Ryzen 3 3200G vs FX 8350
Description
The 3200G is based on Zen+ architecture while the 8350 is based on Piledriver.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3200G gets a score of 166.8 k points while the 8350 gets 118.1 k points.
Summarizing, the 3200G is 1.4 times faster than the 8350. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3200G gets a score of 166.8 k points while the 8350 gets 118.1 k points.
Summarizing, the 3200G is 1.4 times faster than the 8350. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
810f81
600f20
Core
Picasso
Vishera
Base frecuency
3.6 GHz
4 GHz
Boost frecuency
4 GHz
4.1 GHz
Socket
AM4
Socket AM3+
Cores/Threads
4/4
8/8
TDP
65 W
125 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
4x2048 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
8192 kB
Date
July 2019
October 2012
Mean monothread perf.
49.21k points
28.16k points
Mean multithread perf.
168.69k points
118.14k points
AVX optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode II (AVX) is optimized to used 256 bits registers beside the first version of the Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX). The first AVX compatible CPU was released in 2011.
Monothread
3200G
8350
Test#1 (Integers)
13.05k
9.85k (x0.75)
Test#2 (FP)
22.88k
8.41k (x0.37)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.39k
3.58k (x0.66)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.31k
6.32k (x0.86)
TOTAL
48.63k
28.16k (x0.58)
Multithread
3200G
8350
Test#1 (Integers)
51.73k
44.93k (x0.87)
Test#2 (FP)
87.74k
45.21k (x0.52)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.74k
22.81k (x1.1)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.57k
5.19k (x0.79)
TOTAL
166.79k
118.14k (x0.71)
Performance/W
3200G
8350
Test#1 (Integers)
796 points/W
359 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1350 points/W
362 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
319 points/W
182 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
101 points/W
42 points/W
TOTAL
2566 points/W
945 points/W
Performance/GHz
3200G
8350
Test#1 (Integers)
3262 points/GHz
2402 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5719 points/GHz
2050 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1348 points/GHz
874 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1828 points/GHz
1541 points/GHz
TOTAL
12157 points/GHz
6867 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