AMD Ryzen 3 3300U

The AMD Ryzen 3 3300U is a 4-core, 4-thread mobile processor from the 3000 series, built on the Zen+ architecture (codenamed Picasso) using a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It is a 15 W TDP part with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz, integrating Radeon Vega 6 graphics. Benchmark data positions it at the 38th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1402, placing it in a tightly contested segment where a few points separate it from its nearest rivals.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The Ryzen 3 3300U’s benchmark results reveal a pronounced split between its single-thread and multi-thread capabilities. In Cinebench R23, the processor scores 684 points in single-core and 4849 points in multi-core, yielding a multi-to-single ratio of roughly 7.1x. This ratio is typical for a 4-core/4-thread part without SMT, indicating that the multi-core score scales almost linearly with core count when all threads are active. The single-core score of 684, while modest against desktop parts, is competitive for a 15 W mobile chip, suggesting that lightly-threaded tasks like web browsing, office applications, and legacy software will see adequate responsiveness.

The multi-core score of 4849 in R23 tells a different story. With only four threads, the processor cannot hide latency in heavily parallel workloads. Video encoding, 3D rendering, and compilation tasks will saturate all four threads quickly, and the lack of SMT means there is no extra thread to absorb scheduling gaps. The Cinebench R20 scores reinforce this: 287 single-core and 2036 multi-core. The multi-core result is nearly exactly 4x the single-core result (2036 / 287 ≈ 7.1), confirming that the chip delivers near-ideal scaling per physical core but no more. For users whose workloads are predominantly single-threaded, the 3300U performs admirably; for those expecting multi-threaded throughput, the data shows a hard ceiling that a 6-core or 8-core part would bypass.

The gap also appears in the older Cinebench R15 scores: 68 single-core and 488 multi-core. Here the scaling factor is again about 7.2x, reinforcing the linear behavior. This consistency across generations of the Cinebench test suite indicates that the processor’s behavior is stable and predictable: single-thread performance is the stronger relative asset, while multi-thread performance is strictly a function of its four physical threads. Real-world implications are clear: productivity suites that are lightly threaded will feel snappy, but any workload that spreads across eight or more threads will leave the 3300U at a significant disadvantage compared to similarly priced or higher-tier parts.

Power and Thermals

The 3300U carries a 15 W TDP, which classifies it firmly in the ultraportable and thin-and-light laptop segment. This power envelope is the defining constraint of the chip’s thermal behavior. At 15 W, the processor is designed to operate within the cooling capacity of a small fan or even a passive heat pipe in some chassis, without requiring a bulky heatsink. The 12 nm process node, while not cutting-edge, is mature enough for this power class, and the 4,940 million transistors spread across a 210 mm² die suggest that the chip is not overly dense, which aids in heat dissipation.

For cooling, the data implies that a capable air cooler is sufficient. The 15 W TDP means that sustained multi-threaded loads will generate moderate heat, but the boost clock of 3.50 GHz is not sustainable indefinitely under full load on all cores unless the cooling solution is above average. In practice, the chip will likely hover near its base clock of 2.10 GHz under prolonged heavy loads on all four cores, with single-core boosts reaching the 3.50 GHz ceiling more easily since only one core is active. The lack of an unlocked multiplier means no user-level overclocking, so thermals are strictly managed by the firmware and the chassis design.

The integrated Radeon Vega 6 graphics adds to the thermal load when both CPU and GPU are active. Since the TDP is shared between the CPU and GPU components, a gaming or graphics-heavy session will reduce the available power for CPU boost clocks. However, for typical office or media consumption workloads, the 15 W envelope is well within the comfort zone of modern ultrabook cooling. The data does not include specific thermal throttling metrics, but the benchmark scores indicate that the chip can sustain its multi-core performance long enough to complete Cinebench runs, which suggests that the default power management is balanced for bursty workloads rather than continuous all-core max load.

