AMD Ryzen 5 2600H vs Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 and AMD Ryzen 5 2600H are both 4-core, 8-thread processors, yet they target entirely different segments: one is a server/workstation part, the other a mobile chip. Benchmark results show them landing in the same percentile bracket (44th for both), with average scores of 1973 and 1967 respectively. The data reveals an extraordinarily tight race, where the Xeon edges ahead in every single Cinebench test, but by margins so slim they are effectively within run-to-run variance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkable for their consistency and narrowness. Across all six Cinebench tests, the Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 wins every single one, yet the largest margin of victory is a mere 0.3%. In multi-core tests, the Xeon scores 687 in Cinebench R15 versus 685 for the Ryzen, a 0.3% delta. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 (2865 vs 2856, 0.3%) and Cinebench R23 (6822 vs 6801, 0.3%). These are not meaningful performance gaps; they are statistical noise.

Single-core results are even closer. In Cinebench R15, both chips produce an identical score of 96, with a delta of 0%. The Xeon takes Cinebench R20 single-core at 404 versus 403 (0.2% delta) and Cinebench R23 single-core at 963 versus 960 (0.3% delta). The pattern is clear: the Xeon holds a hair-thin advantage in every discipline, but no workload will feel different between these two.

The overall average benchmark scores reinforce this picture. The Xeon E3-1245 v5 averages 1973, placing it 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-10810U and 0.2% behind the Core i5-7600K. The Ryzen 5 2600H averages 1967, sitting 0.1% behind the AMD Ryzen 3 2300X and 0.2% behind the Xeon itself. Both processors are clustered with mainstream desktop chips from the same era, which suggests that their compute capabilities are broadly comparable despite their different market positions.

Where Each One Wins

Given that the Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, it technically holds the advantage in every Cinebench test category. The multi-core margin of 0.3% in R15, R20, and R23 indicates a slight edge in heavily threaded workloads like video rendering or 3D scene compilation. However, a 0.3% difference translates to roughly one extra frame per several hundred, which no user could perceive in real-world use.

The single-core results are effectively a tie. With identical R15 scores of 96 and deltas of 0.2-0.3% in R20 and R23, neither chip offers a meaningful advantage in lightly threaded tasks like web browsing, office productivity, or legacy application support. The Ryzen 5 2600H's only "win" is in the broader system context: it is an active production part with a 45 W TDP, whereas the Xeon is end-of-life with an 80 W TDP. But strictly on benchmark scores, the Ryzen has zero wins.

The Xeon's advantage, such as it is, comes from its higher clock speeds. It runs at a 3.50 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost, compared to the Ryzen's 3.20 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost. Those higher frequencies account for the tiny margin in every test. The Ryzen counters with a much larger transistor count (4,950 million vs 1,750 million) and a bigger die (210 mm² vs 122 mm²), but that hardware does not translate into a performance lead in these Cinebench workloads.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is significant, even if the benchmark results are not. The Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 uses the Skylake architecture, built on Intel's 14 nm process with 1,750 million transistors on a 122 mm² die. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600H uses the Zen architecture, codenamed Raven Ridge, also on 14 nm but fabricated by GlobalFoundries with 4,950 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. The AMD chip packs nearly three times the transistor count into a die that is about 72% larger.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3. The Ryzen offers 96 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, but only 4 MB of shared L3. That means the AMD part has more per-core cache but half the total L3, which could affect performance in workloads with large shared data sets. Memory support also diverges: the Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4 in dual-channel mode with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ryzen is DDR4-only but with a higher 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Ryzen's memory bandwidth advantage is substantial, but it does not show up in these CPU-bound Cinebench scores.

The integrated graphics tell a similar story of different design goals. The Xeon includes HD Graphics P530, a basic server-oriented iGPU. The Ryzen features Radeon Vega 8, which is a far more capable graphics solution for a mobile part. The Ryzen also lacks ECC memory support, while the Xeon supports it — a key feature for server/workstation reliability. PCIe connectivity is another split: the Xeon offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ryzen provides Gen 3 with only 8 lanes. The Xeon's socket is Intel Socket 1151, the Ryzen's is AMD Socket FP5. The Ryzen is part of the 2000 series, released in September 2018, while the Xeon launched in October 2015 and is now end-of-life. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data presents a simple conclusion: benchmark results show the Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 and AMD Ryzen 5 2600H are performance equals, with the Xeon holding a statistically insignificant edge in all six Cinebench tests. Anyone choosing between these two strictly on compute scores would be deciding on a 0.3% difference, which is effectively zero. The Xeon's 3.90 GHz boost clock gives it a slight theoretical edge, but the Ryzen's larger cache per core and higher memory bandwidth are not enough to overcome it in these tests.

The real differentiators are platform features and market positioning. The Xeon is a server/workstation part with ECC memory support, 16 PCIe lanes, and a dual-channel memory controller that works with both DDR3 and DDR4. Its 80 W TDP and end-of-life status make it a legacy choice for existing Socket 1151 systems or specialized workstation builds. The Ryzen 5 2600H is a mobile part with a 45 W TDP, Radeon Vega 8 graphics, and active production status. It targets laptops and compact systems where power efficiency and integrated graphics matter more than raw CPU throughput. The Ryzen's 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth is a clear advantage for memory-intensive applications, even if Cinebench does not expose it.

For a buyer needing ECC support or a drop-in server upgrade, the Xeon is the only option. For a mobile or low-power build requiring capable integrated graphics, the Ryzen is the obvious pick. For raw Cinebench performance, the winner is whichever chip is cheaper or already in hand — the numbers do not justify a preference.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 scores 963 in Cinebench R23 single-core, narrowly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600H's 960, a 0.3% difference.

Q: How much faster is the Ryzen 5 2600H in multi-core Cinebench R20?

A: It is not faster. The Xeon E3-1245 v5 scores 2865 versus 2856 for the Ryzen, giving the Intel chip a 0.3% lead.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 5 2600H does not.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two chips?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 2600H offers 51.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 provides 34.1 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 boosts to 3.90 GHz, compared to 3.60 GHz for the AMD Ryzen 5 2600H.

Q: How many PCIe lanes does each CPU provide?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the AMD Ryzen 5 2600H provides 8 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.