AMD Ryzen 5 2600H vs Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent, though narrow, advantage for the Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 across every Cinebench workload in the comparison. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600H trails in all six head-to-head tests, with the largest deficit appearing in the multi-threaded R15 run. There, the Xeon scores 693 against 685 for the Ryzen, a 1.2% lead. The single-core R15 result is similarly tight: 97 versus 96, a 1% gap. These differences are small enough that they fall within typical run-to-run variance for a single workload, but the pattern is uniform rather than scattered.

Moving to the newer Cinebench versions, the Intel part holds its edge. In R20 multi-core, the Xeon records 2888 points, while the Ryzen manages 2856, a 1.1% advantage. The R20 single-core test shows 407 against 403, again a 1% lead. The R23 multi-core result repeats the same story: Intel at 6878, AMD at 6801, a 1.1% margin. The R23 single-core test has Intel at 971 and AMD at 960, also 1.1%. When the margin is this small across every test, the conclusion is that the two chips deliver essentially equivalent rendering throughput, with the Intel part having a slight, repeatable edge in the database's measurements.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this picture. The Xeon E3-1585L v5 posts an average score of 1989, while the Ryzen 5 2600H averages 1967. That 22-point gap on the aggregate metric is under 1.2%, so both processors sit in the same performance class. The nearest rivals for the Intel part include the Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 at 1991 (0.1% below the Xeon E3-1585L v5) and the AMD Ryzen 5 1500X at 1992 (0.1% above). For the AMD Ryzen 5 2600H, the closest competitor is the Intel Xeon D-2712T at 1964 (0.2% behind) and the Intel Core i7-10810U at 1971 (0.2% ahead). Both parts land at the 44th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they outperform roughly 44% of recorded processors and trail the remaining 56%.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests against the AMD Ryzen 5 2600H. Its margins range from 1.0% in Cinebench R15 single-core and R20 single-core to 1.2% in Cinebench R15 multi-core.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-core workloads?

A: The largest multi-core gap is 1.2% in Cinebench R15, where the Xeon scores 693 versus 685 for the Ryzen. In R20 multi-core the gap is 1.1% (2888 against 2856), and in R23 multi-core it is 1.1% (6878 against 6801).

Q: Are these two processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes. Both are recorded at the 44th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Their average benchmark scores are also close: 1989 for the Intel part and 1967 for the AMD part.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each processor?

A: For the Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5, the nearest rival by average score is the AMD Ryzen 5 1500X at 1992 (0.1% higher), followed by the Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 at 1991 (0.1% lower). For the AMD Ryzen 5 2600H, the nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-10810U at 1971 (0.2% higher), with the Intel Xeon D-2712T at 1964 (0.2% lower).

Q: Does the AMD processor win any recorded benchmark?

A: No. The database shows zero wins for the AMD Ryzen 5 2600H in the head-to-head comparison. The Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 holds the win in all six tests.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The Intel part leads by 1% in Cinebench R15 single-core (97 versus 96), by 1% in R20 single-core (407 versus 403), and by 1.1% in R23 single-core (971 versus 960). The margins are consistent but very small.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 is built on the Skylake architecture, specifically the Skylake-H codename, and belongs to the Xeon E3 generation. It is manufactured on Intel's 14 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. The die contains 2,300 million transistors on a 171 mm² die size. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600H, by contrast, uses the Zen architecture under the Raven Ridge codename, part of the Ryzen 2000 series. It is also built on a 14 nm process node, but at GlobalFoundries, and packs 4,950 million transistors into a 210 mm² die. The transistor count is more than double that of the Intel chip, even though the process node is the same, which reflects the different design priorities and the integrated graphics approach.

Cache organization differs substantially. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part has a larger L1 at 96 KB per core and a larger L2 at 512 KB per core, but only 4 MB of shared L3. This means the AMD chip dedicates more fast cache close to each core while the Intel chip offers double the last-level cache for the whole processor. In practice, the larger L3 on the Intel side may help with workloads that reuse a larger working set, while the larger per-core L1 and L2 on the AMD side could benefit single-threaded latency-sensitive code.

