AMD Ryzen 5 2600 vs Apple M1
Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 on one side and the Apple M1 on the other side, also their respective performances with the benchmarks. The first is dedicated to the desktop sector, It has 6 cores, 12 threads, a maximum frequency of 3.9GHz. The second is used on the laptop segment, it has a total of 8 cores, 8 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 3.2 GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the number of transistors (if indicated), the amount of cache memory, the maximum RAM memory capacity, the type of memory accepted, the release date, the maximum number of PCIe lanes, the values obtained in Geekbench and Cinebench.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please
visit this page.
Specification comparison:
Processor |
| AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | | |
| Apple M1 | | |
Market (main) | | Desktop |
| | | Laptop | | |
ISA | | x86-64 (64 bit) |
| | | ARMv8.5-A (64-bit) | | |
Microarchitecture | | Zen+ |
| | | Firestorm, Icestorm | | |
Core name | | Pinnacle Ridge |
| | | Firestorm, Icestorm | | |
Family | | Ryzen 5 2000 |
| | | M series | | |
Part number(s), S-Spec | |
YD2600BBM6IAF
| | | |
APL1102, T8103
| | |
Release date | | Q2 2018 |
| | | Q4 2020 | | |
Lithography | | 12 nm |
| | | 5 nm FinFET N5 | | |
Transistors | | 4,800,000,000 |
| | | 33,700,000,000 | | |
Cores | | 6 |
| | | 8 | | |
Threads | | 12 |
| | | 8 | | |
Base frequency | | 3.4 GHz |
| | | 2.06 GHz | | |
Turbo frequency | | 3.9 GHz |
| | | 3.2 GHz | | |
Energy cores | | -
|
| | | 4x Apple Icestorm @ 2.06 GHz
| | |
High performance cores | | 6 Cores 12 Threads @ 3.4 / 3.9 GHz
|
| | | 4x Apple Firestorm @ 3.2 GHz
| | |
Cache memory | | 16 MB |
| | | 16 MB | | |
Max memory capacity | | 64 GB |
| | | 16 GB | | |
Memory types | | DDR4-2933
|
| | | LPDDR4X-4266 (2133 MHz)
| | |
Max # of memory channels | | 2 |
| | | 2 | | |
Max memory bandwidth | | 43.71 GB/s |
| | | 66.7 GB/s | | |
Max PCIe lanes | | 20 |
| | | - | | |
TDP | | 65 W |
| | | 14 W | | |
Suggested PSU | | 600W ATX Power Supply  |
| | | - | | |
GPU integrated graphics | | None |
| | | Apple M1 GPU 8-Core | | |
GPU cores | | - |
| | | 8 | | |
GPU execution units | | - |
| | | 128 | | |
GPU shading units | | - |
| | | 1,024 | | |
GPU clock | | - |
| | | 1,278 MHz | | |
GPU FP32 floating point | | - |
| | | 2,617 GFLOPS | | |
Socket | | AM4, PGA-1331 |
| | | SoC | | |
Compatible motherboard | | Socket AM4 Motherboard  |
| | | - | | |
AI accelerator | | -
|
| | | AI accelerator 16-core
| | |
AI computing operations per seconds | | - |
| | | 11 TOPS | | |
Crypto engine | | AES Instructions
|
| | | -
| | |
Security | | Enhanced Virus Protection
|
| | | -
| | |
Max display resolution | | -
|
| | | 6016 x 3384@60Hz (Thunderbolt),
3840 x 2160@60Hz (HDMI)
| | |
Video decoding | | - |
| | | H.265, HEVC, VP9 | | |
Video encoding | | - |
| | | H.265, HEVC | | |
Connectivity | | - |
| | | 2 Thunderbolt, 2 USB-C, 1 HDMI 2.0 | | |
Cinebench R15 single thread | | 161 |
| | | 197 | | |
Cinebench R15 multi-thread | | 1,384 |
| | | 1,063 | | |
Cinebench R20 single thread | | 304 |
| | | 412 | | |
Cinebench R20 multi-thread | | 2,572 |
| | | 2,104 | | |
Cinebench R23 single thread | | 1,022 |
| | | 1,503 | | |
Cinebench R23 multi-thread | | 8,126 |
| | | 7,794 | | |
Cinebench 2024 single thread | | 56 |
| | | 110 | | |
Cinebench 2024 multi-thread | | 430 |
| | | 511 | | |
PassMark single thread | | 2,243 |
| | | 3,703 | | |
PassMark CPU Mark | | 13,215 |
| | | 14,204 | | |
(Windows | Mac OS X) Geekbench 4 single core | | 4,426 |
| | | 5,792 | | |
(Windows | Mac OS X) Geekbench 4 multi-core | | 21,541 |
| | | 23,220 | | |
(Windows | macOS) Geekbench 5 single core | | 953 |
| | | 1,744 | | |
(Windows | macOS) Geekbench 5 multi-core | | 5,429 |
| | | 7,657 | | |
(Windows | macOS) Geekbench 6 single core | | 1,290 |
| | | 2,375 | | |
(Windows | macOS) Geekbench 6 multi-core | | 5,513 |
| | | 8,490 | | |
(SGEMM) GFLOPS Performance | | 267.1 GFLOPS |
| | | 203.4 GFLOPS | | |
(Multi-core / watt performance) Performance / watt ratio | | 331 pts / W |
| | | 1,659 pts / W | | |
Amazon | |  |
| | |  |
| |
eBay | |  |
| | |  |
| |
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
We can better compare what are the technical differences between the two processors.
