AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE vs AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits these two AMD Ryzen 3 parts into distinct profiles. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G takes the lead in the majority of recorded tests, winning 10 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE wins 7. However, the margin of victory matters more than the raw count. The PRO chip's wins in Cinebench are consistent and decisive. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the PRO 8300G scores 12,359 against 11,705 for the 8300GE, a 5.3% advantage. That same 5.3% delta appears across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core runs. The single-core R23 result shows 1,744 versus 1,652, and the R20 single-core test shows 732 versus 693. These are not marginal differences; the PRO 8300G is clearly faster in rendering workloads.

The 8300GE counters in several Passmark subtests. Its most notable wins come in floating-point math (24,681 versus 23,374, a 5.6% gap) and integer math (39,163 versus 37,292, a 5% gap). It also leads in extended instructions (11,923 versus 11,451, a 4.1% delta) and data compression (155,164 versus 150,567, a 3.1% delta). In single-thread Passmark, the 8300GE scores 3,644 against 3,550, a 2.6% edge, and it edges out the PRO chip in multithread Passmark (13,507 versus 13,368, a 1% delta). These wins suggest that the lower-TDP chip is not universally slower; in specific arithmetic and compression tasks, it actually pulls ahead.

The PRO 8300G's other wins include random string sorting (19,703 versus 18,010, an 8.6% delta, its largest margin) and find prime numbers (47 versus 44, a 6.4% delta). It also wins Passmark physics (772 versus 750, a 2.8% delta) and data encryption, where the scores are nearly identical: 8,607 versus 8,603, a delta of 0.0%. The average benchmark scores reflect this split. The 8300GE has an average score of 17,614, while the PRO 8300G sits at 17,278. Both chips land in the 71st percentile of all CPUs in the database. The delta between their averages is small, roughly 2%, but the distribution of wins matters. The PRO chip dominates the Cinebench suite, which is often used as a proxy for sustained multi-core performance, while the 8300GE shows strength in math-heavy Passmark tests.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is the pick for anyone prioritizing rendering, encoding, or any workload that scales with sustained multi-core throughput. Every Cinebench iteration, from R15 through R23, shows a 5.3% lead for the PRO chip. The single-core Cinebench results also favor it, which indicates a higher sustained clock under load. The PRO 8300G also wins in random string sorting, a task that stresses memory access patterns and sorting algorithms, and in prime number finding. Its Passmark physics score is higher, which can matter for basic physics simulations in benchmarks or light computational tasks. The data encryption result is effectively a tie, so neither chip offers a meaningful edge there.

The AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE is the better choice for integer and floating-point arithmetic. Its 5.6% lead in floating-point math and 5% lead in integer math are the largest performance advantages recorded for either chip in any category. It also handles extended instructions (SIMD workloads) with a 4.1% edge and data compression with a 3.1% edge. Single-threaded Passmark favors the 8300GE by 2.6%, which is curious given that the PRO chip wins single-core Cinebench. This suggests the 8300GE can hit higher peak clocks in short bursts, while the PRO chip sustains performance better over longer rendering runs. The 8300GE also wins Passmark multithread, though by just 1%, so the overall thread throughput is close. For users running spreadsheet-like calculations, compression tools, or SIMD-optimized code, the 8300GE offers measurable advantages.

FAQ

Q: Which chip has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE has an average score of 17,614, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has an average score of 17,278. The 8300GE is about 2% higher on average.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G win in all Cinebench tests?

A: Yes. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core, the PRO 8300G wins with a consistent 5.3% delta over the 8300GE.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between these two chips?

A: The largest gap is in Passmark random string sorting, where the PRO 8300G scores 19,703 versus 18,010 for the 8300GE, a difference of 8.6%. The PRO chip also leads by 6.4% in find prime numbers.

Q: Are there any tests where the AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE wins by a large margin?

A: Yes. The 8300GE leads by 5.6% in floating-point math and by 5% in integer math. It also wins extended instructions by 4.1% and data compression by 3.1%.

Q: How do these chips compare in single-threaded performance?

A: It depends on the test. The 8300GE wins Passmark single-thread (3,644 versus 3,550, a 2.6% delta), but the PRO 8300G wins all Cinebench single-core tests by 5.1% to 5.3%.

Q: Do both chips have the same integrated graphics?

A: Yes, both feature the Radeon 740M integrated graphics. Neither chip has a discrete GPU advantage in the recorded data.

Specification Differences

The two processors share the same socket, architecture, core count, and most core specifications. Both use AMD Socket AM5, have 4 cores and 8 threads, and run a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The base clock differs: the 8300GE runs at 3.50 GHz, while the PRO 8300G runs at 3.40 GHz. That 0.10 GHz base clock difference is the only clock speed variance between them. The TDP is a major differentiator. The 8300GE is rated at 35 watts, while the PRO 8300G is rated at 65 watts. This explains why the PRO chip can sustain higher performance in Cinebench, as it has more thermal headroom. The part numbers also differ, with the 8300GE listed as 100-000001496 and the PRO 8300G as 100-000001187. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either.

Memory support is identical: both support DDR5, dual-channel memory, 83.2 GB/s bandwidth, and ECC memory. PCIe connectivity is the same, with Gen 4 and 14 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics are identical, the Radeon 740M. The production status is Active for both, and the release date is the same, 2024-04-15. There is no launch MSRP recorded for either chip, so pricing data is unavailable. The only specification differences that appear in the database are the base clock, TDP, and part number.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are built on the same Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix2 codename. They are part of the 8000 series and the Ryzen 3 generation. The process node is 4 nm, fabricated by TSMC. The transistor count is 20,900 million, and the die size is 137 mm² for both. Cache configuration matches exactly: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. There is no 3D V-Cache on either chip. The memory controller supports DDR5 with dual-channel operation and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth, and ECC is enabled on both. The PCIe implementation is identical, Gen 4 with 14 lanes from the CPU. Both chips integrate the Radeon 740M graphics. The market segment is Desktop for both, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. In short, there are no architectural differences between these two chips. They are the same silicon with different power limits and base clocks. The PRO 8300G is configured with a higher TDP, while the 8300GE is a lower-power variant. All recorded architectural data points, from cache to process node to graphics, are identical.

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is the faster chip in rendering and sustained multi-core workloads. Its 5.3% lead across the entire Cinebench suite, both single and multi-core, is the clearest performance signal in the data. It also wins in random string sorting, prime number finding, and physics. If the workload involves video encoding, 3D rendering, or any long-running thread-heavy task, the PRO 8300G is the correct choice. The higher 65 watt TDP delivers measurable results.

The AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE is the better option for math-intensive and compression-heavy tasks. Its 5.6% lead in floating-point math and 5% lead in integer math are substantial, and it also wins in extended instructions and data compression. The 8300GE also has a slight edge in Passmark single-thread and multithread scores. For users running scientific calculations, financial modeling, or compression utilities, the 8300GE offers better performance per benchmark point despite its lower 35 watt TDP.

Both chips sit in the 71st percentile of all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores differ by only about 2%. The choice comes down to workload. The PRO 8300G for Cinebench-style rendering, the 8300GE for Passmark-style arithmetic. There is no universal winner, but the PRO chip's consistent Cinebench dominance is harder to ignore for general productivity. The 8300GE's wins are narrower in some cases but cover a wider variety of math operations. Neither chip supports overclocking, both have the same integrated graphics, and both are active in the market. The data does not indicate a clear overall champion, only a clear split by workload type.