Ryzen 5 3500U vs FX-7500

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

FX-7500
2014
4 cores / 4 threads
2.07
Ryzen 5 3500U
2019
4 cores / 8 threads
4.50
+117%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 117% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

Comparing FX-7500 and Ryzen 5 3500U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking17811231
Place by popularitynot in top-10035
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD KaveriAMD Ryzen 5
Architecture codenameKaveri (2014−2015)Picasso-U (Zen+)
Release date4 June 2014 (9 years ago)6 January 2019 (5 years ago)
Current price$267 $672

Detailed Specifications

FX-7500 and Ryzen 5 3500U 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads48
Base clock speed2.1 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz3.7 GHz
L1 cacheno data128K (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm12 nm
Die size245 mm2209.78 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors2410 Million4500 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on FX-7500 and Ryzen 5 3500U 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFP3FP5
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-7500 and Ryzen 5 3500U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA, DDR3-1600 ControllerDDR4-2400 RAM, PCIe 3, 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++
FRTC1no data
PowerTune-no data
TrueAudio+no data
PowerNow+no data
PowerGating+no data
Out-of-band client management+no data
VirusProtect+no data
HSA1no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-7500 and Ryzen 5 3500U are enumerated here.

AMD-V1+
IOMMU 2.0+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-7500 and Ryzen 5 3500U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1600DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 GraphicsAMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
iGPU core count6no data
Enduro+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-7500 and Ryzen 5 3500U integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-7500 and Ryzen 5 3500U integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-7500 and Ryzen 5 3500U.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

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.

FX-7500 2.07
Ryzen 5 3500U 4.50
+117%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 117% 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%

FX-7500 3209
Ryzen 5 3500U 6956
+117%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 117% 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%

FX-7500 312
Ryzen 5 3500U 859
+175%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 175% 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%

FX-7500 700
Ryzen 5 3500U 2452
+250%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 250% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

FX-7500 2060
Ryzen 5 3500U 4558
+121%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 121% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

FX-7500 5482
Ryzen 5 3500U 17231
+214%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 214% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

FX-7500 2771
Ryzen 5 3500U 5951
+115%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 115% in 3DMark06 CPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

FX-7500 23.32
Ryzen 5 3500U 12.88
+81.1%

FX-7500 outperforms Ryzen 5 3500U by 81% in wPrime 32.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

FX-7500 2
Ryzen 5 3500U 8
+343%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 343% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit 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%

FX-7500 153
Ryzen 5 3500U 650
+325%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 325% 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%

FX-7500 55
Ryzen 5 3500U 143
+160%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 160% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

FX-7500 0.65
Ryzen 5 3500U 1.65
+154%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 154% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-7500 1.1
Ryzen 5 3500U 4.4
+300%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 300% in TrueCrypt AES.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-7500 1479
Ryzen 5 3500U 2455
+66%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 66% in WinRAR 4.0.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-7500 69
Ryzen 5 3500U 135
+96.8%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 97% in x264 encoding pass 1.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-7500 14
Ryzen 5 3500U 39
+182%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 182% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

FX-7500 1769
Ryzen 5 3500U 3443
+94.6%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 95% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

FX-7500 4116
Ryzen 5 3500U 13040
+217%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 217% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 2

Benchmark coverage: 5%

FX-7500 4730
Ryzen 5 3500U 11917
+152%

Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms FX-7500 by 152% in Geekbench 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 2.07 4.50
Integrated graphics card 4.49
Recency 4 June 2014 6 January 2019
Threads 4 8
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 15 Watt

The Ryzen 5 3500U is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-7500 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-7500 and Ryzen 5 3500U, 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 FX-7500
FX-7500
AMD Ryzen 5 3500U
Ryzen 5 3500U

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.


3.9 76 votes

Rate FX-7500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 8302 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 3500U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

Here you can ask a question about FX-7500 or Ryzen 5 3500U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.