AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 vs Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 across all six Cinebench comparisons. The margins are consistent, ranging from 2.3% to 2.6%. In the multicore tests, the Xeon takes Cinebench R15 with 635 against 619 for the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300, a 2.6% lead. Cinebench R20 multicore shows 2647 versus 2582, a 2.5% gap. The R23 multicore result repeats the pattern: 6303 for Intel, 6148 for AMD, again 2.5% ahead.

Single-core results follow the same shape. The Xeon leads in R15 single-core by 2.3% (89 to 87), in R20 single-core by 2.5% (373 to 364), and in R23 single-core by 2.4% (889 to 868). None of these deltas are dramatic, but they are consistent across every workload. The Intel part never loses a single test, and the AMD chip never closes the gap to under 2%. For a buyer looking at raw Cinebench throughput, the Xeon is the pick, but the margins are tight enough that real-world differences will be small in lightly threaded tasks.

Looking at the broader database context, the Xeon E5-1630 v3 sits at the 42nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is at the 41st percentile. That one-percentile difference aligns with the average benchmark scores: 1823 for the Intel part versus 1778 for the AMD part. The nearest rivals for the Xeon include the Intel Core i7-4790S (average score 1827, a 0.2% difference) and the Intel Xeon D-1537 (1830, 0.4% higher). The Ryzen’s closest neighbors include the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 (1777, 0.1% lower) and the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE (1787, 0.5% higher). So both chips are firmly in the same performance tier, with the Xeon holding a small but repeatable edge.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design eras and philosophies. The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 is built on a 22 nm process at Intel’s foundry, using the Haswell-EP architecture. It packs 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with the Zen (Summit Ridge) architecture. It contains 4,800 million transistors on a smaller 213 mm² die. The node advantage goes to AMD, but the transistor density story is more complex: AMD fits more transistors in less space, yet the Xeon still wins the benchmarks.

Core and thread counts differ. Both have 4 cores, but the Xeon supports 8 threads while the Ryzen has only 4 threads. That explains part of the multicore edge. Cache layouts also diverge. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 10 MB of shared L3. The Ryzen has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, but only 8 MB of shared L3. So the AMD chip has faster per-core cache, but less total L3.

Memory support is another split. Both accept DDR4, but the Xeon runs a quad-channel memory bus with 68.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ryzen uses a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s. That bandwidth difference is significant for memory-heavy workloads, even if Cinebench does not fully expose it. Both support ECC memory, which is rare for a desktop chip like the Ryzen and expected for a server part like the Xeon.

The sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 2011-3 versus AMD Socket AM4. The Xeon targets the server and workstation segment, while the Ryzen is a desktop part. The Xeon has 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the Ryzen’s PCIe configuration is not listed in the database. The Xeon is end-of-life in production status, while the Ryzen remains active. The Ryzen has an unlocked multiplier; the Xeon does not. The Xeon’s TDP is 140 watts, more than double the Ryzen’s 65 watts. That power draw is a direct consequence of the older process and the higher memory bandwidth interface.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 wins every benchmark in this comparison, but the margins are modest. If you need the absolute best Cinebench scores from these two, the Xeon is the choice. It leads by 2.5% or so in multicore and 2.3% to 2.5% in single-core, and it offers 8 threads versus 4. That thread advantage will matter in heavily threaded rendering or compilation workloads beyond Cinebench, though the database only records Cinebench results.

However, the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is not far behind. Its scores are within 2.6% across the board, and it does so at 65 watts TDP versus 140 watts. For a system builder prioritizing power efficiency or a compact desktop build, the Ryzen’s lower draw is a practical advantage. It also has an unlocked multiplier, which the Xeon lacks, meaning overclocking headroom exists on the AMD side if the cooling and motherboard allow it.

The Ryzen is also an active product with a modern socket, while the Xeon is end-of-life. If you are building new today, the Ryzen’s platform longevity and lower power requirements make it the more sensible pick for a desktop. The Xeon’s quad-channel memory and 40 PCIe lanes point to workstation or server use cases where memory bandwidth and expansion matter more than power draw. In short: choose the Xeon for raw single and multicore performance in a workstation context, choose the Ryzen for an efficient, current desktop build where the small performance gap is acceptable.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 scores 889, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 scores 868. The Xeon leads by 2.4%.

Q: Does the AMD chip offer any advantage in power consumption?

A: Yes. The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 has a TDP of 65 watts, compared to 140 watts for the Xeon E5-1630 v3. That is a substantial difference in thermal and power requirements.

Q: Are both processors compatible with ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 support ECC memory. This is notable because ECC support is uncommon in desktop processors.

Q: How many memory channels does each processor support?

A: The Intel Xeon supports quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Ryzen supports dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Xeon has 8 threads (4 cores with Hyper-Threading). The AMD Ryzen has 4 threads (4 cores without SMT). This gives the Xeon an advantage in multi-threaded workloads.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Xeon has an average benchmark score of 1823, while the AMD Ryzen has 1778. The Xeon is about 2.5% higher, consistent with the head-to-head Cinebench deltas.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 wins all six recorded Cinebench tests. Its leads are small but uniform. The biggest win is in Cinebench R15 multicore, where it is 2.6% ahead of the Ryzen. That same test also shows the largest single-core lead at 2.3%. For any workload that mirrors Cinebench’s rendering engine, the Xeon is the faster part. The 8-thread count also suggests it will scale better in heavily parallel tasks, even if the database does not include those specific benchmarks.

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 does not win any recorded benchmark, but its advantages lie outside the Cinebench scores. It has a 65 watt TDP, which is less than half of the Xeon’s 140 watts. That makes it the clear winner for power-sensitive builds, small form factor systems, or any scenario where cooling and electricity costs are primary concerns. The unlocked multiplier means users can attempt overclocking, something the locked Xeon cannot offer. The Ryzen also uses the AM4 socket, which remains an active platform with ongoing motherboard support, while the Xeon’s LGA 2011-3 platform is end-of-life.

For memory bandwidth, the Xeon wins with 68.3 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s, thanks to quad-channel support. That matters for scientific computing, large database operations, or virtual machines that thrash memory. The Ryzen’s smaller L3 cache (8 MB versus 10 MB) is offset by larger L1 and L2 per core, so per-core cache-sensitive tasks may see less of a penalty than the L3 numbers suggest. The Xeon’s 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes also give it an edge in multi-GPU or high-speed storage configurations, though the Ryzen’s PCIe count is not listed for comparison.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ.

| Specification | Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 | AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 |

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

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.70 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.80 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 140 W | 65 W |

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

| Architecture | Haswell | Zen |

| Codename | Haswell-EP | Zen (Summit Ridge) |

| Generation | Xeon E5 (Haswell-EP) | Ryzen 3 (Zen) |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 2,600 million | 4,800 million |

| Die Size | 356 mm² | 213 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 10 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 68.3 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 40 Lanes (CPU only) | Not listed |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

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

| Release Date | 2014-09-07 | 2017-06-28 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | QFSVSR20L | YD130BBBM4KAE |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 42 | 41 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 1823 | 1778 |