The AMD Athlon Silver 3050e (Codename Dali) is a mobile APU that integrates two Zen cores (with SMT, therefore 4 threads) clocked at 1.4 to 2.8 GHz. The TDP is specified at 6 Watt and therefore the chip can be passively cooled. The integrated Radeon graphics card offers 3 CUs at up to 1000 MHz (Radeon RX Vega 3). The dual channel memory controller supports only DDR4-2400. The chip is manufactured on a 14 nm node and officially counted to the 3000 series of mobile processors.
The AMD Athlon Silver 3050e is the fastest 6W CPU of the Dali SoCs. The slower AMD 3015e and 3020e range below and are compared to the Celeron N4120. Therefore, the Athlon 3050e should reach a level of a Pentium N5000 and therefore still positioned in the entry level of CPUs in 2020. It is best suited for light tasks.
More information on Raven Ridge can be found in our launch article.
Much like Intel's N-class Celeron and Pentium processors, AMD's 3050e has a 6 W TDP (also known as the long-term power limit). This CPU is built on a 14 nm process making for subpar energy efficiency.
The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U is a mobile SoC that was announced in October 2017. Compared to the consumer Ryzen 7 2700U, the PRO versions offer additional security features. It combines four Zen cores (8 threads) clocked at 2.2 - 3.8 GHz with a Radeon RX Vega 10 graphics card with 10 CUs (640 Shaders) clocked at up to 1300 MHz. The TDP can be configured by the laptop manufacturer between 12 to 25 Watt (15 Watt nominal) and therefore the APU is also suited for thin and light laptops. The integrated dual-channel memory controller supports up to DDR4-2400 memory. More information on Raven Ridge can be found in our launch article.
The performance of the Zen CPU cores should be better than a high end Kaby-Lake-Refresh Quad-Core CPU (e.g. the Core i7-8650U) according to AMD. Therefore, the Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U is suited for all applications.
The AMD Athlon 300U is a mobile entry level dual core SoC that was announced in January 2019. It combines two Zen cores (with SMT / Hyperthreading so running 4 threads) clocked at 2.4 - 3.3 GHz with a Radeon RX Vega 3 graphics card with 3 CUs (192 Shaders) clocked at up to 1000 MHz. Specified at 15 Watt TDP, the SoC is intended for thin mid-range laptops. It is quite similar to the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U (2.6 - 3.5 GHz).
Compared to the Picasso APUs of the Ryzen 3000 series, the Athlon 300U is still based on the first generation of the 2000 series. Only the PRO variant is based on the new Zen+ microarchitecture that should lead to a 3% IPS (performance per clock) improvement.
The integrated dual-channel memory controller supports up to DDR4-2400 memory. As the features of the Picasso APUs are the same compared to the Raven Ridge predecessors, we point to our Raven Ridge launch article.
In contrast to the faster quad-core Picasso APUs, the Athlon 300U only supports 3 instead of 4 displays in total.
Performance wise, the Athlon 300 should be slightly slower than the Ryzen 3 2200U (2.5 - 3.4 GHz Dual Core with SMT).
Average Benchmarks AMD Athlon Silver 3050e → 100%n=2
Average Benchmarks AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U → 210%n=2
Average Benchmarks AMD Athlon 300U → 151%n=2
- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card - Average benchmark values for this graphics card * Smaller numbers mean a higher performance 1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation
log 09. 18:06:41
#0 checking url part for id 12722 +0s ... 0s
#1 checking url part for id 10132 +0s ... 0s
#2 checking url part for id 11201 +0s ... 0s
#3 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s
#4 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Wed, 07 Dec 2022 16:40:39 +0100 +0.001s ... 0.001s
#5 composed specs +0.04s ... 0.041s
#6 did output specs +0s ... 0.041s
#7 getting avg benchmarks for device 12722 +0.011s ... 0.052s
#8 got single benchmarks 12722 +0.009s ... 0.061s
#9 getting avg benchmarks for device 10132 +0.002s ... 0.063s
#10 got single benchmarks 10132 +0.006s ... 0.069s
#11 getting avg benchmarks for device 11201 +0.002s ... 0.071s
#12 got single benchmarks 11201 +0.009s ... 0.08s
#13 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.08s
#14 min, max, avg, median took s +0.205s ... 0.285s