Ryzen 5 3600 vs Core i5-7267U
Aggregated performance score
Ryzen 5 3600 outperforms Core i5-7267U by 387% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
Comparing Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1677 | 611 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | no data | 41.26 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Core i5 | AMD Ryzen 5 |
| Architecture codename | Kaby Lake (2016−2019) | Matisse (2019−2020) |
| Release date | 3 January 2017 (7 years ago) | 7 July 2019 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $304 | $199 |
| Current price | $806 (2.7x MSRP) | $148 (0.7x MSRP) |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed Specifications
Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600 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 | 3.1 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 32 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | BGA1356 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| eDRAM | 64 MB | no data |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| My WiFi | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | no data |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| SIPP | - | no data |
| Smart Response | + | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| MPX | + | no data |
| Identity Protection | + | no data |
| SGX | Yes with Intel® ME | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 51.196 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel Iris Plus Graphics 650 | - |
| Max video memory | 32 GB | - |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video | + | - |
| Clear Video HD | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.05 GHz | - |
| InTru 3D | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | - |
| eDP | + | - |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| DVI | + | - |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | + | - |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096x2304@30Hz | - |
| Max resolution over eDP | 4096x2304@60Hz | - |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 4096x2304@60Hz | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12 | - |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | 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.
Ryzen 5 3600 outperforms Core i5-7267U by 387% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Ryzen 5 3600 outperforms Core i5-7267U by 388% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Ryzen 5 3600 outperforms Core i5-7267U by 54% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Ryzen 5 3600 outperforms Core i5-7267U by 212% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
Ryzen 5 3600 outperforms Core i5-7267U by 309% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
Ryzen 5 3600 outperforms Core i5-7267U by 36% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.
Pros & Cons Summary
| Performance score | 2.36 | 11.49 |
| Recency | 3 January 2017 | 7 July 2019 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 6 |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Cost | $304 | $199 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 65 Watt |
The Ryzen 5 3600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-7267U in performance tests.
Be aware that Core i5-7267U is a notebook processor while Ryzen 5 3600 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-7267U and Ryzen 5 3600, 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.
