Ryzen 9 3900X vs Core i5-10400F
Description
The 3900X is based on Zen 2 architecture while the i5-10400F is based on Comet Lake.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3900X gets a score of 756.3 k points while the i5-10400F gets 390.8 k points.
Summarizing, the 3900X is 1.9 times faster than the i5-10400F. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3900X gets a score of 756.3 k points while the i5-10400F gets 390.8 k points.
Summarizing, the 3900X is 1.9 times faster than the i5-10400F. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
870f10
a0655
Core
Matisse
Comet Lake-S
Base frecuency
3.8 GHz
2.9 GHz
Boost frecuency
4.6 GHz
4.3 GHz
Socket
AM4
LGA 1200
Cores/Threads
12/24
6/12
TDP
105 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
12x32+12x32 kB
6x32+6x32 kB
Cache L2
12x512 kB
6x256 kB
Cache L3
4x16384 kB
16386 kB
Date
July 2019
May 2020
Mean monothread perf.
72.51k points
72.25k points
Mean multithread perf.
756.3k points
390.78k 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
3900X
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
16.73k
28.39k (x1.7)
Test#2 (FP)
24.74k
24.89k (x1.01)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
8.82k
5.78k (x0.66)
Test#1 (Memory)
22.22k
13.19k (x0.59)
TOTAL
72.51k
72.25k (x1)
Multithread
3900X
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
248.24k
180.2k (x0.73)
Test#2 (FP)
309.66k
163.51k (x0.53)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
140.01k
40.6k (x0.29)
Test#1 (Memory)
58.39k
6.48k (x0.11)
TOTAL
756.3k
390.78k (x0.52)
Performance/W
3900X
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
2364 points/W
2772 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
2949 points/W
2515 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1333 points/W
625 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
556 points/W
100 points/W
TOTAL
7203 points/W
6012 points/W
Performance/GHz
3900X
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
3638 points/GHz
6603 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5377 points/GHz
5788 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1917 points/GHz
1344 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
4831 points/GHz
3067 points/GHz
TOTAL
15763 points/GHz
16803 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