AMD Ryzen 3 3300X vs Intel Xeon D-1715TER Comparison

The Intel Xeon D-1715TER and AMD Ryzen 3 3300X are both 4-core, 8-thread processors, but they target entirely different segments: one is a server/workstation part, the other a desktop chip. The recorded benchmark data shows a clear performance gap, with the Ryzen 3 3300X taking both head-to-head wins. The Xeon D-1715TER posts a 47th percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the Ryzen 3 3300X also sits at the 47th percentile, yet their average benchmark scores differ, with the Xeon D-1715TER at 2238 and the Ryzen 3 3300X at 2148. This discrepancy highlights how different benchmark suites and workload distributions can produce divergent aggregate results even when the direct comparison favors one part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison in the database covers two Cinebench tests, and the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X wins both. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 3 3300X scores 1071 against the Xeon D-1715TER's 779, a delta of -27.3% from the perspective of the Intel part. This means the Ryzen 3 3300X is approximately 37% faster in this multi-threaded workload, a substantial margin for two chips with identical core and thread counts. The single-core result is even more lopsided: the Ryzen 3 3300X scores 195 in Cinebench R15 single-core, while the Xeon D-1715TER manages only 109, a delta of -44.1%. That is a massive single-thread advantage, nearly doubling the Intel part's score.

The Xeon D-1715TER does not win any of the recorded head-to-head tests. Its performance profile, however, includes additional Cinebench results that are not part of the head-to-head set. In Cinebench R20, the Xeon D-1715TER scores 3249 multi-core and 458 single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 7738 multi-core and 1092 single-core. These numbers are not directly comparable to the Ryzen 3 3300X because the Ryzen part lacks corresponding R20 and R23 entries in the database. The Ryzen 3 3300X instead has Geekbench results, scoring 5772 multi-core and 1555 single-core, which are metrics the Xeon D-1715TER does not have recorded. The overlap in test coverage is limited to the two Cinebench R15 tests, and in both, the AMD part is decisively ahead.

The delta percentages in the nearest rivals list further contextualize the Xeon D-1715TER's standing. Its average score of 2238 is 0.3% above the Intel Xeon D-1548 (2231) and 0.5% above the Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 (2227). It trails the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (2246) by -0.3% and the Intel Core i7-10710U (2248) by -0.5%. For the Ryzen 3 3300X, its average score of 2148 is -0.3% relative to the Intel Core i5-10200H (2154) and -0.4% relative to the Intel Core i7-5950HQ (2158). It is 0.6% ahead of both the Intel Core i5-9400T (2136) and the AMD Ryzen 3 5300U (2135). These margins are narrow, indicating that both chips sit in a dense performance cluster among their peers, but the direct head-to-head shows the Ryzen 3 3300X with a clear edge.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X is the outright winner in both recorded Cinebench R15 tests, which means it holds the advantage in every directly comparable workload. Its single-core performance, in particular, is a standout: a 44.1% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core suggests that applications relying on per-thread speed, such as lightly threaded games or legacy productivity software, would favor the Ryzen 3 3300X. The multi-core lead of 27.3% in Cinebench R15 also indicates that even fully threaded workloads, like video encoding or 3D rendering in older Cinebench versions, would complete faster on the AMD part.

The Intel Xeon D-1715TER, however, has strengths that are not captured by the head-to-head metrics. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 7738 and R20 multi-core score of 3249 are the highest recorded values for this chip across its benchmark suite, and they show that the part scales reasonably well in newer rendering workloads. The Xeon D-1715TER also supports ECC memory, which the Ryzen 3 3300X does not, making it suitable for error-sensitive server or workstation tasks where data integrity is paramount. Its triple-channel memory bus provides a theoretical bandwidth of 64.0 GB/s, compared to the Ryzen 3 3300X's dual-channel 51.2 GB/s, which can matter in memory-bound server workloads.

