We present a tight analysis for the well-studied randomized 3-majority dynamics of stabilizing consensus, hence answering the main open question of Becchetti et al. [SODA'16]. Consider a distributed system of n nodes, each initially holding an opinion in {1, 2, ..., k}. The system should converge to a setting where all (non-corrupted) nodes hold the same opinion. This consensus opinion should be \emph{valid}, meaning that it should be among the initially supported opinions, and the (fast) convergence should happen even in the presence of a malicious adversary who can corrupt a bounded number of nodes per round and in particular modify their opinions. A well-studied distributed algorithm for this problem is the 3-majority dynamics, which works as follows: per round, each node gathers three opinions --- say by taking its own and two of other nodes sampled at random --- and then it sets its opinion equal to the majority of this set; ties are broken arbitrarily, e.g., towards the node's own opinion. Becchetti et al. [SODA'16] showed that the 3-majority dynamics converges to consensus in O((k^2\sqrt{\log n} + k\log n)(k+\log n)) rounds, even in the presence of a limited adversary. We prove that, even with a stronger adversary, the convergence happens within O(k\log n) rounds. This bound is known to be optimal.