AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE vs Intel Core i3-10100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a stark split between these two processors, with each dominating in different test suites. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE wins five of the eight head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core i3-10100 takes three. The margins, however, tell a more complex story than the win count suggests.

In Cinebench testing, the AMD part is decisively ahead. The Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE scores 582 in Cinebench R15 multi-core against the Intel's 258, a 125.6% advantage. That pattern repeats across every Cinebench iteration: R20 multi-core shows 2429 versus 1076 (125.7% delta), and R23 multi-core shows 5785 versus 2564 (125.6% delta). Even in single-core Cinebench tests, where Intel typically excels, the AMD part wins by wide margins—816 versus 362 in R23 single-core (125.4% delta) and 342 versus 152 in R20 single-core (125% delta).

The Intel Core i3-10100 fights back in Geekbench. It scores 4495 in multi-core versus 2921 for the AMD chip, a 35% advantage. Single-core Geekbench also favors Intel: 1350 versus 1042, a 22.8% lead. The only other Intel win is Cinebench R15 single-core, where it edges out the AMD part 88 to 82, a 6.8% margin.

These results are puzzling at first glance. The AMD part wins all but one Cinebench test, yet loses badly in Geekbench. The data suggests these benchmarks stress different aspects of the architecture—Cinebench appears to favor whatever the Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE does differently, while Geekbench rewards the Intel's higher clock speeds and thread count. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 1750 for AMD versus 1742 for Intel, with both parts sitting at the 41st percentile among all CPUs.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different design philosophies and manufacturing generations. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE uses the Zen+ architecture on a 12 nm process from GlobalFoundries, codenamed Picasso. It belongs to the 3000 series and features 4 cores with 4 threads—no simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core i3-10100 uses Comet Lake architecture on Intel's 14 nm process, also with 4 cores but with 8 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading.

The AMD chip integrates Radeon Vega 8 graphics, while Intel pairs its CPU with UHD Graphics 630. Both support DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration, but the AMD part has higher memory bandwidth at 46.9 GB/s versus Intel's 42.7 GB/s. The AMD chip supports ECC memory; the Intel does not. Both use PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

Cache layouts differ notably. The AMD part allocates 96 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 4 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD die is 210 mm² with 4,940 million transistors; Intel does not disclose die size or transistor count in the data.

Sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket AM4, Intel uses Socket 1200. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD chip has a 35 W TDP, the Intel part draws 65 W. Release dates differ by roughly seven months—AMD launched in September 2019, Intel in April 2020.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench tests?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE wins all Cinebench comparisons except R15 single-core. In R23 multi-core, it scores 5785 versus Intel's 2564, a 125.6% lead. The only Intel Cinebench win is R15 single-core at 88 versus 82.

Q: Why does the Intel Core i3-10100 win Geekbench despite losing Cinebench?

A: The Geekbench results favor Intel heavily. The Core i3-10100 scores 4495 multi-core versus 2921 for AMD (35% ahead) and 1350 single-core versus 1042 (22.8% ahead). The two benchmark suites clearly measure different workload characteristics.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: Yes. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE includes Radeon Vega 8 graphics, while the Intel Core i3-10100 includes UHD Graphics 630. Both are desktop processors with active production status.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i3-10100 does not list ECC as a feature.

Q: How do the thread counts compare?

A: Both have 4 physical cores, but the Intel Core i3-10100 has 8 threads while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE has 4 threads. This means Intel can handle twice as many concurrent threads.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The Intel Core i3-10100 has a 3.60 GHz base clock and 4.30 GHz boost clock. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE has a 3.30 GHz base clock and 4.00 GHz boost clock. Intel is faster in both metrics.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE | Intel Core i3-10100 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.30 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.00 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel Socket 1200 |

| Architecture | Zen+ | Comet Lake |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 4,940 million | Not disclosed |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | Not disclosed |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB per core | 64 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB per core | 256 KB per core |

| L3 Cache | 4 MB shared | 6 MB shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 46.9 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| ECC Support | Yes | No |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 | UHD Graphics 630 |

| Release Date | 2019-09-29 | 2020-04-29 |

| Part Number | YD320BC6M4MFH | SRH3N |

The Verdict

The data points to two very different usage profiles. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE delivers massive Cinebench advantages—consistently 125% or more ahead of the Intel part across multi-core and single-core tests. If your workload resembles Cinebench's rendering and compute patterns, the AMD chip is the clear choice. It also does this at half the TDP: 35 W versus 65 W, making it dramatically more power-efficient.

The Intel Core i3-10100 wins Geekbench by 35% in multi-core and 22.8% in single-core. It also has 8 threads versus 4, which matters for heavily threaded applications that scale with thread count. Its higher base and boost clocks (3.60/4.30 GHz versus 3.30/4.00 GHz) likely contribute to this advantage.

Neither processor distinguishes itself in the broader market. Both sit at the 41st percentile among all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are nearly tied at 1750 versus 1742. The nearest rivals for the AMD chip include the Intel Core i5-8269U (0.1% delta) and Intel Core i7-4790T (-0.3% delta), while the Intel part's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 4300U (0% delta) and Intel Core i5-6600 (-0.1% delta). These are adjacent performers, not class leaders.

The choice comes down to workload compatibility. For Cinebench-style rendering, the AMD processor is overwhelmingly superior. For Geekbench-style general compute and applications that exploit high thread counts, the Intel part is better. The AMD chip's ECC support and lower power draw make it attractive for specific professional or always-on scenarios, while the Intel chip's higher thread count suits multitasking environments.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE wins when:

• The workload resembles Cinebench rendering, where it leads by 125.4% to 125.7% in every R20 and R23 test
• Power efficiency is a priority, with a 35 W TDP versus Intel's 65 W
• ECC memory support is required for data integrity
• Memory bandwidth matters, with 46.9 GB/s versus Intel's 42.7 GB/s
• The task fits within 4 threads, since its single-core Cinebench scores exceed Intel's by 125% or more

Intel Core i3-10100 wins when:

• The workload resembles Geekbench's mixed compute patterns, where it leads by 35% multi-core and 22.8% single-core
• More than 4 threads can be utilized, given its 8-thread capability
• Higher clock speeds are beneficial, with 3.60 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost
• The application benefits from the larger 6 MB L3 cache versus AMD's 4 MB
• Compatibility with Intel Socket 1200 platforms is required

The benchmark data shows a genuine split personality. The AMD part's Cinebench dominance is so pronounced that it suggests architectural optimization for that specific workload type. The Intel part's Geekbench wins indicate better general-purpose performance in that benchmark's estimation. Both processors are active in production, so availability is not a differentiator. The 41st percentile ranking for both means neither is a high-end performer, but each has clear strengths for specific use cases. Choose based on your actual workload, not on average scores.