The integrated graphics solutions are also different. The Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 carries Iris Pro Graphics P580, while the AMD Ryzen 5 2600H includes Radeon Vega 8 graphics. On the memory side, the Intel chip supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, while the AMD chip supports only DDR4. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, which the AMD part does not, a meaningful distinction for server and workstation use cases. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the Intel chip provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the AMD chip provides Gen 3 with only 8 lanes from the CPU. The AMD chip routes fewer direct CPU lanes, which can affect configurations with multiple high-bandwidth devices.

Market positioning also separates the two. The Intel part is classified as a Server/Workstation product and is marked as end-of-life, having been released in May 2016. The AMD part is a Mobile product, remains active in production, and was released in September 2018. The sockets are not interchangeable: the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1440, while the AMD chip uses AMD Socket FP5. Both are soldered or surface-mounted designs rather than socketed desktop parts.

Specification Differences

The base clock differs, with the AMD Ryzen 5 2600H starting at 3.20 GHz against 3.00 GHz for the Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5. The boost clock, however, favors the Intel part at 3.70 GHz versus 3.60 GHz for the AMD chip. Both have 4 cores and 8 threads, so the thread count is identical. The TDP is also the same at 45 watts for both processors.

The cache hierarchy shows clear differences: the Intel part has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, while the AMD part has 96 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core. The shared L3 goes the other way, with 8 MB on the Intel chip versus 4 MB on the AMD chip. Memory bandwidth is higher on the AMD side at 51.2 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s for the Intel side, despite both using dual-channel memory buses. ECC memory support is present on the Intel part but absent on the AMD part. The Intel chip launches with a recorded MSRP of $445, while the AMD chip has no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

The PCIe configuration differs in lane count: Intel offers 16 CPU lanes on Gen 3, while AMD offers 8 CPU lanes on Gen 3. The integrated graphics units are different models, as noted. The Intel part is end-of-life and was released in May 2016; the AMD part is active and was released in September 2018. The transistor count and die size also differ significantly, with AMD at 4,950 million transistors on 210 mm² and Intel at 2,300 million on 171 mm². Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 wins every recorded benchmark in this comparison, so the straightforward answer is that it wins across all tested Cinebench workloads. The margins are small, but they are consistent. For multi-threaded rendering, the Intel part leads by 1.2% in R15, 1.1% in R20, and 1.1% in R23. For single-threaded rendering, it leads by 1% in R15, 1% in R20, and 1.1% in R23. If the workload is any of these Cinebench tests, the Intel chip is the one with the higher recorded score.

However, the use-case split is not simply about raw scores. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600H brings a higher memory bandwidth figure (51.2 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s) and larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, which could matter in memory-latency-sensitive or bandwidth-heavy tasks that are not represented in the Cinebench suite. The Intel part counters with double the L3 cache, ECC memory support, more PCIe lanes, and a server/workstation market classification. For a database or file server workload that benefits from ECC and more last-level cache, the Intel chip has the architectural edge. For a mobile or embedded scenario where memory bandwidth is a priority and the integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics are sufficient, the AMD chip may be the more appropriate choice despite losing the Cinebench comparisons.

The production status also matters. The Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 is end-of-life, so it is not a candidate for new designs that need long-term availability. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600H remains active, which makes it the only one of the two that can be sourced for ongoing production. The Intel part also has a recorded launch MSRP of $445, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP, so any direct cost comparison is not possible from the database.

In summary, the Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 is the winner in every measured benchmark, but only by about 1% in each case. Its advantages in ECC support, PCIe lane count, and L3 capacity give it a stronger profile for workstation and server roles. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600H, with higher memory bandwidth, larger per-core caches, active production status, and a newer release date, is positioned for mobile systems where those attributes and the Radeon Vega 8 graphics carry more weight than a 1% Cinebench deficit.