Ryzen 3 3200G vs Xeon E5-2620
Description
The 3200G is based on Zen+ architecture while the E5-2620 is based on Sandy Bridge.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3200G gets a score of 166.8 k points while the E5-2620 gets 224.7 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-2620 is 1.3 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 166.8 k points while the E5-2620 gets 224.7 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-2620 is 1.3 times faster than the 3200G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
810f81
206d7
Core
Picasso
Sandy Bridge-EP
Base frecuency
3.6 GHz
2 GHz
Boost frecuency
4 GHz
2.5 GHz
Socket
AM4
LGA 2011
Cores/Threads
4/4
6/12
TDP
65 W
95 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
6x32+6x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
6x256 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
15360 kB
Date
July 2019
March 2012
Mean monothread perf.
49.21k points
18.8k points
Mean multithread perf.
168.69k points
224.7k 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
E5-2620
Test#1 (Integers)
13.05k
6.95k (x0.53)
Test#2 (FP)
22.88k
6.24k (x0.27)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.39k
3.05k (x0.57)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.31k
2.56k (x0.35)
TOTAL
48.63k
18.8k (x0.39)
Multithread
3200G
E5-2620
Test#1 (Integers)
51.73k
90.01k (x1.74)
Test#2 (FP)
87.74k
82.43k (x0.94)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.74k
42.59k (x2.05)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.57k
9.66k (x1.47)
TOTAL
166.79k
224.7k (x1.35)
Performance/W
3200G
E5-2620
Test#1 (Integers)
796 points/W
948 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1350 points/W
868 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
319 points/W
448 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
101 points/W
102 points/W
TOTAL
2566 points/W
2365 points/W
Performance/GHz
3200G
E5-2620
Test#1 (Integers)
3262 points/GHz
2780 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5719 points/GHz
2494 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1348 points/GHz
1220 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1828 points/GHz
1024 points/GHz
TOTAL
12157 points/GHz
7519 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