Ryzen 3 8300G vs Ryzen 3 2200U
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 3 2200U and Ryzen 3 8300G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1786 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 3 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Phoenix2 (2024) |
| Release date | 8 January 2018 (6 years ago) | 8 January 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 2200U and Ryzen 3 8300G 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 4.9 GHz |
| Multiplier | 25 | no data |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 209.78 mm2 | 137 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 4950 Million | 20,900 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 2200U and Ryzen 3 8300G 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 2200U and Ryzen 3 8300G. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 2200U and Ryzen 3 8300G are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 2200U and Ryzen 3 8300G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 38.397 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 | AMD Radeon 740M |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 2200U and Ryzen 3 8300G.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | 14 |
Pros & cons summary
| Integrated graphics card | 2.98 | 8.35 |
| Recency | 8 January 2018 | 8 January 2024 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 4 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Ryzen 3 2200U has 333.3% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 3 8300G, on the other hand, has 180.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 3 2200U and Ryzen 3 8300G. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Ryzen 3 2200U is a notebook processor while Ryzen 3 8300G is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 2200U and Ryzen 3 8300G, 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.
