AMD Ryzen 3 3100 vs Intel Core i7-7820HK Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 and Intel Core i7-7820HK are both 4-core, 8-thread processors, yet the benchmark data reveals a stark performance gulf between the desktop AMD part and the mobile Intel chip. With the Ryzen 3 3100 winning all four head-to-head benchmark comparisons, the data suggests that generational architecture and platform positioning play a far larger role than the specification sheet alone would indicate. The i7-7820HK, a once-high-end mobile processor from 2017, simply cannot keep pace with the 2020 desktop budget chip in the tests available.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic discrepancy appears in the Cinebench R15 multicore test. The Ryzen 3 3100 scores 991, while the Core i7-7820HK manages only 635. This translates to a 56.1% advantage for the AMD processor, a massive gap that indicates the Zen 2 architecture extracts significantly more throughput from the same core and thread count. The i7-7820HK’s lower 2.90 GHz base clock, compared to the Ryzen’s 3.60 GHz, likely contributes to this deficit, but the sheer size of the delta points to deeper architectural inefficiencies in the older Kaby Lake design.

The single-core Cinebench R15 result is even more lopsided, albeit with a caveat. The Ryzen 3 3100 posts a score of 178, exactly double the i7-7820HK’s 89, resulting in a 100% delta. This is an extraordinary outlier; a 100% improvement in single-threaded performance is rarely seen between two modern processors. While the boost clocks are identical at 3.90 GHz, the Ryzen’s superior instructions-per-clock (IPC) from the Zen 2 architecture is the only plausible explanation for such a pronounced difference. The Intel chip’s score appears anomalously low, but the data is clear: the Ryzen 3 3100 delivers twice the single-thread performance in this specific workload.

Moving to Geekbench, the margins narrow but remain firmly in AMD’s favor. In the multicore test, the Ryzen 3 3100 scores 4898 against the Intel’s 4173, a 17.4% lead. This is a more moderate gap than Cinebench, suggesting that Geekbench’s workload composition is less sensitive to the architectural differences between the two. The single-core Geekbench result shows a 9.6% advantage for the Ryzen 3 3100, with scores of 1395 and 1273 respectively. This is a far more realistic representation of the per-core performance difference than the Cinebench R15 single-core result, but it still confirms the AMD processor’s clear superiority in this metric.

Across all four benchmarks, the Ryzen 3 3100 wins decisively. The winsA count of 4 and winsB count of 0 leave no ambiguity. The data suggests that the i7-7820HK, despite its "HK" unlocked multiplier designation, is fundamentally outclassed. Interestingly, the average benchmark scores from the nearestRivals data show the two processors are extremely close overall: the Ryzen 3 3100 averages 2055, while the i7-7820HK averages 2048, a delta of just 0.3%. This contradiction between the head-to-head results and the aggregate average is curious. It implies that the two chips are closely matched across a broad spectrum of tests, but in the specific workloads where they are directly compared, the AMD part consistently pulls ahead.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the head-to-head data, the AMD Ryzen 3 3100 wins in every category where a comparison exists. This includes both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. For users prioritizing raw computational throughput, whether in rendering, encoding, or general productivity, the Ryzen 3 3100 is the clear choice. Its 56.1% lead in Cinebench R15 multicore is particularly compelling for heavily threaded applications.

The Intel Core i7-7820HK, however, does not win any of the compared benchmarks. Its only potential advantage lies outside the scope of raw CPU performance. The data shows it has an integrated graphics solution, the Intel HD Graphics 630, while the Ryzen 3 3100 has no integrated graphics at all. This means the Intel chip can power a display without a discrete GPU, a feature that is irrelevant for a desktop Ryzen build which requires a separate graphics card. Furthermore, the i7-7820HK’s 45W TDP, compared to the Ryzen’s 65W, makes it a more power-efficient part, which is a critical factor for its original mobile market segment. However, in terms of CPU benchmark wins, the Ryzen 3 3100 is the undisputed victor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 is significantly faster. In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, it scores 991 compared to the Intel Core i7-7820HK’s 635, a 56.1% difference. It also leads in Geekbench multicore with a score of 4898 versus 4173.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-7820HK better for single-threaded tasks?

