AMD Ryzen 5 3400G vs Intel Core i3-9350KF Comparison

The Intel Core i3-9350KF and AMD Ryzen 5 3400G are both four-core desktop processors from 2019, yet they represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel chip is a high-frequency, no-frills compute part, while the AMD chip is a versatile APU with integrated graphics and simultaneous multithreading. Benchmark data from the FACT PACK reveals a clear split: the Ryzen 5 3400G dominates in most multi-threaded and single-threaded rendering workloads, while the Core i3-9350KF counters with significant wins in Geekbench tests. With both CPUs sitting at the 46th percentile of all CPUs and nearly identical average benchmark scores (2082 for Intel, 2059 for AMD), the choice between them hinges entirely on workload and system requirements.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G is the clear winner in Cinebench rendering tests, taking all six Cinebench comparisons in the head-to-head data. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen scores 7835 against the Intel’s 6352, a delta of -18.9% from the Intel perspective, meaning the AMD part is roughly 19% faster. The same margin appears consistently across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multi-core variants. For example, in Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ryzen scores 111 versus Intel’s 90, and in R20 single-core it scores 464 versus 376. This consistency suggests the Ryzen’s architectural efficiency and higher thread count (8 threads vs 4) provide a tangible advantage in rendering and heavily threaded compute tasks.

The Intel Core i3-9350KF wins in Geekbench, however, with a decisive 39.3% lead in single-core (1534 vs 1101) and a 9.8% lead in multi-core (4098 vs 3731). These Geekbench results measure a different kind of workload, often more dependent on clock speed and memory latency. The Intel chip’s higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz, compared to the Ryzen’s 4.20 GHz, likely contributes to its Geekbench edge, despite the Ryzen having more threads. This indicates that for applications that are not heavily thread-scaled and are sensitive to raw frequency, the Intel part is superior.

The data implies a use-case split: the Ryzen 5 3400G is the better choice for content creation, 3D rendering, and any multi-threaded productivity software that leverages 8 threads. The Core i3-9350KF, with its Geekbench single-core lead, could be preferable for lightly threaded applications, older games, or tasks where high frequency per core matters more than total throughput. The Ryzen’s integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics is another factor, meaning it can run without a discrete GPU, while the Intel chip has no integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The data in the FACT PACK is unequivocal for most users: the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G wins the majority of benchmark comparisons, securing 6 out of 8 head-to-head tests. Its consistent ~19% lead across every Cinebench test, from R15 to R23, in both single-core and multi-core, makes it the stronger choice for rendering and threaded productivity workloads. The Ryzen also offers the flexibility of integrated graphics and a lower 65W TDP, versus Intel’s 91W, and is unlocked for overclocking. The average benchmark scores are nearly tied, but the Ryzen’s wins are in more broadly applicable tests.

The Intel Core i3-9350KF is the pick only for a narrow use case: if your primary workloads are those modeled by Geekbench, where it holds a 39.3% single-core advantage. This could translate to better performance in certain legacy applications or games that are single-thread bound. However, its lack of integrated graphics means you must purchase a discrete GPU, and its 4 threads limit it in modern multi-threaded software. The Intel chip’s higher base and boost clocks (4.00/4.60 GHz) do not overcome the Ryzen’s threading advantage in Cinebench.

For a general-purpose desktop CPU, the Ryzen 5 3400G is the data-backed winner. The Intel part is a niche performer for users who prioritize Geekbench-style single-thread speed above all else and already have a dedicated graphics card. The Ryzen’s active production status and integrated graphics also make it a more practical, self-contained solution.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G is a 39.3% lead in Geekbench single-core, but that is actually a win for Intel. Looking at the Ryzen’s biggest victories, they are uniformly in Cinebench R20 and R23 single-core tests, where it leads by 19%. Specifically, in Cinebench R20 single-core, the Ryzen scores 464 versus Intel’s 376, a delta of -19%. Similarly, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen scores 1106 against Intel’s 896, also a -19% delta. These are substantial margins in single-threaded rendering, showing the Ryzen’s Zen+ architecture is more efficient per clock in this workload.

