Xeon Silver 4310T vs Ryzen 3 3300X
Aggregate performance score
Xeon Silver 4310T outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by an impressive 56% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon Silver 4310T processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 892 | 564 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 30.73 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Power efficiency | 12.29 | 11.89 |
| Architecture codename | Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) | Ice Lake-SP (2021) |
| Release date | 24 April 2020 (4 years ago) | 6 April 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $120 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon Silver 4310T 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.3 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 15 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 74 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 95 °C | 88 °C |
| Number of transistors | 3,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon Silver 4310T 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 configuration | 1 | 2 |
| Socket | AM4 | FCLGA4189 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 105 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon Silver 4310T. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2 | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon Silver 4310T technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® SPS |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon Silver 4310T are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon Silver 4310T. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR4-2667 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 6 TB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon Silver 4310T.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 64 |
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.48 | 13.25 |
| Recency | 24 April 2020 | 6 April 2021 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 10 |
| Threads | 8 | 20 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 105 Watt |
Ryzen 3 3300X has a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 61.5% lower power consumption.
Xeon Silver 4310T, on the other hand, has a 56.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, and 150% more physical cores and 150% more threads.
The Xeon Silver 4310T is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 3 3300X in performance tests.
Note that Ryzen 3 3300X is a desktop processor while Xeon Silver 4310T is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon Silver 4310T, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
