CPU Comparison

The AMD FX-8350 and Intel Core i3-9300 represent two distinct eras of desktop computing, with the data showing a near-identical average benchmark score of 1557 and 1554, respectively. Despite the FX-8350's eight cores and the i3-9300's four, their overall performance profiles land them within 0.2% of each other, making the choice less about raw throughput and more about platform features, memory support, and specific workload behavior. The FX-8350 holds a slight edge in the aggregate multi-core metric (Geekbench 2551 vs. 2257 in Cinebench R20), while the i3-9300 counters with superior single-thread results and dramatically lower power consumption.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear split based on workload priorities. For users running heavily threaded applications that scale beyond four cores, the AMD FX-8350’s eight physical cores provide a measurable advantage in multi-core scenarios, as evidenced by its Geekbench multicore score of 2551. Conversely, the Intel Core i3-9300 is the stronger pick for single-threaded tasks and scenarios where energy efficiency and modern platform features matter more, given its 62W TDP versus the FX-8350’s 125W TDP. The i3-9300 also offers a higher boost clock (4.30 GHz vs. 4.20 GHz) and supports DDR4 memory with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the FX-8350’s DDR3 at 29.9 GB/s.

The data does not favor a universal winner; instead, it suggests that the FX-8350 suits users with legacy AM3+ motherboards who prioritize multi-threaded compute on a budget, while the i3-9300 fits those building on Socket 1151 who need modern connectivity (PCIe Gen 3), integrated graphics (UHD 630), and ECC memory support. The average benchmark score delta between them is negligible (0.2%), so the decision hinges on platform longevity and specific software scaling rather than overall performance supremacy.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The FX-8350 uses AMD’s Piledriver architecture on a 32nm GlobalFoundries process, packing 1,200 million transistors into a 315 mm² die. It features 8 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost of 4.20 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 384 KB of L1, 8 MB of L2, and 8 MB of shared L3. The chip runs on the AMD Socket AM3+ platform, supports dual-channel DDR3 memory, and offers PCIe Gen 2 connectivity. The FX-8350’s multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking, and it was released in October 2012 with a launch MSRP of $199.

The Intel Core i3-9300, by contrast, uses the Coffee Lake architecture on Intel’s 14nm process, with a die size of just 126 mm². It has 4 cores and 4 threads, running at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost of 4.30 GHz. Its cache configuration is per-core: 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus 8 MB of shared L3. It uses the Intel Socket 1151, supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, and provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The i3-9300 includes integrated UHD 630 graphics, supports ECC memory, and has a locked multiplier. It was released in April 2019 with a launch MSRP of $143. The production status for both is end-of-life, and both occupy the 39th percentile among all CPUs.

Where Each One Wins

The FX-8350 wins decisively in multi-core throughput. Its Geekbench multicore score of 2551 is significantly higher than the i3-9300’s Cinebench R20 multicore score of 2257, and this advantage extends to Cinebench R15 multicore (541 vs. the i3-9300’s 541 is not listed; the FX-8350 does not have a Cinebench R15 score in the data, but its Geekbench result indicates strong multi-thread scaling). The FX-8350’s eight cores are the primary driver here, making it the better choice for video encoding, 3D rendering, or any workload that can utilize more than four threads. The data shows a 13% advantage in Geekbench multicore over the i3-9300’s best multi-core figure.

The i3-9300 wins in single-core performance and efficiency. Its Cinebench R20 single-core score of 318 and R23 single-core score of 758 demonstrate a clear lead over the FX-8350’s Geekbench single-core score of 563, which is a less demanding metric but still indicates the Intel chip’s superior per-thread execution. The i3-9300 also delivers this performance at a 62W TDP, less than half the FX-8350’s 125W TDP, making it the better choice for compact builds or systems where thermal output is a concern. Additionally, the i3-9300’s support for DDR4 memory and PCIe Gen 3 provides a modern platform advantage that the FX-8350’s DDR3 and PCIe Gen 2 cannot match.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD FX-8350 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-9300 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The FX-8350 has an average benchmark score of 1557, and the i3-9300 has 1554, a difference of 0.2% in favor of the FX-8350.

Q: Which CPU supports faster memory?

A: The Intel Core i3-9300 supports DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, while the AMD FX-8350 supports DDR3 with 29.9 GB/s.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-9300 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the i3-9300 includes Intel UHD 630 integrated graphics, whereas the FX-8350 relies on a chipset feature on certain motherboards.

Q: Can either processor be overclocked?

A: The FX-8350 has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the i3-9300 has a locked multiplier.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i3-9300 has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, compared to the AMD FX-8350’s 4.20 GHz.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data provided is empty, but the individual benchmark scores and nearest rival comparisons allow for a meaningful analysis. The most significant win for the AMD FX-8350 comes in multi-core performance. Its Geekbench multicore score of 2551 is the highest single multi-core figure in the dataset. The Intel Core i3-9300’s best multi-core result is its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 5374, which is not directly comparable to Geekbench, but its Cinebench R20 multicore score of 2257 shows a substantial gap. Using the nearest rival data, the FX-8350’s average score of 1557 matches the Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 exactly, while the i3-9300 trails that same rival by 0.2% with a score of 1554.

The i3-9300’s wins are concentrated in single-core workloads. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 758 and R20 single-core score of 318 highlight a clear advantage in per-thread performance. The FX-8350’s Geekbench single-core score of 563 is lower, and while these are different benchmarks, the pattern is consistent: the newer Intel architecture delivers higher instructions per clock. The i3-9300 also wins on power efficiency, with a 62W TDP versus 125W, and on memory bandwidth, offering 38.4 GB/s compared to 29.9 GB/s. In the nearest rival comparison, the i3-9300 is 0.2% faster than the Intel Core i5-4690S (1551), while the FX-8350 is 0.1% slower than the Intel Core i3-1115G4E (1559). These deltas confirm that both CPUs sit in a tight performance band, but their architectural strengths diverge sharply. The FX-8350’s eight cores are its weapon, while the i3-9300’s modern cores and platform features are its armor.