AMD PRO A12-9800 vs Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 wins all five compared Cinebench tests, with the AMD PRO A12-9800 trailing by a consistent margin of roughly 15.4% to 15.6% across every workload. The narrowest gap appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Xeon scores 382 against the AMD's 323, a delta of -15.4%. The widest gap is in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Xeon posts 225 versus 190, a delta of -15.6%.

The pattern holds steady through the newer Cinebench releases. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Xeon reaches 1595 while the AMD manages 1347, a 15.5% deficit. The R23 multi-core test shows the same story: Xeon at 3798, AMD at 3208, again a 15.5% difference. Single-core results in R23 follow suit, with the Xeon at 536 and the AMD at 453, also a 15.5% gap.

What stands out is the uniformity of the margin. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, whether the benchmark generation is older or newer, the Xeon holds a nearly identical advantage. This suggests the performance difference is structural rather than workload-dependent. The AMD part does not close the gap in any test, nor does the Xeon extend its lead beyond roughly 15.6%. For a user comparing these two processors, the expectation should be a consistent 15% performance disadvantage for the AMD PRO A12-9800 in Cinebench workloads.

It is notably both processors share the same core and thread counts: 4 cores and 4 threads each. The performance gap therefore cannot be attributed to a difference in parallelism. Instead, the Xeon's advantage comes from its per-core efficiency, despite its lower base clock of 2.80 GHz compared to the AMD's 3.80 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost. The data indicates that the Xeon's Haswell architecture delivers more work per clock cycle than the AMD Excavator design, at least in these rendering tests.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 is the faster processor in every measured category. It wins all five head-to-head comparisons, and its margins are consistent and significant. The AMD PRO A12-9800 does not win a single test in the recorded data. For any user prioritizing raw Cinebench performance, the Xeon is the clear choice.

However, the verdict is not simply about speed. The two processors occupy different market segments. The AMD PRO A12-9800 is a desktop part with integrated graphics (Radeon R7), while the Xeon E5-1603 v3 is a server or workstation processor without integrated graphics. The AMD part is still in active production, whereas the Xeon is end-of-life. The AMD also draws far less power: its TDP is 65 watts, while the Xeon is rated at 140 watts.

The average benchmark scores in the database tell an interesting side story. The AMD PRO A12-9800 has an average benchmark score of 1104, while the Xeon E5-1603 v3 sits at 1098. This places the AMD part slightly ahead in the overall database average, despite losing every Cinebench head-to-head. This discrepancy likely reflects differences in the benchmark suites used for the averages, but the recorded Cinebench data is clear: the Xeon wins where it counts in these tests. Both processors rank at the 31st percentile among all CPUs, indicating they are mid-pack performers overall.

The verdict for most users should be: if Cinebench rendering performance is the sole criterion, select the Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3. If power consumption, integrated graphics, and active production status matter more, the AMD PRO A12-9800 has tangible advantages, but it will cost you about 15% performance in these workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 wins in all measured Cinebench scenarios. Its multi-core dominance is clear: 382 versus 323 in R15, 1595 versus 1347 in R20, and 3798 versus 3208 in R23. Its single-core results are equally strong: 225 versus 190 in R20 and 536 versus 453 in R23. The Xeon also offers ECC memory support, which the AMD lacks, and a quad-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth compared to the AMD's dual-channel 38.4 GB/s. The Xeon provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD offers only 8 lanes.

The AMD PRO A12-9800 wins in areas outside raw Cinebench performance. It has a significantly lower TDP at 65 watts versus the Xeon's 140 watts, making it more power-efficient in that metric. It includes integrated Radeon R7 graphics, which the Xeon does not have at all. The AMD part is also marked as active in production, while the Xeon is end-of-life. The AMD's base clock is higher at 3.80 GHz versus 2.80 GHz, and it offers a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, which the Xeon lacks entirely. The AMD's process node is 28 nm versus the Xeon's 22 nm, but that is a manufacturing detail rather than a user-facing win.

In terms of nearest rivals in the database, the AMD PRO A12-9800 sits within 0.2% of the Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3, Intel Pentium Gold G6605, AMD Opteron 3280, and AMD Athlon X4 845. The Xeon E5-1603 v3 sits within 0.1% of the AMD PRO A10-8850B, Intel Pentium 6805, Intel Core i5-3450S, and Intel Core i7-2710QE. These rival groups are nearly identical in average score, reinforcing that both processors occupy the same performance tier overall, even though the Xeon wins the specific Cinebench tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 scores 3798, while the AMD PRO A12-9800 scores 3208, giving the Xeon a 15.5% advantage.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 4 threads, according to the database records.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 supports ECC memory, while the AMD PRO A12-9800 does not.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two?

A: The AMD PRO A12-9800 has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 has a TDP of 140 watts.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The AMD PRO A12-9800 includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD PRO A12-9800 has an average benchmark score of 1104, while the Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 has an average score of 1098, a difference of only 0.5%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The AMD PRO A12-9800 uses the Excavator architecture, specifically the Bristol Ridge codename, and is built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die. The cache layout consists of 320 KB of L1 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache, with no L3 cache at all. This lack of L3 cache is a notable architectural limitation, as the Xeon has a 10 MB shared L3 cache.

The Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 uses the Haswell architecture, specifically Haswell-EP, built on a 22 nm process at Intel. It contains 2,600 million transistors on a larger 356 mm² die. The cache structure is described per core: 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon's cache hierarchy is clearly more robust, and the larger L3 cache likely contributes to its performance advantage in the Cinebench tests.

Memory architecture also differs significantly. The AMD supports DDR4 memory through a dual-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon also supports DDR4 but through a quad-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, a 55% higher theoretical memory bandwidth. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which is typical for its server or workstation market segment. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the AMD provides 8 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), a fivefold difference.

The AMD's integrated Radeon R7 graphics is a major architectural difference, as the Xeon has no integrated graphics. This means the AMD can drive a display without a discrete GPU, while the Xeon requires one. The AMD's socket is AM4, while the Xeon uses Socket 2011-3, which are not cross-compatible. The AMD's production status is active, while the Xeon is end-of-life, which may affect availability and long-term support.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two processors differ, based on the database records.

| Specification | AMD PRO A12-9800 | Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 |

|---|---|---|

| Base Clock | 3.80 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.20 GHz | None |

| TDP | 65 watts | 140 watts |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Architecture | Excavator | Haswell |

| Codename | Bristol Ridge | Haswell-EP |

| Generation | A12 (Bristol Ridge) | Xeon E5 (Haswell-EP) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 22 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 2,600 million |

| Die Size | 250 mm² | 356 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | None | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe Lanes (CPU only) | 8 lanes | 40 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon R7 | None |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2016-10-02 | 2014-09-07 |

| Part Number | AD980BAUM44AB | SR20K |

Both processors share the same core count (4), thread count (4), memory support type (DDR4), and both have locked multipliers. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP in the database. The AMD's higher base and boost clocks do not translate into a performance win, as the Xeon's architectural efficiency overcomes the clock disadvantage. The Xeon's larger die and more complex cache hierarchy likely explain its consistent 15% lead in Cinebench tests.