AMD Ryzen 3 3100 vs AMD Ryzen 5 3400G Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G has an average benchmark score of 2059, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3100 scores 2055. The difference is just 0.2%, placing both at the 46th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Does the Ryzen 3 3100 win in any benchmark category?

A: Yes. In head-to-head testing, the Ryzen 3 3100 wins all 10 recorded benchmarks. Its largest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it leads by 37.6%. Its smallest margin is in 3DMark 8-thread, still ahead by 19.5%.

Q: What is the integrated graphics situation?

A: The Ryzen 5 3400G includes Radeon RX Vega 11 integrated graphics, while the Ryzen 3 3100 has no integrated graphics listed. This makes the 3400G a self-contained option for systems without a discrete GPU.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Ryzen 3 3100 supports 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, while the Ryzen 5 3400G offers 46.9 GB/s. Both use dual-channel DDR4 memory.

Q: Which CPU has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Ryzen 3 3100 has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, four times the 4 MB shared L3 cache found on the Ryzen 5 3400G. L1 cache also differs, with the 3400G having 96 KB per core versus 64 KB per core on the 3100.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: Yes, both the Ryzen 5 3400G and Ryzen 3 3100 have an unlocked multiplier, and both use the AMD Socket AM4 platform.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the Ryzen 3 3100 is the superior computing engine, winning every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. Its sweep is not marginal — the smallest victory is 19.5% in 3DMark 8-thread, and the largest is 37.6% in Cinebench R15 single-core. For anyone building a system with a discrete graphics card, the Ryzen 3 3100 is the obvious choice because its raw CPU performance is substantially higher in all measured workloads.

The Ryzen 5 3400G, however, offers something the 3100 cannot: integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics. This makes it a viable all-in-one solution for a basic desktop where adding a separate GPU is not desired. The 3400G also has a higher base clock (3.70 GHz versus 3.60 GHz) and boost clock (4.20 GHz versus 3.90 GHz), though these clock advantages do not translate into benchmark wins.

The verdict depends on the use case. If the system will rely on a discrete GPU, the Ryzen 3 3100 is the stronger performer. If the system must run without any add-in graphics card, the Ryzen 5 3400G is the only option of the two. The launch MSRP for the 3400G is $149, while the 3100 launched at $99.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Ryzen 3 3100 dominates every measured benchmark, and the margins reveal a consistent pattern. In 3DMark tests, the 3100 leads by 19.5% in 8-thread (2972 vs 2391), 19.6% in 16-thread (3001 vs 2414), 19.7% in max-thread (2970 vs 2384), 21.5% in 2-thread (1267 vs 994), 21.8% in single-thread (660 vs 516), and 23.1% in 4-thread (2214 vs 1703). These results show that the 3100's advantage grows slightly as thread counts increase from 2 to 4, then stabilizes around 19-20% for higher thread counts.

Cinebench results are even more lopsided. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 3100 scores 991 versus 789 for the 3400G, a 20.4% lead. The single-core test shows the largest gap of any benchmark: 178 versus 111, a 37.6% difference. This suggests the Zen 2 architecture of the 3100 delivers a particularly strong single-thread performance boost over the Zen+ architecture of the 3400G.

Geekbench results follow the same trend. The 3100 scores 4898 in multi-core versus 3731 for the 3400G, a 23.8% lead. In single-core, the 3100 scores 1395 versus 1101, a 21.1% advantage. Notably, the Ryzen 3 3100 also has additional Cinebench R20 and R23 scores in its benchmark list, while the 3400G lacks those entries, but the available head-to-head data is sufficient to establish the performance hierarchy.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs share several core specifications: both have 4 cores, 8 threads, a 65 W TDP, the AMD Socket AM4 socket, dual-channel DDR4 memory support, and no ECC memory support. Both are also desktop parts with unlocked multipliers and belong to the AMD 3000 series.

The differences are concentrated in clocks, cache, process node, and graphics. The Ryzen 5 3400G has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.20 GHz, while the Ryzen 3 3100 runs at 3.60 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost. The 3400G has 96 KB L1 cache per core and 4 MB shared L3 cache; the 3100 has 64 KB L1 per core and 16 MB shared L3. Both have 512 KB L2 per core.

Memory bandwidth differs: 46.9 GB/s for the 3400G versus 51.2 GB/s for the 3100. PCIe support also varies — the 3400G is Gen 3, while the 3100 is Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The 3400G includes integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics; the 3100 has none. Launch MSRP was $149 for the 3400G and $99 for the 3100.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is fundamental. The Ryzen 5 3400G uses the Zen+ architecture on a 12 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with a die size of 210 mm² and 4,940 million transistors. The Ryzen 3 3100 uses the newer Zen 2 architecture on a 7 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of 74 mm² and 3,800 million transistors.

The process node shrink from 12 nm to 7 nm is a major factor in the performance difference. The 3100's smaller die and newer architecture enable higher instructions-per-clock, which explains why it wins even though it has lower clock speeds. The 3400G compensates with higher clocks, but the architectural advantage of Zen 2 proves decisive.

Cache architecture also reflects the generational shift. The 3100's 16 MB L3 cache is four times larger than the 3400G's 4 MB. This larger cache likely contributes to the 3100's superior single-thread performance, as more data can be stored closer to the cores.

The integrated graphics on the 3400G is part of the Picasso design, which pairs Zen+ CPU cores with Vega graphics on the same die. The 3100's Matisse design omits integrated graphics entirely, freeing die area and thermal budget for CPU performance. This trade-off explains why the 3400G offers graphics capability but falls behind in pure compute.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 3 3100 wins in every CPU-bound workload measured. Its 37.6% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core makes it the clear choice for lightly threaded applications like older games or productivity tasks that rely on one or two cores. Its 20.4% lead in multi-core Cinebench shows it also handles heavily threaded rendering workloads better. Geekbench results confirm this across both single-core (21.1% ahead) and multi-core (23.8% ahead) scenarios.

The Ryzen 5 3400G wins in one specific but important scenario: systems without a discrete GPU. Its integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics means it can produce a display output on its own, which the Ryzen 3 3100 cannot do. For a basic office PC, home theater setup, or emergency build where adding a graphics card is undesirable, the 3400G is functional out of the box.

The 3400G also holds clock speed advantages — 3.70 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost versus 3.60 GHz and 3.90 GHz on the 3100 — but these do not translate into benchmark wins. The data suggests that memory bandwidth (46.9 GB/s vs 51.2 GB/s) and L3 cache (4 MB vs 16 MB) are more impactful than raw clock frequency.

For gamers planning to install a discrete GPU, the Ryzen 3 3100 is the stronger pick. Its PCIe Gen 4 support with 16 CPU lanes also makes it more future-proof for modern graphics cards. For users who need an integrated solution, the 3400G is the only choice between these two, and its higher launch MSRP reflects that added graphics capability.