Ryzen 3 3200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G
Description
The 3200G is based on Zen+ architecture while the 2400G is based on Zen.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3200G gets a score of 168.7 k points while the 2400G gets 198.3 k points.
Summarizing, the 2400G is 1.2 times faster than the 3200G. 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 168.7 k points while the 2400G gets 198.3 k points.
Summarizing, the 2400G is 1.2 times faster than the 3200G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
810f81
810f10
Core
Picasso
Raven Ridge
Base frecuency
3.6 GHz
3.6 GHz
Boost frecuency
4 GHz
3.9 GHz
Socket
AM4
AM4
Cores/Threads
4/4
4/8
TDP
65 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
4x64+4x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
4x512 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
4096 kB
Date
July 2019
January 2018
Mean monothread perf.
49.21k points
47.96k points
Mean multithread perf.
168.69k points
198.27k points
Non-optimized benchmark
The benchmark in Mode 0 (FPU) measures cpu performance with non-optimized software. It uses the basic µinstructions from the i386 architecture with the i387 floating point unit. This mode is compatible with all CPUs so it's practical to compare very different CPUs
Monothread
3200G
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
3.89k
3.8k (x0.98)
Test#2 (FP)
17.94k
17.38k (x0.97)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.34k
5.17k (x0.97)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.62k
3.16k (x0.48)
TOTAL
33.79k
29.52k (x0.87)
Multithread
3200G
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
15.07k
15.28k (x1.01)
Test#2 (FP)
66.84k
76.44k (x1.14)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
19.56k
27.48k (x1.4)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.54k
3.02k (x0.46)
TOTAL
108.01k
122.2k (x1.13)
SSE3 optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode I (SSE) is optimized for the use of SIMD instructions with 128 bits register and the SSE set up to version 3. Nearly every modern CPU has support for this mode.
Monothread
3200G
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
14.3k
13.95k (x0.98)
Test#2 (FP)
21.69k
20.7k (x0.95)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.42k
5.33k (x0.98)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.6k
3.03k (x0.46)
TOTAL
48k
43.01k (x0.9)
Multithread
3200G
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
55.45k
58.56k (x1.06)
Test#2 (FP)
83.13k
92.95k (x1.12)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.76k
28.55k (x1.38)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.58k
2.98k (x0.45)
TOTAL
165.91k
183.04k (x1.1)
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
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
13.05k
13.04k (x1)
Test#2 (FP)
22.88k
22.35k (x0.98)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.39k
5.37k (x1)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.31k
3.4k (x0.46)
TOTAL
48.63k
44.15k (x0.91)
Multithread
3200G
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
51.73k
56.49k (x1.09)
Test#2 (FP)
87.74k
100.74k (x1.15)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.74k
28.21k (x1.36)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.57k
3.04k (x0.46)
TOTAL
166.79k
188.49k (x1.13)
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
3200G
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
14.48k
14.2k (x0.98)
Test#2 (FP)
23.84k
23.23k (x0.97)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.43k
5.35k (x0.99)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.46k
5.18k (x0.95)
TOTAL
49.21k
47.96k (x0.97)
Multithread
3200G
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
54.39k
58.24k (x1.07)
Test#2 (FP)
88.77k
105.72k (x1.19)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.04k
28.73k (x1.43)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.48k
5.59k (x1.02)
TOTAL
168.69k
198.27k (x1.18)
Performance/W
3200G
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
837 points/W
896 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1366 points/W
1626 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
308 points/W
442 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
84 points/W
86 points/W
TOTAL
2595 points/W
3050 points/W
Performance/GHz
3200G
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
3619 points/GHz
3641 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5961 points/GHz
5957 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1357 points/GHz
1372 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1365 points/GHz
1327 points/GHz
TOTAL
12302 points/GHz
12298 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