CPU Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE and Intel Xeon E-2336 are both six-core, twelve-thread processors, but they are engineered for different corners of the market: one is a low-power desktop APU with integrated graphics, the other a server/workstation CPU with ECC memory support. Benchmark data from the Cinebench suite shows a consistent, though narrow, advantage for the Intel part across every test, while the AMD chip counters with a dramatically lower thermal envelope and a feature set aimed at compact systems.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unambiguous in its direction: the Intel Xeon E-2336 wins all six head-to-head comparisons, but the margin is remarkably thin. In Cinebench R15, the Xeon scores 1388 versus 1361 for the Ryzen in multi-core, a 1.9% lead; in single-core, it is 195 versus 192, a 1.5% edge. This pattern repeats in R20, where the Xeon takes multi-core 5786 to 5672 (2% ahead) and single-core 816 to 800 (2% ahead). The most modern test, Cinebench R23, shows the Xeon at 13777 against 13505 in multi-core (2% ahead) and 1945 versus 1906 in single-core (2% ahead).

The consistency of the 2% delta across the R20 and R23 workloads suggests a stable architectural advantage rather than a test-specific anomaly. However, the absolute score differences are small, roughly 272 points in R23 multi-core, which places both chips in the same performance tier for heavily threaded workloads. The Ryzen’s best showing is in R15 multi-core, where the gap narrows to just 1.9%, indicating that older, shorter-duration workloads slightly favor the AMD part. Conversely, the Xeon’s single-core lead, while never exceeding 2%, is present in every generation of the Cinebench test, pointing to a superior per-thread execution rate that scales with the benchmark’s evolution.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the Xeon E-2336 sits at the 57th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 3985. Its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon D-2733NT, matches it exactly at 3984 (0% delta), and it edges out the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G by 0.2%. The Ryzen 5 4600GE, by contrast, lands at the 56th percentile with an average score of 3906, placing it just 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS and 0.8% ahead of the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718. This places the two chips in adjacent percentile bands, reinforcing that their real-world performance difference is measurable but far from transformative.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental split between these two parts is visible in their process technology and design goals. The AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE is built on TSMC’s 7 nm node, packing 9,800 million transistors into a 156 mm² die. It uses the Zen 2 architecture with the Renoir codename, which is a monolithic design that integrates Radeon Vega 7 graphics directly onto the chip. This integration allows the 4600GE to operate at a 35 W TDP, a figure that is half of the Intel part’s 65 W TDP. The AMD chip also has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, and uses the AMD Socket AM4 platform with PCIe Gen 3.

The Intel Xeon E-2336 takes a different path. It is fabricated on Intel’s 14 nm process, which results in a significantly larger 276 mm² die, the datasheet does not list a transistor count for this part. The architecture is Rocket Lake, specifically the Rocket Lake-E variant, which is a server/workstation derivative. It lacks integrated graphics entirely, which is typical for a Xeon SKU, and instead focuses on platform features: it supports ECC memory, uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, and fits into Intel Socket 1200. The base clock is lower at 2.90 GHz, but the boost clock is substantially higher at 4.80 GHz, compared to the Ryzen’s 3.30 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost. This higher boost ceiling is the likely driver behind the Xeon’s consistent single-core wins.

Cache configurations also differ. The Ryzen 5 4600GE employs a 64 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core, with a shared 8 MB L3. The Xeon E-2336 has a larger 80 KB L1 per core and the same 512 KB L2 per core, but its shared L3 is 12 MB, a 50% increase over the AMD part. This additional L3 cache could contribute to the Xeon’s slight edge in multi-threaded workloads, as it provides more room for data reuse across the six cores. Both chips support DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with identical 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, but the Xeon’s ECC support makes it viable for error-corrected memory configurations, which the AMD part lacks.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear, if modest, winner: the Intel Xeon E-2336 outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE in every tested workload. The margins are consistent, 2% in most cases, and the Xeon holds a higher average benchmark score (3985 versus 3906) and a higher percentile ranking (57th versus 56th). For applications that are purely CPU-bound and can leverage six cores, the Intel part is the better choice based on raw performance.

However, the data also defines the Ryzen 5 4600GE’s role precisely. Its 35 W TDP is a decisive advantage in power-constrained or thermally limited systems, and it includes integrated Radeon Vega 7 graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely. The AMD part also offers an unlocked multiplier and a smaller 7 nm process, making it suitable for compact builds where space and cooling are at a premium. The Ryzen’s average score of 3906 is only 2% lower than the Xeon’s, yet it achieves that with a fraction of the power draw, a trade-off that the benchmark numbers alone do not fully capture.

For a server or workstation environment where ECC memory is non-negotiable and PCIe Gen 4 connectivity is required, the Xeon E-2336 is the only option between these two. For a desktop or small-form-factor system with integrated graphics needs and a strict power budget, the Ryzen 5 4600GE is the data-backed choice, provided the 2% performance deficit is acceptable.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2336 has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE’s boost clock is 4.20 GHz.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE support ECC memory?

A: No, the Ryzen 5 4600GE does not support ECC memory, whereas the Intel Xeon E-2336 does.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2336 has an average benchmark score of 3985, and the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE has an average score of 3906, a difference of 79 points.

Q: Which chip includes integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE includes Radeon Vega 7 integrated graphics, while the Intel Xeon E-2336 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2336 scores 13777, and the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE scores 13505, giving the Intel part a 2% advantage.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No, the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE has an unlocked multiplier, but the Intel Xeon E-2336 is locked.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E-2336 wins every benchmark test in this comparison, making it the choice for raw compute throughput. Its wins are most pronounced in single-core workloads, where it maintains a 2% lead across R20 and R23, and in multi-core tests where its larger 12 MB L3 cache and higher boost clock contribute to a consistent edge. The Xeon is also the only option with ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 4 lanes, making it the data-driven selection for workstations, servers, or any application that requires error-corrected memory or high-bandwidth peripheral connectivity.

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE does not win any benchmark, but it wins in the metrics that matter for specific use cases. Its 35 W TDP is exactly 30 W lower than the Xeon’s, which is a critical advantage in silent PCs, mini-ITX builds, or any system with limited cooling capacity. The integrated Radeon Vega 7 graphics eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic display or multimedia workloads, a capability the Xeon cannot offer. Additionally, the Ryzen’s unlocked multiplier and 7 nm process make it a more flexible and efficient part for enthusiasts building compact systems, despite its slight performance deficit. The data shows that the Xeon is the faster processor, but the Ryzen is the more adaptable one for power-sensitive or graphics-inclusive configurations.