GadgetVersus Smartphone Processor Graphics card Language ⏷ English French
EN ⏷
FR ☰
- Home page
- ⏵ Processor
- ⏵ Comparison
Intel Pentium Gold G6400 vs AMD Athlon Gold 3150U
Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the Intel Pentium Gold G6400 on one side and the AMD Athlon Gold 3150U on the other side, also their respective performances with the benchmarks. The first is dedicated to the desktop sector, It has 2 cores, 4 threads, a maximum frequency of 4.0GHz. The second is used on the thin and light laptop segment, it has a total of 2 cores, 4 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 3.3 GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the number of transistors (if indicated), the amount of cache memory, the maximum RAM memory capacity, the type of memory accepted, the release date, the maximum number of PCIe lanes, the values obtained in Geekbench and Cinebench.Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.
Specification comparison:
| Processor | Intel Pentium Gold G6400 | AMD Athlon Gold 3150U |
| Market (main) | Desktop | Thin and light laptop |
| ISA | x86-64 (64 bit) | x86-64 (64 bit) |
| Microarchitecture | Comet Lake | Zen |
| Core name | Comet Lake-S | Dali |
| Family | Pentium 6000 | Athlon Gold 3000 |
| Part number(s), S-Spec | BX80701G6400, BXC80701G6400, CM8070104291810, QTPC, SRH3Y | YM3150C4T2OFG |
| Release date | Q2 2020 | Q1 2020 |
| Lithography | 14 nm++ | 14 nm |
| Cores | 2 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base frequency | 4.0 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Turbo frequency | - | 3.3 GHz |
| High performance cores | 2 Cores 4 Threads @ 4.0 GHz | 2 Cores 4 Threads @ 2.4 / 3.3 GHz |
| Cache memory | 4 MB | 4 MB |
| Max memory capacity | 128 GB | 32 GB |
| Memory types | DDR4-2666 | DDR4-2400 |
| Max # of memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Max memory bandwidth | 41.6 GB/s | 35.76 GB/s |
| Max PCIe lanes | 16 | 12 |
| TDP | 58 W | 15 W |
| Suggested PSU | 600W ATX Power Supply  | - | |
| GPU integrated graphics | Intel UHD Graphics 610 (Comet Lake) | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 |
| GPU cores | - | 3 |
| GPU execution units | 12 | - |
| GPU shading units | 96 | 192 |
| GPU base clock | 350 MHz | 600 MHz |
| GPU boost clock | 1050 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| GPU FP32 floating point | 201.6 GFLOPS | 460.8 GFLOPS |
| Socket | LGA1200 | FP5, BGA |
| Compatible motherboard | Socket LGA 1200 Motherboard | - |
| Maximum temperature | 100°C | 95°C |
| Crypto engine | AES New Instructions, Secure Key | AES Instructions |
| Security | Software Guard Extensions, OS Guard, Execute Disable Bit, Boot Guard | Enhanced Virus Protection |
| Max display resolution | 4096 x 2160@30Hz (HDMI), 4096 x 2304@60Hz (DP), 4096 x 2304@60Hz (eDP) | - |
| CPU-Z single thread | 422 | 314 |
| CPU-Z multi thread | 1,191 | 967 |
| Cinebench R15 single thread | 165 | 130 |
| Cinebench R15 multi-thread | 429 | 310 |
| Cinebench R20 single thread | 374 | 180 |
| Cinebench R20 multi-thread | 955 | 520 |
| PassMark single thread | 2,479 | 1,925 |
| PassMark CPU Mark | 4,233 | 4,374 |
| (Windows)Geekbench 4 single core | 4,748 | 3,719 |
| (Windows)Geekbench 4 multi-core | 9,193 | 7,819 |
| (Windows)Geekbench 5 single core | 1,007 | 730 |
| (Windows)Geekbench 5 multi-core | 2,197 | 1,762 |
| (SGEMM)GFLOPS Performance | 53.4 GFLOPS | 81.7 GFLOPS |
| (Multi-core / watt performance)Performance / watt ratio | 159 pts / W | 521 pts / W |
| Amazon |  | |
| eBay |  | |
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.We can better compare what are the technical differences between the two processors. Suggested PSU: We assume that we have an ATX computer case, a high end graphics card, 16GB RAM, a 512GB SSD, a 1TB HDD hard drive, a Blu-Ray drive. We will have to rely on a more powerful power supply if we want to have several graphics cards, several monitors, more memory, etc.Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.We see that the two processors have an equivalent number of cores, the maximum frequency of Intel Pentium Gold G6400 is greater, that the thermal dissipation power of AMD Athlon Gold 3150U is less. Both were produced in the same year.
