AMD Ryzen 5 220 vs AMD Ryzen 5 2600X Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark database clearly separates these two six-core, twelve-thread AMD processors. The AMD Ryzen 5 220 wins 14 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen 5 2600X wins only one. The result is not subtle: the Ryzen 5 220 is the faster processor in nearly every measurable workload.

For users building a desktop system around the AM4 socket, the Ryzen 5 2600X remains a functional choice, but the data shows it is decisively outpaced. The Ryzen 5 220, despite being a mobile-class part, delivers a generational leap in performance, particularly in single-threaded and extended instruction workloads. If the choice is purely about performance, the Ryzen 5 220 is the clear pick. If the constraint is platform compatibility with AM4, the Ryzen 5 2600X is the only one of the two that fits, but the recorded scores show a large gap.

The Ryzen 5 220 also brings a much higher boost clock, a smaller process node, and a newer architecture. The Ryzen 5 2600X counters with a higher base clock, a lower power draw in one specific metric (TDP is not the same as power draw, but the listed TDP is 95 versus 28), and the only benchmark win in the entire set: data encryption, where it leads by 5.1 percent. For general productivity, rendering, and math-heavy tasks, the Ryzen 5 220 dominates.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras of AMD design. The Ryzen 5 2600X uses the Zen architecture, specifically the Zen+ refinement known as Pinnacle Ridge, built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Ryzen 5 220 uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. This process shrink is substantial: the Ryzen 5 2600X has 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die, while the Ryzen 5 220 packs 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die.

Both chips have six cores and twelve threads, and both share 16 MB of L3 cache. The cache hierarchy differs in the lower levels: the Ryzen 5 2600X has 96 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, while the Ryzen 5 220 has 64 KB of L1 per core but a larger 1 MB of L2 per core. The L1 reduction is notable, but the L2 doubling likely helps offset it in many workloads.

Clock speeds tell a clear story. The Ryzen 5 2600X has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.25 GHz. The Ryzen 5 220 has a lower base clock of 3.20 GHz but a much higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The recorded single-threaded benchmark scores reflect that boost advantage. The Ryzen 5 220 also supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and a listed bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, compared to the Ryzen 5 2600X's DDR4 support and 46.9 GB/s bandwidth.

Other differences: the Ryzen 5 2600X uses AMD Socket AM4, has a 95 W TDP, supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes, and has no integrated graphics. The Ryzen 5 220 uses AMD Socket FP8, has a 28 W TDP, supports PCIe Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes, and includes Radeon 740M integrated graphics. The Ryzen 5 2600X has an unlocked multiplier; the Ryzen 5 220 does not. The Ryzen 5 2600X launched in April 2018 with a launch MSRP of $229. The Ryzen 5 220 launched in January 2025.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the Ryzen 5 220 comes in the PassMark extended instructions test. There it scores 15,512 against 7,581 for the Ryzen 5 2600X, a delta of 51.1 percent. This is the widest gap in the entire comparison. The Ryzen 5 220 also dominates single-threaded tests. In Geekbench single-core, it scores 2,027 versus 1,250, which is 38.3 percent ahead. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 3,646 versus 2,381, a 34.7 percent lead. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 25.9 percent gap (220 versus 163).

Multi-threaded results follow the same pattern. Cinebench R15 multi-core: the Ryzen 5 220 scores 1,562 against 1,341, a 14.1 percent lead. Geekbench multi-core: 7,974 versus 6,153, a 22.8 percent lead. PassMark multi-thread: 18,582 versus 13,893, a 25.2 percent gap. PassMark physics: 983 versus 695, a 29.3 percent lead. PassMark integer math: 57,987 versus 47,377, an 18.3 percent lead. PassMark floating point math: 35,500 versus 24,270, a 31.6 percent lead.

The Ryzen 5 220 also wins in data compression, scoring 212,739 against 198,785, a 6.6 percent margin, and in prime number finding, 65 versus 38, a 41.5 percent margin. Random string sorting goes to the Ryzen 5 220 by 9.9 percent (25,433 versus 22,911).

