AMD Ryzen 3 3300X vs Intel Core i5-9400T Comparison

# AMD Ryzen 3 3300X vs Intel Core i5-9400T

The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X and Intel Core i5-9400T occupy similar overall performance territory—their average benchmark scores sit within 0.6% of each other—but they get there through completely different approaches. The Ryzen 3 3300X uses a modern 7nm Zen 2 design with 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-9400T relies on a 14nm Coffee Lake architecture with 6 cores and 6 threads. The benchmark data shows the Ryzen leading in every head-to-head test, yet the i5-9400T remains competitive in the aggregate because of its additional benchmark results and lower power design.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X averages 2148 across its benchmark suite, while the Intel Core i5-9400T averages 2136. The difference is 0.6% in favor of the Ryzen, which is essentially a statistical tie.

Q: How do their core and thread counts differ?

A: The Ryzen 3 3300X has 4 cores and 8 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core i5-9400T has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading support. This gives the Intel chip two additional physical cores but two fewer logical threads.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The Ryzen 3 3300X has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Intel Core i5-9400T has a base clock of 1800.00 MHz (1.80 GHz) and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The Ryzen's boost clock is 0.90 GHz higher.

Q: Which CPU has better single-core performance?

A: The Ryzen 3 3300X wins decisively in single-core tests. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 195 versus 97 for the i5-9400T, a 101% advantage. In Geekbench single-core, the Ryzen scores 1555 versus 1152, a 35% lead.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-9400T include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the i5-9400T features Intel UHD 630 integrated graphics. The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required for display output.

Q: Are these CPUs unlocked for overclocking?

A: The Ryzen 3 3300X has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking on compatible AMD Socket AM4 motherboards. The Intel Core i5-9400T has a locked multiplier, so it does not support user overclocking.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X is built on TSMC's 7nm process node, packing 3,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die. In contrast, the Intel Core i5-9400T uses Intel's 14nm process from the Coffee Lake generation. This process advantage gives the Ryzen a significant efficiency and density edge, though the Intel chip's 35W TDP versus the Ryzen's 65W TDP tells a complementary story—the i5-9400T is explicitly designed for lower power operation.

The Ryzen 3 3300X belongs to the Zen 2 architecture (codename Matisse) and supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes. The i5-9400T uses Coffee Lake (Coffee Lake Refresh) and is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes. Both support DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration, but the Ryzen's memory bandwidth is rated at 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s for the Intel part.

Cache configurations differ notably. The Ryzen 3 3300X has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The i5-9400T also has 64 KB L1 per core but only 256 KB L2 per core and a smaller 9 MB shared L3. The Ryzen's doubled L2 per core and larger L3 pool contribute to its strong per-thread performance.

Production status separates these parts further. The Ryzen 3 3300X remains active in production, while the i5-9400T is end-of-life. The Ryzen launched on 2020-04-23 with a launch MSRP of $120; the i5-9400T launched earlier on 2018-08-31 with no launch MSRP listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X wins all four comparisons, with margins that range from substantial to enormous.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ryzen scores 1071 against 695 for the Intel, a 54.1% advantage. This is a massive gap for a workload that scales with thread count. Even though the i5-9400T has two more physical cores, the Ryzen's eight threads, higher clocks, and superior architecture more than compensate. The single-core Cinebench R15 result is even more lopsided: 195 versus 97, a 101% delta. That means the Ryzen delivers roughly double the single-threaded rendering performance of the i5-9400T in this test.

Geekbench results follow the same pattern but with smaller margins. In Geekbench multicore, the Ryzen scores 5772 against 3969, a 45.4% lead. The single-core Geekbench test shows 1555 versus 1152, a 35% advantage. These results reinforce that the Ryzen 3 3300X is faster in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, though the gap narrows in the Geekbench suite compared to Cinebench R15.

The wins tally reflects this dominance: the Ryzen 3 3300X takes 4 wins, the i5-9400T takes 0. However, the i5-9400T's broader benchmark portfolio—including Cinebench R20 and R23 results that the Ryzen lacks—helps explain why their average scores are nearly identical. The Intel chip's additional benchmarks bring its average up despite losing every direct comparison.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on nearly every specification that matters:

• Cores: Ryzen 3 3300X has 4 cores; i5-9400T has 6 cores
• Threads: Ryzen 3 3300X has 8 threads; i5-9400T has 6 threads
• Base clock: 3.80 GHz versus 1800.00 MHz (1.80 GHz)
• Boost clock: 4.30 GHz versus 3.40 GHz
• TDP: 65W versus 35W
• Socket: AMD Socket AM4 versus Intel Socket 1151
• Process node: 7nm (TSMC) versus 14nm (Intel)
• L2 cache per core: 512 KB versus 256 KB
• L3 cache: 16 MB shared versus 9 MB shared
• Memory bandwidth: 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s
• PCIe version: Gen 4 versus Gen 3
• Integrated graphics: None versus UHD 630
• Unlocked multiplier: Yes versus No
• Production status: Active versus End-of-life

The base clock difference is particularly striking—the Ryzen's 3.80 GHz base is more than double the i5-9400T's 1.80 GHz base. Even the Intel chip's boost clock of 3.40 GHz falls below the Ryzen's base clock. This explains the Ryzen's overwhelming single-core advantage. The i5-9400T compensates with lower power draw (35W versus 65W) and two additional physical cores, but those cores run at significantly lower frequencies.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X wins in every measured scenario. Its 54.1% lead in Cinebench R15 multicore makes it the clear choice for rendering workloads that use this benchmark as a proxy. The 101% single-core advantage in the same suite means snappier response in lightly threaded applications. Geekbench results, while closer, still favor the Ryzen by 45.4% multicore and 35% single-core.

The Intel Core i5-9400T's strengths are not directly visible in the head-to-head benchmarks but emerge from its specification sheet. Its 35W TDP makes it a more power-efficient choice for compact builds or systems where heat output and cooling requirements are constrained. The integrated UHD 630 graphics mean the i5-9400T can operate without a discrete GPU, which is useful for basic office systems or media servers. Its 6 physical cores could also benefit workloads that scale better with physical core count over threads, though the benchmark data does not show this advantage materializing in the tested applications.

For users who already own an Intel Socket 1151 motherboard, the i5-9400T offers a drop-in upgrade path without changing platforms. Similarly, the Ryzen 3 3300X suits AM4 owners, but its active production status and unlocked multiplier give it more future flexibility.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X is the faster processor in every benchmark where they are directly compared. Its wins are not marginal—they range from 35% to 101%, representing generational-level improvements in per-thread performance. The Ryzen also offers modern features like PCIe Gen 4, a smaller 7nm process, more cache per core, and an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Its active production status and $120 launch MSRP add to its appeal.

The Intel Core i5-9400T is not without merit. Its 35W TDP and integrated graphics make it a viable choice for low-power or GPU-less builds, and its 6 physical cores provide a different threading model. But for anyone who prioritizes raw performance in the tested benchmarks, the Ryzen 3 3300X wins decisively.

Who should pick which? Choose the Ryzen 3 3300X for almost any performance-oriented build—it is faster in both single-core and multi-core tests, supports overclocking, and sits on an active platform. Choose the i5-9400T only if you specifically need integrated graphics, require a 35W TDP for thermal constraints, or already have a compatible LGA 1151 motherboard and want to avoid a platform change. For everything else, the Ryzen 3 3300X's benchmark dominance makes it the straightforward recommendation.