Core i5-10400F vs Ryzen 7 3800XT
Description
The i5-10400F is based on Comet Lake architecture while the 3800XT is based on Zen 2.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the i5-10400F gets a score of 390.8 k points while the 3800XT gets 508.9 k points.
Summarizing, the 3800XT is 1.3 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 i5-10400F gets a score of 390.8 k points while the 3800XT gets 508.9 k points.
Summarizing, the 3800XT is 1.3 times faster than the i5-10400F. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
a0655
870f10
Core
Comet Lake-S
Matisse
Base frecuency
2.9 GHz
3.9 GHz
Boost frecuency
4.3 GHz
4.7 GHz
Socket
LGA 1200
AM4
Cores/Threads
6/12
8/16
TDP
65 W
105 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
6x32+6x32 kB
8x32+8x32 kB
Cache L2
6x256 kB
8x512 kB
Cache L3
16386 kB
2x16384 kB
Date
May 2020
July 2020
Mean monothread perf.
72.25k points
78.2k points
Mean multithread perf.
390.78k points
508.89k 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
3800XT
Test#1 (Integers)
28.39k
17.57k (x0.62)
Test#2 (FP)
24.89k
27.38k (x1.1)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.78k
9.35k (x1.62)
Test#1 (Memory)
13.19k
23.9k (x1.81)
TOTAL
72.25k
78.2k (x1.08)
Multithread
i5-10400F
3800XT
Test#1 (Integers)
180.2k
176.08k (x0.98)
Test#2 (FP)
163.51k
219.88k (x1.34)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
40.6k
100k (x2.46)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.48k
12.93k (x1.99)
TOTAL
390.78k
508.89k (x1.3)
Performance/W
i5-10400F
3800XT
Test#1 (Integers)
2772 points/W
1677 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
2515 points/W
2094 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
625 points/W
952 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
100 points/W
123 points/W
TOTAL
6012 points/W
4847 points/W
Performance/GHz
i5-10400F
3800XT
Test#1 (Integers)
6603 points/GHz
3738 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5788 points/GHz
5827 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1344 points/GHz
1989 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
3067 points/GHz
5085 points/GHz
TOTAL
16803 points/GHz
16638 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