AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is a 4-core, 4-thread desktop processor built on the Zen architecture at GlobalFoundries. It carries a base clock of 3.50 GHz, a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, and a 65 W TDP. In the aggregate data, this CPU holds the 43rd percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 1778, and its four nearest rivals all sit within 0.5% of that average. The result is a tightly grouped performance cluster in which the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is the reference point.

Benchmark Performance

The Cinebench results show a consistent pattern across three generations of the test. In Cinebench R15, the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 scores 619 in multicore and 87 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 2582 in multicore and 364 in single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 6148 in multicore and 868 in single-core. The multicore figures are substantially larger than the single-core figures, which is the expected signature for a processor with four threads rather than a high core-count design.

The summary comparison value is an average benchmark score of 1778. Against the nearest rivals, the deltas are small. The Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 has an average score of 1777, which is 0.1% lower. The Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 has an average score of 1784, which is 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE has an average score of 1787, which is 0.5% higher. The Intel Xeon E-2224 has an average score of 1788, which is also 0.5% higher. In percentage terms, the entire nearest-rival band is narrow: the distances range from 0.1% to 0.5% from the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300’s average.

These margins mean the aggregate ranking is not a decisive separation. The 43rd percentile position places this CPU below the majority of the database, but its nearest rivals are not far away in average score. The benchmark data suggests that specific workload behavior, rather than the overall average, will determine whether the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 or a close rival is the better fit.

How It Compares

The Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 is the closest rival by average score. It records 1777 against the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300’s 1778, a 0.1% delta in favor of the AMD part. This is the only rival in the nearestRivals set where the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is the higher-scoring processor. The gap is tiny enough that individual Cinebench sections could easily change the perceived order.

The Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 moves slightly ahead, with an average score of 1784 and a 0.3% positive delta over the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300. The margin is still small, and the two processors occupy essentially the same performance band in the aggregate data. The Ryzen part is behind, but not by a meaningful margin in percentage terms.

The AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE is 0.5% ahead, with an average score of 1787. As the only AMD-branded rival in this nearestRivals list, it provides a direct family comparison. The data places the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 just behind this part, with the same 0.5% delta that separates it from the top rival in the group.

The Intel Xeon E-2224 has the highest average score among the four nearest rivals at 1788. The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is 0.5% behind this part. Despite being the top of the nearestRivals group, the E-2224 is still inside the same narrow cluster as the other three rivals, so the overall comparison remains close.

Power and Thermals

The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is rated at a 65 W TDP. That is the only thermal-power number in the data, and it defines the thermal class for this processor. A 65 W TDP implies a capable air cooler is an appropriate tier, although no specific cooler specification is included in the FACT PACK.

The process data is relevant to the thermal picture. The chip is manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process, with 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. These figures describe a mainstream desktop die for the Zen generation. The data does not include measured power draw or thermal results beyond the 65 W TDP rating, so cooling conclusions should be drawn from that TDP class rather than from any direct thermal measurements.

Platform and Compatibility

The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 uses AMD Socket AM4, with the Zen architecture and the generation label Ryzen 3 (Zen (Summit Ridge)). It was released on 2017-06-28, is in the Desktop market segment, and has a production status of Active. The part number is YD130BBBM4KAE.

Memory support is DDR4 through a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth. ECC memory support is listed as true, which is a relevant feature for workstation-oriented builds. The integrated-graphics field is null, so this CPU has no iGPU and requires a discrete graphics adapter for display output.

The cache hierarchy consists of 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The multiplier is unlocked, so the processor supports frequency adjustment through the multiplier. No PCIe specification is present in the data, so this analysis cannot make a PCIe lane or version claim from the FACT PACK. The AM4 socket and Active production status define the socket-level platform in the data, but no specific successor CPUs are listed.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score of the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300?

A: The average benchmark score is 1778, which places it at the 43rd percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Does the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, ECC memory support is listed as true in the data.

Q: What are the Cinebench R23 scores?

A: The Cinebench R23 multicore score is 6148, and the single-core score is 868.

Q: What socket does the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 use?

A: It uses AMD Socket AM4.

Q: Does this processor have integrated graphics?

A: No. The integrated-graphics field is null, so a discrete GPU is required.

Q: What is the TDP and process node?

A: The TDP is 65 W, and the process node is 14 nm at GlobalFoundries.

Who Should Consider It

The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is best suited to workloads that can operate within four threads. The data shows a 4-core, 4-thread processor with no integrated graphics, so any build must include a discrete GPU. For office and productivity workloads, the single-thread scores of 87 in Cinebench R15, 364 in R20, and 868 in R23 indicate a moderate level of per-core performance, while the multicore scores of 619, 2582, and 6148 provide useful parallel throughput for a four-thread part.

For gaming, the lack of an iGPU makes a discrete graphics card mandatory. The single-thread scores are the more relevant metric for lightly threaded game logic, and the 43rd percentile ranking suggests that this CPU does not sit at the top of the performance distribution. For creation workloads, the multicore scores are stronger relative to the single-core scores, but the four-thread limit means workloads that scale beyond four threads will not receive additional CPU-side scaling from this part.

The 65 W TDP, AM4 socket, and Active production status make it a straightforward desktop platform candidate. Users who need ECC memory support on a desktop AM4 board, an unlocked multiplier, and a moderate-power processor are the natural audience for this CPU.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The Cinebench data shows a clear split between single-thread and multi-thread behavior. In R15, the single-core score is 87 and the multicore score is 619. In R20, the single-core score is 364 and the multicore score is 2582. In R23, the single-core score is 868 and the multicore score is 6148. In every generation, the multicore score is much larger than the single-core score, reflecting the combined throughput of four threads.

For real workloads, the single-thread scores represent how the processor behaves in lightly threaded applications, while the multicore scores represent how it behaves when all four threads are active. The base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 3.70 GHz are the frequency anchors for those behaviors. Because the CPU has exactly four threads, the multicore ceiling is limited to four concurrent threads; workloads that use one or two threads will lean primarily on per-core performance, and workloads that use all four threads will approach the multicore scores. The 43rd percentile ranking shows that this processor does not lead the database in either category, but its single-thread and multi-thread results are closely matched to its nearest rivals.