AMD Ryzen 3 3300X vs Intel Core i5-8500T Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and Intel Core i5-8500T occupy different corners of the desktop CPU market. The Ryzen chip is a modern, unlocked quad-core built for performance, while the Intel part is a low-power, six-core design aimed at efficiency. The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner, but the reasons behind that result are worth examining in detail. The Ryzen 3 3300X wins all four recorded head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 31% to over 100% depending on the workload.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X wins every single benchmark category in the database. There is no recorded test where the Intel Core i5-8500T comes out ahead. This is a complete sweep, with all four head-to-head results favoring the AMD part. The largest victory comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Ryzen 3 3300X scores 109.7% higher than the i5-8500T. That is a massive gap for a single-threaded workload and indicates a fundamental difference in per-core performance.

The Intel Core i5-8500T does not win any of the recorded benchmarks. Its strongest relative showing is in Geekbench multicore, where it trails by 34.5%. Even in that test, which should favor its higher core count, the AMD processor maintains a substantial lead. The i5-8500T’s best case scenario is still a loss by roughly one-third. The data does not support any use case where the Intel chip is the better performer, at least within the measured workloads.

For single-threaded tasks, the Ryzen 3 3300X is in a different league entirely. The 109.7% advantage in Cinebench R15 single-core means it delivers more than double the score of the i5-8500T. This affects everyday responsiveness, lightly threaded applications, and anything that relies on a single fast core. The Geekbench single-core result confirms the trend with a 31% lead for AMD.

For multi-threaded work, the Ryzen 3 3300X still dominates despite having only 4 cores and 8 threads versus the Intel’s 6 cores and 6 threads. The Cinebench R15 multicore score shows a 61.8% advantage for AMD. The Geekbench multicore result shows a 34.5% lead. The higher clock speeds and better architecture of the Ryzen chip more than compensate for the Intel part’s two additional physical cores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing eras and design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X uses the Zen 2 architecture with the Matisse codename, built on a 7 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Core i5-8500T uses the Coffee Lake architecture, built on a 14 nm process by Intel’s own foundries. This process gap is significant. The 7 nm node allows AMD to pack 3,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die. Intel does not have recorded transistor or die size figures for the i5-8500T in the database.

The core configurations differ in a way that matters for parallel workloads. The Ryzen 3 3300X has 4 cores and 8 threads, using simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count. The Intel Core i5-8500T has 6 physical cores but no hyper-threading, giving it 6 threads total. The AMD part has fewer physical cores but more threads. The Intel part has more physical cores but fewer total threads. In practice, the Ryzen chip’s thread advantage and clock speed advantage win out.

Cache allocation shows a clear difference in design priorities. The Ryzen 3 3300X has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core i5-8500T also has 64 KB of L1 per core, but only 256 KB of L2 per core and 9 MB of shared L3. The AMD part has double the L2 per core and nearly double the total L3. This extra cache likely contributes to its strong single-core performance.

Memory bandwidth also favors the AMD processor. The Ryzen 3 3300X supports dual-channel DDR4 with a recorded bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-8500T supports the same dual-channel DDR4 configuration but with a lower bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The PCIe implementation differs as well. The Ryzen chip offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel chip offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Both support DDR4 memory and neither supports ECC memory.

The production status of the two chips tells a different story. The Ryzen 3 3300X is listed as Active, meaning it is still in production. The Intel Core i5-8500T is listed as End-of-life. The Ryzen chip is also multiplier unlocked, allowing overclocking, while the Intel chip is locked. The Ryzen 3 3300X includes no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required. The Intel Core i5-8500T includes the UHD 630 integrated graphics, which is a meaningful feature for systems without a separate graphics card.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows the Ryzen 3 3300X scoring 1071 against the i5-8500T’s 662. That is a 61.8% advantage for AMD. The Intel chip’s two extra cores do not help enough here. The Ryzen chip’s higher clock speeds and simultaneous multithreading produce a much stronger multi-core result. This is the second-largest margin in the head-to-head data.

