Ryzen 3 PRO 210 vs Ryzen 3 2200G
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 3 PRO 210 outperforms Ryzen 3 2200G by an impressive 80% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1602 | 1170 |
| Place by popularity | 90 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 8.79 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 3 | AMD Hawk Point (Zen 4/4c) |
| Power efficiency | 2.50 | 10.45 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | GlobalFoundries | no data |
| Architecture codename | Raven Ridge (2017−2019) | Hawk Point-U (Zen 4 + Zen 4c) (2023−2025) |
| Release date | 12 February 2018 (7 years ago) | 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $99 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 3 PRO 210 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 4.7 GHz |
| Multiplier | 35 | no data |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 8 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 210 mm2 | 178 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4,950 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 3 PRO 210 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 (Uniprocessor) | no data |
| Socket | AM4 | FP7/FP7r2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 28 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 3 PRO 210. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT | AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, SSSE3 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 3 PRO 210 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 3 PRO 210. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 46.933 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) ( - 1100 MHz) | AMD Radeon 740M ( - 2500 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 3 PRO 210.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.82 | 6.89 |
| Integrated graphics card | 4.15 | 7.28 |
| Recency | 12 February 2018 | 6 January 2025 |
| Threads | 4 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 28 Watt |
Ryzen 3 PRO 210 has a 80.4% higher aggregate performance score, 75.4% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more threads, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 132.1% lower power consumption.
The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 210 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Ryzen 3 2200G in performance tests.
Note that Ryzen 3 2200G is a desktop processor while Ryzen 3 PRO 210 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
