Ryzen 3 3300U vs Core i5-10400T
Description
The 3300U is based on Zen+ architecture while the i5-10400T is based on Comet Lake.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3300U gets a score of 139.6 k points while the i5-10400T gets 307.2 k points.
Summarizing, the i5-10400T is 2.2 times faster than the 3300U. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3300U gets a score of 139.6 k points while the i5-10400T gets 307.2 k points.
Summarizing, the i5-10400T is 2.2 times faster than the 3300U. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
810f81
a0653
Core
Picasso
Comet Lake-S
Base frecuency
2.1 GHz
2 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.5 GHz
3.6 GHz
Socket
BGA-FP5
FC-LGA 1200
Cores/Threads
4/4
6/12
TDP
15 W
35 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
6x32+6x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
6x256 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
12288 kB
Date
January 2019
April 2020
Mean monothread perf.
40.81k points
57.85k points
Mean multithread perf.
139.56k points
307.18k 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
3300U
i5-10400T
Test#1 (Integers)
12k
22k (x1.83)
Test#2 (FP)
19.55k
19.98k (x1.02)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.43k
4.57k (x1.03)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.83k
11.31k (x2.34)
TOTAL
40.81k
57.85k (x1.42)
Multithread
3300U
i5-10400T
Test#1 (Integers)
43.64k
136.69k (x3.13)
Test#2 (FP)
73.99k
135.25k (x1.83)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
17.03k
32.76k (x1.92)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.91k
2.48k (x0.5)
TOTAL
139.56k
307.18k (x2.2)
Performance/W
3300U
i5-10400T
Test#1 (Integers)
2909 points/W
3905 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
4933 points/W
3864 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1135 points/W
936 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
327 points/W
71 points/W
TOTAL
9304 points/W
8776 points/W
Performance/GHz
3300U
i5-10400T
Test#1 (Integers)
3430 points/GHz
6111 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5587 points/GHz
5549 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1266 points/GHz
1268 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1379 points/GHz
3141 points/GHz
TOTAL
11661 points/GHz
16069 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