Ryzen 5 7540U vs i3-3217U

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i3-3217U
2012
2 cores / 4 threads, 17 Watt
0.79
Ryzen 5 7540U
2023
6 cores / 12 threads, 28 Watt
11.99
+1418%

Ryzen 5 7540U outperforms Core i3-3217U by a whopping 1418% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i3-3217U and Ryzen 5 7540U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2628654
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i3AMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040)
Power efficiency4.3239.77
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Phoenix (Zen4) (2023)
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)3 May 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$225no data

Detailed specifications

Core i3-3217U and Ryzen 5 7540U 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 cores2 (Dual-core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads412
Base clock speed1.8 GHz3.2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz4.9 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache3 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm4 nm
Die size118 mm2178 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
Number of transistorsno data25,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Core i3-3217U and Ryzen 5 7540U 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
SocketFCBGA1023FP7
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt28 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-3217U and Ryzen 5 7540U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXno data
AES-NI-+
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Core i3-3217U and Ryzen 5 7540U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Identity Protection+-
Anti-Theft+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-3217U and Ryzen 5 7540U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i3-3217U and Ryzen 5 7540U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600DDR5
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 4000AMD Radeon 740M
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1.05 GHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i3-3217U and Ryzen 5 7540U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-3217U and Ryzen 5 7540U.

PCIe version2.04.0
PCI Express lanes1620

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.

i3-3217U 0.79
Ryzen 5 7540U 11.99
+1418%

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.

i3-3217U 1225
Ryzen 5 7540U 18696
+1426%

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.

i3-3217U 293
Ryzen 5 7540U 2072
+607%

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.

i3-3217U 619
Ryzen 5 7540U 7979
+1189%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

i3-3217U 2477
Ryzen 5 7540U 7365
+197%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

i3-3217U 5394
Ryzen 5 7540U 27647
+413%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

i3-3217U 2229
Ryzen 5 7540U 11925
+435%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

i3-3217U 2
Ryzen 5 7540U 19
+992%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

i3-3217U 152
Ryzen 5 7540U 1676
+1003%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

i3-3217U 64
Ryzen 5 7540U 264
+316%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

i3-3217U 0.75
Ryzen 5 7540U 3.22
+329%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

i3-3217U 0.2
Ryzen 5 7540U 8.7
+4733%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

i3-3217U 10
Ryzen 5 7540U 76
+637%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

i3-3217U 56
Ryzen 5 7540U 226
+303%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

i3-3217U 1867
Ryzen 5 7540U 5273
+183%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.79 11.99
Integrated graphics card 1.18 8.33
Recency 1 June 2012 3 May 2023
Physical cores 2 6
Threads 4 12
Chip lithography 22 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 28 Watt

i3-3217U has 64.7% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 5 7540U, on the other hand, has a 1417.7% higher aggregate performance score, 605.9% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 10 years, 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 450% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 5 7540U is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-3217U in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-3217U and Ryzen 5 7540U, 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.


Intel Core i3-3217U
Core i3-3217U
AMD Ryzen 5 7540U
Ryzen 5 7540U

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.


3.2 535 votes

Rate Core i3-3217U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 56 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 7540U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i3-3217U or Ryzen 5 7540U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.