AMD Ryzen 3 3200G vs Intel Core i9-10940X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a strikingly one-sided comparison. Across every shared benchmark in the database, the Intel Core i9-10940X finishes ahead of the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G, with the AMD processor recording zero wins in the head-to-head set. The most dramatic gaps appear in multi-threaded workloads, where the Intel part’s larger core and thread count translates into overwhelming score advantages. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel Core i9-10940X scores 23,520 against the Ryzen 3 3200G’s 5,955, a delta of -74.7% from the AMD side, meaning the Intel chip is nearly four times faster in that specific test. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core (9,878 vs 2,501, also -74.7%) and Cinebench R15 multi-core (2,370 vs 600, again -74.7%). The consistency of that -74.7% figure across all three Cinebench multi-core tests suggests a fixed scaling factor related to the core count difference, rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Single-threaded results are closer but still favor Intel decisively. In Geekbench single-core, the Intel Core i9-10940X scores 1,556 while the Ryzen 3 3200G manages 884, a delta of -43.2%. That is a substantial gap, though far smaller than the multi-core deficit. The Cinebench single-core tests show a wider split: R23 single-core has Intel at 3,320 versus AMD at 840 (-74.7%), and R15 single-core shows 334 versus 84 (-74.9%). The near-identical delta percentages across both single-core and multi-core Cinebench runs hint that the Intel architecture simply has a higher per-thread throughput in this rendering workload, not just more threads. The Ryzen 3 3200G’s best relative showing comes in Geekbench single-core, where it trails by less than half, suggesting that in some lighter, latency-sensitive tasks the AMD chip is not as far behind as the raw Cinebench numbers imply.

The Geekbench multi-core result reinforces the core-count narrative: Intel scores 10,464 versus AMD’s 2,833, a -72.9% delta. That is slightly less severe than the Cinebench multi-core gaps, but still a massive margin. Notably, the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G has its own set of benchmarks in the database that the Intel part does not share, including 3DMark tests and PassMark subtests, so the head-to-head table only covers eight tests. In those eight, the Intel Core i9-10940X wins all of them, with deltas ranging from -43.2% (Geekbench single-core) to -74.9% (Cinebench R15 single-core). The data leaves no room for ambiguity: on a pure performance basis, the Intel part dominates every metric where both were measured.

The Verdict

The benchmark results point to a simple conclusion for most buyers. If the workload involves rendering, compilation, or any heavily multi-threaded task, the Intel Core i9-10940X is the only rational choice from this data. Its 14 cores and 28 threads, combined with a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, produce scores that are roughly 4x higher in Cinebench multi-core tests compared to the Ryzen 3 3200G. The AMD part, with 4 cores and 4 threads, simply cannot compete in those scenarios; the database shows a -74.7% delta consistently across all three Cinebench multi-core versions.

For users whose primary concern is single-thread performance, the Intel part still wins, but the margin narrows. The Geekbench single-core delta of -43.2% suggests that the Ryzen 3 3200G is not completely outclassed in lightly threaded applications. However, the Cinebench single-core results tell a different story, with Intel ahead by roughly 74.9% in R15 and 74.7% in R23. The discrepancy between Geekbench and Cinebench single-core scores likely reflects different instruction mixes; the Intel core appears to excel in AVX-heavy rendering work, while the AMD Zen+ core holds up better in more general integer and floating-point tasks. Still, across the full set of shared benchmarks, the Intel Core i9-10940X is the stronger processor.

The Ryzen 3 3200G does have one notable advantage that the head-to-head table does not capture: an integrated GPU. The database lists Radeon Vega 8 graphics for the AMD part, while the Intel Core i9-10940X has no integrated graphics. For a system without a discrete GPU, the Ryzen 3 3200G can output video, whereas the Intel chip requires a separate graphics card to function at all. That is a fundamental system-level difference, not a performance metric, but it matters for certain builds. The data also shows the AMD chip draws less power (65 W TDP versus 165 W for Intel), though the database does not include performance-per-watt calculations.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-10940X wins in every benchmark category that the two share. That includes all Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23) in both single-core and multi-core, plus Geekbench in both single-core and multi-core. The most pronounced wins are in multi-threaded rendering, where the Intel part’s score advantage is roughly 74.7% in every Cinebench multi-core test. This points to usage scenarios like 3D rendering, video encoding, and scientific computing, where the extra cores and threads translate directly into reduced wall-clock time.

