Ryzen 9 3900 vs Ryzen 7 8700G

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 7 8700G
2024
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
20.03
+3.3%
Ryzen 9 3900
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 65 Watt
19.39

Ryzen 7 8700G outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 9 3900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking277289
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation44.7619.98
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataAMD Matisse (Ryzen 3000 Desktop)
Power efficiency29.1628.23
Architecture codenamePhoenix (2023−2024)Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
Release date8 January 2024 (less than a year ago)24 September 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329$499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 7 8700G has 124% better value for money than Ryzen 9 3900.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 9 3900 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads1624
Base clock speed4.2 GHz3.1 GHz
Boost clock speed5.1 GHz4.3 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)64 MB
Chip lithography4 nm7 nm, 12 nm
Die size178 mm22x 74 mm2
Number of transistors25,000 million7,600 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 9 3900 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
SocketAM5AM4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 9 3900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2
AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 9 3900 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 9 3900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5DDR4-3200
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 780MN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 9 3900.

PCIe version4.04.0
PCI Express lanes2024

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 7 8700G 20.03
+3.3%
Ryzen 9 3900 19.39

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 7 8700G 31822
+3.3%
Ryzen 9 3900 30802

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 7 8700G 2682
+59.6%
Ryzen 9 3900 1680

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 7 8700G 13896
+45.4%
Ryzen 9 3900 9557

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 7 8700G 7759
+36.1%
Ryzen 9 3900 5700

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 7 8700G 50560
+14.4%
Ryzen 9 3900 44191

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.

Ryzen 7 8700G 16417
+18.8%
Ryzen 9 3900 13817

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 7 8700G 31
+0.8%
Ryzen 9 3900 31

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Ryzen 7 8700G 2693
Ryzen 9 3900 2804
+4.1%

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 7 8700G 286
+45.2%
Ryzen 9 3900 197

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 7 8700G 3.4
+53.2%
Ryzen 9 3900 2.22

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 7 8700G 14.8
+42.3%
Ryzen 9 3900 10.4

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 7 8700G 156
+18.1%
Ryzen 9 3900 132

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 7 8700G 331
+29.4%
Ryzen 9 3900 256

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 7 8700G 8593
+20.3%
Ryzen 9 3900 7145

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 7 8700G 12618
+23.8%
Ryzen 9 3900 10190

Blender(-)

Ryzen 7 8700G 186
+3.9%
Ryzen 9 3900 179

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 7 8700G 2012
+61.5%
Ryzen 9 3900 1246

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 7 8700G 6665
+29.8%
Ryzen 9 3900 5134

7-Zip

Ryzen 7 8700G 75427
Ryzen 9 3900 75612
+0.2%

WebXPRT 3

Ryzen 7 8700G 336
+48%
Ryzen 9 3900 227

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.03 19.39
Recency 8 January 2024 24 September 2019
Physical cores 8 12
Threads 16 24
Chip lithography 4 nm 7 nm

Ryzen 7 8700G has a 3.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

Ryzen 9 3900, on the other hand, has 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 9 3900.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 9 3900, 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 7 8700G
Ryzen 7 8700G
AMD Ryzen 9 3900
Ryzen 9 3900

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.


4.1 235 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 8700G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 623 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 7 8700G or Ryzen 9 3900, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.