OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

AMD Ryzen 3 1300X Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£120PassMark benchmark result:6932N. of physical cores:4CPU boost clock speed:3.7 GHzCPU socket:AM4TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

AMD Ryzen 3 1300X Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

4.7

Overall score

Score
4.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
Score components

90%

4.3

Technical score

10%

9.1

User score

â–¼Worse than 68% of processors
4.3

Technical score

Technical score
4.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
Score components

60%

3.2

Performance

18%

4.6

Cache & Architecture

10%

6.5

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.1

Power & Thermal

4%

8.3

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated Graphics

â–¼Worse than 77% of processors
9.1

User score

User score
9.1/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 90% of models
Score components

70%

9.0

User ratings

30%

9.4

Number of reviews

Based on 1,266 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
★Better than 90% of processors
  • amd-ryzen-3-1300x
  • amd-ryzen-3-1300x
  • amd-ryzen-3-1300x
amd-ryzen-3-1300x
amd-ryzen-3-1300x
amd-ryzen-3-1300x

Best prices

*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 3 1300X

Technical score
Technical score
4.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
Score components:

60%

3.2

Performance

18%

4.6

Cache & Architecture

10%

6.5

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.1

Power & Thermal

4%

8.3

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated Graphics

4.3
User score
User score
9.1/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 90% of models
Score components

70%

9.0

User ratings

30%

9.4

Number of reviews

Based on 1,266 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
9.1
Popularity
Popularity
9.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 91% of models
Popularity:
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X has a popularity score of 9.4 points, which is higher than that of 90.6% of products in this category.
9.4
Value for money
Value for money
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
Score components:

60%

4.7

Overall score

40%

9.9

Price

6.3
Brand name
AMD
Processor type
desktop
Processor type
desktop
â–² Better than 56% of models
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 56% of processors and equal to that of 37.9% of processors.
CPU socket
AM4
CPU socket
AM4
â–² Better than 77% of models
This processor uses the AM4 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 76.5% of processors and equal to that of 9.6% of processors.
Chipset
X570, B550, A520, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320
Chipset
X570, B550, A520, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320
â–² Better than 74% of models
This processor supports X570, B550, A520, X470, B450, X370, B350, A320 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 73.8% of processors and equal to that of 4.5% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
â–² Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
4
N. of physical cores
4
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 4 CPU cores, which is fewer than 50.7% of processors and equal to 28.5% of processors.
CPU threads
4
CPU threads
4
â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 4 CPU threads, which is fewer than 67.4% of processors and equal to 26.5% of processors.
Threads per core
1
Threads per core
1
â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
Market range: <0 – >2.5
This processor offers 1 threads per core, which is fewer than 69.8% of processors and equal to 30.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
3.7 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
3.7 GHz
â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 3.7 GHz which is lower than that of 72.7% of processors and equal to that of 3.9% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
4x 3.5 GHz
CPU base clock speed
4x 3.5 GHz
â–² Better than 50% of models
This processor has a base clock of 4x3.5 GHz which is higher than that of 49.8% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Semiconductor size
14 nm
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 50.6% of processors and equal to that of 33.9% of processors.
Foundry
GlobalFoundries 14 nm
Foundry
GlobalFoundries 14 nm
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
This processor is built on the GlobalFoundries 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
L3 cache
8 MB
L3 cache
8 MB
â–¼ Worse than 49% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 8 MB which is larger than that of 39.7% of processors and equal to that of 11.8% of processors.
L2 cache
2 MB
L2 cache
2 MB
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 2 MB which is smaller than that of 51% of processors and equal to that of 11.2% of processors.
L1 cache
384 KB
L1 cache
384 KB
â–² Better than 45% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 384 KB which is larger than that of 44.9% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
DDR memory version
DDR4
â–¼ Worse than 42% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 26.3% of processors and equal to that of 31.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,666 MHz
Maximum memory speed
2,666 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,666 MHz, which is lower than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to 8.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2667 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2667 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-2667 MHz, which is lower than that of 57.6% of processors and equal to 0.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
â–¼ Worse than 44% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 28.4% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
no
Integrated graphics
no
â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 87.6% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
65 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
65 W
â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 65 W which is higher than that of 69.9% of processors and equal to that of 16.3% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
65 W
Base power (PL1)
65 W
â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 65 W which is higher than that of 70.1% of processors and equal to that of 16.7% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
Configurable TDP
no
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
Show more