The Cinebench R15 single-core test is the most lopsided result. The Ryzen 3 3300X scores 195, while the Intel Core i5-8500T scores only 93. That is a 109.7% advantage, meaning the AMD chip more than doubles the Intel chip’s score. This is a staggering result and indicates the i5-8500T is severely limited in single-threaded performance, likely due to its low 2.10 GHz base clock and 3.50 GHz boost clock. The Ryzen chip’s 3.80 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost clocks give it a massive frequency advantage.

The Geekbench multicore test shows a 34.5% lead for the Ryzen 3 3300X, with scores of 5772 versus 4293. This is the closest margin of the four comparisons, but it is still a decisive win for AMD. The i5-8500T’s six cores help it close the gap somewhat compared to the Cinebench R15 multicore result, but not enough to threaten the AMD chip’s lead.

The Geekbench single-core test shows the Ryzen 3 3300X scoring 1555 against 1187 for the Intel part. That is a 31% advantage. This is the smallest margin in the head-to-head set, but it still represents a clear and consistent single-core victory for AMD. Across all four tests, the pattern is consistent: the Ryzen 3 3300X leads by a wide margin in every workload.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ. The Ryzen 3 3300X has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i5-8500T has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Ryzen chip has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Intel chip has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz.

Thermal design power differs. The Ryzen 3 3300X has a TDP of 65 watts. The Intel Core i5-8500T has a TDP of 35 watts. The Intel part is designed for much lower power consumption.

The process node differs. The Ryzen chip is built on 7 nm. The Intel chip is built on 14 nm.

Socket compatibility differs. The Ryzen 3 3300X uses AMD Socket AM4. The Intel Core i5-8500T uses Intel Socket 1151.

Cache configuration differs. The Ryzen chip has 512 KB of L2 per core and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip has 256 KB of L2 per core and 9 MB of shared L3. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core.

Memory bandwidth differs. The Ryzen chip has 51.2 GB/s. The Intel chip has 42.7 GB/s.

PCIe generation differs. The Ryzen chip supports Gen 4 with 16 lanes. The Intel chip supports Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ. The Ryzen 3 3300X has none. The Intel Core i5-8500T includes UHD 630.

Overclocking support differs. The Ryzen chip has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel chip does not.

Production status differs. The Ryzen chip is Active. The Intel chip is End-of-life.

Release dates differ. The Ryzen 3 3300X was released on 2020-04-23. The Intel Core i5-8500T was released on 2018-04-01.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R15?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X scores 195, while the Intel Core i5-8500T scores 93. That is a 109.7% advantage for AMD.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-8500T’s six cores beat the Ryzen 3 3300X’s four cores in multi-threaded tests?

A: No. The Ryzen 3 3300X scores 1071 in Cinebench R15 multicore versus 662 for the i5-8500T, a 61.8% lead. The Ryzen chip also leads by 34.5% in Geekbench multicore.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-8500T have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes UHD 630 graphics. The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X has no integrated graphics, so it requires a separate GPU.

Q: Which processor supports overclocking?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X has an unlocked multiplier and supports overclocking. The Intel Core i5-8500T has a locked multiplier.

Q: What are the power consumption ratings for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X has a TDP of 65 watts. The Intel Core i5-8500T has a TDP of 35 watts.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X has 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core i5-8500T has 9 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X is the clear performance winner in every recorded benchmark. It wins all four head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 31% to 109.7%. The data shows no scenario in the database where the Intel Core i5-8500T outperforms it. Buyers who want maximum performance from these two options should choose the Ryzen 3 3300X without hesitation.

The Intel Core i5-8500T has one practical advantage: it includes integrated graphics and runs at a much lower 35 watt TDP. The Ryzen 3 3300X requires a discrete GPU and uses 65 watts. For a system that needs a GPU anyway and values performance, the Ryzen chip is the obvious pick. For a low-power build with no discrete graphics, the i5-8500T’s UHD 630 and lower power draw make it the only viable option of the two. The i5-8500T is also end-of-life, while the Ryzen chip remains in active production.

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Ryzen 3 3300X is faster in single-core and multi-core workloads, has more cache, higher memory bandwidth, and a newer process node. The Intel Core i5-8500T offers lower power consumption and integrated graphics, but its performance is far behind. The Ryzen 3 3300X is the better processor for anyone who can accommodate a discrete GPU and the higher TDP. The i5-8500T is only the right choice for ultra-low-power systems that cannot use a separate graphics card.