| | | | | | |

Ryzen 7 3750H vs Core i5-10400F


Description
The 3750H is based on Zen+ architecture while the i5-10400F is based on Comet Lake.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3750H gets a score of 175.2 k points while the i5-10400F gets 370 k points.

Summarizing, the i5-10400F is 2.1 times faster than the 3750H. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
810f81
a0653
Core
Picasso
Comet Lake-S
Architecture
Base frecuency
2.3 GHz
2.9 GHz
Boost frecuency
4 GHz
4.3 GHz
Socket
BGA-FP5
LGA 1200
Cores/Threads
4/8
6/12
TDP
35 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+4x32 kB
6x32+6x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
6x256 kB
Cache L3
4096 kB
12288 kB
Date
January 2019
April 2020
Mean monothread perf.
46.91k points
68.14k points
Mean multithread perf.
175.18k points
369.97k 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
3750H
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
3.78k
4.3k (x1.14)
Test#2 (FP)
16.42k
16.56k (x1.01)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.75k
5.25k (x1.11)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.51k
12.61k (x2.29)
TOTAL
30.46k
38.72k (x1.27)

Multithread

3750H

i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
15.18k
18.1k (x1.19)
Test#2 (FP)
74.87k
79.16k (x1.06)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
27.85k
26.75k (x0.96)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.08k
13.81k (x2.27)
TOTAL
123.97k
137.82k (x1.11)

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
3750H
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
13.72k
26.28k (x1.92)
Test#2 (FP)
22.93k
23.38k (x1.02)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.99k
5.52k (x1.11)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.27k
12.96k (x2.46)
TOTAL
46.91k
68.14k (x1.45)

Multithread

3750H

i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
50.54k
163.67k (x3.24)
Test#2 (FP)
93.33k
159.74k (x1.71)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
25.25k
39k (x1.54)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.07k
7.56k (x1.25)
TOTAL
175.18k
369.97k (x2.11)

Performance/W
3750H
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
1444 points/W
2518 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
2667 points/W
2457 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
721 points/W
600 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
173 points/W
116 points/W
TOTAL
5005 points/W
5692 points/W

Performance/GHz
3750H
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
3430 points/GHz
6112 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5733 points/GHz
5438 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1248 points/GHz
1283 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1317 points/GHz
3014 points/GHz
TOTAL
11726 points/GHz
15847 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