Ryzen 5 2400G vs Ryzen 9 3900
Description
The 2400G is based on Zen architecture while the 3900 is based on Zen 2.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 2400G gets a score of 198.3 k points while the 3900 gets 687.5 k points.
Summarizing, the 3900 is 3.5 times faster than the 2400G. 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 3900 gets 687.5 k points.
Summarizing, the 3900 is 3.5 times faster than the 2400G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
810f10
870f10
Core
Raven Ridge
Matisse
Base frecuency
3.6 GHz
3.1 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.9 GHz
4.3 GHz
Socket
AM4
AM4
Cores/Threads
4/8
12/24
TDP
65 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
12x32+12x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
12x512 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
4x16384 kB
Date
January 2018
September 2019
Mean monothread perf.
47.96k points
74.97k points
Mean multithread perf.
198.27k points
687.5k 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
3900
Test#1 (Integers)
3.8k
4.39k (x1.15)
Test#2 (FP)
17.38k
16.99k (x0.98)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.17k
7.74k (x1.5)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.16k
24.57k (x7.77)
TOTAL
29.52k
53.69k (x1.82)
Multithread
2400G
3900
Test#1 (Integers)
15.28k
48.45k (x3.17)
Test#2 (FP)
76.44k
230.81k (x3.02)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
27.48k
122.82k (x4.47)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.02k
54.73k (x18.15)
TOTAL
122.2k
456.8k (x3.74)
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
3900
Test#1 (Integers)
13.95k
16.59k (x1.19)
Test#2 (FP)
20.7k
24.55k (x1.19)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.33k
8.55k (x1.6)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.03k
26.28k (x8.69)
TOTAL
43.01k
75.97k (x1.77)
Multithread
2400G
3900
Test#1 (Integers)
58.56k
181.33k (x3.1)
Test#2 (FP)
92.95k
261.01k (x2.81)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
28.55k
126.62k (x4.43)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.98k
66.64k (x22.4)
TOTAL
183.04k
635.6k (x3.47)
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
3900
Test#1 (Integers)
13.04k
16.16k (x1.24)
Test#2 (FP)
22.35k
23.75k (x1.06)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.37k
9.32k (x1.74)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.4k
23.17k (x6.82)
TOTAL
44.15k
72.4k (x1.64)
Multithread
2400G
3900
Test#1 (Integers)
56.49k
174.73k (x3.09)
Test#2 (FP)
100.74k
275.63k (x2.74)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
28.21k
125.65k (x4.45)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.04k
44.17k (x14.53)
TOTAL
188.49k
620.18k (x3.29)
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
3900
Test#1 (Integers)
14.2k
16.85k (x1.19)
Test#2 (FP)
23.23k
26.03k (x1.12)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.35k
9.54k (x1.78)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.18k
22.55k (x4.36)
TOTAL
47.96k
74.97k (x1.56)
Multithread
2400G
3900
Test#1 (Integers)
58.24k
229.41k (x3.94)
Test#2 (FP)
105.72k
292.81k (x2.77)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
28.73k
128.48k (x4.47)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.59k
36.8k (x6.59)
TOTAL
198.27k
687.5k (x3.47)
Performance/W
2400G
3900
Test#1 (Integers)
896 points/W
3529 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1626 points/W
4505 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
442 points/W
1977 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
86 points/W
566 points/W
TOTAL
3050 points/W
10577 points/W
Performance/GHz
2400G
3900
Test#1 (Integers)
3641 points/GHz
3920 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5957 points/GHz
6054 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1372 points/GHz
2218 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1327 points/GHz
5243 points/GHz
TOTAL
12298 points/GHz
17435 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