Athlon X2 340 vs Ryzen 3 2200G

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 3 2200G
2018
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
4.25
+418%
Athlon X2 340
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.82

Ryzen 3 2200G outperforms Athlon X2 340 by a whopping 418% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon X2 340 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking13682583
Place by popularity91not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.79no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 3no data
Power efficiency6.191.19
Architecture codenameRaven Ridge (2017−2018)Trinity (2012−2013)
Release date12 February 2018 (6 years ago)2 October 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon X2 340 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)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.5 GHz3.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz3.6 GHz
Multiplier35no data
L1 cache128K (per core)96K
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB (shared)
L3 cache4 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography14 nm32 nm
Die size210 mm2246 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors4,950 million1,303 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon X2 340 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
SocketAM4FM2
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon X2 340. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTno data
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon X2 340 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon X2 340. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR3-1600
Maximum memory size64 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 cardAMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon X2 340.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes12no 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 3 2200G 4.25
+418%
Athlon X2 340 0.82

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 3 2200G 6755
+417%
Athlon X2 340 1307

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 3 2200G 998
+233%
Athlon X2 340 300

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 3 2200G 2839
+573%
Athlon X2 340 422

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.25 0.82
Recency 12 February 2018 2 October 2012
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm

Ryzen 3 2200G has a 418.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 3 2200G is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon X2 340 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon X2 340, 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 3 2200G
Ryzen 3 2200G
AMD Athlon X2 340
Athlon X2 340

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 2284 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 2200G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 11 votes

Rate Athlon X2 340 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 3 2200G or Athlon X2 340, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.