How It Compares

vs Intel Xeon D-1521: The Ryzen 3 3300U is effectively tied with the Xeon D-1521, with a delta of +0.1% in average benchmark score (1402 vs 1401). This is a statistical dead heat. The Xeon D-1521 is a server-oriented part, but the data shows that in this benchmark suite, the mobile 3300U matches it. The 3300U achieves this parity with a 15 W TDP, whereas the Xeon is a higher-power part, indicating that the 3300U delivers comparable performance per benchmark point despite its mobile classification.

vs Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2: The 3300U trails the Xeon E5-1410 v2 by 0.2% (1402 vs 1404). This is again within noise margin. The Xeon E5-1410 v2 is an older server chip, and the 3300U’s near-identical score suggests that architectural improvements in Zen+ have closed the gap with much larger, older server dies. From a user perspective, there is no meaningful performance difference between these two in the tested workloads.

vs Intel Core i5-8365UE: The 3300U is 0.4% behind the Core i5-8365UE (1402 vs 1408). This is the largest delta among the rivals, but still negligible in real-world terms. The i5-8365UE is a 15 W Whiskey Lake part, so the comparison is direct: the 3300U is essentially equivalent to a contemporary Intel ultrabook chip of the same power class. The data does not break down single-thread vs multi-thread for the rival, so the overall parity is the only available conclusion.

vs AMD Ryzen 3 2300U: The 3300U is 0.6% ahead of the Ryzen 3 2300U (1402 vs 1394). This is the largest positive delta in the rival set. Both are 4-core/4-thread Zen+ parts, but the 3300U’s slightly higher boost clock (3.50 GHz vs the 2300U’s unspecified clock in the pack) likely accounts for the small edge. The improvement is minor, suggesting that the 3300U is a modest refresh rather than a generational leap over its immediate predecessor.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does the AMD Ryzen 3 3300U have?

A: It has 4 cores and 4 threads, with no SMT support.

Q: What is the boost clock speed of the 3300U?

A: The boost clock is 3.50 GHz, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz.

Q: Does the 3300U support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory is not supported. It supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

Q: What is the manufacturing process for this processor?

A: It is fabricated on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die.

Q: What is the socket type for the 3300U?

A: It uses AMD Socket FP5, which is a mobile socket.

Q: How does the 3300U compare to its closest rival, the Intel Core i5-8365UE?

A: The 3300U is 0.4% behind the i5-8365UE in average benchmark score, making them effectively equal in performance.

Benchmark Performance

The average benchmark score of 1402 places the Ryzen 3 3300U at the 38th percentile of all CPUs, which indicates that it outperforms roughly a third of the processors in the database but sits below the majority. The nearest rivals all cluster within a 0.6% band around this score, highlighting an extremely competitive mid-range mobile segment. The Intel Xeon D-1521 is 0.1% ahead (1401 vs 1402), the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 is 0.2% ahead (1404 vs 1402), the Intel Core i5-8365UE is 0.4% ahead (1408 vs 1402), and the AMD Ryzen 3 2300U is 0.6% behind (1394 vs 1402). These deltas are all within benchmark run-to-run variance, meaning the 3300U is statistically indistinguishable from any of these four rivals.

Looking at the Cinebench suite specifically, the R23 multi-core score of 4849 is the strongest absolute number, but it must be contextualized against the single-core score of 684. A 7.1x ratio between multi and single is high, but for a 4-thread part it is expected. The R20 scores (2036 multi, 287 single) and R15 scores (488 multi, 68 single) follow the same pattern. The consistency across R15, R20, and R23 indicates that the processor’s performance is stable across different versions of the same workload, suggesting no thermal throttling during these short bursts.

The percentile rank of 38 is a sobering statistic. It means that 62% of all CPUs in the database score higher than the 3300U. This is not a condemnation but a reflection of the chip’s positioning: it is a low-power mobile part, and the database includes many desktop and high-performance mobile chips. Within its own 15 W class, the rival deltas show that it is exactly on par with the competition. The 0.6% lead over the Ryzen 3 2300U is the only positive delta among the rivals, and it is small enough to be considered a tie. The 0.4% deficit to the i5-8365UE is similarly negligible.

The data suggests that the 3300U’s benchmark performance is defined by its thread count and power budget. The single-core scores, while not top-tier, are sufficient for everyday tasks, and the multi-core scores scale linearly with cores, meaning no hidden parallel efficiency gains. For a user evaluating this processor, the benchmark results indicate that it will handle basic productivity and light multitasking without issue, but it will not excel in rendering or heavy compilation. The 38th percentile ranking is a useful summary: it is a competent but unremarkable performer, exactly where a 15 W 4-core chip in 2019 would be expected to land.