Ryzen 3 3200U vs Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U
2018
4 cores / 8 threads, 15 Watt
4.21
+76.2%
Ryzen 3 3200U
2019
2 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
2.39

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms Ryzen 3 3200U by an impressive 76% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U and Ryzen 3 3200U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking13761775
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5AMD Ryzen 3
Power efficiency26.4515.02
Architecture codenameRaven Ridge (2017−2018)Picasso-U (Zen) (2019)
Release date8 January 2018 (6 years ago)6 January 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U and Ryzen 3 3200U 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads84
Base clock speed2 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz3.5 GHz
Bus typeno dataPCIe 3.0
Multiplier2026
L1 cache384 KB192 KB
L2 cache2 MB1 MB
L3 cache4 MB (shared)4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm12 nm
Die size209.78 mm2209.78 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
Number of transistors4950 Million4940 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U and Ryzen 3 3200U 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFP5FP5
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U and Ryzen 3 3200U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTMMX, 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++
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U and Ryzen 3 3200U are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U and Ryzen 3 3200U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR4
Maximum memory size32 GB64 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/s38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)AMD Radeon RX Vega 3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U and Ryzen 3 3200U.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes1212

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 PRO 2500U 4.21
+76.2%
Ryzen 3 3200U 2.39

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 PRO 2500U 6669
+76.1%
Ryzen 3 3200U 3786

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.

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 877
+11.7%
Ryzen 3 3200U 785

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.

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 2578
+70.7%
Ryzen 3 3200U 1510

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 PRO 2500U 4349
+2.1%
Ryzen 3 3200U 4258

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 PRO 2500U 14336
+54.4%
Ryzen 3 3200U 9284

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 PRO 2500U 5635
+50.1%
Ryzen 3 3200U 3755

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 PRO 2500U 12.36
+13.5%
Ryzen 3 3200U 14.03

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 PRO 2500U 553
+65.6%
Ryzen 3 3200U 334

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 PRO 2500U 134
+3.9%
Ryzen 3 3200U 129

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 PRO 2500U 3.4
+54.5%
Ryzen 3 3200U 2.2

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 PRO 2500U 34
+73.9%
Ryzen 3 3200U 20

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 PRO 2500U 98
Ryzen 3 3200U 98
+0.1%

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 PRO 2500U 2700
+67.4%
Ryzen 3 3200U 1613

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 3135
+89.8%
Ryzen 3 3200U 1652

Blender(-)

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 1007
Ryzen 3 3200U 1485
+47.5%

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 887
+11.4%
Ryzen 3 3200U 797

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 4102
+21.6%
Ryzen 3 3200U 3372

7-Zip

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 2794
Ryzen 3 3200U 9082
+225%

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 12422
+79.4%
Ryzen 3 3200U 6922

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 3326
+1.3%
Ryzen 3 3200U 3282

Geekbench 2

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 11156
+42.7%
Ryzen 3 3200U 7816

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 9760
+34.9%
Ryzen 3 3200U 7237

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 3480
Ryzen 3 3200U 3626
+4.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.21 2.39
Integrated graphics card 4.50 2.98
Recency 8 January 2018 6 January 2019
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U has a 76.2% higher aggregate performance score, 51% faster integrated GPU, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Ryzen 3 3200U, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 months, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 3 3200U in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U and Ryzen 3 3200U, 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 PRO 2500U
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U
AMD Ryzen 3 3200U
Ryzen 3 3200U

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.


4 116 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1454 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 3200U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U or Ryzen 3 3200U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.