Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE vs E2-3800
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE outperforms E2-3800 by a whopping 1238% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing E2-3800 and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2675 | 782 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD A-Series | AMD Ryzen 5 |
| Power efficiency | 4.61 | 26.42 |
| Architecture codename | Kabini (2013−2014) | Renoir (2020−2023) |
| Release date | 23 May 2013 (11 years ago) | 21 July 2020 (4 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
E2-3800 and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.3 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 33 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2048 KB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | 156 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 90 °C | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 9800 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on E2-3800 and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FT3 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E2-3800 and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | FMA4 | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E2-3800 and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E2-3800 and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1600 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 1 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 51.196 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 8280 | AMD Radeon Vega 7 |
| Number of pipelines | 128 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of E2-3800 and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by E2-3800 and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E2-3800 and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 4 | no 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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.73 | 9.77 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.67 | 7.46 |
| Recency | 23 May 2013 | 21 July 2020 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 6 |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 35 Watt |
E2-3800 has 133.3% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE, on the other hand, has a 1238.4% higher aggregate performance score, 1013.4% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 7 years, 50% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.
The Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-3800 in performance tests.
Be aware that E2-3800 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between E2-3800 and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
