| | | | | | |

Ryzen 3 3200G vs Xeon E5-2620 v4


Description
The 3200G is based on Zen+ architecture while the E5-2620 v4 is based on Broadwell.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3200G gets a score of 168.7 k points while the E5-2620 v4 gets 237.8 k points.

Summarizing, the E5-2620 v4 is 1.4 times faster than the 3200G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
810f81
406f1
Core
Picasso
Broadwell-EP
Architecture
Base frecuency
3.6 GHz
2.1 GHz
Boost frecuency
4 GHz
3 GHz
Socket
AM4
Socket 2011-3
Cores/Threads
4/4
8/16
TDP
65 W
85 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
8x32+8x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
8x256 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
20480 kB
Date
July 2019
March 2016
Mean monothread perf.
49.21k points
29.39k points
Mean multithread perf.
168.69k points
237.83k 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
E5-2620 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
3.89k
2.6k (x0.67)
Test#2 (FP)
17.94k
7.55k (x0.42)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.34k
2.61k (x0.49)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.62k
2.03k (x0.31)
TOTAL
33.79k
14.79k (x0.44)

Multithread

3200G

E5-2620 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
15.07k
17.41k (x1.16)
Test#2 (FP)
66.84k
75.46k (x1.13)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
19.56k
26.25k (x1.34)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.54k
4.65k (x0.71)
TOTAL
108.01k
123.78k (x1.15)

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
E5-2620 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
14.3k
8.22k (x0.57)
Test#2 (FP)
21.69k
12.06k (x0.56)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.42k
4.01k (x0.74)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.6k
2.89k (x0.44)
TOTAL
48k
27.18k (x0.57)

Multithread

3200G

E5-2620 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
55.45k
61.34k (x1.11)
Test#2 (FP)
83.13k
90.21k (x1.09)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.76k
26.2k (x1.26)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.58k
4.62k (x0.7)
TOTAL
165.91k
182.37k (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
E5-2620 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
13.05k
6.04k (x0.46)
Test#2 (FP)
22.88k
10.18k (x0.44)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.39k
2.74k (x0.51)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.31k
2.41k (x0.33)
TOTAL
48.63k
21.37k (x0.44)

Multithread

3200G

E5-2620 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
51.73k
47.51k (x0.92)
Test#2 (FP)
87.74k
75.12k (x0.86)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.74k
19.72k (x0.95)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.57k
5.45k (x0.83)
TOTAL
166.79k
147.8k (x0.89)

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
E5-2620 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
14.48k
12.16k (x0.84)
Test#2 (FP)
23.84k
11.82k (x0.5)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.43k
3.02k (x0.56)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.46k
2.4k (x0.44)
TOTAL
49.21k
29.39k (x0.6)

Multithread

3200G

E5-2620 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
54.39k
103.77k (x1.91)
Test#2 (FP)
88.77k
102.28k (x1.15)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.04k
26.13k (x1.3)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.48k
5.65k (x1.03)
TOTAL
168.69k
237.83k (x1.41)

Performance/W
3200G
E5-2620 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
837 points/W
1221 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1366 points/W
1203 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
308 points/W
307 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
84 points/W
66 points/W
TOTAL
2595 points/W
2798 points/W

Performance/GHz
3200G
E5-2620 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
3619 points/GHz
4054 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5961 points/GHz
3939 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1357 points/GHz
1005 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1365 points/GHz
799 points/GHz
TOTAL
12302 points/GHz
9798 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