3 1300X achieves a 22.5% higher multi-core score and a 95.6% higher single-core score in Geekbench comparisons, making the architectural gap between these two designs unmistakable.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 3 1300X wins both recorded head-to-head comparisons, giving it a 2-0 victory in the wins column. The FX-8350 does not win any of the shared benchmarks. In Geekbench multi-core testing, the Ryzen 3 1300X scores 3126 against the FX-8350's 2551, a 22.5% advantage. This result is particularly telling because the FX-8350 has twice the physical cores and threads, yet still trails by a substantial margin. The Ryzen 3 1300X's superiority is even more pronounced in single-core performance, where it scores 1101 versus 563, a 95.6% difference—essentially double the performance.

The FX-8350's only theoretical advantage lies in its raw core count and higher base clock of 4.00 GHz versus 3.40 GHz, but the benchmark data shows these specifications do not translate into real-world wins. The Ryzen 3 1300X wins in every scenario where both processors were tested, which includes both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. For workloads that are heavily parallelized, the FX-8350's eight threads might seem appealing, but the data indicates the Ryzen 3 1300X's superior per-core efficiency more than compensates for its lower thread count. The Ryzen 3 1300X also maintains a higher average benchmark score of 1562 compared to 1557 for the FX-8350, though both sit at the 39th percentile of all CPUs.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental divide between these processors lies in their architectural origins. The Ryzen 3 1300X uses the Zen architecture on a 14 nm process node, manufactured by GlobalFoundries, while the FX-8350 uses the Piledriver architecture on a 32 nm node, also from GlobalFoundries. This process shrink alone explains much of the performance gap, as the 14 nm node allows for significantly higher transistor density and efficiency. The Ryzen 3 1300X packs 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die, whereas the FX-8350 contains only 1,200 million transistors on a larger 315 mm² die. The FX-8350's larger die with fewer transistors highlights the inefficiency of the older 32 nm process.

Cache configurations also differ substantially. The Ryzen 3 1300X features 96 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, with 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The FX-8350 has 384 KB of total L1 cache and 8 MB of L2 cache, plus 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core cache allocation on the Ryzen 3 1300X provides each core with more dedicated resources, which contributes to its superior single-threaded performance. Memory support also diverges: the Ryzen 3 1300X uses dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the FX-8350 uses dual-channel DDR3 with 29.9 GB/s. The Ryzen 3 1300X also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the FX-8350.

Platform connectivity differs as well. The Ryzen 3 1300X uses AMD Socket AM4 with PCIe Gen 3 and 16 CPU lanes, while the FX-8350 uses AMD Socket AM3+ with PCIe Gen 2. The Ryzen 3 1300X has no integrated graphics, whereas the FX-8350 can rely on chipset-based graphics on certain motherboards. Power requirements are also starkly different: the Ryzen 3 1300X has a 65 W TDP, while the FX-8350 has a 125 W TDP—nearly double the thermal envelope for a processor that performs worse in every benchmark.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench multi-core test delivers the first clear verdict. The Ryzen 3 1300X scores 3126, while the FX-8350 manages 2551. This 22.5% delta demonstrates that the Ryzen 3 1300X's four Zen cores outperform the FX-8350's eight Piledriver cores in parallel workloads. The FX-8350's additional threads cannot compensate for the architectural efficiency of Zen, which delivers significantly more instructions per clock. This result is consistent with the Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 558 for the Ryzen 3 1300X, which places it in the same performance tier as the Intel Core i5-6600T and Intel Core i3-8300, both of which have average scores of 1563 and 1564 respectively.

The single-core Geekbench test reveals an even larger gap. The Ryzen 3 1300X scores 1101, versus 563 for the FX-8350—a 95.6% advantage. This near-doubling of performance underscores the massive IPC improvement Zen brought over Piledriver. The FX-8350's higher boost clock of 4.20 GHz versus 3.70 GHz on the Ryzen 3 1300X is irrelevant when the underlying architecture is so much less efficient. The Ryzen 3 1300X also achieves a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 947 and a multi-core score of 3486, further confirming its dominance. The Geekbench single-core result of 1101 for the Ryzen 3 1300X places it in a different performance class entirely from the FX-8350, which scores just 563.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this trend. The Ryzen 3 1300X has an average score of 1562, placing it 0.1% behind the Intel Core i5-6600T and 0.1% behind the Intel Core i3-8300. The FX-8350's average of 1557 puts it on par with the Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 at 0% delta and 0.1% behind the Intel Core i3-1115G4E. Both processors sit at the 39th percentile of all CPUs, but the Ryzen 3 1300X achieves this with half the cores and a much lower TDP, making its efficiency advantage clear.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD FX-8350 has 8 cores and 8 threads, double the Ryzen 3 1300X's 4 cores and 4 threads. However, the Ryzen 3 1300X still wins the multi-core Geekbench test with a 22.5% higher score.

Q: Does the FX-8350's higher clock speed help it win any benchmarks?

A: No. Despite having a 4.00 GHz base clock and 4.20 GHz boost clock—higher than the Ryzen 3 1300X's 3.40 GHz and 3.70 GHz—the FX-8350 loses both head-to-head Geekbench tests. The Ryzen 3 1300X wins single-core by 95.6% and multi-core by 22.5%.

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

A: The Ryzen 3 1300X supports dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the FX-8350 supports dual-channel DDR3 with 29.9 GB/s. The Ryzen 3 1300X also supports ECC memory, which the FX-8350 does not.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 3 1300X and the AMD FX-8350 have unlocked multipliers, allowing for manual overclocking. This is one of the few features the two processors share.

Q: How does the power consumption compare?

A: The Ryzen 3 1300X has a 65 W TDP, while the FX-8350 has a 125 W TDP. The Ryzen 3 1300X delivers significantly higher benchmark scores while using less than half the thermal design power.

Q: Which processor uses a newer socket and PCIe standard?

A: The Ryzen 3 1300X uses AMD Socket AM4 with PCIe Gen 3 and 16 CPU lanes. The FX-8350 uses AMD Socket AM3+ with PCIe Gen 2. The Ryzen 3 1300X's platform is newer and offers more modern connectivity.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The Ryzen 3 1300X has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the FX-8350 has 8 cores and 8 threads. Clock speeds favor the FX-8350, with a 4.00 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost, compared to the Ryzen 3 1300X's 3.40 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost. However, the Ryzen 3 1300X has a 65 W TDP versus 125 W for the FX-8350. The Ryzen 3 1300X uses the Zen architecture on a 14 nm process, while the FX-8350 uses Piledriver on 32 nm. The Ryzen 3 1300X has 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die, while the FX-8350 has 1,200 million transistors on a 315 mm² die. Cache differs: the Ryzen 3 1300X has 96 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core with 8 MB shared L3, while the FX-8350 has 384 KB total L1 and 8 MB L2 with 8 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 for the Ryzen 3 1300X and DDR3 for the FX-8350, with bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s versus 29.9 GB/s. The Ryzen 3 1300X supports ECC memory; the FX-8350 does not. PCIe connectivity is Gen 3 with 16 lanes on the Ryzen 3 1300X versus Gen 2 on the FX-8350. The Ryzen 3 1300X has no integrated graphics, while the FX-8350 can use chipset-based graphics on certain motherboards. The Ryzen 3 1300X uses Socket AM4, while the FX-8350 uses Socket AM3+. The Ryzen 3 1300X was released in 2017 with a launch MSRP of $129, while the FX-8350 was released in 2012 with a launch MSRP of $199. The Ryzen 3 1300X remains in active production, while the FX-8350 is end-of-life.