Ryzen 9 3900X vs Xeon E5-2690 v3
Description
The 3900X is based on Zen 2 architecture while the E5-2690 v3 is based on Haswell.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3900X gets a score of 756.3 k points while the E5-2690 v3 gets 1016.4 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-2690 v3 is 1.3 times faster than the 3900X. 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 E5-2690 v3 gets 1016.4 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-2690 v3 is 1.3 times faster than the 3900X. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
870f10
306f2
Core
Matisse
Haswell-EP
Base frecuency
3.8 GHz
2.6 GHz
Boost frecuency
4.6 GHz
3.5 GHz
Socket
AM4
LGA 2011-3
Cores/Threads
12/24
12/24
TDP
105 W
135 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
12x32+12x32 kB
12x32+12x32 kB
Cache L2
12x512 kB
12x256 kB
Cache L3
4x16384 kB
30720 kB
Date
July 2019
September 2014
Mean monothread perf.
72.51k points
40.71k points
Mean multithread perf.
756.3k points
1016.36k 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
E5-2690 v3
Test#1 (Integers)
16.73k
20.96k (x1.25)
Test#2 (FP)
24.74k
11.74k (x0.47)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
8.82k
4.61k (x0.52)
Test#1 (Memory)
22.22k
3.4k (x0.15)
TOTAL
72.51k
40.71k (x0.56)
Multithread
3900X
E5-2690 v3
Test#1 (Integers)
248.24k
531.68k (x2.14)
Test#2 (FP)
309.66k
342.28k (x1.11)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
140.01k
133.22k (x0.95)
Test#1 (Memory)
58.39k
9.19k (x0.16)
TOTAL
756.3k
1016.36k (x1.34)
Performance/W
3900X
E5-2690 v3
Test#1 (Integers)
2364 points/W
3938 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
2949 points/W
2535 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1333 points/W
987 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
556 points/W
68 points/W
TOTAL
7203 points/W
7529 points/W
Performance/GHz
3900X
E5-2690 v3
Test#1 (Integers)
3638 points/GHz
5988 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5377 points/GHz
3356 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1917 points/GHz
1318 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
4831 points/GHz
971 points/GHz
TOTAL
15763 points/GHz
11632 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