Ryzen 3 3200U vs Xeon E5-2680 v4
Description
The 3200U is based on Zen+ architecture while the E5-2680 v4 is based on Broadwell.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3200U gets a score of 61.2 k points while the E5-2680 v4 gets 1162.6 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-2680 v4 is 19 times faster than the 3200U. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3200U gets a score of 61.2 k points while the E5-2680 v4 gets 1162.6 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-2680 v4 is 19 times faster than the 3200U. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
810f81
406f1
Core
Picasso
Broadwell-EP
Base frecuency
2.6 GHz
2.4 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.5 GHz
3.3 GHz
Socket
BGA-FP5
LGA 2011-3
Cores/Threads
2/4
14/28
TDP
15 W
120 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
2x64+2x32 kB
14x32+14x32 kB
Cache L2
2x512 kB
14x256 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
35840 kB
Date
January 2019
March 2016
Mean monothread perf.
38.85k points
41.35k points
Mean multithread perf.
61.23k points
1162.63k points
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
3200U
E5-2680 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
11.13k
17.8k (x1.6)
Test#2 (FP)
19.38k
16.51k (x0.85)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.47k
4.47k (x1)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.87k
2.56k (x0.66)
TOTAL
38.85k
41.35k (x1.06)
Multithread
3200U
E5-2680 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
17.13k
494.82k (x28.89)
Test#2 (FP)
30.56k
514.13k (x16.82)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
9.44k
132.87k (x14.08)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.09k
20.8k (x5.08)
TOTAL
61.23k
1162.63k (x18.99)
Performance/W
3200U
E5-2680 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
1142 points/W
4124 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
2038 points/W
4284 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
629 points/W
1107 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
273 points/W
173 points/W
TOTAL
4082 points/W
9689 points/W
Performance/GHz
3200U
E5-2680 v4
Test#1 (Integers)
3181 points/GHz
5393 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5536 points/GHz
5004 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1277 points/GHz
1355 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1105 points/GHz
777 points/GHz
TOTAL
11099 points/GHz
12529 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