Core i5-10400F vs Ryzen 5 3400G
Description
The i5-10400F is based on Comet Lake architecture while the 3400G is based on Zen+.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the i5-10400F gets a score of 370 k points while the 3400G gets 200.3 k points.
Summarizing, the i5-10400F is 1.8 times faster than the 3400G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the i5-10400F gets a score of 370 k points while the 3400G gets 200.3 k points.
Summarizing, the i5-10400F is 1.8 times faster than the 3400G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
a0653
810f81
Core
Comet Lake-S
Picasso
Base frecuency
2.9 GHz
3.7 GHz
Boost frecuency
4.3 GHz
4.2 GHz
Socket
LGA 1200
AM4
Cores/Threads
6/12
4/8
TDP
65 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
6x32+6x32 kB
4x64+4x32 kB
Cache L2
6x256 kB
4x512 kB
Cache L3
12288 kB
4096 kB
Date
April 2020
July 2019
Mean monothread perf.
68.14k points
50.25k points
Mean multithread perf.
369.97k points
200.34k 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
i5-10400F
3400G
Test#1 (Integers)
26.28k
14.58k (x0.55)
Test#2 (FP)
23.38k
23.98k (x1.03)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.52k
5.35k (x0.97)
Test#1 (Memory)
12.96k
6.34k (x0.49)
TOTAL
68.14k
50.25k (x0.74)
Multithread
i5-10400F
3400G
Test#1 (Integers)
163.67k
57.37k (x0.35)
Test#2 (FP)
159.74k
107.03k (x0.67)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
39k
28.9k (x0.74)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.56k
7.05k (x0.93)
TOTAL
369.97k
200.34k (x0.54)
Performance/W
i5-10400F
3400G
Test#1 (Integers)
2518 points/W
883 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
2457 points/W
1647 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
600 points/W
445 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
116 points/W
108 points/W
TOTAL
5692 points/W
3082 points/W
Performance/GHz
i5-10400F
3400G
Test#1 (Integers)
6112 points/GHz
3471 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5438 points/GHz
5710 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1283 points/GHz
1275 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
3014 points/GHz
1509 points/GHz
TOTAL
15847 points/GHz
11965 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