AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE vs Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data presents an unusually consistent picture. Across all six Cinebench tests, the Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 finishes ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE. The margins are narrow but uniform, with the Intel part winning every single comparison by either 2.1% or 2.5%. There are no reversals, no close calls, and no scenarios where the AMD chip takes the lead. The largest single advantage appears in the Cinebench R15 multicore test, where the Xeon scores 1395 against the Ryzen's 1361, a 2.5% gap. The R20 multicore run shows the same 2.5% delta, with 5814 versus 5672. The R23 multicore test repeats the pattern: 13843 for the Intel processor, 13505 for the AMD processor, again a 2.5% edge.

Single-core results tell a similar story, though the margins are slightly smaller in one instance. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Xeon posts 196 versus 192, a 2.1% advantage. The R20 single-core test shows 820 against 800, which works out to a 2.5% gap. The R23 single-core metric lands at 1954 for the Intel chip and 1906 for the AMD chip, once more a 2.5% difference. The consistency of these deltas suggests that the performance relationship between these two processors is stable across different rendering workloads, rather than being sensitive to specific test conditions or thread scaling.

Looking at the broader database context, the Xeon E5-2698B v3 holds an average benchmark score of 4004, while the Ryzen 5 4600GE averages 3906. That places the Intel part at the 57th percentile among all CPUs, with the AMD part at the 56th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Xeon include the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655G at 4010, the Intel Core i5-12400T at 4019, the Intel Xeon E-2336 at 3985, and the Intel Xeon D-2733NT at 3984. The delta percentages against these neighbors are all within a single point, ranging from negative 0.4% to positive 0.5%. For the Ryzen 5 4600GE, the closest competitors are the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS at 3924, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 at 3875, the Intel Xeon E-2278GE at 3939, and the Intel Core i7-11700T at 3864. Again, the spread is narrow, with deltas from negative 0.8% to positive 1.1%. Neither processor dominates its immediate competitive set; both sit in a tightly packed cluster where a few points separate adjacent entries.

The head-to-head win count is decisive on paper: the Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 wins all six recorded comparisons, and the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE wins none. Yet the practical significance of that sweep is muted by the small percentage deltas. A 2.5% difference in rendering scores is real but not transformative. The data indicates that for Cinebench workloads specifically, the Xeon holds a modest but repeatable advantage across both single-threaded and multi-threaded tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design eras and target different market segments. The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 is a server and workstation part built on the Haswell-EP architecture, manufactured on Intel's 22 nm process. It has 16 cores and 32 threads, with a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The thermal design power is 135 watts. The chip uses the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform and supports DDR4 memory over a quad-channel bus, delivering a theoretical memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory, which is typical for its intended deployment in servers and workstations. The PCIe interface is Gen 3 with 40 lanes available from the CPU. The die size is 356 mm², and the transistor count is listed at 2,600 million. The production status is end-of-life, meaning this is a mature platform that has been superseded in the market.

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE, by contrast, is a desktop processor from the 4000 series, built on the Zen 2 architecture with the Renoir codename. It uses a 7 nm process from TSMC, which is substantially more advanced than Intel's 22 nm node. The chip has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. The thermal design power is just 35 watts, a fraction of the Xeon's 135-watt envelope. It fits into the AMD Socket AM4 platform and also supports DDR4 memory, but over a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported. The PCIe interface is Gen 3, though the lane count is not specified in the database. The integrated graphics are Radeon Vega 7, which the Xeon lacks entirely. The die size is 156 mm², and the transistor count is 9,800 million, reflecting the denser 7 nm process even though the physical die is smaller than the Xeon's. The production status is active, and the release date is recorded as July 20, 2020.

Cache configurations also differ notably. The Xeon offers 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 40 MB L3 cache. The Ryzen provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 8 MB L3 cache. The Xeon's L3 pool is five times larger, which can benefit workloads with large working sets that fit into the last-level cache. The Ryzen's larger per-core L2 cache may help with certain access patterns, but the overall cache hierarchy is much smaller.

