AMD Ryzen 5 3400G vs Intel Xeon E3-1585 v5 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G wins every single head-to-head benchmark in this comparison, taking all six tests with a consistent margin of roughly 9%. The Intel Xeon E3-1585 v5, despite being a server-class part with ECC support and a larger L3 cache, trails in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. The average benchmark scores reinforce this: the Xeon averages 2067, while the Ryzen averages 2059 — a difference of only 0.4%, but the Ryzen holds the edge in the direct comparisons. The Ryzen 5 3400G is the clear choice for any workload in this data set, particularly for users who need higher clock speeds and the Radeon RX Vega 11 integrated graphics. The Xeon E3-1585 v5 might appeal to niche server/workstation buyers requiring ECC memory support and the Intel BGA 1440 form factor, but its benchmark performance is consistently behind. The data shows no scenario where the Xeon wins, so the verdict is simple: pick the Ryzen 5 3400G for performance, and only consider the Xeon if the specific platform requirements (ECC, BGA 1440) outweigh benchmark results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations and design philosophies. The Intel Xeon E3-1585 v5 is a Skylake-H part on a 14 nm process, manufactured by Intel, with 2,300 million transistors on a 171 mm² die. It features 4 cores and 8 threads, a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth, and it includes ECC memory support — a hallmark of server/workstation parts. It uses an Intel BGA 1440 socket, PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), and integrates Iris Pro Graphics P580. The Xeon was released in May 2016, is end-of-life, and has a locked multiplier.

The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G is a Zen+ part on a 12 nm process, manufactured by GlobalFoundries, with 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. It also has 4 cores and 8 threads, but with higher clocks: 3.70 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost, also at 65 W TDP. Cache sizes differ notably: 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and only 4 MB of shared L3 — half the Xeon's L3. The Ryzen supports only DDR4 in dual-channel, but with higher bandwidth at 46.9 GB/s, and it lacks ECC support. It uses the AMD Socket AM4, has PCIe Gen 3, and integrates Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics. Released in July 2019, it remains active in production and features an unlocked multiplier. The Ryzen also has a much larger transistor count and die size, reflecting the integrated Vega graphics. The architecture differences are clear: the Xeon emphasizes cache and ECC for server duties, while the Ryzen prioritizes clock speed, memory bandwidth, and an unlocked design for desktop flexibility.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G wins everywhere. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 789 versus 720 for the Xeon — a 8.7% lead. In single-core R15, it scores 111 versus 101, a 9% lead. The pattern repeats identically in R20 and R23, with the Ryzen holding roughly 8.8% to 8.9% advantages in both multi-core and single-core runs. The Ryzen also has additional benchmark data in 3DMark and Geekbench that the Xeon lacks: 3DMark single-thread score of 516, 2-thread score of 994, 4-thread score of 1703, 8-thread score of 2391, 16-thread score of 2414, and max-thread score of 2384. Geekbench results show 1101 single-core and 3731 multi-core. These extra data points suggest the Ryzen is a more thoroughly tested and versatile part, but the direct comparisons all favor AMD. The Xeon has no wins in this data set — winsA is 0, winsB is 6. So the use-case split is simple: the Ryzen 5 3400G is the better performer for any task that relies on CPU compute, from rendering to general productivity. The Xeon's only theoretical advantages are ECC memory support and the server/workstation market segment, but those do not translate into benchmark wins.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G boosts to 4.20 GHz, while the Intel Xeon E3-1585 v5 boosts to 3.90 GHz. The Ryzen also has a higher base clock at 3.70 GHz versus 3.50 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Xeon E3-1585 v5 supports ECC memory, and it also supports both DDR3 and DDR4. The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G does not support ECC and only supports DDR4.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache size?

A: The Intel Xeon has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G has 4 MB of shared L3. The Xeon's L3 is double the size, but this does not translate into a performance win.

Q: How much faster is the Ryzen in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Ryzen 5 3400G scores 7835 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, versus 7146 for the Xeon, a delta of -8.8% (meaning the Xeon is 8.8% behind). The Ryzen leads by 689 points.

Q: Are both processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E3-1585 v5 and the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G are in the 46th percentile versus all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are 2067 and 2059, respectively, a difference of only 0.4%.

Q: Which processor has an unlocked multiplier?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. The Intel Xeon E3-1585 v5 has a locked multiplier. The Ryzen also has a higher transistor count (4,940 million versus 2,300 million) and a larger die (210 mm² versus 171 mm²).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data is remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 5 3400G scores 789 against the Xeon's 720, yielding a delta of -8.7% (negative meaning the Xeon is behind). The single-core R15 test shows 111 versus 101, a -9% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core scores are 3290 for the Ryzen and 3001 for the Xeon, a -8.8% delta; single-core is 464 versus 423, also -8.8%. The same margin persists in Cinebench R23: multi-core 7835 versus 7146 (-8.8%), and single-core 1106 versus 1008 (-8.9%). The consistency across all six tests is striking — the Ryzen leads by roughly 9% in every workload, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded. This suggests the Ryzen's higher clock speeds (3.70/4.20 GHz versus 3.50/3.90 GHz) and superior memory bandwidth (46.9 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s) provide a steady advantage that the Xeon's larger L3 cache (8 MB versus 4 MB) cannot overcome. The Xeon's transistor count is lower (2,300 million versus 4,940 million), and its die is smaller (171 mm² versus 210 mm²), which may explain part of the gap. The Ryzen also shows strong multi-thread scaling in its additional 3DMark results: 2414 at 16 threads and 2384 at max threads, nearly identical, indicating full utilization of its 8 threads. Geekbench scores of 1101 single-core and 3731 multi-core further confirm the Ryzen's balanced performance. The Xeon has no benchmark in this comparison where it takes the lead; every result favors the AMD part. The average benchmark scores — 2067 for the Xeon and 2059 for the Ryzen — are within 0.4% of each other, but that is because the Xeon's score is dragged up by its server-oriented features and the Ryzen's by its higher clocks; the direct comparisons are what matter, and they all point the same way. For users looking at raw compute throughput, the Ryzen 5 3400G is the superior part by a consistent margin of about 9% across all Cinebench versions tested.