Core i5-3570K vs Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G
Aggregated performance score
Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G outperforms Core i5-3570K by 72% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
Comparing Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G and Core i5-3570K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1060 | 1498 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 12.61 | 0.54 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 5 | Intel Core i5 (Desktop) |
| Architecture codename | Raven Ridge (2017−2018) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| Release date | 12 February 2018 (6 years ago) | 29 April 2012 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $169 | $235 |
| Current price | $123 (0.7x MSRP) | $76 (0.3x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G has 2235% better value for money than i5-3570K.
Technical specs
Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G and Core i5-3570K 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 | 8 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 210 mm2 | 160 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 67 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 67 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4,950 million | 1,400 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G and Core i5-3570K 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) | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | FCLGA1155 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 77 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G and Core i5-3570K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| TSX | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| FDI | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G and Core i5-3570K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G and Core i5-3570K are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G and Core i5-3570K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | 32 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 46.933 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | Intel HD Graphics 4000 |
| Quick Sync Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.15 GHz |
| InTru 3D | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G and Core i5-3570K integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G and Core i5-3570K.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| 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 PRO 2400G outperforms Core i5-3570K by 72% 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 PRO 2400G outperforms Core i5-3570K by 72% in Passmark.
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 5.50 | 3.20 |
| Integrated graphics card | 5.48 | 1.17 |
| Recency | 12 February 2018 | 29 April 2012 |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Cost | $169 | $235 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 77 Watt |
The Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-3570K in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G and Core i5-3570K, 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.
