| | | | | | |

Ryzen 5 2400G vs Xeon Silver 4208


Description
The 2400G is based on Zen architecture while the Silver 4208 is based on Cascade Lake.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 2400G gets a score of 198.3 k points while the Silver 4208 gets 311.6 k points.

Summarizing, the Silver 4208 is 1.6 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
2.1 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.9 GHz
3.2 GHz
Socket
AM4
LGA 3647
Cores/Threads
4/8
8/16
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
April 2019
Mean monothread perf.
47.96k points
38.61k points
Mean multithread perf.
198.27k points
311.57k 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
Silver 4208
Test#1 (Integers)
3.8k
2.59k (x0.68)
Test#2 (FP)
17.38k
9.5k (x0.55)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.17k
3.15k (x0.61)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.16k
5.9k (x1.86)
TOTAL
29.52k
21.13k (x0.72)

Multithread

2400G

Silver 4208
Test#1 (Integers)
15.28k
21.09k (x1.38)
Test#2 (FP)
76.44k
80.93k (x1.06)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
27.48k
30.76k (x1.12)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.02k
8.51k (x2.82)
TOTAL
122.2k
141.3k (x1.16)

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
Silver 4208
Test#1 (Integers)
14.2k
16.86k (x1.19)
Test#2 (FP)
23.23k
12.08k (x0.52)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.35k
3.37k (x0.63)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.18k
6.29k (x1.22)
TOTAL
47.96k
38.61k (x0.8)

Multithread

2400G

Silver 4208
Test#1 (Integers)
58.24k
150.99k (x2.59)
Test#2 (FP)
105.72k
118.54k (x1.12)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
28.73k
33.44k (x1.16)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.59k
8.6k (x1.54)
TOTAL
198.27k
311.57k (x1.57)

Performance/W
2400G
Silver 4208
Test#1 (Integers)
896 points/W
1776 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1626 points/W
1395 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
442 points/W
393 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
86 points/W
101 points/W
TOTAL
3050 points/W
3666 points/W

Performance/GHz
2400G
Silver 4208
Test#1 (Integers)
3641 points/GHz
5269 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5957 points/GHz
3776 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1372 points/GHz
1054 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1327 points/GHz
1966 points/GHz
TOTAL
12298 points/GHz
12065 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