Ryzen 5 5600G vs Athlon X4 840

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon X4 840
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.17
Ryzen 5 5600G
2021
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
12.99
+499%

Ryzen 5 5600G outperforms Athlon X4 840 by a whopping 499% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon X4 840 and Ryzen 5 5600G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1870607
Place by popularitynot in top-10018
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data28.37
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Series4x AthlonAMD Ryzen 5
Power efficiency3.0418.22
Architecture codenameKaveri (2014−2015)Cezanne (2021−2024)
Release dateAugust 2014 (10 years ago)13 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$259

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon X4 840 and Ryzen 5 5600G basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads412
Base clock speed3.1 GHz3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz4.4 GHz
Multiplierno data39
L1 cache256K384 KB
L2 cache4 MB3 MB
L3 cacheno data16 MB
Chip lithography28 nm7 nm
Die size245 mm2AM4 (1331) mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °C95 °C
Number of transistors2,411 million10,700 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Athlon X4 840 and Ryzen 5 5600G compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketSocket FM2+AM4
Power consumption (TDP)65 watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X4 840 and Ryzen 5 5600G. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X4 840 and Ryzen 5 5600G are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X4 840 and Ryzen 5 5600G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory bandwidthno data51.196 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon Vega 7

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon X4 840 and Ryzen 5 5600G.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes16no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Athlon X4 840 2.17
Ryzen 5 5600G 12.99
+499%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Athlon X4 840 3325
Ryzen 5 5600G 19874
+498%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Athlon X4 840 446
Ryzen 5 5600G 1939
+335%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Athlon X4 840 1109
Ryzen 5 5600G 7725
+597%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.17 12.99
Recency on August 2014 13 April 2021
Physical cores 4 6
Threads 4 12
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm

Ryzen 5 5600G has a 498.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 50% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 5 5600G is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon X4 840 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X4 840 and Ryzen 5 5600G, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Athlon X4 840
Athlon X4 840
AMD Ryzen 5 5600G
Ryzen 5 5600G

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 614 votes

Rate Athlon X4 840 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 8939 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 5600G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon X4 840 or Ryzen 5 5600G, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.