3020e vs Ryzen 5 3500U
Aggregated performance score
Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms 3020e by 185% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
Comparing Ryzen 5 3500U and 3020e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1231 | 1985 |
| Place by popularity | 36 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 5 | AMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU) |
| Architecture codename | Picasso-U (Zen+) | Dali (Zen) |
| Release date | 6 January 2019 (5 years ago) | 4 August 2020 (3 years ago) |
| Current price | $672 | no data |
Detailed Specifications
Ryzen 5 3500U and 3020e 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 8 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 209.78 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4500 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 5 3500U and 3020e 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 | FP5 | FT5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 3500U and 3020e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | DDR4-2400 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 | DDR4-2400, PCIe 3, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 3500U and 3020e are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 3500U and 3020e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 38.397 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 3500U and 3020e.
| 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 3500U outperforms 3020e by 185% 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 3500U outperforms 3020e by 184% 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 3500U outperforms 3020e by 31% 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 3500U outperforms 3020e by 125% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
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%
3020e outperforms Ryzen 5 3500U by 125% in wPrime 32.
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 3500U outperforms 3020e by 232% 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 3500U outperforms 3020e by 55% in Cinebench 15 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%
Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms 3020e 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%
Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms 3020e by 99% 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%
Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms 3020e by 106% 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%
Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms 3020e by 206% in x264 encoding pass 2.
Pros & Cons Summary
| Performance score | 4.50 | 1.58 |
| Integrated graphics card | 4.49 | 2.97 |
| Recency | 6 January 2019 | 4 August 2020 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 8 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 6 Watt |
The Ryzen 5 3500U is our recommended choice as it beats the 3020e in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 3500U and 3020e, 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.
