Ryzen 7 7700 vs Ryzen 3 3300X

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 3 3300X
2020
4 cores / 8 threads, 65 Watt
8.45
Ryzen 7 7700
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
21.81
+158%

Ryzen 7 7700 outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by a whopping 158% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 3 3300X and Ryzen 7 7700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking894238
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation30.8348.86
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataAMD Ryzen 7
Power efficiency12.3031.75
Architecture codenameMatisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)Raphael (Zen4) (2022−2023)
Release date24 April 2020 (4 years ago)14 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$120$339

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 7 7700 has 58% better value for money than Ryzen 3 3300X.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 3 3300X and Ryzen 7 7700 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads816
Base clock speed3.8 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz5.3 GHz
L1 cache96K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die size74 mm271 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)95 °C61 °C
Number of transistors3,800 million6,570 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 3 3300X and Ryzen 7 7700 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
SocketAM4AM5
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65W, (85W real world)

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Ryzen 7 7700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 25 nm, 0.650 - 1.475V
AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Ryzen 7 7700 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Ryzen 7 7700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR5-5200
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) (400 - 2200 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Ryzen 7 7700.

PCIe version4.05.0
PCI Express lanes1624

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.

Ryzen 3 3300X 8.45
Ryzen 7 7700 21.81
+158%

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.

Ryzen 3 3300X 13425
Ryzen 7 7700 34640
+158%

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.

Ryzen 3 3300X 1711
Ryzen 7 7700 2875
+68%

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.

Ryzen 3 3300X 5936
Ryzen 7 7700 14927
+151%

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.

Ryzen 3 3300X 5856
Ryzen 7 7700 8345
+42.5%

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.

Ryzen 3 3300X 25416
Ryzen 7 7700 53881
+112%

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.

Ryzen 3 3300X 6.04
Ryzen 7 7700 2.72
+122%

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.

Ryzen 3 3300X 12
Ryzen 7 7700 34
+190%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen 3 3300X 1071
Ryzen 7 7700 3047
+185%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made 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 (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 3 3300X 195
Ryzen 7 7700 308
+57.9%

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.

Ryzen 3 3300X 2.28
Ryzen 7 7700 3.64
+59.6%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ryzen 3 3300X 5.9
Ryzen 7 7700 15.9
+169%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Ryzen 3 3300X 62
Ryzen 7 7700 175
+183%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Ryzen 3 3300X 234
Ryzen 7 7700 368
+57.6%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Ryzen 3 3300X 7177
Ryzen 7 7700 14860
+107%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 3 3300X 5311
Ryzen 7 7700 13929
+162%

Blender(-)

Ryzen 3 3300X 449
+171%
Ryzen 7 7700 166

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 3 3300X 1296
Ryzen 7 7700 2161
+66.7%

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 3 3300X 5329
Ryzen 7 7700 7880
+47.9%

7-Zip

Ryzen 3 3300X 30353
Ryzen 7 7700 85260
+181%

WebXPRT 3

Ryzen 3 3300X 233
Ryzen 7 7700 352
+51.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.45 21.81
Recency 24 April 2020 14 January 2023
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 8 16
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm

Ryzen 7 7700 has a 158.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 7 7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 3 3300X in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 3300X and Ryzen 7 7700, 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 Ryzen 3 3300X
Ryzen 3 3300X
AMD Ryzen 7 7700
Ryzen 7 7700

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.


4.4 1060 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 3300X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 1436 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 7700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 3 3300X or Ryzen 7 7700, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.