Athlon X4 870K vs Ryzen 5 2400G

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 5 2400G
2018
4 cores / 8 threads, 65 Watt
5.49
+155%
Athlon X4 870K
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
2.15

Ryzen 5 2400G outperforms Athlon X4 870K by a whopping 155% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 2400G and Athlon X4 870K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking11491849
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.95no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5no data
Power efficiency7.992.14
Architecture codenameRaven Ridge (2017−2018)Godaveri (2014−2016)
Release date12 February 2018 (6 years ago)December 2015 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$169no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 2400G and Athlon X4 870K 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)
Threads84
Base clock speed3.6 GHz3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz4.1 GHz
Multiplier36no data
L1 cache128K (per core)256K
L2 cache512K (per core)4 MB
L3 cache4 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die size210 mm2245 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors4,950 million2,411 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 2400G and Athlon X4 870K 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 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 2400G and Athlon X4 870K. 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 5 2400G and Athlon X4 870K are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 2400G and Athlon X4 870K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR3-2133
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 11no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 2400G and Athlon X4 870K.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes1216

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 2400G 5.49
+155%
Athlon X4 870K 2.15

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 5 2400G 8727
+156%
Athlon X4 870K 3410

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 5 2400G 1042
+124%
Athlon X4 870K 465

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 5 2400G 3241
+170%
Athlon X4 870K 1199

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.49 2.15
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 95 Watt

Ryzen 5 2400G has a 155.3% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more threads, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 5 2400G is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon X4 870K in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 2400G and Athlon X4 870K, 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 5 2400G
Ryzen 5 2400G
AMD Athlon X4 870K
Athlon X4 870K

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.


4.1 1439 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 2400G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 72 votes

Rate Athlon X4 870K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 2400G or Athlon X4 870K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.