A10-9620P vs Ryzen 7 PRO 3700

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 7 PRO 3700
2019
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
14.42
+801%
A10-9620P
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.60

Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 outperforms A10-9620P by a whopping 801% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 and A10-9620P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking4972093
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 7Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency20.9910.09
Architecture codenameMatisse (2019−2020)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date30 September 2019 (5 years ago)1 January 2017 (7 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 and A10-9620P 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads164
Base clock speed3.6 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed4.4 GHz3.4 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache512 KB (per core)2 MB
L3 cache32 MBno data
Chip lithography7 nm28 nm
Die size74 mm2250 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)95 °Cno data
Number of transistors3,800 million3100 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 and A10-9620P 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)no data
SocketAM4FP4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 and A10-9620P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 and A10-9620P are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 and A10-9620P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size128 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth51.196 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AAMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) ( - 758 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 and A10-9620P.

PCIe version4.0no data
PCI Express lanes24no 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.

Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 14.42
+801%
A10-9620P 1.60

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 7 PRO 3700 22899
+803%
A10-9620P 2535

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 7 PRO 3700 1644
+227%
A10-9620P 503

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 7 PRO 3700 7928
+612%
A10-9620P 1114

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.42 1.60
Recency 30 September 2019 1 January 2017
Physical cores 8 4
Threads 16 4
Chip lithography 7 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 has a 801.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

A10-9620P, on the other hand, has 333.3% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-9620P in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 is a desktop processor while A10-9620P is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 and A10-9620P, 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 7 PRO 3700
Ryzen 7 PRO 3700
AMD A10-9620P
A10-9620P

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.


4.4 406 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 313 votes

Rate A10-9620P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 or A10-9620P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.