AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U vs Intel Xeon E-2104G Comparison

The Intel Xeon E-2104G and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U land in almost the same performance band despite targeting completely different machines. The Xeon is an end-of-life server and workstation part built on Intel's Coffee Lake architecture for Socket 1151, while the Ryzen is an active mobile chip from the Raven Ridge generation soldered into AMD's FP5 package. The database records the Xeon winning all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, but the margins are narrow, between 1.5 and 1.8 percent, which makes this a contest decided by platform features rather than raw speed.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows the Intel Xeon E-2104G winning every benchmark category in the head-to-head set: Cinebench R15 multi-core (488 versus 480), R15 single-core (68 versus 67), R20 multi-core (2035 versus 2002), R20 single-core (287 versus 282), R23 multi-core (4847 versus 4769), and R23 single-core (684 versus 673). Six tests, six wins for the Xeon, a clean sweep.

The size of those wins matters more than the sweep itself. A lead of roughly 1.6 percent across the board is consistent with the Xeon's higher base clock of 3.20 GHz against the Ryzen's 2.0 GHz base, but the Ryzen's 3.40 GHz boost clock keeps it close in lightly threaded runs. The single-core gaps are no larger than the multi-core gaps, which indicates neither chip holds a meaningful responsiveness advantage in day-to-day tasks. In practical terms, both deliver near-identical CPU throughput, and the Xeon's edge is real but small.

The Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U wins on dimensions the CPU benchmarks do not capture. Its 15 W TDP is far below the Xeon's 65 W, its market segment is mobile rather than server/workstation, and it remains in active production while the Xeon is end-of-life. For anything that runs on a battery or in a thermally constrained chassis, the Ryzen is the only realistic option of the two.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are 4-core, 4-thread processors without hyper-threading or SMT, and both are fabricated on a 14 nm process. That is where the symmetry ends. The Xeon E-2104G uses Intel's Coffee Lake architecture (codename Coffee Lake-S WS) on Intel's own foundry, with a 126 mm² die. The Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U uses AMD's Zen architecture (codename Raven Ridge) manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a larger 210 mm² die containing 4,950 million transistors.

Cache hierarchies favor Intel. The Xeon carries 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with a full 8 MB of shared L3. The Ryzen offers larger per-core cache, 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2, but only 4 MB of shared L3. The doubled L3 capacity on the Xeon likely contributes to its consistent, if small, benchmark lead in multi-core rendering loads.

Memory and I/O also split along market lines. Both support DDR4 on a dual-channel bus, but the Xeon's bandwidth is rated at 42.7 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s for the Ryzen. The Xeon supports ECC memory, a workstation requirement the Ryzen lacks. PCIe is a clear Intel advantage: Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes against Gen 3 with 8 CPU lanes on the Ryzen. Both have integrated graphics, the Xeon with UHD Graphics P630 and the Ryzen with Radeon Vega 6, and neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

One structural difference deserves emphasis: clocks operate in opposite ways. The Xeon runs a fixed 3.20 GHz with no boost clock listed, while the Ryzen starts at a 2.0 GHz base and boosts to 3.40 GHz. The Xeon also carries a launch MSRP of $193; the Ryzen's launch MSRP is not recorded in the database.

The Verdict

The data supports a simple split. If sustained rendering throughput, ECC memory, wider PCIe connectivity, or a server/workstation platform is the requirement, the Xeon E-2104G is the stronger pick on paper: it wins every benchmark, offers twice the L3 cache, doubles the CPU PCIe lanes, and supports error-correcting memory. Its 37th percentile ranking against all CPUs in the database edges out the Ryzen's 36th percentile, and its average benchmark score of 1402 beats the Ryzen's 1379 by about 1.7 percent.

If power efficiency, mobility, or platform longevity matter more, the Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U is the choice. It delivers essentially the same performance within a 15 W envelope instead of 65 W, it ships in mobile FP5 systems rather than requiring a Socket 1151 workstation board, and it is still an active product while the Xeon has been retired. A buyer matching either chip against alternatives should also note their peer groups: the Xeon sits in a cluster with the Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 (average score 1401), the Pentium Gold G7400TE (1404), the Core i5-6500TE (1399), and the Xeon E3-1240L v3 (1396), while the Ryzen matches the Opteron 6366 HE, Ryzen 3 PRO 1200, Core i7-3740QM, and Core i7-3615QE, all within 0.1 percent of its 1379 average.

Neither chip is a performance leader in absolute terms, sitting in the mid-to-high 30s percentile-wise. This is a comparison about platform fit, not speed.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in benchmarks?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2104G wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with margins of 1.5 to 1.8 percent. Its average benchmark score is 1402 against 1379 for the Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U.

Q: How much lower is the Ryzen's power consumption?

A: The Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U has a 15 W TDP compared to 65 W for the Xeon E-2104G, making it the far more efficient option for mobile and thermally limited designs.

Q: Do both chips support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon E-2104G supports ECC memory, which aligns with its server/workstation segment. The Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U does not.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. The Xeon E-2104G is end-of-life, having launched on July 11, 2018. The Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U is an active product, launched January 7, 2019.

Q: Which has more cache?

A: The Xeon has 8 MB of shared L3, double the Ryzen's 4 MB, though the Ryzen has larger per-core L1 (96 KB versus 64 KB) and L2 (512 KB versus 256 KB) caches.

Q: Can either CPU be overclocked?

A: No. Neither the Xeon E-2104G nor the Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sweep belongs to Intel, but every result tells the same story of a narrow gap.

Cinebench R15 multi-core: 488 for the Xeon versus 480 for the Ryzen, a 1.7 percent win. R15 single-core: 68 versus 67, 1.5 percent. The R15 numbers show the two chips trading blow-for-blow even at low thread counts, confirming that the Ryzen's 3.40 GHz boost keeps it competitive in lightly loaded moments.

Cinebench R20 widens the picture slightly. Multi-core lands at 2035 against 2002, a 1.6 percent Xeon win, and single-core at 287 against 282, the largest single-test gap at 1.8 percent. That R20 single-core result is the Xeon's best showing in the entire set, yet it is still under two percent.

Cinebench R23, the most modern test in the database, mirrors the rest: 4847 versus 4769 multi-core (1.6 percent) and 684 versus 673 single-core (1.6 percent). The consistency across three Cinebench generations indicates the gap is architectural and steady, not the product of any one test's quirks.

Aggregated, the Xeon's average benchmark score of 1402 against the Ryzen's 1379 (1.7 percent) and its percentile ranking of 37 versus 36 confirm the same conclusion. The Xeon E-2104G is the marginally faster processor in every recorded test, but the difference is small enough that platform requirements, the Xeon's ECC support and 16 PCIe lanes against the Ryzen's 15 W envelope and active production status, should drive the decision.