| | | |

Core i5-10400T vs Ryzen 3 3200G


Description
The i5-10400T is based on Comet Lake architecture while the 3200G is based on Zen+.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the i5-10400T gets a score of 307.2 k points while the 3200G gets 176.3 k points.

Summarizing, the i5-10400T is 1.7 times faster than the 3200G. 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
Architecture
Base frecuency
2 GHz
3.6 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.6 GHz
4 GHz
Socket
FC-LGA 1200
AM4
Cores/Threads
6/12
4/4
TDP
35 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

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
i5-10400T
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
4004
3890 (-2.84%)
Test#2 (FP)
14189
17944 (26.46%)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4620
5338 (15.56%)
Test#1 (Memory)
11029
6616 (-40.01%)
TOTAL
33842
33789 (-0.16%)

Multithread

i5-10400T

3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
22767
15068 (-33.82%)
Test#2 (FP)
96586
66845 (-30.79%)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
31652
19560 (-38.20%)
Test#1 (Memory)
2451
6541 (166.89%)
TOTAL
153456
108015 (-29.61%)

SSE3 optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode I (SSE) is optimized for the use of SIMD instructions with 128 bits register and the SSE set up to version 3. Nearly every modern CPU has support for this mode.
Monothread
i5-10400T
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
12610
14296 (13.37%)
Test#2 (FP)
17941
21686 (20.87%)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4828
5417 (12.19%)
Test#1 (Memory)
10811
6601 (-38.94%)
TOTAL
46191
48000 (3.92%)

Multithread

i5-10400T

3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
74617
55447 (-25.69%)
Test#2 (FP)
119634
83131 (-30.51%)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
32645
20757 (-36.42%)
Test#1 (Memory)
2520
6576 (160.96%)
TOTAL
229416
165910 (-27.68%)

AVX optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode II (AVX) is optimized to used 256 bits registers beside the first version of the Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX). The first AVX compatible CPU was released in 2011.
Monothread
i5-10400T
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
12498
13047 (4.40%)
Test#2 (FP)
19053
22878 (20.07%)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4722
5391 (14.18%)
Test#1 (Memory)
10297
7311 (-29.00%)
TOTAL
46570
48627 (4.42%)

Multithread

i5-10400T

3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
74581
51730 (-30.64%)
Test#2 (FP)
126959
87745 (-30.89%)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
31762
20744 (-34.69%)
Test#1 (Memory)
2497
6571 (163.13%)
TOTAL
235799
166789 (-29.27%)

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
i5-10400T
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
21999
14589 (-33.68%)
Test#2 (FP)
19977
23951 (19.89%)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4566
5424 (18.78%)
Test#1 (Memory)
11306
6541 (-42.15%)
TOTAL
57847
50504 (-12.69%)

Multithread

i5-10400T

3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
136687
56613 (-58.58%)
Test#2 (FP)
135254
92186 (-31.84%)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
32756
20909 (-36.17%)
Test#1 (Memory)
2478
6640 (167.96%)
TOTAL
307175
176348 (-42.59%)

Performance/W
i5-10400T
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
3905 points/W
871 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
3864 points/W
1418 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
936 points/W
322 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
71 points/W
102 points/W
TOTAL
8776 points/W
2713 points/W

Performance/GHz
i5-10400T
3200G
Test#1 (Integers)
6111 points/GHz
3647 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5549 points/GHz
5988 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1268 points/GHz
1356 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
3141 points/GHz
1635 points/GHz
TOTAL
16069 points/GHz
12626 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. 3.7.9