| | | | | | |

Xeon Bronze 3206R vs Ryzen 5 2400G


Description
The 3206R is based on Cascade Lake architecture while the 2400G is based on Zen.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 3206R gets a score of 216 k points while the 2400G gets 198.3 k points.

Summarizing, the 3206R is 1.1 times faster than the 2400G. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
50657
810f10
Core
Cascade Lake-SP
Raven Ridge
Architecture
Base frecuency
1.9 GHz
3.6 GHz
Boost frecuency
1.9 GHz
3.9 GHz
Socket
LGA 3647-0
AM4
Cores/Threads
8/8
4/8
TDP
85 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
8x32+8x32 kB
4x64+4x32 kB
Cache L2
8x1024 kB
4x512 kB
Cache L3
11264 kB
4096 kB
Date
February 2020
January 2018
Mean monothread perf.
31.52k points
47.96k points
Mean multithread perf.
216.02k points
198.27k points

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
3206R
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
1.97k
3.8k (x1.93)
Test#2 (FP)
8.15k
17.38k (x2.13)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.37k
5.17k (x2.18)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.84k
3.16k (x0.65)
TOTAL
17.32k
29.52k (x1.7)

Multithread

3206R

2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
15.73k
15.28k (x0.97)
Test#2 (FP)
64.78k
76.44k (x1.18)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
18.06k
27.48k (x1.52)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.21k
3.02k (x0.58)
TOTAL
103.77k
122.2k (x1.18)

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
3206R
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
12.92k
14.2k (x1.1)
Test#2 (FP)
10.97k
23.23k (x2.12)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.54k
5.35k (x2.11)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.09k
5.18k (x1.02)
TOTAL
31.52k
47.96k (x1.52)

Multithread

3206R

2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
103.33k
58.24k (x0.56)
Test#2 (FP)
87.67k
105.72k (x1.21)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.1k
28.73k (x1.43)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.91k
5.59k (x1.14)
TOTAL
216.02k
198.27k (x0.92)

Performance/W
3206R
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
1216 points/W
896 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1031 points/W
1626 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
237 points/W
442 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
58 points/W
86 points/W
TOTAL
2541 points/W
3050 points/W

Performance/GHz
3206R
2400G
Test#1 (Integers)
6801 points/GHz
3641 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5774 points/GHz
5957 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1334 points/GHz
1372 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
2678 points/GHz
1327 points/GHz
TOTAL
16588 points/GHz
12298 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. 3.11.4