The sole win for the Ryzen 5 2600X is in data encryption. It scores 13,133 against 12,493 for the Ryzen 5 220, a 5.1 percent lead. This is the only test where the older chip comes out ahead. Notably, the Ryzen 5 2600X's average benchmark score is 22,823, which sits slightly above the Ryzen 5 220's average of 22,289. The Ryzen 5 2600X also has a slightly higher percentile ranking versus all CPUs, at 76 compared to 75.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 220 has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 2600X has a boost clock of 4.25 GHz.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 2600X win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins the PassMark data encryption test, scoring 13,133 against the Ryzen 5 220's 12,493, a 5.1 percent advantage.

Q: How large is the single-threaded performance gap?

A: In Geekbench single-core, the Ryzen 5 220 leads by 38.3 percent (2,027 versus 1,250). In PassMark single-thread, the lead is 34.7 percent (3,646 versus 2,381).

Q: What are the memory support differences?

A: The Ryzen 5 220 supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Ryzen 5 2600X supports DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 46.9 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both have six cores and twelve threads. They also share 16 MB of L3 cache, but the Ryzen 5 220 has 1 MB of L2 per core versus 512 KB per core on the Ryzen 5 2600X.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 5 220 includes integrated graphics, specifically the Radeon 740M. The Ryzen 5 2600X has no integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 220 is the winner for nearly every performance-oriented task. Its 51.1 percent lead in extended instructions suggests a strong advantage for workloads that use SIMD-style operations or newer instruction sets. Its 38.3 percent lead in Geekbench single-core and 34.7 percent lead in PassMark single-thread make it the better choice for lightly threaded applications, such as older games or productivity software that relies on one or two cores. The 31.6 percent lead in floating point math and 29.3 percent lead in physics point to advantages in scientific computing and physics simulation. For rendering, the Cinebench R15 multi-core lead of 14.1 percent and the 25.2 percent lead in PassMark multi-thread indicate the Ryzen 5 220 handles multi-threaded rendering workloads better. The 41.5 percent lead in prime number finding also favors the newer chip for integer-heavy calculations.

The Ryzen 5 2600X wins in exactly one area: data encryption, where it leads by 5.1 percent. This is a narrow margin, but it is consistent and measurable. For users who prioritize encryption throughput specifically, the older chip has a slight edge. Additionally, the Ryzen 5 2600X has a higher base clock of 3.60 GHz versus 3.20 GHz, which may help in sustained all-core workloads at lower boost states, though the recorded benchmarks do not show a consistent advantage there. The Ryzen 5 2600X also carries a higher average benchmark score (22,823 versus 22,289) and a higher percentile (76 versus 75), driven largely by the encryption win and the fact that the average score includes all recorded tests.

For desktop builders on AM4, the Ryzen 5 2600X is the only compatible option, and it remains an active production part. For anyone not bound to that socket, the Ryzen 5 220 is the superior choice in 14 of 15 measured tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification except core count, thread count, L3 cache size, memory channel configuration, ECC support (both lack it), and manufacturer.

• Socket: AMD Socket AM4 (Ryzen 5 2600X) versus AMD Socket FP8 (Ryzen 5 220)
• Architecture: Zen (Zen+, Pinnacle Ridge) versus Zen 4 (Hawk Point)
• Process Node: 12 nm GlobalFoundries versus 4 nm TSMC
• Transistors: 4,800 million versus 20,900 million
• Die Size: 213 mm² versus 137 mm²
• Base Clock: 3.60 GHz versus 3.20 GHz
• Boost Clock: 4.25 GHz versus 4.90 GHz
• TDP: 95 W versus 28 W
• L1 Cache: 96 KB per core versus 64 KB per core
• L2 Cache: 512 KB per core versus 1 MB per core
• Memory Support: DDR4 versus DDR5
• Memory Bandwidth: 46.9 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s
• PCIe: Gen 3, 16 lanes versus Gen 4, 14 lanes
• Integrated Graphics: None versus Radeon 740M
• Market Segment: Desktop versus Mobile
• Multiplier Unlocked: Yes versus No
• Launch MSRP: $229 versus not listed
• Release Date: April 2018 versus January 2025