AMD PRO A10-8770E vs AMD Ryzen 3 3200U Comparison

The AMD PRO A10-8770E and the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U are two very different processors that happen to land at nearly the same average benchmark score. The data shows a 24th-percentile ranking for both, with the PRO A10-8770E averaging 895 points and the Ryzen 3 3200U averaging 893 points—a negligible 0.2% difference. Yet their benchmark results diverge sharply by workload, making the choice between them a matter of matching the silicon to the task.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 3 3200U dominates the majority of the tested workloads, taking four of the five head-to-head benchmarks. Its biggest margin comes in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 765 against the PRO A10-8770E's 361—a 52.8% advantage. That gap extends to Geekbench single-core, where the Ryzen 3 leads 817 to 572, a 30% edge. In Geekbench multi-core, the Ryzen 3 wins 1527 to 1291, a 15.5% lead, and it also takes Cinebench R15 multi-core with 334 versus 258, a 22.8% win. These results point to a processor that is simply more efficient per thread and better at handling modern, lightly-threaded applications.

The PRO A10-8770E's lone victory is a striking one. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2560 against the Ryzen 3's 1786, a 43.3% advantage. This suggests that under sustained, heavily-threaded rendering workloads, the four physical Excavator cores can outpace the two Zen cores with simultaneous multithreading. It is a narrow win, but a decisive one in that specific test.

The pattern is clear: for everyday responsiveness, single-threaded applications, and most general-purpose computing, the Ryzen 3 3200U is the stronger choice. For a specific multi-threaded rendering scenario, the PRO A10-8770E pulls ahead.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different eras and design philosophies. The PRO A10-8770E uses the Excavator architecture on a 28 nm process, built by GlobalFoundries with 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die. It is a desktop part on AMD Socket AM4, running at a 35 W TDP with a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz. Its cache layout is modest: 320 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2, with no L3 cache at all.

The Ryzen 3 3200U is a mobile chip on the Zen architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries with 4,940 million transistors on a smaller 210 mm² die. It fits into AMD Socket FP5 and draws only 15 W TDP, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and the same 3.50 GHz boost. Its cache structure is more modern: 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a 4 MB shared L3 cache. The Ryzen 3 also has a higher transistor count despite the smaller die, reflecting the denser 14 nm process.

Both parts support DDR4 memory over a dual-channel bus with identical 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, and neither supports ECC. Both use PCIe Gen 3. Integrated graphics differ: the PRO A10-8770E carries Radeon R7 graphics while the Ryzen 3 3200U uses Radeon Vega 3. The Ryzen 3 is locked, as is the PRO A10-8770E—neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Ryzen 3 belongs to the 3000 series and was released on 2019-01-05, while the PRO A10-8770E has no release date listed and belongs to the A10 (Carrizo) generation.

The core counts are telling: the PRO A10-8770E has four physical cores and four threads, while the Ryzen 3 has two physical cores and four threads via simultaneous multithreading. That explains the multi-core Cinebench R23 result—the PRO A10's four dedicated cores sustain a heavy all-core load better than the Ryzen 3's two cores with extra threads.

The Verdict

The benchmark data supports a clear split. For users prioritizing single-thread performance, the Ryzen 3 3200U is the obvious pick. Its 52.8% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 30% lead in Geekbench single-core are decisive margins that translate to faster application launches, snappier web browsing, and better performance in older or lightly-threaded software.

For users running sustained multi-threaded rendering on Cinebench R23, the PRO A10-8770E is the better option, with a 43.3% advantage. This is a narrow use case, but the data is unambiguous: in that specific benchmark, the four-core Excavator chip beats the two-core Zen chip by a wide margin.

The overall averages are nearly identical, so neither CPU is a clear winner across all workloads. The Ryzen 3 3200U wins four of five head-to-head benchmarks, but the PRO A10-8770E's single win is by a larger margin than any of the Ryzen 3's victories. The Ryzen 3's wins range from 15.5% to 52.8%, while the PRO A10's win is 43.3%. The Ryzen 3 is the more consistent performer, but the PRO A10-8770E has a specific strength that cannot be ignored.

Given the Ryzen 3's 15 W TDP versus the PRO A10's 35 W TDP, the mobile chip also offers significantly higher efficiency per watt while winning most benchmarks. The PRO A10-8770E targets desktop systems where power draw is less of a concern, and its multi-core Cinebench R23 result suggests it can handle rendering tasks that the Ryzen 3 struggles with. The data does not support a universal recommendation—it supports a workload-based one.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8770E averages 895 points, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U averages 893 points. The difference is 0.2%, which is negligible.

Q: Which CPU wins in single-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3200U wins in single-core tests. It scores 765 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 361 for the PRO A10-8770E, a 52.8% advantage, and 817 in Geekbench single-core versus 572, a 30% lead.

Q: Is the PRO A10-8770E ever faster than the Ryzen 3 3200U?

A: Yes. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the PRO A10-8770E scores 2560 versus 1786 for the Ryzen 3, a 43.3% advantage. This is the only benchmark where the PRO A10 wins.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory?

A: Both support DDR4 memory over a dual-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. Neither supports ECC memory.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each chip?

A: The PRO A10-8770E has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Ryzen 3 3200U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Which processor has a lower TDP?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3200U has a 15 W TDP, while the AMD PRO A10-8770E has a 35 W TDP. The Ryzen 3 is the more power-efficient part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic result is in Cinebench R23 single-core. The Ryzen 3 3200U scores 765, while the PRO A10-8770E manages only 361. That is a 52.8% difference—the largest margin in any test. This single result encapsulates the architectural gap between Zen and Excavator. The Ryzen 3's newer design extracts far more work from each clock cycle, and even at a lower base clock of 2.60 GHz versus 2.80 GHz, it leaves the older chip behind.

Geekbench single-core tells the same story, though with a smaller margin. The Ryzen 3 posts 817 against 572 for the PRO A10, a 30% lead. This test reinforces the single-thread dominance of the Zen architecture. The Ryzen 3's advantage is consistent across different benchmarking methodologies.

In Geekbench multi-core, the Ryzen 3 wins again, scoring 1527 to 1291—a 15.5% edge. Despite having half the physical cores, the Ryzen 3's superior per-thread performance and simultaneous multithreading allow it to outpace the four-core PRO A10. This is a strong indicator that core count alone does not determine multi-threaded performance in this comparison.

Cinebench R15 multi-core also favors the Ryzen 3, with a score of 334 versus 258 for the PRO A10. That is a 22.8% win for the mobile chip. The margin here is substantial, though not as large as the single-core gaps. It shows that even in an older multi-threaded benchmark, the Ryzen 3's architecture holds up.

The outlier is Cinebench R23 multi-core. Here, the PRO A10-8770E reverses the trend, scoring 2560 against the Ryzen 3's 1786. That is a 43.3% victory for the desktop chip. This benchmark appears to favor the four physical cores of the Excavator design, allowing it to sustain higher throughput over the longer rendering workload. It is the only test where the PRO A10 wins, but it wins big.

The overall benchmark count favors the Ryzen 3, with four wins out of five head-to-head tests. The average scores are nearly identical, so the Ryzen 3's victories are not enough to separate the two in overall ranking. The PRO A10-8770E's single win, however, is large enough to keep its average competitive. The data suggests that users should look at their primary workloads: the Ryzen 3 is the better all-rounder, but the PRO A10-8770E has a specific multi-threaded rendering niche where it excels.