AMD Ryzen 5 2500X vs Intel Xeon D-1557 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 2500X and the Intel Xeon D-1557 land in almost the same place in the database, and that is what makes this pairing interesting. The recorded data puts them within a single percentile of each other (48 versus 47 against all CPUs in the database), with average benchmark scores of 2361 for the Ryzen and 2282 for the Xeon. Yet they arrive there by completely different routes: a four-core desktop part running at high clocks versus a twelve-core server chip running at low ones. The Ryzen 5 2500X wins every head-to-head benchmark recorded here, six out of six, but the margins are small and the Xeon carries server-class features the Ryzen simply does not have. The launch MSRP of the Xeon D-1557 was $694.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sweep is clean: the Ryzen 5 2500X wins all six recorded comparisons, and every single margin sits in a narrow band between 1.8 and 1.9 percent. That consistency is itself informative, because it indicates the gap is not workload-dependent but a stable property of the two configurations.

Start with Cinebench R15. The Ryzen posts 810 in multi-core against 795 for the Xeon, a 1.9 percent lead, and 114 versus 112 in single-core, a 1.8 percent lead. Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern: 3375 versus 3314 in multi-core (1.8 percent) and 476 versus 467 in single-core (1.9 percent). Cinebench R23 closes the set with the Ryzen ahead at 8036 versus 7892 in multi-core (1.8 percent) and 1134 versus 1114 in single-core (1.8 percent).

The striking part is the multi-core story. The Xeon D-1557 brings twelve cores and twenty-four threads to the table, triple the core count of the Ryzen's four cores and eight threads, and it still cannot pull ahead in any multi-core test. The reason is visible in the clock data: the Xeon's base clock is 1.5 GHz with a boost of 2.1 GHz, while the Ryzen runs a 3.6 GHz base with a 4.0 GHz boost. The per-thread throughput advantage of the Ryzen is large enough to offset the Xeon's parallelism in these rendering tests. The single-core scores confirm it: 476 versus 467 in R20, 1134 versus 1114 in R23.

There is also a Geekbench data point for the Ryzen alone, 3813 multi-core and 1126 single-core, but no corresponding Xeon score is recorded in the database, so no comparison can be drawn there.

In context of the broader database, both chips sit mid-pack: the Ryzen at the 48th percentile and the Xeon at the 47th. The Ryzen's average score of 2361 places it in a cluster with the Intel Xeon E-2226GE (2365 average, a delta of -0.2 percent), the Intel Core i5-9600 (2354, +0.3 percent), the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 (2348, +0.6 percent), and the Intel Xeon E-2234 (2374, -0.6 percent). The Xeon D-1557's 2282 average is nearly identical to the Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 (2283, a delta of 0 percent), with the Intel Core i3-10305 (2264, +0.8 percent), Intel Core i5-10400H (2303, -0.9 percent), and Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (2259, +1 percent) also within a point of it.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 2500X. It wins all six head-to-head tests, with margins of 1.8 to 1.9 percent in every case. Its average benchmark score of 2361 also exceeds the Xeon D-1557's 2282.

Q: Does the Xeon's higher core count give it a multi-core advantage?

A: Not in the recorded rendering tests. Despite having 12 cores and 24 threads versus 4 cores and 8 threads, the Xeon trails in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core, for example 7892 versus 8036 in R23. Its much lower clock speeds offset the parallelism advantage.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon D-1557. ECC support is listed as true for the Xeon and false for the Ryzen 5 2500X. The Xeon also supports both DDR3 and DDR4, while the Ryzen supports DDR4 only.

Q: Can either CPU be overclocked?

A: The Ryzen 5 2500X has an unlocked multiplier. The Xeon D-1557 does not.

Q: How do their power envelopes compare?

A: The Xeon D-1557 is rated at 45 W TDP against 65 W for the Ryzen 5 2500X, despite the Xeon having many more cores.

Q: Which platforms do they use?

A: The Ryzen uses AMD Socket AM4, a desktop socket. The Xeon uses Intel BGA 1667, a soldered ball-grid array with no socket swap path.

The Verdict

For anything measured by the database's benchmark suite, the data favors the Ryzen 5 2500X unambiguously. It wins every test, in both single-core and multi-core modes, and it does so with a quarter of the thread count. If the decision is about rendering throughput or per-thread responsiveness as measured by Cinebench, the Ryzen is the pick.