AMD Ryzen 3 1300X vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    PCIe lane count
    24
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <10 – >30
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    Unlocked multiplier
    yes
    â–² Better than 78% of models
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, the average processor does not. 21.7% of processors have an unlocked multiplier.
  • Includes stock cooler
    Cooler included
    yes
    â–² Better than 74% of models
    This processor includes a stock cooler, the average processor does not. 25.9% of processors include a stock cooler.
  • Supports memory overclocking
    Memory overclocking
    yes
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This processor supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not. 43.6% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 5 °C lower CPU temperature
    CPU temperature
    95 °C
    â–² Better than 72% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • Broader instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2
    ★ Better than 92% of models
    This processor supports a broader instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • Supports ECC memory
    ECC memory support
    yes
    â–² Better than 68% of models
    This processor supports ECC memory, the average processor does not. 32.5% of processors support ECC memory.
  • Modern CPU socket
    CPU socket
    AM4
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (AM4 vs FP4).
    AM4 vs FP4
  • 9.45x more popular
    AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is more popular than the average processor (9.45 vs 1).
    9.45 vs 1
  • 14.2% higher user score
    User score
    9.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    AMD Ryzen 3 1300X
    the average processor
    AMD Ryzen 3 1300X has a higher user score than the average processor (9.13 vs 8.000).
    9.13 vs 8
  • Broader instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2
    ★ Better than 92% of models
    This processor supports a broader instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • Modern CPU socket
    CPU socket
    AM4
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (AM4 vs FP4).
    AM4 vs FP4
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    Unlocked multiplier
    yes
    â–² Better than 78% of models
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, the average processor does not. 21.7% of processors have an unlocked multiplier.
  • 16.7% more L3 per core
    L3 per core
    2 MB/core
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    PCIe lane count
    24
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <10 – >30
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • Supports memory overclocking
    Memory overclocking
    yes
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This processor supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not. 43.6% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • Supports ECC memory
    ECC memory support
    yes
    â–² Better than 68% of models
    This processor supports ECC memory, the average processor does not. 32.5% of processors support ECC memory.
  • Includes stock cooler
    Cooler included
    yes
    â–² Better than 74% of models
    This processor includes a stock cooler, the average processor does not. 25.9% of processors include a stock cooler.
  • 5 °C lower CPU temperature
    CPU temperature
    95 °C
    â–² Better than 72% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 66.1% weaker multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    947
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (947 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    947 vs 2,791
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • 14% lower boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    3.7 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    3.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Summit Ridge
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Summit Ridge vs Kaby Lake).
    Summit Ridge vs Kaby Lake
  • 29.4% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    Cinebench R20 single-core benchmark score
    345
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
    Market range: <282 – >775
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (345 vs 489). The average processor scores 489 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    345 vs 489
  • No configurable TDP
    Configurable TDP
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 25.4% lower single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,097
    â–¼ Worse than 71% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,097 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,097 vs 1,471
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    CPU threads
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • 3 years older release date
    Release date
    2017
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2017 vs 2020).
    July 2017
    2017 vs 2020
  • Older TPM support
    TPM type
    fTPM 2.0
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 66.1% weaker multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    947
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (947 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    947 vs 2,791
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • 14% lower boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    3.7 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    3.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 29.4% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    Cinebench R20 single-core benchmark score
    345
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
    Market range: <282 – >775
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (345 vs 489). The average processor scores 489 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    345 vs 489
  • 25.4% lower single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,097
    â–¼ Worse than 71% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,097 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,097 vs 1,471
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    CPU threads
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • 34.4% lower PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    6,932
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (6,932 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    6,932 vs 10,572.5
  • 35.5% lower multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    3,114
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (3,114 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    3,114 vs 4,829
  • No multithreading support
    Multithreading
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    This processor does not support multithreading, the average processor does. 74.2% of processors support multithreading.
  • 15% weaker single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    2,125
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,125 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    2,125 vs 2,500
  • 66.7% slower classroom rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    111.23
    Category Benchmark
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (111.2 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
    111.23 vs 334.1
  • 1 fewer threads per core
    Threads per core
    1
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    Market range: <0 – >2.5
    This processor has fewer threads per core than the average processor (1 vs 2). The average processor offers 2 threads per core.
    1 vs 2
  • No Turbo Core
    Turbo Core version
    1.0
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    This processor does not support Turbo Core, the average processor does. 1.00% of processors support Turbo Core.
    Precision Boost
    1.0 vs 2.0
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Summit Ridge
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Summit Ridge vs Kaby Lake).
    Summit Ridge vs Kaby Lake
  • 16.7% larger process node
    Semiconductor size
    14 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 20.3% larger die size
    Die size
    213 mm²
    â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (213 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    213 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 20% smaller L2 cache
    L2 cache
    2 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (2 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    2 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    PCIe bifurcation modes
    x16
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4).
    x16 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4
  • 9.1% lower memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    2,666 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (2666 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    2,666 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    DDR4-2667 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR4-2667 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR4-2,667 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • No integrated graphics
    Integrated graphics
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, the average processor does. 87.6% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • No configurable TDP
    Configurable TDP
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 44.4% higher base power
    Base power (PL1)
    65 W
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower TJ Max
    Maximum operating temperature (TJ Max)
    95 °C
    â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower TJ Max than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 44.4% higher TDP
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    65 W
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
I REVIEW
≈ estimated
20/09/2017
Hands-on review · benchmarks, temperatures and value
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is not the fastest on paper, but it is a strong deal for the money.
9.0
goldfries
≈ estimated
28/07/2017
Hands-on review · overclocking, benchmarks and value
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X offers strong performance and overclocking for the price, a good budget choice.
9.0
Booredatwork.com
≈ estimated
27/07/2017
Hands-on review · gaming benchmarks and budget build
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is a good budget pick for 1080p gaming, and you can later move to higher-end Ryzen chips on the same motherboard.
8.0
Toasty Bros
≈ estimated
27/07/2017
Gaming benchmarks · 1080p tests and overclocking
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is faster at stock speeds, but the cheaper Ryzen 3 1200 is the better value.
7.0
Gamers Nexus
≈ estimated
27/07/2017
Detailed review · gaming, thermals, overclocking and Intel comparison
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is a good budget quad-core, but the Ryzen 5 is the better buy if you can afford it.
7.0
ClickTech Kev
≈ estimated
21/01/2018
Build benchmarks · budget gaming and everyday PC tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X won't set FPS records, but it's a fair budget pick for basic tasks and esports.
7.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
27/07/2017
Day one review · benchmarks, overclocking and value comparison
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is good value for budget builds, but it is hard to justify over the cheaper Ryzen 3 1200.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

