AMD Ryzen 3 3100 vs Intel Core i3-8350K Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a fascinating split between these two quad-core desktop parts. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 and Intel Core i3-8350K each take two wins in the recorded head-to-head tests, but the margins tell very different stories. The Ryzen 3 3100 dominates the Cinebench suite with overwhelming leads, while the Intel chip claws back narrow victories in Geekbench.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 3 3100 scores 991 against the i3-8350K's 593. That is a 40.2% advantage for AMD, a massive gap that reflects the Ryzen's simultaneous multithreading. The single-core Cinebench R15 result is even more lopsided in percentage terms: 178 for the Ryzen versus 83 for the Intel part, a 53.4% deficit for the i3-8350K. These are not marginal differences; they represent a fundamental performance chasm in this particular workload.

The Geekbench results flip the script. The i3-8350K posts 4992 in multi-core against 4898 for the Ryzen 3 3100, a slim 1.9% edge. In single-core Geekbench, the Intel chip extends its lead to 12.1%, scoring 1564 versus 1395. While the Cinebench margins were enormous, these Geekbench wins are comparatively modest, suggesting the Intel architecture retains an advantage in certain lightly threaded or differently structured tests.

Looking at the broader database context, both CPUs sit at the 46th percentile among all recorded processors. The i3-8350K's average benchmark score is 2096, placing it within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X (2094) and 0.2% above the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G (2101). The Ryzen 3 3100 averages 2055, landing within 0.1% of the Intel Core i7-8705G (2058) and 0.3% of the Intel Core i7-7820HK (2048). The two CPUs are effectively siblings in overall database standing, despite their very different workload profiles.

Architecture Differences

The underlying architectures could hardly be more different. The Intel Core i3-8350K uses Coffee Lake, built on Intel's 14 nm process with a die size of 126 mm². It packs 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 4.00 GHz and no boost clock listed. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 is a Zen 2 part, codenamed Matisse, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process. Its die measures just 74 mm², and it contains 3,800 million transistors. The Ryzen offers 4 cores but 8 threads, with a 3.60 GHz base clock and a 3.90 GHz boost clock.

Cache allocation differs substantially. Both allocate 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core for the Intel side, but the Ryzen 3 3100 doubles the per-core L2 to 512 KB. The L3 situation is also asymmetric: the i3-8350K has 8 MB shared, while the Ryzen 3 3100 has 16 MB shared, double the capacity. These cache differences, combined with the additional threads, explain much of the Cinebench multi-core disparity.

Memory bandwidth favors AMD as well. The Ryzen 3 3100 supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to 38.4 GB/s for the i3-8350K. Both support DDR4 memory, and both use dual-channel buses. The Ryzen also brings PCIe Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Intel part is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i3-8350K includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, whereas the Ryzen 3 3100 has no integrated graphics at all. ECC memory support is present on the Intel chip but absent on the AMD chip.

Power characteristics differ as well. The i3-8350K has a 91 W TDP, while the Ryzen 3 3100 draws 65 W. The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1151; the AMD chip uses AMD Socket AM4. Both have unlocked multipliers, and both target the desktop market segment. The Intel part is end-of-life, released in October 2017, while the Ryzen 3 3100 remains active, released in April 2020. The launch MSRP for the i3-8350K is $168, and for the Ryzen 3 3100 it is $99.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different use cases. If the workload relies heavily on Cinebench-style rendering, the AMD Ryzen 3 3100 is the definitive choice. Its 40.2% multi-core lead and 53.4% single-core lead in those tests are decisive. The Ryzen's 8 threads, larger 16 MB L3 cache, and higher memory bandwidth give it a structural advantage that the benchmark results confirm.

For Geekbench-oriented tasks, the Intel Core i3-8350K holds the edge. The 12.1% single-core advantage and 1.9% multi-core advantage are real, though modest compared to AMD's Cinebench margins. The i3-8350K's higher 4.00 GHz base clock and Intel's architectural strengths in these specific tests keep it competitive.

The overall database percentiles are identical at 46, and the average scores are close: 2096 for Intel versus 2055 for AMD. Neither chip is dramatically superior in aggregate. The choice depends entirely on which benchmark family represents the user's actual workload. Users prioritizing Cinebench-style multi-threaded rendering should select the Ryzen 3 3100. Users whose applications resemble Geekbench's test patterns, particularly single-threaded ones, may prefer the i3-8350K.

The Ryzen 3 3100 also offers a lower 65 W TDP versus 91 W, a 7 nm process versus 14 nm, and PCIe Gen 4 support. The i3-8350K counters with integrated graphics, ECC memory support, and a higher base clock. For new builds, the Ryzen's active production status and more modern platform make it the safer long-term pick, but the data does not support declaring a single universal winner.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins in Cinebench R15 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 wins decisively with a score of 991 versus 593 for the Intel Core i3-8350K, a 40.2% advantage.

Q: How large is the single-core Geekbench gap?

A: The Intel Core i3-8350K leads by 12.1%, scoring 1564 against the Ryzen 3 3100's 1395.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores. However, the Ryzen 3 3100 supports 8 threads while the i3-8350K supports only 4 threads.

Q: Which CPU has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, double the 8 MB found on the Intel Core i3-8350K.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The i3-8350K uses Intel's 14 nm process, while the Ryzen 3 3100 uses TSMC's 7 nm process.

Q: Does either CPU include integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-8350K includes integrated graphics, specifically UHD Graphics 630. The Ryzen 3 3100 has none.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 is the clear winner in multi-threaded rendering workloads. Its Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 991 crushes the i3-8350K's 593, and the single-core Cinebench R15 result of 178 versus 83 shows AMD also wins in that specific test. The 8 threads, 16 MB L3 cache, 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 7 nm process all feed into this dominance. The Ryzen also wins on platform modernity with PCIe Gen 4 support and a lower 65 W TDP, making it the better choice for productivity-focused builds where rendering performance matters most.

The Intel Core i3-8350K wins in Geekbench testing. Its multi-core score of 4992 edges out the Ryzen's 4898, and the single-core result of 1564 versus 1395 gives Intel a comfortable 12.1% margin. The higher 4.00 GHz base clock and Intel's architectural efficiency in these tests make the i3-8350K the better option for applications that resemble Geekbench's workload patterns. The integrated UHD Graphics 630 also gives Intel an advantage for systems that cannot accommodate a discrete GPU, and ECC memory support may appeal to specific stability-focused use cases.

The database's average scores place the two chips nearly level: 2096 for Intel versus 2055 for AMD. The percentile rankings are identical at 46. This means neither chip dominates the other in aggregate; they simply excel in different test families. Users should match the chip to their primary application type rather than chasing an overall winner. For Cinebench-style work, the Ryzen's 40.2% lead is too large to ignore. For Geekbench-style tasks, the Intel chip's 12.1% single-core advantage is the deciding factor.