Ryzen 9 3900X vs E-300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

E-300
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 18 Watt
0.21
Ryzen 9 3900X
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 105 Watt
20.53
+9676%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms E-300 by a whopping 9676% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing E-300 and Ryzen 9 3900X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3207275
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data21.73
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD E-SeriesAMD Ryzen 9
Power efficiency1.1015.54
Architecture codenameZacate (2011−2013)Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
Release date22 August 2011 (13 years ago)7 July 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

E-300 and Ryzen 9 3900X basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads224
Base clock speedno data3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed1.3 GHz4.6 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)768 KB
L2 cache512K (per core)6 MB
L3 cache0 KB64 MB
Chip lithography40 nm7 nm, 12 nm
Die size75 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Number of transistorsno data19,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on E-300 and Ryzen 9 3900X compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFT1AM4
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E-300 and Ryzen 9 3900X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SVMno data
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E-300 and Ryzen 9 3900X are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E-300 and Ryzen 9 3900X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data51.196 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6310-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

E-300 0.21
Ryzen 9 3900X 20.53
+9676%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

E-300 340
Ryzen 9 3900X 32613
+9492%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

E-300 88
Ryzen 9 3900X 1710
+1843%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

E-300 152
Ryzen 9 3900X 9939
+6439%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

E-300 853
Ryzen 9 3900X 6019
+606%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

E-300 1176
Ryzen 9 3900X 45539
+3772%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

E-300 839
Ryzen 9 3900X 14889
+1676%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

E-300 79
Ryzen 9 3900X 2.69
+2837%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

E-300 0
Ryzen 9 3900X 34
+6958%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

E-300 0.25
Ryzen 9 3900X 2.36
+844%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.21 20.53
Recency 22 August 2011 7 July 2019
Physical cores 2 12
Threads 2 24
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 105 Watt

E-300 has 483.3% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 9 3900X, on the other hand, has a 9676.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 9 3900X is our recommended choice as it beats the E-300 in performance tests.

Be aware that E-300 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 9 3900X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between E-300 and Ryzen 9 3900X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD E-300
E-300
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
Ryzen 9 3900X

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.4 303 votes

Rate E-300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 5169 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 3900X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E-300 or Ryzen 9 3900X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.