Core i5-10400T vs Ryzen 3 3200U
Description
The i5-10400T is based on Comet Lake architecture while the 3200U is based on Zen+.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the i5-10400T gets a score of 307.2 k points while the 3200U gets 61.2 k points.
Summarizing, the i5-10400T is 5 times faster than the 3200U. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the i5-10400T gets a score of 307.2 k points while the 3200U gets 61.2 k points.
Summarizing, the i5-10400T is 5 times faster than the 3200U. 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 GHz
2.6 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.6 GHz
3.5 GHz
Socket
FC-LGA 1200
BGA-FP5
Cores/Threads
6/12
2/4
TDP
35 W
15 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
6x32+6x32 kB
2x64+2x32 kB
Cache L2
6x256 kB
2x512 kB
Cache L3
12288 kB
4096 kB
Date
April 2020
January 2019
Mean monothread perf.
57.85k points
38.85k points
Mean multithread perf.
307.18k points
61.23k 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
i5-10400T
3200U
Test#1 (Integers)
22k
11.13k (x0.51)
Test#2 (FP)
19.98k
19.38k (x0.97)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.57k
4.47k (x0.98)
Test#1 (Memory)
11.31k
3.87k (x0.34)
TOTAL
57.85k
38.85k (x0.67)
Multithread
i5-10400T
3200U
Test#1 (Integers)
136.69k
17.13k (x0.13)
Test#2 (FP)
135.25k
30.56k (x0.23)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
32.76k
9.44k (x0.29)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.48k
4.09k (x1.65)
TOTAL
307.18k
61.23k (x0.2)
Performance/W
i5-10400T
3200U
Test#1 (Integers)
3905 points/W
1142 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
3864 points/W
2038 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
936 points/W
629 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
71 points/W
273 points/W
TOTAL
8776 points/W
4082 points/W
Performance/GHz
i5-10400T
3200U
Test#1 (Integers)
6111 points/GHz
3181 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5549 points/GHz
5536 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1268 points/GHz
1277 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
3141 points/GHz
1105 points/GHz
TOTAL
16069 points/GHz
11099 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