Suggested PSU: We assume that we have an ATX computer case, a high end graphics card, 16GB RAM, a 512GB SSD, a 1TB HDD hard drive, a Blu-Ray drive. We will have to rely on a more powerful power supply if we want to have several graphics cards, several monitors, more memory, etc.
Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.
The processor Apple M1 has a larger number of cores, the maximum frequency of AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is greater, that the thermal dissipation power of Apple M1 is less. The Apple M1 was started more recently.
Performance comparison with the benchmarks:
Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench.
In single core, the difference is -18%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 30%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R15 evaluates the performance of CPU calculations by restoring a photorealistic 3D scene. The scene has 2,000 objects, 300,000 polygons, uses sharp and fuzzy reflections, bright areas, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and so on. The faster the rendering of the scene is created, the more powerful the PC is, with a high number of points.
In single core, the difference is -26%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 22%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R20 is a multi-platform test software which allows to evaluate the hardware capacities of a device such as a computer, a tablet, a server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant.
In single core, the difference is -32%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 4%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R23 is cross-platform testing software that allows you to assess the hardware capabilities of a device such as a computer, tablet, server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant. The test scene contains no less than 2,000 objects and more than 300,000 polygons in total.
In single core, the difference is 96%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 19%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench 2024 is a benchmarking software that includes various tools for 3D modeling, animation, visual effects, motion graphics, composition and color grading capabilities. With for example a GPU-accelerated rendering engine, a 3D simulation tool, digital sculpture and painting, intelligent assets, models, shaders, and other materials, production tools.
In single core, the difference is 65%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 7%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity.
With Mac OS X:In single core, the difference is 31%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 4%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Geekbench 4 is a complete benchmark platform with several types of tests, including data compression, images, AES encryption, SQL encoding, HTML, PDF file rendering, matrix computation, Fast Fourier Transform, 3D object simulation, photo editing, memory testing. This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices. For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.
With macOS:In single core, the difference is 84%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 45%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Geekbench 5 is a software for measuring the performance of a computer system, for fixed devices, mobile devices, servers. This platform makes it possible to better compare the power of the CPU, the computing power and to compare it with similar or totally different systems. Geekbench 5 includes new workloads that represent work tasks and applications that we can find in reality.
With macOS:In single core, the difference is 109%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 66%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Geekbench 6 is a benchmarking platform that is capable of evaluating the performance of a device across multiple operating systems. The software evaluates processor power, with its ability to support different tasks, such as file compression, browsing; GPU computing capabilities, with image editing, video editing, gaming skills, machine learning workloads.
Equivalence:
AMD Ryzen 5 2600 Intel EquivalentApple M1 Intel EquivalentApple M1 AMD EquivalentSee also:
AMD Ryzen 5 2600HAMD Ryzen 5 2600XApple M1 MaxApple M1 Pro 10-CoreApple M1 Pro 8-CoreApple M1 UltraApple M2Apple M2 MaxApple M2 Pro 10-CoreApple M2 Pro 12-CoreApple M2 UltraApple M3Apple M3 Max 14-CoreApple M3 Max 16-CoreApple M3 Pro 11-CoreApple M3 Pro 12-Core