Performance comparison with the benchmarks:
Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench.
| CPU-Z - Multi-Thread & Single Thread Score |
| Intel Pentium Gold G6400 | 422 1,191 |
| AMD Athlon Gold 3150U | 314 967 |
In single core, the difference is 34%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 23%.Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.CPU-Z is a system information software that provides the name of the processor, its model number, the codename, the cache levels, the package, the process. It can also gives data about the mainboard, the memory. It makes real time measurement, with finally a benchmark for the single thread, as well as for the multi thread.
| Cinebench R15 - Multi-Thread & Single Thread Score |
| Intel Pentium Gold G6400 | 165 429 |
| AMD Athlon Gold 3150U | 130 310 |
In single core, the difference is 27%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 38%.Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.Cinebench R15 evaluates the performance of CPU calculations by restoring a photorealistic 3D scene. The scene has 2,000 objects, 300,000 polygons, uses sharp and fuzzy reflections, bright areas, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and so on. The faster the rendering of the scene is created, the more powerful the PC is, with a high number of points.
| Cinebench R20 - Multi-Thread & Single Thread Score |
| Intel Pentium Gold G6400 | 374 955 |
| AMD Athlon Gold 3150U | 180 520 |
In single core, the difference is 108%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 84%.Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.Cinebench R20 is a multi-platform test software which allows to evaluate the hardware capacities of a device such as a computer, a tablet, a server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant.
| PassMark - CPU Mark & single thread |
| AMD Athlon Gold 3150U | 1,925 4,374 |
| Intel Pentium Gold G6400 | 2,479 4,233 |
In single core, the difference is 29%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 3%.Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity. With Windows:
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-core & Single Core Score - Windows |
| Intel Pentium Gold G6400 | 4,748 9,193 |
| AMD Athlon Gold 3150U | 3,719 7,819 |
In single core, the difference is 28%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 18%.Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.Geekbench 4 is a complete benchmark platform with several types of tests, including data compression, images, AES encryption, SQL encoding, HTML, PDF file rendering, matrix computation, Fast Fourier Transform, 3D object simulation, photo editing, memory testing. This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices. For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.With Windows:
| Geekbench 5 - Multi-core & Single Core Score - Windows |
| Intel Pentium Gold G6400 | 1,007 2,197 |
| AMD Athlon Gold 3150U | 730 1,762 |
In single core, the difference is 38%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 25%.With Linux:
| Geekbench 5 - Multi-core & Single Core Score - Linux |
| AMD Athlon Gold 3150U | 831 1,771 |
| Intel Pentium Gold G6400 | 969 1,480 |
In single core, the difference is 17%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 20%.Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.Geekbench 5 is a software for measuring the performance of a computer system, for fixed devices, mobile devices, servers. This platform makes it possible to better compare the power of the CPU, the computing power and to compare it with similar or totally different systems. Geekbench 5 includes new workloads that represent work tasks and applications that we can find in reality.
Equivalence:
Intel Pentium Gold G6400 AMD EquivalentAMD Athlon Gold 3150U Intel Equivalent
See also:
Intel Pentium Gold G6400TIntel Pentium Gold G6405Intel Pentium Gold G6405TAMD Athlon Gold 3150CAMD Athlon Gold 3150G GadgetVersus.com © 2024 - About us - XML sitemap - Privacy policy - Advertising policy - Contact
Disclaimer: When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. This page includes affiliate links for which the administrator of GadgetVersus may earn a commission at no extra cost to you should you make a purchase. These links are indicated using the hashtag #ad. Information: We do not assume any responsibility for the data displayed on our website. Please use at your own risk. Some or all of this data may be out of date or incomplete, please refer to the technical page on the respective manufacturer's website to find the latest up-to-date information regarding the specifics of these products.
