Athlon 3000G vs Ryzen 3 3200U
Description
Both models 3000G and 3200U are based on Zen+ architecture.
Zen+ is the second generation of Ryzen processors. It uses the 12nm process by GlobalFoundries. Other than that, the die is the same than first generation Zen. It comes with 64kB of L1 cache and 512kB of L2 cache per core. There are 3 variants: Pinnacle Ridge (desktop), Colfax (high-end desktop) and Picasso (APU).
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3000G gets a score of 95.8 k points while the 3200U gets 61.2 k points.
Summarizing, the 3000G is 1.6 times faster than the 3200U. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Zen+ is the second generation of Ryzen processors. It uses the 12nm process by GlobalFoundries. Other than that, the die is the same than first generation Zen. It comes with 64kB of L1 cache and 512kB of L2 cache per core. There are 3 variants: Pinnacle Ridge (desktop), Colfax (high-end desktop) and Picasso (APU).
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3000G gets a score of 95.8 k points while the 3200U gets 61.2 k points.
Summarizing, the 3000G is 1.6 times faster than the 3200U. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
810f81
810f81
Core
Picasso
Picasso
Base frecuency
3.5 GHz
2.6 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.5 GHz
3.5 GHz
Socket
AM4
BGA-FP5
Cores/Threads
2/4
2/4
TDP
35 W
15 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
2x64+2x32 kB
2x64+2x32 kB
Cache L2
2x512 kB
2x512 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
4096 kB
Date
November 2019
January 2019
Mean monothread perf.
43.82k points
38.85k points
Mean multithread perf.
95.84k points
61.23k points
AVX2 optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode III (AVX2), like AVX1, is optimized to used 256 bits registers beside the second version of the Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX). The first AVX2 compatible CPU was released in 2013.
Monothread
3000G
3200U
Test#1 (Integers)
13.02k
11.13k (x0.86)
Test#2 (FP)
20.56k
19.38k (x0.94)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.81k
4.47k (x0.93)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.43k
3.87k (x0.71)
TOTAL
43.82k
38.85k (x0.89)
Multithread
3000G
3200U
Test#1 (Integers)
27.29k
17.13k (x0.63)
Test#2 (FP)
49.37k
30.56k (x0.62)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
13.57k
9.44k (x0.7)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.61k
4.09k (x0.73)
TOTAL
95.84k
61.23k (x0.64)
Performance/W
3000G
3200U
Test#1 (Integers)
780 points/W
1142 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1411 points/W
2038 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
388 points/W
629 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
160 points/W
273 points/W
TOTAL
2738 points/W
4082 points/W
Performance/GHz
3000G
3200U
Test#1 (Integers)
3719 points/GHz
3181 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5873 points/GHz
5536 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1374 points/GHz
1277 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1553 points/GHz
1105 points/GHz
TOTAL
12519 points/GHz
11099 points/GHz
Monothread performance graph
Monothread performance graphics gives the performance vs time. They are useful to measure the time it takes to the CPU to reach the maximum performance.
Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.
Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.
Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]
Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]
Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]
Multithread performance graph
Multithread graphs measure the performance against a heavy load during certain time.
If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.
If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.
Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]
Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]
Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]
Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4