AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 vs Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 and Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 compare in raw average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 posts an average benchmark score of 1778, while the Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 scores 1773. That puts the AMD part 0.3% ahead of the Xeon in average score, a difference that is effectively negligible in real-world use.

Q: Which processor wins the head-to-head Cinebench tests?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons. It leads by 0.3% in Cinebench R15 multicore (619 vs 617), R20 multicore (2582 vs 2574), R20 single-core (364 vs 363), R23 multicore (6148 vs 6130), and R23 single-core (868 vs 865). The R15 single-core test is a dead tie at 87 for both.

Q: Do the two chips have the same core and thread configuration?

A: No. Both have 4 physical cores, but the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 has 4 threads total, while the Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 has 8 threads via Hyper-Threading. Despite the Xeon's thread advantage, the AMD chip still edges it out in every multicore benchmark listed.

Q: What are the memory channel configurations for each CPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 uses dual-channel DDR4 memory with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 uses quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s of bandwidth. Both support ECC memory, but the Xeon has a significant theoretical memory bandwidth advantage.

Q: Which processor is more modern and which is end-of-life?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 was released on 2017-06-28 and its production status is Active. The Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 was released on 2014-09-07 and has a production status of End-of-life. The AMD part is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the Intel part uses a 22 nm process at Intel.

Q: How do these CPUs rank against all CPUs in the database?

A: Both processors sit at the 41st percentile against all CPUs. Their nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 (average score 1777, 0.1% from AMD and -0.2% from Intel) and the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE (average score 1787, -0.5% from AMD).

Architecture Differences

The architectural split here is fundamental. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is built on the Zen (Summit Ridge) architecture using a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 4,800 million transistors into a 213 mm² die. The Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 uses the Haswell-EP architecture on Intel's 22 nm node, with 2,600 million transistors on a significantly larger 356 mm² die. The transistor density difference is stark: AMD crams nearly twice as many transistors into a much smaller area.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The AMD chip provides 96 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, with 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Xeon offers 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a larger 15 MB of shared L3 cache. That extra L3 capacity on the Intel side could help with certain workloads, though the benchmark data shows it doesn't translate into a win.

Threading is another major divergence. The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is a pure 4-core/4-thread part with no simultaneous multithreading. The Xeon E5-2637 v3 is a 4-core/8-thread part. On paper, the Xeon should have an advantage in heavily threaded workloads, but the benchmark results tell a different story — the Ryzen wins every multicore test anyway.

Memory architecture also splits these two. The Ryzen uses a dual-channel DDR4 controller with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon uses quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth — a 60% theoretical advantage. Both support ECC, but the Xeon's platform is clearly aimed at server/workstation duty with its Socket 2011-3 and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only). The Ryzen uses AMD Socket AM4 and lists no PCIe lane count in the data.

Production status is a decisive difference. The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is Active; the Xeon E5-2637 v3 is End-of-life. The Ryzen is also multiplier-unlocked, while the Xeon is locked. The Xeon does carry a launch MSRP of $996, which is the only pricing data available for either part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent, with the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 taking all six comparisons. The margins are small but uniform — every win is exactly 0.3% except for the single R15 single-core tie at 0%.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ryzen scores 619 against the Xeon's 617, a 0.3% edge. The R15 single-core test is a perfect tie at 87 points each. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Ryzen takes multicore 2582 to 2574 (0.3%) and single-core 364 to 363 (0.3%). Cinebench R23 shows the same pattern: multicore 6148 vs 6130 (0.3%) and single-core 868 vs 865 (0.3%).

What's notable here is the Xeon's 8 threads don't help it close the gap. In fact, the Ryzen's advantage in multicore tests (0.3%) is identical to its single-core advantage (0.3% in all but the R15 tie). The thread advantage of the Xeon is effectively nullified by the Zen architecture's efficiency. The average benchmark scores confirm the overall picture: AMD at 1778, Intel at 1773, a 0.3% gap.

