AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX vs Intel Core i3-8100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data delivers an unambiguous verdict in every paired test. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX wins all eight head-to-head comparisons, with the Intel Core i3-8100 recording zero wins. The margins are substantial. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Threadripper PRO scores 2869 against the i3-8100's 379, a delta of -86.8% from Intel's perspective. The single-core R15 test shows 404 versus 53, also -86.9%. The pattern holds across newer Cinebench versions: R20 multicore sees 11956 versus 1582, and R23 multicore sees 28469 versus 3769, both at -86.8%. Even in single-core R20 and R23, the Threadripper PRO leads by the same -86.8% margin (1687 vs 223, and 4019 vs 532). Geekbench multicore shows a slightly narrower gap: 10854 versus 3458, a -68.1% delta. The closest contest of the set is Geekbench single-core, where the Threadripper PRO's 1668 beats the i3-8100's 1214 by -27.2%, still a decisive lead.

What the deltas reveal is that the Threadripper PRO's advantage is not confined to throughput-heavy multithreaded workloads. The single-core deltas are nearly identical to the multicore deltas in Cinebench, indicating that the architectural and clock differences between the two chips produce a consistent per-thread performance gap, not merely a core-count effect. The Geekbench single-core result, while the smallest margin, still favors the AMD part by over a quarter. The data suggests that the i3-8100, despite being a modern Coffee Lake design, cannot match the Zen 2 core efficiency at comparable clock behavior. Every benchmark in the head-to-head set points in one direction, and the magnitude of the deltas (mostly -86.8%) indicates a performance class separation, not a chip-to-chip rivalry.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multicore, and by how much?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX wins with a score of 28469, while the Intel Core i3-8100 scores 3769. The delta is -86.8% from the Intel chip's perspective, meaning the AMD part is roughly 7.5 times faster in this test.

Q: Is the single-core performance gap as large as the multicore gap?

A: In Cinebench R15, the single-core delta is -86.9%, nearly identical to the multicore delta of -86.8%. Geekbench single-core shows a smaller margin: the AMD chip scores 1668 versus 1214, a -27.2% delta. So the single-core gap is significant but varies by benchmark, with Cinebench showing a larger per-thread deficit for Intel.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i3-8100 has an average benchmark score of 8123, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX has an average of 7741. Despite the Threadripper PRO winning every head-to-head test, its average score is lower because the average includes different benchmark sets and the i3-8100 has more recorded tests (19 vs 8).

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The i3-8100's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon Platinum 8180M with an avg score of 8110, a delta of 0.2%, and the AMD EPYC 7302 at 8139, a -0.2% delta. The Threadripper PRO's nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-4590 at 7609 (1.7% delta) and the Intel Core i9-10980XE at 7910 (-2.1% delta). Both chips sit at the 64th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Both the Intel Core i3-8100 and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX have ECC memory support listed as true. This is a shared feature, though the memory channels and bandwidth differ dramatically.

Q: Does the Intel chip have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i3-8100 includes UHD Graphics 630. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required for any display output.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Intel Core i3-8100 uses the Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm process node, fabricated by Intel itself. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX is built on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Castle Peak, using a 7 nm process from TSMC. The process node difference (14 nm vs 7 nm) is a primary factor in the power and density characteristics, though the Threadripper PRO's 280 W TDP versus the i3-8100's 65 W TDP shows that the AMD part consumes far more energy to achieve its performance.

The core configurations are stark: the i3-8100 has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Threadripper PRO has 12 cores and 24 threads. The cache hierarchy also diverges. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core for Intel versus 512 KB per core for AMD. The L3 cache is a major differentiator: the i3-8100 has 6 MB shared, while the Threadripper PRO has 64 MB. The AMD chip also lists 7,600 million transistors and a die size of 2x 74 mm², whereas the Intel chip has a 126 mm² die with no transistor count listed. The Threadripper PRO's dual-die design with 64 MB of L3 is a hallmark of the Zen 2 chiplet architecture, which the Coffee Lake monolithic die does not employ.

The memory subsystem further separates the two. The i3-8100 uses a dual-channel DDR4 bus with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Threadripper PRO uses an eight-channel DDR4 bus with 204.8 GB/s, a 5.3x bandwidth advantage that directly supports its higher core count. PCIe connectivity also differs: Intel provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while AMD provides Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The Threadripper PRO's 128 lanes are suited for workstation expansion, while the i3-8100's 16 lanes are typical for a desktop part.

