AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE vs AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS and AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE make for an unusual but instructive comparison: a six-core mobile chip from the Zen 3+ era set against a four-core desktop part built on newer Zen 4 silicon. The database shows them separated by remarkably little in aggregate terms, an average benchmark score of 19047 versus 18505 and percentile placements of 73 versus 72 against all CPUs, yet the underlying story splits cleanly along core-count and per-core lines. The Ryzen 5 wins nine of fifteen head-to-head tests, while the Ryzen 3 PRO takes six, and nearly every result falls into one of two predictable camps.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The multi-threaded picture belongs to the Ryzen 5 7535HS, and mostly by wide margins. In Passmark's multithreaded suite the gap is decisive: integer math lands at 62372 versus 40348, a 54.6 percent advantage, floating point math at 35540 versus 25258 (40.7 percent ahead), data compression at 221668 versus 162623 (36.3 percent ahead), and data encryption at 13656 versus 9224 (48 percent ahead). The overall Passmark multithread score follows the same pattern, 17914 versus 14403, a 24.4 percent win for the Ryzen 5. Extended instructions (15411 versus 12313) and string sorting (22781 versus 20134) round out a 25.2 and 13.1 percent lead respectively. Six cores and twelve threads simply outmuscle four cores and eight threads in parallel workloads, and these numbers quantify exactly how much.

Cinebench R15 multicore also favors the Ryzen 5, 1457 versus 1260, a 15.6 percent gap. But here the data raises a question. In Cinebench R23 multicore the result inverts hard: the 8300GE scores 12511 against 8613, a 31.2 percent win for the newer chip. That is a dramatic swing between two generations of the same rendering benchmark, and it points to how differently Zen 4 behaves under a sustained, modern AVX-heavy render load. The R15 results skew toward the older chip's strengths, while R23 rewards the newer core design.

Single-threaded results are far more consistent, and they all favor the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE. Passmark single-thread reads 3828 versus 3123, an 18.4 percent lead. Cinebench R23 single-core is 1766 versus 1445, 18.2 percent in the same direction. The one exception is Cinebench R15 single-core, where the 7535HS posts 232 against 177, a 31.1 percent win, which again suggests the R15 suite in the database behaves differently from its successors. Two narrow results also go to the 8300GE: Passmark physics at 857 versus 844 (1.5 percent) and find prime numbers at 52 versus 49 (5.8 percent).

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 7535HS is the clear pick when the workload spreads across threads. Its wins in integer math, floating point math, compression, encryption, and the combined multithread score map directly onto tasks like file archiving, encryption work, code compilation, and batch media processing. The 36 to 55 percent margins in the Passmark subtests indicate these are not marginal wins but structural ones driven by having half again as many cores.

The Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE owns responsiveness-oriented scenarios. Its uniform 18 percent single-thread advantage across both Passmark and Cinebench R23, plus the R23 multicore result of 12511, make it the stronger chip for lightly threaded applications and for workloads that scale with per-core throughput rather than thread count. The R23 multicore number is particularly interesting: despite fewer cores, it beats the 7535HS by 31.2 percent, implying per-core efficiency strong enough to overcome a core-count deficit in that specific test.

Context from the rivals list reinforces how close these two are overall. The 7535HS sits within a fraction of a percent of the Intel Core i5-12400F, Intel Core 3 201E, and Intel Core i5-1335U in average score. The 8300GE is similarly bracketed by the Intel Core i5-13420H, Core i3-14100F, Core i3-13100, and Core 7 360. Both chips occupy essentially the same performance band across the database, just arriving at it by different means.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is a full generation. The 7535HS uses Zen 3+ cores under the Rembrandt-R codename, fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process. The 8300GE uses Zen 4 cores, codename Phoenix2, on a denser 4 nm TSMC process. That node jump shows up in the physical data: the 8300GE packs 20,900 million transistors into a 137 mm² die, while the 7535HS spreads a larger 208 mm² die across the older node. The transistor count for the 7535HS is not recorded in the database, so a direct density comparison is not possible.

