AMD Ryzen 5 3400G vs AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a clear picture: the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G wins every single head-to-head comparison, taking all six contested tests. The Ryzen Embedded R2544 does not register a single victory. Across the Cinebench suite, the 3400G’s advantage is remarkably consistent, hovering just below the 8% mark in every workload. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 3400G scores 789 against the R2544’s 726, a delta of -8%. The single-core R15 result is nearly identical in proportional terms: 111 versus 102, a -8.1% gap. This pattern persists in the newer R20 and R23 tests, where the 3400G delivers 3290 versus 3029 in R20 multi-core (-7.9%) and 7835 versus 7213 in R23 multi-core (-7.9%). The single-core deltas in R20 and R23 are both exactly -8%, with scores of 464 versus 427 and 1106 versus 1018, respectively.

What stands out is the uniformity of the deficit. The R2544 trails by roughly eight percent in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, which suggests the gap is not a scaling issue tied to core count or thread scheduling, but rather a fundamental clock-speed and efficiency difference. The 3400G’s advantage is steady, not spiky. It does not win by a landslide in one test and lose in another; it simply wins by the same margin everywhere. For a system builder comparing these two parts, the data indicates the 3400G is the faster processor in every measurable CPU-bound scenario within this benchmark set.

Interestingly, the average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The R2544 posts an average score of 2086 across its benchmark suite, while the 3400G averages 2059. This inversion is due to the fact that the R2544’s average includes only Cinebench results, whereas the 3400G’s average also incorporates Geekbench and 3DMark tests, which pull its mean downward. Neither processor’s percentile ranking differs: both sit at the 46th percentile among all CPUs. That parity in percentile, despite the 3400G’s clear head-to-head wins, reflects how close these parts are in the broader performance distribution. The R2544’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-9350KF (delta 0.2%), Intel Xeon W-2123 (delta 0.3%), AMD Ryzen 7 1700X (delta -0.4%), and Intel Core i3-8350K (delta -0.5%). The 3400G’s nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-10105T (delta 0.1%), Intel Core i7-8705G (delta 0.1%), AMD Ryzen 3 3100 (delta 0.2%), and Intel Xeon E3-1585 v5 (delta -0.4%).

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental silicon. They are built on the Zen+ architecture, use the Picasso codename, and are fabricated on a 12 nm process node at GlobalFoundries. The transistor count is identical at 4,940 million, and the die size is the same 210 mm². Cache hierarchies match exactly: 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. Both are 4-core, 8-thread parts. The similarities end at the packaging and feature set.

The R2544 is a Ryzen Embedded part, part of the 2000 series, while the 3400G belongs to the Ryzen 5 3000 series. The R2544 uses AMD Socket FP5, which is a soldered embedded socket, whereas the 3400G uses the mainstream AMD Socket AM4. This socket difference is significant for platform compatibility. The R2544’s TDP is 45 watts, substantially lower than the 3400G’s 65 watts, which reflects its embedded design focus on thermal efficiency and reliability in constrained environments. Clock speeds differ accordingly: the R2544 has a base clock of 3.35 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, while the 3400G runs at 3.70 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost. The 3400G’s higher clocks explain its consistent benchmark lead.

The integrated graphics also differ. The R2544 pairs with Radeon Vega 8, while the 3400G uses Radeon RX Vega 11. The naming alone suggests the 3400G carries a more capable graphics unit, though the benchmark data in the fact pack does not include GPU-specific tests. Memory support is DDR4 for both, but the R2544’s dual-channel bus yields a theoretical bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, while the 3400G’s is rated at 46.9 GB/s. That bandwidth advantage for the R2544 is notable because it does not translate into a performance win, underscoring that the 3400G’s clock speed advantage outweighs the memory bandwidth difference in CPU-bound tests. ECC memory is supported on the R2544, but not on the 3400G. PCIe support is Gen 3 for both, though the R2544 explicitly lists 16 lanes (CPU only), while the 3400G simply lists Gen 3 without a lane count. The R2544’s multiplier is locked; the 3400G has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking. The 3400G launched with an MSRP of $149, while the R2544 has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G scores 7835, which is 7.9% ahead of the Ryzen Embedded R2544’s 7213.

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

A: Yes, both are 4-core, 8-thread parts, and both use the same 12 nm Zen+ architecture with 4 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Ryzen Embedded R2544 has a 45-watt TDP, while the Ryzen 5 3400G has a 65-watt TDP.

Q: Does the R2544 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, ECC memory support is listed for the R2544. The 3400G does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Ryzen 5 3400G has a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, compared to the R2544’s 3.70 GHz.

Q: Are these processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are at the 46th percentile among all CPUs, despite the 3400G winning all head-to-head tests.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors. The Ryzen 5 3400G has a base clock of 3.70 GHz versus 3.35 GHz for the R2544. The boost clock is 4.20 GHz versus 3.70 GHz. The 3400G’s TDP is 65 watts, while the R2544 is rated at 45 watts. The socket is AM4 for the 3400G and FP5 for the R2544. The memory bandwidth is 46.9 GB/s for the 3400G and 51.2 GB/s for the R2544. ECC memory support is absent on the 3400G and present on the R2544. The PCIe specification lists "Gen 3" for the 3400G and "Gen 3, 16 Lanes(CPU only)" for the R2544. The integrated graphics are Radeon RX Vega 11 on the 3400G and Radeon Vega 8 on the R2544. The 3400G has an unlocked multiplier; the R2544’s is locked. The 3400G is a 3000 series part, while the R2544 is a 2000 series part. The 3400G’s release date is 2019-07-06, while the R2544’s is 2022-09-29. The 3400G has a launch MSRP of $149; the R2544 has no listed launch MSRP. The 3400G’s part numbers are YD3400C5M4MFH and YD3400C5FHBOX, while the R2544 lists YE2544C3T4MFH and YE2544C3T4MFHA.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 3400G wins every head-to-head benchmark in the data, but the context matters. Its wins are concentrated in CPU-bound rendering workloads, specifically the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 suites, covering both multi-core and single-core tests. If the workload is any of these standard CPU benchmarks, the 3400G is the faster part by a margin of roughly 8%. The 3400G also holds advantages in platform flexibility: it uses the mainstream AM4 socket, supports an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, and includes the higher-tier Radeon RX Vega 11 integrated graphics. Its higher clock speeds make it the better choice for users prioritizing raw CPU throughput in a desktop environment.

The Ryzen Embedded R2544 does not win any benchmark in this comparison, but it wins in other dimensions that the data captures indirectly. Its 45-watt TDP is 20 watts lower than the 3400G’s, making it the more thermally conservative option for embedded or compact systems where heat dissipation is a constraint. It supports ECC memory, which is critical for reliability in server or industrial applications where data integrity is paramount. Its memory bandwidth is higher at 51.2 GB/s, which could benefit memory-intensive workloads that are not represented in the Cinebench-only head-to-head results. The R2544’s FP5 socket is designed for embedded use, signaling long-term availability and ruggedness that a mainstream desktop part does not guarantee. The R2544 also carries the Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics, which, while a lower tier than the 3400G’s Radeon RX Vega 11, still provides a display output and basic GPU acceleration. For a system builder whose priority is a locked, low-power, ECC-capable embedded processor, the R2544 is the logical choice despite its benchmark deficit. For anyone building a desktop PC where CPU performance is the primary metric, the 3400G is the clear winner across the board.