The Xeon D-1557 case rests entirely on characteristics the benchmark suite does not score. It offers ECC memory support, which matters for data-integrity-sensitive deployments. It offers 24 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU versus 16 on the Ryzen, useful for expansion-heavy server builds. It carries a lower 45 W TDP despite its dozen cores, relevant for dense or thermally constrained systems. And its BGA 1667 packaging and Server/Workstation market segment mark it as an embedded board-level component, not a desktop upgrade part. Buyers choosing between these two are really choosing between a desktop platform and an embedded server platform that happen to score nearly identically.

Neither chip is meaningfully faster overall: the 1.8 to 1.9 percent deltas are small, and both sit adjacent in percentile terms at 48 and 47.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ on nearly every specification line:

• Cores and threads: 4 cores / 8 threads on the Ryzen versus 12 cores / 24 threads on the Xeon.
• Clocks: 3.6 GHz base and 4.0 GHz boost for the Ryzen, versus 1.5 GHz base and 2.1 GHz boost for the Xeon.
• TDP: 65 W for the Ryzen versus 45 W for the Xeon.
• Socket: AMD Socket AM4 versus Intel BGA 1667.
• Memory: DDR4 only on the Ryzen; DDR3 and DDR4 supported on the Xeon.
• ECC: false on the Ryzen, true on the Xeon.
• PCIe: Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes on the Ryzen, Gen 3 with 24 CPU lanes on the Xeon.
• Multiplier: unlocked on the Ryzen, locked on the Xeon.
• Memory bandwidth: recorded at 46.9 GB/s for the Ryzen on a dual-channel bus; no bandwidth figure is recorded for the Xeon, though it also uses a dual-channel bus.
• Market segment: Desktop versus Server/Workstation.
• Launch timing: the Xeon was released earlier, in February 2016, while the Ryzen followed in September 2018.

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen 5 2500X is built on AMD's Zen architecture, in the Zen+ (Pinnacle Ridge) generation of Ryzen 5, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 12 nm process. The die measures 213 mm² and packs 4,800 million transistors.

The Xeon D-1557 uses Intel's Broadwell architecture, specifically the Broadwell-DE generation of Xeon D, produced by Intel on a 14 nm process. Its die is larger at 246 mm² but carries fewer transistors at 3,200 million, reflecting the older, less dense node.

Cache configurations diverge sharply. The Ryzen gives each core 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2, with 8 MB of shared L3. The Xeon takes the opposite approach, matching its many cores with 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core plus 1.5 MB of L3 per core. That per-core L3 allocation scales with the twelve cores and suits a many-core server workload, whereas the Ryzen concentrates a fixed 8 MB L3 pool behind four fast cores.

Neither part has integrated graphics. Both connect through PCIe Gen 3, with the Xeon offering more lanes. Neither supports 3D V-Cache, which is absent from both cache listings.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 2500X wins on measured performance, full stop. Every Cinebench generation in the database, single-core and multi-core alike, goes its way by 1.8 to 1.9 percent: 810 versus 795 in R15 multi-core, 3375 versus 3314 in R20 multi-core, 8036 versus 7892 in R23 multi-core, and 114, 476, and 1134 in the respective single-core tests. Workloads that favor per-thread speed, such as the rendering tests recorded here, belong to the Ryzen. Its unlocked multiplier also gives tuning headroom the Xeon cannot match.

The Xeon D-1557 wins where benchmarks do not reach. Its twelve cores and twenty-four threads suit sustained parallel server workloads that scale beyond what four cores can feed, even at low clocks. Its ECC support, DDR3/DDR4 flexibility, 24 PCIe lanes, and 45 W envelope in a BGA package make it a fit for compact, reliability-focused server and workstation deployments. Its nearest-rival cluster, including the Xeon E5-2629 v3 at a dead-even delta of 0 percent, shows it benchmarking like mainstream desktop chips while offering server-class platform features.

The bottom line from the data: identical measured performance, different machines entirely. Choose the Ryzen for speed on a desktop AM4 platform; choose the Xeon for ECC, lanes, threads, and efficiency in an embedded server build.