| | | | | | |

Ryzen 3 3200G vs Core i5-10300H


Description
The 3200G is based on Zen+ architecture while the i5-10300H is based on Comet Lake.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3200G gets a score of 168.7 k points while the i5-10300H gets 246.1 k points.

Summarizing, the i5-10300H is 1.5 times faster than the 3200G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
810f81
a0652
Core
Picasso
Comet Lake-H
Architecture
Base frecuency
3.6 GHz
2.5 GHz
Boost frecuency
4 GHz
4.5 GHz
Socket
AM4
BGA 1440
Cores/Threads
4/4
4/8
TDP
65 W
45 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
4x32+4x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
4x256 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
8192 kB
Date
July 2019
April 2020
Mean monothread perf.
49.21k points
69.47k points
Mean multithread perf.
168.69k points
246.07k 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
i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
13.05k
15.65k (x1.2)
Test#2 (FP)
22.88k
23.13k (x1.01)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.39k
5.66k (x1.05)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.31k
11.43k (x1.56)
TOTAL
48.63k
55.87k (x1.15)

Multithread

3200G

i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
51.73k
26.77k (x0.52)
Test#2 (FP)
87.74k
43.81k (x0.5)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.74k
10.17k (x0.49)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.57k
11.91k (x1.81)
TOTAL
166.79k
92.66k (x0.56)

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
i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
14.48k
27.14k (x1.87)
Test#2 (FP)
23.84k
24.75k (x1.04)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.43k
5.73k (x1.06)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.46k
11.84k (x2.17)
TOTAL
49.21k
69.47k (x1.41)

Multithread

3200G

i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
54.39k
105.77k (x1.94)
Test#2 (FP)
88.77k
107.47k (x1.21)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.04k
24.82k (x1.24)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.48k
8.02k (x1.46)
TOTAL
168.69k
246.07k (x1.46)

Performance/W
3200G
i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
837 points/W
2350 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1366 points/W
2388 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
308 points/W
552 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
84 points/W
178 points/W
TOTAL
2595 points/W
5468 points/W

Performance/GHz
3200G
i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
3619 points/GHz
6031 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5961 points/GHz
5500 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1357 points/GHz
1274 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1365 points/GHz
2632 points/GHz
TOTAL
12302 points/GHz
15437 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