Ryzen 3 8300G vs Xeon E5-4660 v3

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Ryzen 3 8300G

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +15.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 120W, a 55W reduction.
✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (14,113 vs 14,167).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 35 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4660 v3, which brings 14 cores / 28 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $176 MSRP, while Xeon E5-4660 v3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E5-4660 v3

2015

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅+337.5% larger total L3 cache (35 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 14 cores / 28 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 3 8300G across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌84.6% higher power demand at 120W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while Ryzen 3 8300G moves to AM5 and DDR5.

Ryzen 3 8300G

2024

Xeon E5-4660 v3

2015

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +15.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 120W, a 55W reduction.
✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅+337.5% larger total L3 cache (35 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 14 cores / 28 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (14,113 vs 14,167).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 35 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4660 v3, which brings 14 cores / 28 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $176 MSRP, while Xeon E5-4660 v3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 3 8300G across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌84.6% higher power demand at 120W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while Ryzen 3 8300G moves to AM5 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 3 8300G better than Xeon E5-4660 v3?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E5-4660 v3 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 3 8300G is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-4660 v3 is the better fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 14 cores and 28 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 337.5% larger total L3 cache (35 MB vs 8 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Ryzen 3 8300G is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 3 8300G is at an unclear MSRP at $176 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 15.4% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon E5-4660 v3 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.4% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (80.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Ryzen 3 8300G is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2015) and a healthier platform with AM5 and DDR5 instead of LGA2011. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Ryzen 3 8300G Benchmark Check

Xeon E5-4660 v3 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen 3 8300G	Xeon E5-4660 v3
1080p
low	262 FPS	174 FPS
medium	232 FPS	151 FPS
high	199 FPS	119 FPS
ultra	168 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	229 FPS	146 FPS
medium	184 FPS	123 FPS
high	152 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	132 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	159 FPS	68 FPS
medium	129 FPS	61 FPS
high	99 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	86 FPS	38 FPS

Open Ryzen 3 8300G Open Xeon E5-4660 v3

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen 3 8300G	Xeon E5-4660 v3
1080p
low	347 FPS	212 FPS
medium	280 FPS	193 FPS
high	245 FPS	164 FPS
ultra	206 FPS	132 FPS
1440p
low	286 FPS	183 FPS
medium	238 FPS	166 FPS
high	214 FPS	143 FPS
ultra	176 FPS	112 FPS
4K
low	212 FPS	115 FPS
medium	183 FPS	106 FPS
high	153 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	124 FPS	74 FPS

Open Ryzen 3 8300G Open Xeon E5-4660 v3

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen 3 8300G	Xeon E5-4660 v3
1080p
low	353 FPS	354 FPS
medium	353 FPS	354 FPS
high	353 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	353 FPS	354 FPS
1440p
low	353 FPS	354 FPS
medium	353 FPS	354 FPS
high	353 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	353 FPS	354 FPS
4K
low	353 FPS	354 FPS
medium	353 FPS	354 FPS
high	352 FPS	323 FPS
ultra	292 FPS	269 FPS

Open Ryzen 3 8300G Open Xeon E5-4660 v3

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen 3 8300G	Xeon E5-4660 v3
1080p
low	353 FPS	354 FPS
medium	353 FPS	354 FPS
high	353 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	353 FPS	354 FPS
1440p
low	353 FPS	354 FPS
medium	353 FPS	354 FPS
high	353 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	353 FPS	354 FPS
4K
low	353 FPS	354 FPS
medium	353 FPS	354 FPS
high	353 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	353 FPS	354 FPS

Open Ryzen 3 8300G Open Xeon E5-4660 v3

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 3 8300G and Xeon E5-4660 v3

Ryzen 3 8300G

The Ryzen 3 8300G is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 8 January 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Phoenix2 (2024) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 14,113 points. Launch price was $176.

Xeon E5-4660 v3

The Xeon E5-4660 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Haswell-EP (2014−2015) architecture. It features 14 cores and 28 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 35 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 120 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,167 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 3 8300G packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-4660 v3 offers 14 cores / 28 threads — the Xeon E5-4660 v3 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Ryzen 3 8300G versus 2.9 GHz on the Xeon E5-4660 v3 — a 51.3% clock advantage for the Ryzen 3 8300G (base: 3.4 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The Ryzen 3 8300G uses the Phoenix2 (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Xeon E5-4660 v3 uses Haswell-EP (2014−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 3 8300G scores 14,113 against the Xeon E5-4660 v3's 14,167 — a 0.4% lead for the Xeon E5-4660 v3. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Ryzen 3 8300G vs 35 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-4660 v3.

Feature	Ryzen 3 8300G	Xeon E5-4660 v3
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	14 / 28+250%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+69%	2.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.4 GHz+62%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	35 MB (total)+338%
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+300%	256K (per core)
Process	4 nm-82%	22 nm
Architecture	Phoenix2 (2024)	Haswell-EP (2014−2015)
PassMark	14,113	14,167

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 3 8300G uses the AM5 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon E5-4660 v3 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.