tomshardware.com
27/07/2017
Benchmark review · Gaming and overclocking
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is a four-core chip with unlocked multipliers that beats Intel's dual-core Core i3s in threaded work, but has no graphics.
P
pcgamer.com
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 review
T
techradar.com
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X review - TechRadar
P
pcmag.com
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X Review
T
trustedreviews.com
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 & 1300X review: Core i3-busting performance?
T
tweaktown.com
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X and Ryzen 3 1200 CPU Review
H
hothardware.com
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X And 1200 Processor Review
techadvisor.com
08/09/2017
Benchmark review · Gaming and rendering
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is a quad-core chip that beats Intel's dual-core Core i3-7350K in multithreaded tests, but trails it in single-core work.
H
hardwarecanucks.com
28/09/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X & 1200 Performance Review
channelpostmea.com
27/08/2017
Benchmark review · 1080p gaming
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is a quad-core chip that handles 1080p gaming well, though its four threads hold it back in fast video rendering.
xda-developers.com
08/02/2018
Hands-on test · Upgrade benchmarks
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X suits older PC upgrades with good single-core speed, but its four threads make ImageMagick builds take nearly twice as long as on the 1700X.
P
pcper.com
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X and 1200 Processor Review
notebookcheck.net
09/11/2017
Benchmark review · Entry-level quad-core
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is a faster version of the 1200 with higher clocks, but Intel's Core i5-7600K still leads in several tests.
T
techpowerup.com
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X 3.4 GHz Review - Value & Conclusion(www.anandtech.com) | July 27 2017 | The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X and Ryzen 3 1200 CPU Review: Zen on a...
chip.de
02/08/2017
Lab test · Core i3 rival
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is a strong entry-level quad-core that beats most Core i3 chips, but it lacks integrated graphics and needs a separate card.
C
computerbase.de
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X and 1200 Review: Four Zen Cores vs Intel's Dual-Core i3
(Translated)Show original
G
gamestar.de
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X - Affordable quad-core gaming CPU
(Translated)Show original
P
pcwelt.de
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X & Ryzen 3 1200 Review
(Translated)Show original
C
computerbild.de
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
CPU Review: Ryzen 3 1300X, Ryzen 3 1200
(Translated)Show original
pcgameshardware.de
28/07/2017
Overclocking test · Entry-level quad-core
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is an unlocked quad-core that can be pushed to about 4GHz, though no individual chip is guaranteed to reach it.
T
tweakpc.de
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X and 1200 vs Core i3-7350K Review
(Translated)Show original
H
hardware.fr
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
Ryzen 3 1300X and 1200 review: taking on the Core i3
(Translated)Show original
lesnumeriques.com
25/08/2017
Lab test · Entry-level quad-core
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is a sensible office processor that rivals Core i3 chips, but it needs a graphics card and trails in games.
T
tomshardware.fr
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
Ryzen 3 1300X and 1200 Review: Perfect for Budget Gaming
(Translated)Show original
P
profesionalreview.com
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X Review (Full Analysis)
(Translated)Show original
geeknetic.es
30/07/2017
Full review · Entry-level quad-core
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is a four-core chip for everyday PCs and virtual machines, with higher clocks than the Ryzen 3 1200 but little room to overclock.
X
xataka.com
01/08/2017
Summary of the review
Ryzen 3 1300X review: how the Core i3 competitor performs
(Translated)Show original
E
elchapuzasinformatico.com
07/08/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X Review - El Chapuzas Informático
(Translated)Show original
M
madboxpc.com
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X [AM4] Review - MadBoxPC & El Chapuzas Informático
(Translated)Show original
T
tomshw.it
26/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X Review
(Translated)Show original
H
hwupgrade.it
27/07/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X and 1200: The family is complete
(Translated)Show original
T
tech.everyeye.it
18/08/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X Review: The true best buy of the Ryzen family
(Translated)Show original
T
techpulse.be
06/11/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X review: red dominates
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on 1,266 buyer reviews from online shops.
Reviews last updated: October 2026 · How we calculate this
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about AMD Ryzen 3 1300X

