AMD Ryzen 5 2400G vs Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-threaded performance in Cinebench R15?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G wins decisively, scoring 846.5 versus the Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5’s 510. This is a 39.8% advantage for the AMD part in that test.

Q: How do the two chips compare on single-core performance?

A: The Ryzen 5 2400G is also far ahead here. In the Cinebench R15 single-core test, it scores 155.65 while the Xeon E3-1225 v5 scores 72, a 53.7% gap that favors AMD.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5 supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G does not list ECC support in its specifications.

Q: What are the integrated graphics solutions on each chip?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5 includes HD Graphics P530, while the AMD Ryzen 5 2400G features the Radeon RX Vega 11.

Q: Which processor has a higher transistor count and larger die?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G has 4,950 million transistors on a 210 mm² die, whereas the Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5 has 1,750 million transistors on a 122 mm² die.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G offers 46.9 GB/s of memory bandwidth, notably higher than the Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5’s 34.1 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory, but AMD supports only DDR4 while Intel supports both DDR3 and DDR4.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a clear picture of two very different usage profiles. The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G dominates in every head-to-head benchmark recorded, winning both Cinebench R15 multi-core and single-core tests outright. This suggests it is the stronger choice for general desktop workloads where both multi-threaded and single-threaded responsiveness matter.

The Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5, however, claims its wins in areas not captured by the Cinebench suite. It supports ECC memory, a feature entirely absent from the AMD part. That makes the Xeon the only viable option for error-correcting memory workloads, which are often required in server or workstation environments. It also supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, offering more flexibility in system builds. The Xeon’s market segment is listed as Server/Workstation, while the Ryzen is explicitly a Desktop part.

In terms of platform longevity, the Ryzen 5 2400G is still in active production, whereas the Xeon is end-of-life. For new builds, that means the AMD chip is easier to source and likely has a longer support horizon. The Ryzen also has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, while the Xeon is locked. The data shows the Ryzen wins on raw performance, but the Xeon wins on specific enterprise-oriented features.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5 is built on the Skylake architecture, specifically the Skylake-DT codename, and belongs to the Xeon E3 generation. It is manufactured on a 14 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G uses the Zen architecture with the Raven Ridge codename, part of the Ryzen 5 2000 series, and is fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm node as well.

A major divergence lies in thread support. The Xeon offers 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Ryzen provides 4 cores and 8 threads, effectively doubling the thread count. This explains the large multi-core performance gap in the benchmarks.

Cache hierarchies also differ substantially. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, but only 4 MB of shared L3. The Xeon’s larger L3 cache is notable, yet it does not translate into benchmark wins. The Ryzen compensates with larger per-core L1 and L2 caches.

The integrated graphics units are architecturally distinct as well. Intel’s HD Graphics P530 is a modest solution, while AMD’s Radeon RX Vega 11 is a much more capable iGPU. This is reflected in their target markets: the Xeon is a server/workstation chip where graphics are secondary, while the Ryzen is a desktop APU designed to deliver competent integrated graphics performance.

The PCIe configurations also differ. The Xeon provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU only, while the Ryzen offers Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU only. This gives the Intel part more direct CPU-attached PCIe bandwidth, which could matter for discrete GPUs or NVMe storage.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on several key specification fields. The Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5 has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G runs higher, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The Ryzen also carries a lower TDP of 65 watts compared to the Xeon’s 80 watts, meaning AMD delivers more performance at a lower power envelope.

Sockets are incompatible: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1151, while the Ryzen uses AMD Socket AM4. Memory support differs, with the Xeon accepting both DDR3 and DDR4, while the Ryzen only accepts DDR4. As noted, the Xeon supports ECC memory and the Ryzen does not.

The Ryzen has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, while the Xeon is multiplier-locked. The Xeon’s part number is SR2LJ, and the Ryzen’s is YD2400C5M4MFB. The Ryzen is from the 2000 series, while the Xeon has no series listed. The Xeon was released in October 2015, while the Ryzen came in February 2018.

Transistor counts and die sizes are very different: the Xeon has 1,750 million transistors on a 122 mm² die, while the Ryzen has 4,950 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. The Ryzen’s larger and denser design houses both CPU and a more powerful GPU. The Xeon’s production status is end-of-life, whereas the Ryzen remains active.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is limited to two Cinebench R15 tests, and the AMD Ryzen 5 2400G wins both decisively. In the multi-core test, the Ryzen scores 846.5 against the Xeon’s 510, a delta of -39.8% from the Xeon’s perspective. That means the Xeon trails by nearly 40% in multi-threaded performance.

The single-core result is even more lopsided. The Ryzen scores 155.65, while the Xeon scores only 72. This is a 53.7% deficit for the Intel part. The Ryzen’s advantage in single-core is proportionally larger than its multi-core lead, suggesting that clock speed and IPC improvements in the Zen architecture are substantial.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, the Xeon has additional scores not present for the Ryzen. In Cinebench R20, the Xeon scores 2127 multi-core and 300 single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 5065 multi-core and 715 single-core. The Ryzen has Geekbench scores of 3750 multi-core and 1003 single-core, which are not directly comparable to the Cinebench results.

The average benchmark scores tell a similar story. The Xeon has an average benchmark score of 1465, while the Ryzen averages 1439. This is a marginal difference of about 1.8%, despite the Ryzen’s overwhelming wins in the head-to-head tests. The Xeon’s percentile rank among all CPUs is 38, while the Ryzen sits at 37. These are nearly identical positions in the overall performance distribution.

The nearest rivals for each chip further contextualize their standing. The Xeon’s closest competitor is the Intel Core i3-7350K, with an average score of 1462 and a delta of 0.2%. The Ryzen’s nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 3 2200GE, with a score of 1444 and a delta of -0.4%. Both chips are clustered tightly with mid-range processors from around the same era.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous on raw performance: the AMD Ryzen 5 2400G wins every head-to-head benchmark, with a 39.8% lead in multi-core and a 53.7% lead in single-core. For any workload measured by Cinebench, the Ryzen is the clear choice. It also has a lower TDP, higher clocks, and an unlocked multiplier, making it the more attractive desktop processor for general use.

The Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5, however, is not without merit. Its support for ECC memory is a hard requirement for certain server and workstation applications. The Xeon also offers 16 PCIe lanes versus the Ryzen’s 8, which could be important for systems with multiple expansion cards. Its support for DDR3 as well as DDR4 gives it an edge in legacy system upgrades.

The production status is a significant factor. The Xeon is end-of-life, while the Ryzen is active. For new system builds, the Ryzen is the practical recommendation. For maintaining or upgrading an existing server/workstation platform that requires ECC, the Xeon’s feature set is irreplaceable.

The average benchmark scores and percentile rankings are nearly identical, with the Xeon at 1465 and the Ryzen at 1439. This suggests that in real-world mixed workloads, the two processors are far closer than the Cinebench head-to-head results imply. The Ryzen’s wins are concentrated in specific rendering tests, while the Xeon’s strengths lie in stability, ECC support, and platform compatibility.

The verdict hinges on use case. Choose the AMD Ryzen 5 2400G for desktop performance, integrated graphics capability, and modern platform features. Choose the Intel Xeon E3-1225 v5 for ECC memory support, server-grade reliability, and PCIe lane count. The benchmark data favors the Ryzen, but the Xeon’s specialized features serve a different audience.