Cache design diverges in an interesting way. The 7535HS pairs 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core with a generous 16 MB of shared L3. The 8300GE doubles L2 to 1 MB per core but halves shared L3 to 8 MB. The Zen 4 part bets on a bigger private pool per core, which aligns with its stronger single-thread showings, while the Zen 3+ part maintains a deeper shared cache for its six cores.

Integrated graphics differ too: the 7535HS carries a Radeon 660M, the 8300GE a Radeon 740M. Neither chip offers an unlocked multiplier, both are active production parts, and neither has 3D V-Cache. Both support dual-channel DDR5, though the 8300GE records higher memory bandwidth at 83.2 GB/s against 76.8 GB/s.

Specification Differences

The two differ on nearly every specification that matters:

• Cores/threads: 7535HS has 6 cores and 12 threads; 8300GE has 4 cores and 8 threads.
• Base clock: 3.30 GHz on the 7535HS versus 3.40 GHz on the 8300GE.
• Boost clock: 4.55 GHz on the 7535HS versus 4.90 GHz on the 8300GE.
• Cache: 512 KB L2 per core and 16 MB L3 on the 7535HS; 1 MB L2 per core and 8 MB L3 on the 8300GE.
• Process node: 6 nm versus 4 nm, both TSMC.
• Die size: 208 mm² versus 137 mm².
• Socket: FP7 (mobile) on the 7535HS, AM5 (desktop) on the 8300GE.
• Market segment: Mobile versus Desktop.
• PCIe: Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes on the 7535HS versus Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes on the 8300GE.
• ECC: not supported on the 7535HS, supported on the 8300GE.
• Memory bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s.
• Integrated graphics: Radeon 660M versus Radeon 740M.

Shared traits include the 35 W TDP rating, DDR5 support, dual-channel memory buses, the absence of an unlocked multiplier, and active production status. The release dates differ, with the 8300GE arriving later than the 7535HS.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster overall?

A: The averages are nearly tied: 19047 for the 7535HS versus 18505 for the 8300GE, and the percentile placements are 73 versus 72. The 7535HS wins nine of fifteen direct comparisons, so it has the edge in breadth, but the split is workload-dependent.

Q: Which one is better for multi-threaded workloads?

A: The 7535HS. It leads Passmark multithread by 24.4 percent, integer math by 54.6 percent, and encryption by 48 percent, all products of its 6-core, 12-thread configuration.

Q: Which one has better single-core performance?

A: The 8300GE, by 18.4 percent in Passmark single-thread (3828 versus 3123) and 18.2 percent in Cinebench R23 single-core (1766 versus 1445), consistent with its higher 4.90 GHz boost clock and newer Zen 4 architecture.

Q: Why does the 8300GE win Cinebench R23 multicore despite having fewer cores?

A: The data shows it scoring 12511 versus 8613, a 31.2 percent lead. The database does not record the mechanism, but the combination of Zen 4 cores, higher boost clocks, and 1 MB of L2 per core is the visible difference on the spec sheet.

Q: Do both support ECC memory?

A: No. The 8300GE supports ECC, which suits its PRO desktop positioning. The 7535HS does not.

Q: Which platform has more PCIe connectivity?

A: The 7535HS provides Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, against Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes on the 8300GE, giving the mobile part more headroom for GPUs and storage, at least on paper.

The Verdict

The data points different buyers in different directions. For sustained, parallel workloads such as compression, encryption, rendering in older benchmarks, and general multithreaded throughput, the Ryzen 5 7535HS is the stronger choice, and its margins there are large, often 25 to 55 percent. For per-core responsiveness, modern rendering workloads as measured by Cinebench R23, and a desktop AM5 platform with ECC support and a socket that invites future upgrades, the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE is the pick, and its single-thread advantage is consistent across every modern test in the database. Aggregate performance is a near tie, so the deciding factors are practical: the 7535HS is a mobile FP7 part with six cores and 20 PCIe lanes, while the 8300GE is a four-core desktop chip on newer 4 nm Zen 4 silicon. Choose the thread count that matches the workload.