Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 935 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Ryzen 3 | AMD Renoir (Ryzen 4000 APU) |
| Power efficiency | no data | 50.15 |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Renoir-U PRO (Zen 2) (2020) |
| Release date | 7 January 2018 (6 years ago) | 7 May 2020 (4 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 4 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Multiplier | no data | 21 |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | no data | 156 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4500 Million | 9,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | FP6 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT | PRO, MMX, 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 Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 68.27 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 | AMD Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Integrated graphics card | 2.98 | 6.04 |
| Recency | 7 January 2018 | 7 May 2020 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 6 |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U has 102.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 2 years, 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U, 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.
