Ryzen 5 2400G vs Ryzen 3 3200G
Description
The 2400G is based on Zen architecture while the 3200G is based on Zen+.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 2400G gets a score of 198.3 k points while the 3200G gets 168.7 k points.
Summarizing, the 2400G is 1.2 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 2400G gets a score of 198.3 k points while the 3200G gets 168.7 k points.
Summarizing, the 2400G is 1.2 times faster than the 3200G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
810f10
810f81
Core
Raven Ridge
Picasso
Base frecuency
3.6 GHz
3.6 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.9 GHz
4 GHz
Socket
AM4
AM4
Cores/Threads
4/8
4/4
TDP
65 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
4x64+4x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
4x512 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
4096 kB
Date
January 2018
July 2019
Mean monothread perf.
47.96k points
49.21k points
Mean multithread perf.
198.27k points
168.69k 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
2400G
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
3.8k
3.89k (x1.02)
Test#2 (FP)
17.38k
17.94k (x1.03)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.17k
5.34k (x1.03)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.16k
6.62k (x2.09)
TOTAL
29.52k
33.79k (x1.14)
Multithread
2400G
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
15.28k
15.07k (x0.99)
Test#2 (FP)
76.44k
66.84k (x0.87)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
27.48k
19.56k (x0.71)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.02k
6.54k (x2.17)
TOTAL
122.2k
108.01k (x0.88)
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
2400G
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
13.95k
14.3k (x1.02)
Test#2 (FP)
20.7k
21.69k (x1.05)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.33k
5.42k (x1.02)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.03k
6.6k (x2.18)
TOTAL
43.01k
48k (x1.12)
Multithread
2400G
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
58.56k
55.45k (x0.95)
Test#2 (FP)
92.95k
83.13k (x0.89)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
28.55k
20.76k (x0.73)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.98k
6.58k (x2.21)
TOTAL
183.04k
165.91k (x0.91)
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
2400G
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
13.04k
13.05k (x1)
Test#2 (FP)
22.35k
22.88k (x1.02)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.37k
5.39k (x1)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.4k
7.31k (x2.15)
TOTAL
44.15k
48.63k (x1.1)
Multithread
2400G
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
56.49k
51.73k (x0.92)
Test#2 (FP)
100.74k
87.74k (x0.87)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
28.21k
20.74k (x0.74)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.04k
6.57k (x2.16)
TOTAL
188.49k
166.79k (x0.88)
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
2400G
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
14.2k
14.48k (x1.02)
Test#2 (FP)
23.23k
23.84k (x1.03)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.35k
5.43k (x1.01)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.18k
5.46k (x1.05)
TOTAL
47.96k
49.21k (x1.03)
Multithread
2400G
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
58.24k
54.39k (x0.93)
Test#2 (FP)
105.72k
88.77k (x0.84)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
28.73k
20.04k (x0.7)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.59k
5.48k (x0.98)
TOTAL
198.27k
168.69k (x0.85)
Performance/W
2400G
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
896 points/W
837 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1626 points/W
1366 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
442 points/W
308 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
86 points/W
84 points/W
TOTAL
3050 points/W
2595 points/W
Performance/GHz
2400G
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
3641 points/GHz
3619 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5957 points/GHz
5961 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1372 points/GHz
1357 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1327 points/GHz
1365 points/GHz
TOTAL
12298 points/GHz
12302 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