AMD Ryzen 5 220 vs AMD Ryzen 5 3600X Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 220 and AMD Ryzen 5 3600X are both 6-core, 12-thread processors, but the benchmark data reveals a clear generational shift. The Ryzen 5 220 wins 15 of 19 head-to-head tests, with its most dramatic advantages in single-threaded and math-heavy workloads. The Ryzen 5 3600X, however, retains wins in four specific tests, including prime number finding and physics simulations, where its older architecture still holds an edge. This is not a close contest; it is a decisive victory for the newer Zen 4 part, punctuated by a 37.6% lead in PassMark single-thread performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in the PassMark single-thread test, where the Ryzen 5 220 scores 3,646 against the 3600X's 2,649. That is a 37.6% advantage, the largest margin in any comparison. This is corroborated by Geekbench single-core, where the 220 (2,027) leads by 29.3% over the 3600X (1,568). These are not marginal improvements; the 220's Zen 4 architecture delivers a massive per-core performance uplift that is immediately visible in any latency-sensitive or lightly-threaded application.

The Ryzen 5 220 also dominates in floating-point and integer math. In PassMark floating-point math, the 220 scores 35,500 versus 29,339, a 21% lead. In integer math, the gap is 16.1%, with the 220 scoring 57,987 against 49,934. These results indicate that the 220's newer instruction set and memory pipeline are far more efficient at crunching numbers, making it the superior choice for scientific computing, encoding, and any workload that relies heavily on arithmetic logic.

Multi-threaded performance is closer but still favors the 220. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 220 scores 15,502 versus the 3600X's 15,430, a slim 0.5% margin. Similarly, in Cinebench R20 multi-core, the 220's 6,510 edges out the 3600X's 6,480 by 0.5%. The PassMark multi-thread test shows a 2.4% lead for the 220 (18,582 vs. 18,154). While the 220 wins these tests, the margins are small, suggesting that the 3600X's older but larger L3 cache (32 MB vs. 16 MB) helps it stay competitive when all cores are engaged.

However, the 3600X does secure four wins. Its most significant victory is in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 110 versus the 220's 65, a 40.9% advantage. This is a specialized workload that appears to favor the 3600X's architecture. The 3600X also wins in PassMark physics (1,186 vs. 983, a 17.1% lead), data compression (224,318 vs. 212,739, a 5.2% lead), and data encryption (14,255 vs. 12,493, a 12.4% lead). These wins are not trivial, but they are isolated to specific algorithms where the 3600X's design has a distinct optimization.

The remaining tests are closer. In PassMark extended instructions, the 220 wins by 5% (15,512 vs. 14,773). In random string sorting, the 220 leads by 4.5% (25,433 vs. 24,343). The Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core tests show the 220 ahead by 0.5% and 0.4%, respectively, while Geekbench multi-core gives the 220 a 2.4% edge (7,974 vs. 7,785). Overall, the data is unambiguous: the 220 is the faster processor in the vast majority of scenarios, with the 3600X only fighting back in a few niche workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 220 is significantly faster in single-threaded tasks. It leads by 37.6% in PassMark single-thread (3,646 vs. 2,649) and by 29.3% in Geekbench single-core (2,027 vs. 1,568).

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 3600X win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the 3600X wins 4 of 19 head-to-head tests. Its most notable victories are in PassMark find prime numbers (110 vs. 65, a 40.9% lead) and PassMark physics (1,186 vs. 983, a 17.1% lead). It also wins in data compression and data encryption.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-core workloads?

A: The Ryzen 5 220 leads in most multi-core tests, but by small margins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 15,502 versus 15,430 (0.5% lead). In PassMark multi-thread, it scores 18,582 versus 18,154 (2.4% lead). The 220’s advantage is more pronounced in Geekbench multi-core (2.4% lead).

Q: What is the most significant performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark single-thread, where the Ryzen 5 220 is 37.6% faster. The second-largest is in Geekbench single-core, where the 220 leads by 29.3%. These indicate a massive per-core advantage for the 220.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 220 always faster than the 3600X?

