| | | | | | |

Athlon 3000G vs Core i5-10400T


Description
The 3000G is based on Zen+ architecture while the i5-10400T is based on Comet Lake.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3000G gets a score of 95.8 k points while the i5-10400T gets 307.2 k points.

Summarizing, the i5-10400T is 3.2 times faster than the 3000G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
810f81
a0653
Core
Picasso
Comet Lake-S
Architecture
Base frecuency
3.5 GHz
2 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.5 GHz
3.6 GHz
Socket
AM4
FC-LGA 1200
Cores/Threads
2/4
6/12
TDP
35 W
35 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
2x64+2x32 kB
6x32+6x32 kB
Cache L2
2x512 kB
6x256 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
12288 kB
Date
November 2019
April 2020
Mean monothread perf.
43.82k points
57.85k points
Mean multithread perf.
95.84k points
307.18k 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
i5-10400T
Test#1 (Integers)
13.02k
22k (x1.69)
Test#2 (FP)
20.56k
19.98k (x0.97)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.81k
4.57k (x0.95)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.43k
11.31k (x2.08)
TOTAL
43.82k
57.85k (x1.32)

Multithread

3000G

i5-10400T
Test#1 (Integers)
27.29k
136.69k (x5.01)
Test#2 (FP)
49.37k
135.25k (x2.74)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
13.57k
32.76k (x2.41)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.61k
2.48k (x0.44)
TOTAL
95.84k
307.18k (x3.21)

Performance/W
3000G
i5-10400T
Test#1 (Integers)
780 points/W
3905 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1411 points/W
3864 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
388 points/W
936 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
160 points/W
71 points/W
TOTAL
2738 points/W
8776 points/W

Performance/GHz
3000G
i5-10400T
Test#1 (Integers)
3719 points/GHz
6111 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5873 points/GHz
5549 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1374 points/GHz
1268 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1553 points/GHz
3141 points/GHz
TOTAL
12519 points/GHz
16069 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.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

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.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4