| | | | | | |

Core E5-2620 v3 vs Ryzen 5 3400G


Description
The E5-2620 v3 is based on Haswell architecture while the 3400G is based on Zen+.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the E5-2620 v3 gets a score of 358 k points while the 3400G gets 200.3 k points.

Summarizing, the E5-2620 v3 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
306f2
810f81
Core
Haswell-EP
Picasso
Architecture
Base frecuency
2.4 GHz
3.7 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.2 GHz
4.2 GHz
Socket
LGA 2011-3
AM4
Cores/Threads
6/12
4/8
TDP
85 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
6x32+6x32 kB
4x64+4x32 kB
Cache L2
6x256 kB
4x512 kB
Cache L3
15360 kB
4096 kB
Date
September 2014
July 2019
Mean monothread perf.
35.86k points
50.25k points
Mean multithread perf.
357.99k 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
E5-2620 v3
3400G
Test#1 (Integers)
18.64k
14.58k (x0.78)
Test#2 (FP)
10.55k
23.98k (x2.27)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.12k
5.35k (x1.3)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.54k
6.34k (x2.5)
TOTAL
35.86k
50.25k (x1.4)

Multithread

E5-2620 v3

3400G
Test#1 (Integers)
181.66k
57.37k (x0.32)
Test#2 (FP)
122.09k
107.03k (x0.88)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
47.02k
28.9k (x0.61)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.22k
7.05k (x0.98)
TOTAL
357.99k
200.34k (x0.56)

Performance/W
E5-2620 v3
3400G
Test#1 (Integers)
2137 points/W
883 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1436 points/W
1647 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
553 points/W
445 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
85 points/W
108 points/W
TOTAL
4212 points/W
3082 points/W

Performance/GHz
E5-2620 v3
3400G
Test#1 (Integers)
5826 points/GHz
3471 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
3297 points/GHz
5710 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1288 points/GHz
1275 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
794 points/GHz
1509 points/GHz
TOTAL
11205 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.


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