For a desktop user focused on raw compute speed, the Ryzen 3 3300X is the clear choice based on the recorded benchmarks. For a server or workstation deployment where ECC support, higher memory bandwidth, and a lower TDP of 50 watts (versus 65 watts) are priorities, the Xeon D-1715TER offers features that the Ryzen 3 3300X cannot match. The data does not include power draw measurements, but the TDP figures are recorded and show a 15-watt difference in favor of the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Xeon D-1715TER is built on the Ice Lake architecture, specifically the Ice Lake-D codename, using Intel's 10 nm process node. It is part of the Xeon D generation and is manufactured by Intel. The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Matisse, on a 7 nm process node from TSMC. The process node difference is notable: 10 nm versus 7 nm, with the smaller node typically offering better transistor density and power efficiency, though the Xeon D-1715TER's lower TDP suggests its power envelope is designed for different priorities.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Xeon D-1715TER has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen 3 3300X has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has larger L1 and L2 caches per core, while the AMD part has 60% more L3 cache. The Ryzen 3 3300X also has recorded transistor and die size figures: 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, while the Xeon D-1715TER does not have those measurements in the database.

Memory support shows a split: both support DDR4, but the Xeon D-1715TER uses a triple-channel memory bus with 64.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ryzen 3 3300X uses dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon D-1715TER but not on the Ryzen 3 3300X. Both have PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Xeon D-1715TER uses an Intel BGA 2227 socket, while the Ryzen 3 3300X uses AMD Socket AM4. The Ryzen 3 3300X has an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable, while the Xeon D-1715TER does not.

Clock speeds also diverge. The Xeon D-1715TER has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz. The Ryzen 3 3300X has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The AMD part runs at higher frequencies across the board, which aligns with its significant single-core benchmark advantage. The Xeon D-1715TER was released on 2022-02-23, while the Ryzen 3 3300X was released on 2020-04-23, making the Intel part nearly two years newer. The Ryzen 3 3300X has a recorded launch MSRP of $120, which can be stated once, while the Xeon D-1715TER has no launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench R15?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X scores 1071, which is 27.3% higher than the Intel Xeon D-1715TER's 779 in Cinebench R15 multi-core.

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

A: In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ryzen 3 3300X scores 195 versus 109 for the Xeon D-1715TER, a delta of -44.1% from the Intel part's perspective, meaning the AMD chip is roughly 79% faster.

Q: Does the Xeon D-1715TER support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon D-1715TER has ECC memory support, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X does not.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for each platform?

A: The Xeon D-1715TER has a triple-channel memory bus with 64.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Ryzen 3 3300X has a dual-channel memory bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the Xeon D-1715TER wins?

A: In the recorded head-to-head tests, the Xeon D-1715TER wins zero tests. The Ryzen 3 3300X wins both Cinebench R15 multi-core and single-core.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The Xeon D-1715TER is built on Intel's 10 nm process node. The Ryzen 3 3300X is built on TSMC's 7 nm process node.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X outperforms the Intel Xeon D-1715TER in both recorded head-to-head tests. For any user whose primary concern is raw compute performance in Cinebench R15 workloads, the Ryzen 3 3300X is the superior choice. Its 44.1% single-core advantage and 27.3% multi-core advantage are decisive. The Ryzen 3 3300X also has a higher base clock (3.80 GHz versus 2.40 GHz) and boost clock (4.30 GHz versus 3.50 GHz), and it is unlocked for overclocking.

The Xeon D-1715TER, however, is not without merit for specific use cases. Its ECC memory support, triple-channel memory bus with higher bandwidth, and lower TDP of 50 watts make it a fit for server or workstation environments where data integrity and memory throughput matter more than raw speed. Its 10 MB of L3 cache versus 16 MB on the Ryzen part is a point in the AMD chip's favor, but the Intel part's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches may help in certain cache-sensitive workloads. The Xeon D-1715TER also has a newer release date (2022-02-23 versus 2020-04-23) and is built on a 10 nm process, compared to the Ryzen 3 3300X's 7 nm TSMC process.

For a desktop builder looking for a fast 4-core chip, the Ryzen 3 3300X is the clear pick from the data. Its benchmark scores are higher in every comparable test, and its launch MSRP of $120 makes it an accessible option. For a server or workstation integrator prioritizing ECC, memory bandwidth, and lower power draw, the Xeon D-1715TER offers features that the Ryzen 3 3300X simply does not have. The data shows two capable 4-core, 8-thread processors, but they excel in different domains: one in raw speed, the other in platform features. Choose based on workload priorities, as the benchmarks clearly favor the AMD part in compute, while the Intel part holds the edge in enterprise-oriented capabilities.