| | | | | | |

Ryzen 5 2400G vs Xeon Bronze 3206R


Description
The 2400G is based on Zen architecture while the 3206R is based on Cascade Lake.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 2400G gets a score of 198.3 k points while the 3206R gets 216 k points.

Summarizing, the 3206R is 1.1 times faster than the 2400G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
810f10
50657
Core
Raven Ridge
Cascade Lake-SP
Architecture
Base frecuency
3.6 GHz
1.9 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.9 GHz
1.9 GHz
Socket
AM4
LGA 3647-0
Cores/Threads
4/8
8/8
TDP
65 W
85 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
8x32+8x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
8x1024 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
11264 kB
Date
January 2018
February 2020
Mean monothread perf.
47.96k points
31.52k points
Mean multithread perf.
198.27k points
216.02k 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
3206R
Test#1 (Integers)
3.8k
1.97k (x0.52)
Test#2 (FP)
17.38k
8.15k (x0.47)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.17k
2.37k (x0.46)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.16k
4.84k (x1.53)
TOTAL
29.52k
17.32k (x0.59)

Multithread

2400G

3206R
Test#1 (Integers)
15.28k
15.73k (x1.03)
Test#2 (FP)
76.44k
64.78k (x0.85)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
27.48k
18.06k (x0.66)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.02k
5.21k (x1.73)
TOTAL
122.2k
103.77k (x0.85)

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
3206R
Test#1 (Integers)
14.2k
12.92k (x0.91)
Test#2 (FP)
23.23k
10.97k (x0.47)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.35k
2.54k (x0.47)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.18k
5.09k (x0.98)
TOTAL
47.96k
31.52k (x0.66)

Multithread

2400G

3206R
Test#1 (Integers)
58.24k
103.33k (x1.77)
Test#2 (FP)
105.72k
87.67k (x0.83)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
28.73k
20.1k (x0.7)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.59k
4.91k (x0.88)
TOTAL
198.27k
216.02k (x1.09)

Performance/W
2400G
3206R
Test#1 (Integers)
896 points/W
1216 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1626 points/W
1031 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
442 points/W
237 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
86 points/W
58 points/W
TOTAL
3050 points/W
2541 points/W

Performance/GHz
2400G
3206R
Test#1 (Integers)
3641 points/GHz
6801 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5957 points/GHz
5774 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1372 points/GHz
1334 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1327 points/GHz
2678 points/GHz
TOTAL
12298 points/GHz
16588 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