The multi-core Cinebench tests show the same pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen scores 7835 versus Intel’s 6352, an 18.9% lead. The Ryzen’s 8 threads allow it to scale better, even though the Intel chip has a higher boost clock. The same 18.9% delta appears in R15 and R20 multi-core tests, with scores of 789 vs 640 and 3290 vs 2667, respectively. The Ryzen’s consistency across all Cinebench versions reinforces that its architecture and threading provide a robust advantage for this workload.

The Intel Core i3-9350KF’s biggest win is a 39.3% lead in Geekbench single-core, scoring 1534 versus the Ryzen’s 1101. This is a massive margin, nearly double the Ryzen’s Cinebench lead. In Geekbench multi-core, Intel also wins, but by a smaller 9.8%, scoring 4098 versus 3731. This suggests that Geekbench’s test suite favors Intel’s higher clock speeds and memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s, though the Intel number is lower, the test still favors Intel). The Intel chip wins only these two tests, but the single-core margin is so large it could matter for specific software.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G is faster, scoring 7835 compared to the Intel Core i3-9350KF’s 6352, a difference of 18.9%.

Q: Does the Intel chip have any single-core advantage?

A: Yes, in Geekbench single-core, the Intel Core i3-9350KF scores 1534, which is 39.3% higher than the Ryzen 5 3400G’s 1101 score.

Q: Why does the Ryzen 5 3400G win most benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen has 8 threads versus Intel’s 4, which allows it to process more parallel workloads, as seen in its consistent wins across all Cinebench multi-core and single-core tests.

Q: Can I use the Intel Core i3-9350KF without a dedicated graphics card?

A: No, the Intel Core i3-9350KF has no integrated graphics, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G includes Radeon RX Vega 11 integrated graphics.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core i3-9350KF has an average benchmark score of 2082, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G has an average of 2059, a negligible difference of about 1%.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i3-9350KF has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G’s boost clock of 4.20 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different architectures and process nodes. The Intel Core i3-9350KF uses the Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm process from Intel, with a die size of 126 mm². In contrast, the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G uses the Zen+ architecture (codename Picasso) on a 12 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with a significantly larger die size of 210 mm² and 4,940 million transistors. The Intel chip is a 4-core, 4-thread part, while the AMD chip is a 4-core, 8-thread part, indicating simultaneous multithreading support.

Cache configurations differ notably. The Intel chip has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip has a larger 96 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core, but only 4 MB of shared L3. The AMD’s larger L1 and L2 caches likely contribute to its Cinebench efficiency, while Intel’s larger L3 helps with its Geekbench performance. The Intel chip supports ECC memory, whereas the AMD chip does not. The AMD chip features an integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 GPU, a capability entirely absent from the Intel part.

The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G is built on the Zen+ architecture, which is a refinement of the first-gen Zen, and the data suggests it offers better instructions-per-clock in rendering workloads. The Intel part is a Coffee Lake refresh, which focuses on high clock speeds. The AMD chip has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Intel chip is locked. The AMD chip is also produced on a smaller 12 nm node, which may contribute to its lower 65W TDP versus Intel’s 91W.

Specification Differences

The specifications where the two CPUs differ are numerous. The Intel Core i3-9350KF has 4 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G has 8 threads. Base clocks differ: Intel runs at 4.00 GHz, AMD at 3.70 GHz. Boost clocks differ: Intel at 4.60 GHz, AMD at 4.20 GHz. The TDP is significantly different: Intel draws 91W, AMD draws 65W. The sockets are incompatible: Intel uses Socket 1151, AMD uses Socket AM4.

Memory bandwidth differs, with Intel at 38.4 GB/s and AMD at 46.9 GB/s, both on dual-channel DDR4. ECC memory support is present on the Intel chip but absent on the AMD chip. PCIe support is listed as Gen 3 with 16 lanes for Intel, while AMD is simply listed as Gen 3. The integrated graphics are a key difference: AMD has Radeon RX Vega 11, Intel has none. The multiplier is unlocked on AMD but locked on Intel. The production status differs: Intel is end-of-life, AMD is active. The die sizes are 126 mm² for Intel and 210 mm² for AMD, with transistor counts of null for Intel and 4,940 million for AMD. The launch MSRP is $173 for Intel and $149 for AMD.