AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE vs Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear, if narrow, picture: the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 wins every recorded head-to-head test against the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE. Across six Cinebench workloads, the Xeon secures a 6-0 sweep, with margins ranging from 1.9% to 2.3%. The largest advantage comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon leads by 2.3% (89 vs. 87). The smallest gap is in Cinebench R20 single-core and Cinebench R23 multi-core, both at 1.9% to 2.0% deltas.

The Ryzen 3 3200GE is the choice for a system builder prioritizing power efficiency and a modern feature set. Its 35-watt TDP is a fraction of the Xeon's 140-watt TDP, and it includes Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics, a feature entirely absent from the Xeon. The Ryzen also carries an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, and remains an active production part.

The Xeon E5-1630 v3 is the choice for workloads that live or die by multi-threaded throughput and sustained memory bandwidth. It offers 8 threads via Hyper-Threading, quadruple-channel memory support with 68.3 GB/s of bandwidth, and a larger 10 MB shared L3 cache. Its 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes also provide far more expansion headroom than the Ryzen's 16 lanes. The data shows the Xeon leads in every benchmark, but the differences are so small that real-world application performance would likely be indistinguishable in most single-threaded tasks. The Xeon is a legacy server part, end-of-life, while the Ryzen is a current desktop processor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 scores 889 points, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE scores 872 points. This represents a 1.9% advantage for the Xeon.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Ryzen 3 3200GE is equipped with Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 has no integrated graphics component listed in the database.

Q: What is the difference in memory bus width between the two processors?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 supports quad-channel memory, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE supports dual-channel memory. This contributes to the Xeon's higher theoretical memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s compared to the Ryzen's 46.9 GB/s.

Q: Which processor offers more PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), whereas the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only). This makes the Xeon more suitable for expansion-heavy server or workstation configurations.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No, the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 does not have an unlocked multiplier.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 has an average benchmark score of 1823, placing it at the 42nd percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE has an average score of 1787, also at the 42nd percentile. The Xeon's nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-4790S, scores 1827, a 0.2% difference; the Ryzen's nearest rival, the AMD Opteron 6281, scores 1789, a 0.1% difference.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies separated by five years of silicon evolution. The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 is built on the Haswell-EP architecture using a 22 nm process at Intel's foundry. It is a server and workstation part, designed for multi-socket platforms, high memory bandwidth, and long service life. Its transistor count is listed at 2,600 million on a 356 mm² die.

In contrast, the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE uses the Zen+ architecture, specifically the Picasso generation, manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 12 nm process. It is a desktop part with a smaller 210 mm² die but a higher transistor count of 4,940 million. The Ryzen is a current, active production part, while the Xeon is end-of-life.

The cache hierarchy differs significantly. The Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, with a 10 MB shared L3 cache. The Ryzen offers 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, but a smaller 4 MB shared L3 cache. This gives the Intel part a larger pool of last-level cache, which can benefit larger working sets.

Threading is a major differentiator. The Xeon supports 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Ryzen supports 4 cores and 4 threads. This means the Xeon can process two threads per core, which the head-to-head multi-core results show yields a slight edge in heavily threaded Cinebench loads, despite the Ryzen's higher boost clock.

The memory controllers also diverge. The Xeon uses a quad-channel DDR4 memory bus, delivering 68.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ryzen uses a dual-channel bus, delivering 46.9 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, but the Xeon's higher bandwidth is a clear advantage for memory-intensive server workloads.

PCIe connectivity is another stark difference. The Xeon offers 40 Gen 3 lanes, while the Ryzen offers only 16 Gen 3 lanes. This positions the Xeon for platforms with multiple GPUs, NVMe drives, or high-speed network cards, whereas the Ryzen is limited to typical desktop expansion.

Finally, the integrated graphics situation is one-sided. The Ryzen 3 3200GE includes Radeon Vega 8 graphics, making it a complete APU solution. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 and the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE, as recorded in the database:

• Threads: 8 (Xeon) vs. 4 (Ryzen)
• Base Clock: 3.70 GHz (Xeon) vs. 3.30 GHz (Ryzen)
• Boost Clock: 3.80 GHz (Xeon) vs. 4.00 GHz (Ryzen)
• TDP: 140 W (Xeon) vs. 35 W (Ryzen)
• Socket: Intel Socket 2011-3 (Xeon) vs. AMD Socket AM4 (Ryzen)
• Architecture: Haswell (Xeon) vs. Zen+ (Ryzen)
• Codename: Haswell-EP (Xeon) vs. Picasso (Ryzen)
• Process Node: 22 nm (Xeon) vs. 12 nm (Ryzen)
• Foundry: Intel (Xeon) vs. GlobalFoundries (Ryzen)
• Transistors: 2,600 million (Xeon) vs. 4,940 million (Ryzen)
• Die Size: 356 mm² (Xeon) vs. 210 mm² (Ryzen)
• L1 Cache: 64 KB per core (Xeon) vs. 96 KB per core (Ryzen)
• L2 Cache: 256 KB per core (Xeon) vs. 512 KB per core (Ryzen)
• L3 Cache: 10 MB shared (Xeon) vs. 4 MB shared (Ryzen)
• Memory Bus: Quad-channel (Xeon) vs. Dual-channel (Ryzen)
• Memory Bandwidth: 68.3 GB/s (Xeon) vs. 46.9 GB/s (Ryzen)
• PCIe Lanes: 40 (Xeon) vs. 16 (Ryzen)
• Integrated Graphics: None (Xeon) vs. Radeon Vega 8 (Ryzen)
• Market Segment: Server/Workstation (Xeon) vs. Desktop (Ryzen)
• Production Status: End-of-life (Xeon) vs. Active (Ryzen)
• Release Date: 2014-09-07 (Xeon) vs. 2019-07-06 (Ryzen)
• Multiplier Unlocked: No (Xeon) vs. Yes (Ryzen)

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent, narrow victory for the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 across all six Cinebench tests. The performance difference is real but modest, never exceeding 2.3%.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 635 against the Ryzen's 622, a 2.1% advantage. This is the largest multi-core delta in the dataset. The single-core R15 test shows the Xeon at 89 and the Ryzen at 87, a 2.3% lead, the largest margin in any test.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon leads multi-core with 2647 points versus 2595, a 2.0% difference. In single-core R20, the Xeon scores 373 versus 366, a 1.9% lead.

The Cinebench R23 results mirror the R20 pattern. Multi-core shows the Xeon at 6303 points and the Ryzen at 6179, a 2.0% delta. Single-core shows the Xeon at 889 and the Ryzen at 872, a 1.9% difference.

The Ryzen 3 3200GE, despite having a 4.00 GHz boost clock versus the Xeon's 3.80 GHz, does not manage to win any test. The Xeon's larger L3 cache and extra threads from Hyper-Threading likely compensate for the clock speed disadvantage in multi-threaded workloads. In single-threaded tests, the Xeon's older architecture still edges out the newer Zen+ part by a small margin.

For context, the Xeon's average benchmark score of 1823 places it just 0.2% below the Intel Core i7-4790S (1827) and 0.4% below the Intel Xeon D-1537 (1830). The Ryzen's average score of 1787 is only 0.1% below the AMD Opteron 6281 (1789) and 0.5% below the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 (1778). Both processors sit at the 42nd percentile of all CPUs, indicating they occupy a similar mid-range performance tier.

The data shows the Xeon is the faster part in every recorded benchmark, but the Ryzen offers a dramatically lower power envelope, integrated graphics, and a modern, active platform. The choice between them depends entirely on whether the priority is raw multi-threaded performance and platform expansion, or power efficiency and desktop integration.