i3-N300 vs Ryzen 5 2600

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 5 2600
2018
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
8.30
+55.1%
Core i3-N300
2023
8 cores / 8 threads, 7 Watt
5.35

Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms Core i3-N300 by an impressive 55% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i3-N300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking9161178
Place by popularity21not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation10.13no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5no data
Power efficiency12.0872.33
Architecture codenamePinnacle Riege (Zen+) (2018)Alder Lake-N (2023)
Release date13 April 2018 (6 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199$309

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i3-N300 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads128
Base clock speed3.4 GHz0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier34no data
L1 cache576 KB96 KB (per core)
L2 cache3 MB2 MB (per module)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography12 nm10 nm
Die size213 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature95 °C105 °C
Number of transistors4800 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i3-N300 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4Intel BGA 1264
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt7 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i3-N300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SMEno data
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Precision Boost 2+no data

Security technologies

Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i3-N300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i3-N300 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i3-N300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4, DDR5 4800 MHz Single-channel
Maximum memory size128 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth46.933 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-Intel UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs (Rocket Lake) ( - 1250 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i3-N300.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes209

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 8.30
+55.1%
i3-N300 5.35

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 13188
+55.2%
i3-N300 8497

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 4726
+63.9%
i3-N300 2884

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 28173
+135%
i3-N300 12014

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 9290
+118%
i3-N300 4261

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Ryzen 5 2600 5.5
+218%
i3-N300 17.49

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 14
+158%
i3-N300 5

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Ryzen 5 2600 1248
+200%
i3-N300 416

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 157
+85.1%
i3-N300 85

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 1.76
+72.5%
i3-N300 1.02

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 7.5
+188%
i3-N300 2.6

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 4517
+136%
i3-N300 1915

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.  

Ryzen 5 2600 75
+160%
i3-N300 29

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.  

Ryzen 5 2600 205
+92.6%
i3-N300 107

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 5 2600 6070
+127%
i3-N300 2674

Blender(-)

Ryzen 5 2600 375
i3-N300 1095
+192%

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 5 2600 1119
+78.7%
i3-N300 626

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 5 2600 4020
+67.3%
i3-N300 2403

7-Zip

Ryzen 5 2600 30898
+158%
i3-N300 11976

WebXPRT 3

Ryzen 5 2600 179
+71.6%
i3-N300 104

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.30 5.35
Recency 13 April 2018 3 January 2023
Physical cores 6 8
Threads 12 8
Chip lithography 12 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 7 Watt

Ryzen 5 2600 has a 55.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 50% more threads.

i3-N300, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, 33.3% more physical cores, a 20% more advanced lithography process, and 828.6% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 5 2600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-N300 in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 5 2600 is a desktop processor while Core i3-N300 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i3-N300, 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 Ryzen 5 2600
Ryzen 5 2600
Intel Core i3-N300
Core i3-N300

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.


3.3 15155 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 2600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 78 votes

Rate Core i3-N300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 2600 or Core i3-N300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.