Ryzen 5 3400G vs 2600
Description
Both models 3400G and 2600 are based on Zen+ architecture.
Zen+ is the second generation of Ryzen processors. It uses the 12nm process by GlobalFoundries. Other than that, the die is the same than first generation Zen. It comes with 64kB of L1 cache and 512kB of L2 cache per core. There are 3 variants: Pinnacle Ridge (desktop), Colfax (high-end desktop) and Picasso (APU).
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3400G gets a score of 200.3 k points while the 2600 gets 291.5 k points.
Summarizing, the 2600 is 1.5 times faster than the 3400G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Zen+ is the second generation of Ryzen processors. It uses the 12nm process by GlobalFoundries. Other than that, the die is the same than first generation Zen. It comes with 64kB of L1 cache and 512kB of L2 cache per core. There are 3 variants: Pinnacle Ridge (desktop), Colfax (high-end desktop) and Picasso (APU).
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3400G gets a score of 200.3 k points while the 2600 gets 291.5 k points.
Summarizing, the 2600 is 1.5 times faster than the 3400G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
810f81
800f82
Core
Picasso
Pinnacle Ridge
Base frecuency
3.7 GHz
3.4 GHz
Boost frecuency
4.2 GHz
3.9 GHz
Socket
AM4
AM4
Cores/Threads
4/8
6/12
TDP
65 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
6x64+6x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
6x512 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
2x8192 kB
Date
July 2019
April 2018
Mean monothread perf.
50.25k points
57.13k points
Mean multithread perf.
200.34k points
291.53k 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
3400G
2600
Test#1 (Integers)
14.58k
13.76k (x0.94)
Test#2 (FP)
23.98k
23.03k (x0.96)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.35k
5.12k (x0.96)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.34k
15.23k (x2.4)
TOTAL
50.25k
57.13k (x1.14)
Multithread
3400G
2600
Test#1 (Integers)
57.37k
83.23k (x1.45)
Test#2 (FP)
107.03k
161.06k (x1.5)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
28.9k
40.52k (x1.4)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.05k
6.73k (x0.95)
TOTAL
200.34k
291.53k (x1.46)
Performance/W
3400G
2600
Test#1 (Integers)
883 points/W
1281 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1647 points/W
2478 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
445 points/W
623 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
108 points/W
103 points/W
TOTAL
3082 points/W
4485 points/W
Performance/GHz
3400G
2600
Test#1 (Integers)
3471 points/GHz
3529 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5710 points/GHz
5904 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1275 points/GHz
1313 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1509 points/GHz
3904 points/GHz
TOTAL
11965 points/GHz
14650 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