AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 vs Intel Xeon E-2104G Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is remarkably consistent across every Cinebench test: the Intel Xeon E-2104G wins all six head-to-head matchups, but by a narrow margin. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Intel scores 488 against AMD's 480, a 1.7% advantage. The single-core result in R15 shows 68 versus 67, a 1.5% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Intel widens its multicore edge slightly to 2035 versus 2002, a 1.6% delta, while single-core lands at 287 versus 282, the largest relative gap of the set at 1.8%. The R23 results follow the same pattern: 4847 against 4767 in multicore (1.7%) and 684 versus 673 in single-core (1.6%). The Intel processor never trails in any recorded workload, but the margins are tight enough that they fall within run-to-run variance for many real-world applications.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The Xeon E-2104G posts an average of 1402 across all recorded tests, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 sits at 1379. That is a meaningful but modest overall gap. The Intel part's percentile ranking among all CPUs is 37, versus 36 for the AMD chip. Both processors occupy essentially the same performance tier in the database, with the Intel holding a slight but consistent advantage in every measured workload. The deltas range from 1.5% to 1.8%, which means users upgrading from one to the other should not expect a dramatic shift in rendering times or application responsiveness.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on a 14 nm process node, but they come from different foundries and different design philosophies. The Intel Xeon E-2104G uses the Coffee Lake architecture (Coffee Lake-S WS) and is manufactured by Intel, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 uses the Zen architecture (Summit Ridge) and is built by GlobalFoundries. The die sizes diverge significantly: the Intel chip measures 126 mm², whereas the AMD chip is much larger at 213 mm² and packs 4,800 million transistors. The Intel part's transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Core and thread counts are identical at 4 cores and 4 threads. The base clocks are close, with Intel at 3.20 GHz and AMD at 3.10 GHz. The AMD processor has a boost clock of 3.40 GHz, while the Intel part lists no boost clock in the database. This is a key architectural difference: the Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 can raise its frequency under load, yet it still trails in every benchmark. The Intel chip relies on its higher base clock and architectural efficiency to secure its wins. Neither processor offers simultaneous multithreading, so both are strictly 4-core, 4-thread parts.

Cache layouts differ per core. The Intel Xeon carries 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, while the AMD Ryzen has 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core. Both share 8 MB of L3 cache. The AMD chip therefore has more total cache per core, yet the benchmark results show the Intel part still comes out ahead. Memory support is dual-channel DDR4 for both, but the recorded memory bandwidth figures are not directly comparable: the Intel chip lists 42.7 GB/s, while the AMD chip lists 4256 MB/s. The database records the Intel figure in gigabytes and the AMD figure in megabytes, so a direct comparison is not possible from this data. Both support ECC memory.

The Intel Xeon E-2104G includes integrated UHD Graphics P630, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 has no integrated graphics at all. This is a significant feature difference for systems that need a display output without a discrete GPU. Both processors offer PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part targets the server and workstation segment, while the AMD part is a desktop processor. The Intel chip is listed as end-of-life, whereas the AMD chip remains active in production. The Intel Xeon has a locked multiplier, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking on compatible AM4 boards. The Intel part uses Socket 1151, the AMD part uses Socket AM4.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E-2104G wins every single benchmark recorded in the database. That makes its case straightforward in multicore rendering, single-core responsiveness, and every Cinebench generation from R15 through R23. The largest margin is 1.8% in Cinebench R20 single-core, where Intel scores 287 versus AMD's 282. The smallest margin is 1.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core. For users running CPU-bound workloads such as 3D rendering, video encoding, or compilation, the data consistently favors the Intel chip, albeit by a small amount.

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 wins no benchmark in this comparison. However, the architecture differences point to scenarios where the AMD chip could be preferable despite the benchmark losses. The unlocked multiplier means users can overclock the Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 on a suitable AM4 motherboard, potentially closing or reversing the gap in workloads that respond to frequency increases. The larger per-core cache (96 KB L1 and 512 KB L2) may help in cache-sensitive applications, though the recorded Cinebench results do not reflect any such advantage. The AMD chip also has a boost clock of 3.40 GHz, which the Intel part lacks entirely.

For systems that require integrated graphics, the Intel Xeon E-2104G is the clear choice because the AMD part offers none. For server and workstation deployments where ECC memory and stability are priorities, both chips support ECC, but the Intel Xeon is explicitly positioned for that market segment. The AMD chip remains in active production, which matters for long-term availability and procurement. The Intel part is end-of-life, meaning it may become harder to source over time.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2104G has an average benchmark score of 1402, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 has 1379. That is a difference of 23 points in favor of the Intel part.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 win any benchmark in this comparison?

A: No. The database records six head-to-head Cinebench results, and the Intel Xeon E-2104G wins all six. The AMD chip's closest result is a 1.5% deficit in Cinebench R15 single-core.

Q: Can the AMD processor be overclocked?

A: Yes. The Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel Xeon E-2104G has a locked multiplier. Overclocking the AMD chip could potentially offset its benchmark deficit, though the recorded results reflect stock settings.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E-2104G and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 support ECC memory. Both use dual-channel DDR4.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2104G includes UHD Graphics P630. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required for display output.

Q: How close are the two processors in single-core performance?

A: The Intel part leads by 1.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core (68 versus 67), 1.8% in R20 single-core (287 versus 282), and 1.6% in R23 single-core (684 versus 673).

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow winner. The Intel Xeon E-2104G outperforms the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 in every benchmark recorded in the database, with margins between 1.5% and 1.8%. It also carries integrated UHD Graphics P630, which the AMD chip lacks entirely, and it targets the server and workstation segment with ECC memory support. The Intel part's position as an end-of-life product and its locked multiplier are limitations, but the benchmark results are unambiguous.

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 should be chosen when the unlocked multiplier matters. Users on AM4 platforms who plan to overclock can potentially turn the 1.5% to 1.8% deficit into an advantage, especially in workloads that scale with clock speed. The AMD chip also remains in active production, making it easier to source new units, and its larger per-core cache could benefit specific workloads even if Cinebench does not show it. However, for anyone who needs integrated graphics or wants the fastest stock performance in the database, the Intel Xeon E-2104G is the correct pick. The recorded deltas are small, but they are consistent across every test, and consistency is what the data rewards.