AMD PRO A10-9700E vs AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G Comparison

The AMD PRO A10-9700E and the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G are two processors that, despite vastly different internal designs and target markets, land on the exact same average benchmark score of 919. This places both in the 24th and 25th percentiles of all CPUs respectively, making them direct competitors in the low-power computing space. The data reveals a fascinating clash between an older, higher-TDP desktop part and a newer, ultra-low-power embedded mobile chip, with the latter holding a consistent, albeit narrow, lead across every single benchmark test.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: Both processors share an identical average benchmark score of 919. The AMD PRO A10-9700E and the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G are statistical ties in this metric, with a deltaPct of 0.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-core rendering performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2670 versus the PRO A10-9700E's 2574, a 3.6% advantage. It also leads in Cinebench R20 multi-core with 1121 points against 1081 (a 3.6% lead) and in Cinebench R15 with 269 points against 259 (a 3.7% lead).

Q: Is there a difference in single-core performance?

A: Yes, the Ryzen Embedded R1305G consistently outperforms the PRO A10-9700E in single-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 377 versus 363, a 3.7% advantage, and in Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 158 versus 152, a 3.8% lead.

Q: What are the core and thread configurations for each processor?

A: The AMD PRO A10-9700E has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G has 2 cores and 4 threads. The Ryzen chip leverages simultaneous multithreading to match the thread count of the quad-core PRO A10.

Q: How does their power consumption differ?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G has a significantly lower Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10 watts. The AMD PRO A10-9700E has a TDP of 35 watts, making it a 25-watt higher-power part.

Q: What are the architecture and process nodes of these CPUs?

A: The AMD PRO A10-9700E is based on the Excavator architecture (codenamed Bristol Ridge) built on a 28 nm process. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G utilizes the Zen architecture (codenamed Banded Kestrel) built on a more advanced 14 nm process.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent different eras of AMD design. The AMD PRO A10-9700E is a desktop part built on the Excavator architecture, codenamed Bristol Ridge, using a 28 nm process from GlobalFoundries. It features 4 physical cores running at a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes a 320 KB L1 cache and a 2 MB L2 cache, with no L3 cache present. The chip is designed for the AMD Socket AM4 platform.

In contrast, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G is a mobile/embedded part based on the Zen architecture, with the codename Banded Kestrel. It is manufactured on a more efficient 14 nm process and features 2 cores with simultaneous multithreading, allowing it to process 4 threads. Its base clock is significantly lower at 1500.00 MHz, but it boosts up to 2.80 GHz. The cache layout is fundamentally different, with a 96 KB L1 cache per core and a 512 KB L2 cache per core, but it uniquely includes a shared 4 MB L3 cache. This chip uses the AMD Socket FP5.

Other key differences include the integrated graphics, where the PRO A10-9700E features a Radeon R7 GPU, while the R1305G comes with a Radeon Vega 3 GPU. The PRO A10-9700E has a die size of 250 mm² and houses 3,100 million transistors, whereas the R1305G is much smaller at 148 mm² but contains 3,500 million transistors. The R1305G was released later, with a release date of 2020, compared to the PRO A10-9700E's 2016 release. Both support DDR4 memory over a dual-channel bus, offer the same 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, lack ECC support, and provide PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The market segments differ, with the PRO A10-9700E targeting Desktop and the R1305G targeting Mobile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear and consistent picture: the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G wins every single head-to-head comparison, though by a narrow margin. The performance advantage is remarkably uniform across all workloads, suggesting an architectural efficiency advantage rather than a scaling advantage.

In multi-core tests, the R1305G's dual-core Zen design with SMT consistently edges out the PRO A10-9700E's four physical Excavator cores. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the R1305G scores 269 points against the PRO A10's 259, a 3.7% lead. This pattern holds in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the R1305G scores 1121 versus 1081, a 3.6% difference. The most demanding multi-core test, Cinebench R23, shows the R1305G at 2670 points compared to the PRO A10's 2574, again a 3.6% advantage. The consistency of these results indicates that the Zen architecture's instruction efficiency compensates for having half the physical cores.

Single-core performance tells a similar story. The R1305G's boost clock of 2.80 GHz, while lower than the PRO A10's 3.50 GHz, still manages to deliver superior single-threaded performance. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the R1305G scores 158 versus the PRO A10's 152, a 3.8% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the scores are 377 and 363 respectively, a 3.7% advantage for the R1305G. This reflects the IPC (instructions per clock) improvements brought by the newer Zen architecture.

The only benchmark where the PRO A10-9700E does not trail is Geekbench, where it has a multi-core score of 1430 and a single-core score of 577. However, the R1305G does not have a Geekbench score listed in the data, so no direct comparison can be made for that specific test. Overall, the R1305G wins 5 out of 5 head-to-head comparisons, with deltaPct values ranging from -3.6% to -3.8%, all favoring the Ryzen Embedded part.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G is the superior processor in terms of raw performance. It wins every comparative benchmark test, from Cinebench R15 to R23, in both single-core and multi-core workloads. The performance delta is consistent, hovering around 3.6% to 3.8% in favor of the R1305G. Additionally, it achieves this performance with a significantly lower TDP of 10 watts compared to the PRO A10-9700E's 35 watts, making it a more power-efficient choice.

The AMD PRO A10-9700E, while offering more physical cores (4 versus 2), cannot overcome the architectural advantages of the newer Zen design in the R1305G. Its higher base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost clock of 3.50 GHz are not enough to compensate for the IPC deficit of the older Excavator architecture. The PRO A10-9700E does have equal average benchmark scores (919) and a slightly higher percentile ranking (25th versus 24th), but this is likely due to its Geekbench scores, which are not available for the R1305G.

For a user choosing between these two, the data strongly favors the Ryzen Embedded R1305G. It offers better performance in all measured Cinebench tests and consumes less power. The only potential advantage of the PRO A10-9700E is its desktop market segment and AM4 socket, which may offer different platform-level features, but from a pure CPU performance standpoint, the R1305G is the clear winner. The R1305G's inclusion of an L3 cache and more modern architecture makes it the more capable processor for compute-intensive tasks.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications, as detailed below:

| Specification | AMD PRO A10-9700E | AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G |

|:--- |:--- |:--- |

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 1500.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.50 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 10 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | AMD Socket FP5 |

| Architecture | Excavator | Zen |

| Codename | Bristol Ridge | Zen (Banded Kestrel) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 3,500 million |

| Die Size | 250 mm² | 148 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | None | 4 MB (shared) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon R7 | Radeon Vega 3 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2016-10-02 | 2020-02-24 |