A: No. The 3600X is faster in PassMark find prime numbers (40.9% faster), PassMark physics (17.1% faster), data compression (5.2% faster), and data encryption (12.4% faster). These are specific workload types where the older chip excels.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Ryzen 5 220 has a higher average benchmark score of 22,289, compared to the 3600X's 21,992. This is a 1.4% difference, placing the 220 slightly ahead overall.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the AMD Ryzen 5 220 is the superior processor for nearly all users. Its 15 benchmark wins out of 19, combined with a 37.6% lead in single-thread performance, make it the clear choice for everyday computing, gaming, and productivity. The 220’s 75th percentile ranking versus all CPUs matches the 3600X’s, but the 220 achieves this with a much lower TDP (28W vs. 95W) and a newer architecture.

The only reason to pick the Ryzen 5 3600X is if your workflow specifically relies on the four workloads where it wins: prime number calculation, physics simulations, data compression, or data encryption. In those areas, the 3600X is demonstrably faster. However, for general use, the 220’s overwhelming advantage in single-thread and math performance makes it the better buy. The 3600X is not obsolete, but it is clearly outclassed by the newer part in the majority of tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ significantly in their core specifications. The Ryzen 5 220 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the 3600X runs at 3.80 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost. The 220’s boost clock is 0.50 GHz higher, which directly contributes to its single-thread dominance. The TDP is a major differentiator: the 220 draws only 28W, while the 3600X is rated at 95W, making the 220 far more power-efficient.

The memory support also differs. The 220 supports DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the 3600X supports DDR4 with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. This is a 75% advantage in theoretical bandwidth for the 220. The 220 also features integrated graphics (Radeon 740M), while the 3600X has none. The 220 uses an AMD Socket FP8, while the 3600X uses AMD Socket AM4. Finally, the 3600X has an unlocked multiplier, while the 220 does not, although this is less relevant given the 220's mobile market segment.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is the root of the performance difference. The Ryzen 5 220 is built on Zen 4 architecture (codename Hawk Point) using a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the 3600X uses Zen 2 (codename Matisse) on a 7 nm process. The 4 nm node allows the 220 to pack 20,900 million transistors into a 137 mm² die, whereas the 3600X has 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. This density and efficiency are why the 220 can achieve higher clocks at a fraction of the power.

Cache configurations also differ. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core, but the 220 has 1 MB of L2 per core, twice the 3600X's 512 KB. However, the 3600X has 32 MB of shared L3 cache, double the 220's 16 MB. This larger L3 cache likely explains the 3600X's wins in data compression and encryption, where larger working sets can be held on-chip. The 220 counters with DDR5 memory support and a higher memory bandwidth, which helps in bandwidth-hungry tasks like floating-point math.

The 220 also features an integrated Radeon 740M GPU, which the 3600X lacks, making the 220 a more self-contained solution. The 220’s PCIe implementation is Gen 4 with 14 lanes (CPU only), while the 3600X also supports Gen 4 but without a specified lane count. These architectural differences—node, cache size, memory type, and integrated graphics—define why the 220 wins most benchmarks despite having half the L3 cache.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 220 is the winner for general-purpose computing. Its 37.6% lead in PassMark single-thread and 21% lead in floating-point math make it ideal for web browsing, office applications, and any software that relies on fast single-core response. Gamers will also prefer the 220, as its higher boost clock (4.90 GHz vs. 4.40 GHz) and superior single-core scores translate to better frame rates in most titles. The 220 is also the clear choice for developers and content creators who use handbrake-style encoding or compile code, as evidenced by its wins in integer math (16.1% ahead) and extended instructions (5% ahead).

The AMD Ryzen 5 3600X, however, has its niche. If your work involves heavy data compression or encryption, the 3600X’s wins in PassMark data compression (5.2% ahead) and data encryption (12.4% ahead) make it the better tool. Similarly, for scientific simulations that rely on physics calculations, the 3600X’s 17.1% lead in PassMark physics is significant. The 40.9% lead in find prime numbers is a curiosity but indicates the 3600X handles certain integer loops more efficiently. For users with these specialized workloads, the 3600X is not a downgrade; it is a targeted upgrade. For everyone else, the Ryzen 5 220 is the definitive choice.