The production statuses also differ, with the i3-8100 marked as end-of-life and the Threadripper PRO active. Release dates show Intel launched in October 2017 and AMD in July 2020. The Intel chip's integrated UHD Graphics 630 is absent on the AMD part, reinforcing the workstation positioning of the Threadripper PRO.

Specification Differences

The primary specification differences between the two are as follows. Core count: 4 versus 12. Thread count: 4 versus 24. Base clock: 3.60 GHz versus 4.00 GHz. Boost clock: the i3-8100 has none listed, while the Threadripper PRO boosts to 4.30 GHz. TDP: 65 W versus 280 W. Socket: Intel Socket 1151 versus AMD Socket WRX8. Process node: 14 nm versus 7 nm. Foundry: Intel versus TSMC. Die size: 126 mm² versus 2x 74 mm². L2 cache per core: 256 KB versus 512 KB. L3 cache: 6 MB shared versus 64 MB. Memory bus: dual-channel versus eight-channel. Memory bandwidth: 38.4 GB/s versus 204.8 GB/s. PCIe: Gen 3, 16 lanes versus Gen 4, 128 lanes. Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 630 versus none. Market segment: Desktop versus Server/Workstation. Production status: end-of-life versus active. Release date: October 2017 versus July 2020. Launch MSRP: the i3-8100 has a listed launch MSRP of $117, while the Threadripper PRO has none recorded. The i3-8100's multiplier is locked, as is the Threadripper PRO's, so neither offers unlocked overclocking.

Where Each One Wins

Based solely on the benchmark wins, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX wins every category measured in the head-to-head set. It takes all eight comparisons, including both single-core and multicore tests across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and Geekbench. The i3-8100 records zero wins, so there is no benchmark category where the data shows an Intel advantage. However, the i3-8100 does have strengths outside the head-to-head set. Its average benchmark score of 8123 exceeds the Threadripper PRO's 7741, driven by its Passmark results: the i3-8100 scores 82992 in data compression, 1828 in data encryption, 7212 in extended instructions, 13774 in floating point math, and 16191 in integer math. The Threadripper PRO has no Passmark scores recorded, so direct comparison in those workloads is impossible from the data.

The i3-8100 also has a far lower TDP (65 W vs 280 W) and integrated graphics, making it a more self-contained desktop solution. The Threadripper PRO, by contrast, is positioned for server and workstation use, with 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, eight-channel memory, and 64 MB of L3 cache. The use-case split is therefore not about benchmark wins (AMD dominates all paired tests) but about system requirements: the i3-8100 suits a simple desktop with integrated display output and modest power draw, while the Threadripper PRO suits heavy compute with massive memory bandwidth and expansion capacity.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX is overwhelmingly faster than the Intel Core i3-8100 in every head-to-head benchmark recorded. The deltas of -86.8% across most Cinebench tests and -68.1% in Geekbench multicore indicate a performance chasm that no workload reversal could bridge. The single-core Geekbench gap of -27.2% is the closest the Intel chip comes, and even that is a clear loss. The Threadripper PRO's 12 cores, 24 threads, 64 MB L3, eight-channel memory, and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth deliver the expected throughput advantage, and its 4.30 GHz boost clock ensures it also leads in per-thread tests.

Who should pick the Intel Core i3-8100? Given the data, only a user who requires integrated graphics, a 65 W TDP, a smaller die, or the specific Passmark workloads where it shows strength (data compression, encryption, integer math) would consider it. Its end-of-life status and 4-core limit make it a poor choice for any performance-sensitive task. The launch MSRP of $117 reflects its entry-level positioning, but the benchmark results show it cannot compete with the Threadripper PRO in any measured head-to-head test.

Who should pick the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX? Any workload that benefits from the recorded benchmark wins: Cinebench rendering, Geekbench general compute, and by extension any multithreaded application. The 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, eight-channel memory, and 64 MB L3 cache make it a workstation-class part, and its active production status ensures ongoing availability. The 280 W TDP is a cost of entry, but the performance deltas justify it for users who need the compute. The verdict from the data is simple: the Threadripper PRO is the superior processor in every paired benchmark, and the i3-8100's only advantages are its lower power draw, integrated graphics, and certain Passmark sub-scores that the AMD chip does not contest.