  • Excellent price-to-performance ratio for a budget quad-core processor
  • True four-core architecture outperforms dual-core competitors in multi-threaded tasks like video encoding
  • Unlocked multiplier allows for easy overclocking, often reaching 3.8-3.9GHz on the stock cooler
  • Includes a capable and quiet Wraith Stealth stock cooler that maintains good thermal headroom
  • Uses the long-lasting AM4 platform, offering a clear upgrade path to higher-end Ryzen CPUs
  • Low power consumption and efficient operation under standard loads

What we don't like about AMD Ryzen 3 1300X

  • Lacks Simultaneous Multi-Threading (SMT), limiting performance in highly threaded professional applications compared to Ryzen 5
  • Single-core performance and IPC lag behind comparable Intel i3/i5 models of its generation
  • No integrated graphics, requiring the additional cost of a discrete GPU for any system build
  • High memory latency, a common trait in early Ryzen architectures, can impact specific data-intensive tasks
  • Struggles with modern, highly demanding AAA titles, leading to potential bottlenecks with mid-to-high-end GPUs

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 3 1300X is a budget-oriented quad-core desktop processor built on the 14nm 'Zen' architecture for the AM4 socket. It features 4 physical cores and 4 threads with a 3.5 GHz base clock, a 3.7 GHz boost frequency, and up to 3.9 GHz via Extended Frequency Range (XFR) technology. The chip includes 8MB of L3 cache, a 65W TDP, and comes with a Wraith Stealth cooler. Its main advantages include an unlocked multiplier for easy overclocking, superior multi-threaded performance compared to contemporary dual-core rivals, and a highly affordable price point for entry-level gaming and productivity. However, it lacks Simultaneous Multi-Threading (SMT) which limits its ceiling in heavy multitasking, shows weaker single-core performance than competing Intel chips of its era, and lacks integrated graphics, requiring a dedicated GPU.

Compare AMD Ryzen 3 1300X with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Ryzen 3 1300X and other processors

No results found