The nearest rival data reinforces how closely matched these two are. The Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 sits between them with a score of 1777 (0.1% from the Ryzen and -0.2% from the Xeon). The AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE scores 1787, which is 0.5% above the Ryzen 3 PRO 1300.

Specification Differences

• Threads: AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 has 4 threads; Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 has 8 threads.
• Process Node: AMD uses 14 nm at GlobalFoundries; Intel uses 22 nm at Intel.
• Transistor Count: AMD has 4,800 million; Intel has 2,600 million.
• Die Size: AMD is 213 mm²; Intel is 356 mm².
• L1 Cache: AMD has 96 KB per core; Intel has 64 KB per core.
• L2 Cache: AMD has 512 KB per core; Intel has 256 KB per core.
• L3 Cache: AMD has 8 MB shared; Intel has 15 MB shared.
• Memory Bus: AMD is dual-channel; Intel is quad-channel.
• Memory Bandwidth: AMD has 42.7 GB/s; Intel has 68.3 GB/s.
• Socket: AMD uses Socket AM4; Intel uses Socket 2011-3.
• PCIe: AMD lists none; Intel lists Gen 3, 40 lanes (CPU only).
• Market Segment: AMD is Desktop; Intel is Server/Workstation.
• Production Status: AMD is Active; Intel is End-of-life.
• Release Date: AMD is 2017-06-28; Intel is 2014-09-07.
• Multiplier Unlocked: AMD is unlocked; Intel is locked.
• TDP: AMD is 65W; Intel is 135W.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear, if narrow, winner. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons and has a higher average benchmark score (1778 vs 1773). The margins are small — 0.3% across the board — but they are completely consistent. No single Cinebench test shows the Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 ahead.

For a builder deciding between these two, the practical considerations extend beyond raw scores. The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is an active product on a modern AM4 platform, built on a smaller 14 nm node with far better transistor efficiency. It is multiplier-unlocked, giving overclocking headroom the locked Xeon lacks. The Xeon's 135W TDP is more than double the Ryzen's 65W, which means more heat and more power draw for no benchmark benefit.

The Xeon does have legitimate advantages on paper: quad-channel memory with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth, 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, and 15 MB of L3 cache. But these platform features do not translate into Cinebench wins, and the Xeon is end-of-life. The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 also launched with no MSRP listed, while the Xeon's launch MSRP is $996.

If you are building new, the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is the rational pick. It is faster in every measured benchmark, uses less power, is on a live platform, and allows multiplier overclocking. The Xeon E5-2637 v3 makes sense only if you already own a compatible Socket 2011-3 board and need its specific platform features — quad-channel memory and 40 PCIe lanes — and do not care about the end-of-life status or higher power draw.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 wins: Every Cinebench benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. This includes R15 multicore (619 vs 617), R15 single-core (87 vs 87, tie), R20 multicore (2582 vs 2574), R20 single-core (364 vs 363), R23 multicore (6148 vs 6130), and R23 single-core (868 vs 865). It also wins on average benchmark score (1778 vs 1773), production status (Active vs End-of-life), process node (14 nm vs 22 nm), transistor count (4,800M vs 2,600M), smaller die size (213 mm² vs 356 mm²), larger L1 and L2 caches per core, lower TDP (65W vs 135W), and being multiplier-unlocked.

Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 wins: Platform-level specifications. It has more threads (8 vs 4), a larger shared L3 cache (15 MB vs 8 MB), quad-channel memory with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth vs 42.7 GB/s, 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only) vs none listed, and a larger die size. It also has ECC memory support in common with the AMD part, but the Xeon's memory subsystem is clearly built for bandwidth-hungry server workloads. The Xeon was released earlier (2014-09-07 vs 2017-06-28) and carries a launch MSRP of $996. The Ryzen's wins in actual benchmark tests, however, suggest that for Cinebench-style workloads, the Xeon's platform advantages do not translate into performance.