The Ryzen 3 3200G’s wins are not in the shared benchmark set, but in its own benchmark list it shows strengths in certain PassMark subtests. For instance, it scores 85,374 in data compression, 4,475 in data encryption, and 20,141 in integer math. These are not compared against the Intel part because the Intel chip lacks those specific test entries, so no head-to-head delta is available. Still, the AMD processor’s integrated Radeon Vega 8 GPU is a functional advantage for entry-level systems, and its lower 65 W TDP makes it easier to cool in compact chassis. The database does not include gaming benchmarks, so any claims about the Vega 8’s gaming capability would be outside the recorded data.

For single-threaded responsiveness in everyday tasks, the Geekbench single-core score of 884 for the AMD part versus 1,556 for Intel suggests the Intel chip will feel snappier in browser and office workloads, but the AMD chip is not far off enough to be unusable. The real split is between multi-threaded heavy lifting (Intel wins decisively) and integrated-graphics convenience (AMD wins by being the only one with it).

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-10940X has 14 cores and 28 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How much faster is the Intel chip in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i9-10940X scores 23,520 versus 5,955 for the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G, a delta of -74.7% from the AMD side.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Radeon Vega 8 graphics. The Intel Core i9-10940X has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Q: What is the single-core Geekbench score difference?

A: The Intel Core i9-10940X scores 1,556 in Geekbench single-core, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G scores 884, a delta of -43.2%.

Q: Are both CPUs unlocked for overclocking?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G and the Intel Core i9-10940X have the multiplier unlocked.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-10940X boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G boosts to 4.00 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Ryzen 3 3200G uses the Zen+ architecture, codenamed Picasso, built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. Its cache layout is 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. The chip is fabricated with 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. It supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with PCIe Gen 3 connectivity. The integrated Radeon Vega 8 GPU is a key feature, and the part is designed for the AMD Socket AM4.

The Intel Core i9-10940X uses the Cascade Lake architecture, codenamed Cascade Lake-X, built on a 14 nm process at Intel. It has 14 cores and 28 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The cache hierarchy is different: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 19.25 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip supports DDR4 memory in a quad-channel configuration, also with PCIe Gen 3. It has no integrated graphics, and it fits the Intel Socket 2066. The process node difference (12 nm for AMD versus 14 nm for Intel) is notable, yet the Intel part still achieves higher clock speeds, suggesting architectural efficiency differences that the benchmark scores reflect.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ across nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen 3 3200G has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Core i9-10940X has 14 cores and 28 threads. Base clocks are 3.60 GHz for AMD versus 3.30 GHz for Intel, but boost clocks reverse that with 4.00 GHz for AMD versus 4.80 GHz for Intel. The TDP figures are 65 W for AMD and 165 W for Intel, a substantial power envelope difference. The AMD chip uses the AMD Socket AM4, while the Intel chip uses Intel Socket 2066. Cache sizes differ: AMD has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 4 MB shared L3; Intel has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 19.25 MB shared L3. Memory support is dual-channel for AMD and quad-channel for Intel, though both use DDR4. The AMD part includes Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics, while the Intel part has none. The process nodes are 12 nm for AMD (GlobalFoundries) and 14 nm for Intel. The AMD chip has a listed transistor count of 4,940 million and a die size of 210 mm², while the Intel chip has no recorded transistor count or die size. Both are unlocked for overclocking, and both support PCIe Gen 3. The AMD chip was released on 2019-07-06, while the Intel chip was released on 2019-10-18. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.