A: No. The data contradicts that notion. The Ryzen 3 3100 wins the Cinebench R15 single-core test with a score of 178 versus 89, and the Geekbench single-core test with 1395 versus 1273.

Q: What is the difference in their average benchmark scores?

A: The average scores are nearly identical. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 has an average benchmark score of 2055, while the Intel Core i7-7820HK has an average of 2048. The delta between them is only 0.3%, favoring the AMD chip.

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

A: Yes. Both the AMD Ryzen 3 3100 and the Intel Core i7-7820HK have 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor includes a built-in GPU?

A: The Intel Core i7-7820HK includes the Intel HD Graphics 630. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 does not have any integrated graphics, meaning a discrete GPU is mandatory for a system using it.

Q: How does the Intel chip’s power consumption compare?

A: The Intel Core i7-7820HK has a lower TDP of 45W, compared to the AMD Ryzen 3 3100’s 65W TDP, making the Intel part more power-efficient on paper.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge significantly on their platform and memory specifications. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 uses the AMD Socket AM4, while the Intel Core i7-7820HK uses the Intel BGA 1440 socket, which is a soldered mobile platform. The Ryzen supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The Intel chip supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, also in a dual-channel configuration, but its memory bandwidth is not listed in the data.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Ryzen 3 3100 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the i7-7820HK provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The production status of the two parts is starkly different: the Ryzen 3 3100 is listed as "Active," whereas the Intel Core i7-7820HK is marked "End-of-life." The release dates are also far apart, with the Ryzen launching on 2020-04-23 and the Intel on 2017-01-02. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $378, while the AMD chip has a launch MSRP of $99.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two CPUs is vast and explains the benchmark results. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 is built on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed "Matisse," and fabricated on a 7 nm process by TSMC. It contains 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. In contrast, the Intel Core i7-7820HK uses the older Kaby Lake architecture, codenamed "Kaby Lake-H," and is built on Intel’s 14 nm process with a die size of 126 mm². The transistor count for the Intel chip is not provided.

Cache configurations also differ. The Ryzen 3 3100 features 512 KB of L2 cache per core and a large 16 MB shared L3 cache. The i7-7820HK has a smaller 256 KB of L2 cache per core and only 8 MB of shared L3 cache. This halving of the L3 cache is a significant disadvantage for the Intel part in workloads that benefit from larger cache pools. The Ryzen’s base clock of 3.60 GHz is higher than the Intel’s 2.90 GHz, though both have the same 3.90 GHz boost clock. The Ryzen 3 3100 also supports PCIe Gen 4, a newer standard than the Intel chip’s PCIe Gen 3. The Ryzen 3 3100 is also listed as having a "Zen 2 (Matisse)" generation, while the Intel is "Kaby Lake-H," reinforcing their generational divide.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear verdict for any potential buyer. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 is the superior processor in every benchmark where the two are compared. It offers dramatically higher multi-threaded performance, as shown by its 56.1% lead in Cinebench R15, and a substantial advantage in single-threaded tasks. For any user building a desktop system who requires a discrete GPU, the Ryzen 3 3100 is the only logical choice from this pairing. Its active production status and modern AM4 platform further solidify its position.

The Intel Core i7-7820HK, however, is not without a purpose, though it is a purpose outside the bounds of raw CPU performance. As an end-of-life mobile processor, its primary value lies in its 45W TDP and integrated Intel HD Graphics 630, which are essential for laptops. A user with a mobile system powered by this chip should not expect it to match the Ryzen 3 3100 in computational tasks. The data shows that for pure CPU performance, the Ryzen 3 3100 wins unequivocally; the i7-7820HK only makes sense as a legacy component in an existing laptop where its low power draw and integrated graphics are necessary. The 0.3% difference in average benchmark scores is a statistical anomaly when the head-to-head tests show a consistent and sizable AMD advantage.