The market segments reflect the intended usage: the Xeon is aimed at server and workstation environments, while the Ryzen is a desktop part. The Xeon's multiplier is locked, whereas the Ryzen's multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking if the platform and cooling permit. The part numbers differ as well, with the Xeon identified as SR21T and the Ryzen as 100-000000150.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow verdict. For users who prioritize raw Cinebench rendering scores, the Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 is the better choice. It wins every recorded benchmark comparison, and the margins, while small, are consistent across all three Cinebench versions and both single-core and multi-core tests. The Xeon also offers substantially more threads, 32 versus 12, and a much larger L3 cache, 40 MB versus 8 MB, which could matter in heavily threaded server or workstation applications that extend beyond the specific tests in the database.

However, the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE presents a compelling alternative for different reasons. Its 35-watt thermal design power is dramatically lower than the Xeon's 135 watts, which suggests significantly lower heat output and potentially lower operating costs in environments where power consumption matters. The Ryzen also has integrated graphics, making it a more complete package for a desktop system that does not require a discrete GPU. Its smaller die size and more advanced 7 nm manufacturing process point to a more modern design. The Ryzen's unlocked multiplier offers flexibility for users who want to push performance beyond stock settings, assuming the platform supports it.

The benchmark deltas are small enough that real-world differences in other applications could easily flip the comparison. The database only records Cinebench results, and the Xeon's 2.5% edge in those tests does not guarantee superiority in every workload. The Ryzen's higher boost clock, 4.20 GHz versus 3.40 GHz, and its newer architecture could give it advantages in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks. Conversely, the Xeon's quad-channel memory bus and higher memory bandwidth could benefit memory-bound server workloads.

The production status is also relevant. The Xeon is end-of-life, meaning it is no longer an active product line, while the Ryzen is active and still supported. For new system builds, the Ryzen's active status and modern platform may offer a longer support horizon. For existing Xeon platforms, the E5-2698B v3 remains a capable drop-in upgrade.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field recorded in the database. The Xeon has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Ryzen has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2000 MHz versus 3.30 GHz, and boost clocks are 3.40 GHz versus 4.20 GHz. Thermal design power is 135 watts versus 35 watts. Sockets are Intel Socket 2011-3 versus AMD Socket AM4. Architectures are Haswell versus Zen 2, with codenames Haswell-EP and Renoir respectively. Process nodes are 22 nm versus 7 nm, and foundries are Intel versus TSMC. Transistor counts are 2,600 million versus 9,800 million, and die sizes are 356 mm² versus 156 mm².

Cache layouts differ in L2 and L3 sizes: the Xeon has 256 KB of L2 per core and 40 MB of shared L3, while the Ryzen has 512 KB of L2 per core and 8 MB of shared L3. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core. Memory support is DDR4 for both, but the Xeon uses a quad-channel bus with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ryzen uses dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not the Ryzen. PCIe is Gen 3 for both, with the Xeon specifying 40 lanes from the CPU and the Ryzen providing no lane count. Integrated graphics are absent on the Xeon and present as Radeon Vega 7 on the Ryzen. Market segments are server and workstation versus desktop. Production status is end-of-life versus active. The multiplier is locked on the Xeon and unlocked on the Ryzen.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multicore performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 scores 13843, while the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE scores 13505. The Xeon leads by 2.5%.

Q: How does the single-core performance compare in Cinebench R20?

A: The Xeon E5-2698B v3 scores 820, and the Ryzen 5 4600GE scores 800. The Xeon is ahead by 2.5%.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Xeon E5-2698B v3 has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Ryzen 5 4600GE has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE includes Radeon Vega 7 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE does not.

Q: How do the thermal design power ratings differ?

A: The Xeon E5-2698B v3 has a TDP of 135 watts. The Ryzen 5 4600GE has a TDP of 35 watts.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 wins in every recorded Cinebench benchmark, both single-core and multicore. Its advantages are most pronounced in multicore tests, where the delta reaches 2.5%. The Xeon also offers 32 threads, a 40 MB shared L3 cache, quad-channel memory support with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth, and ECC memory, all of which point toward strengths in server, workstation, and heavily threaded compute environments. The end-of-life status does not diminish its capability in these roles, and the large L3 cache may particularly benefit workloads with substantial data reuse.

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE wins in areas not directly measured by the Cinebench scores. Its 35-watt TDP makes it far more power-efficient on paper, which could translate to lower cooling requirements and reduced energy consumption in desktop or compact builds. The integrated Radeon Vega 7 graphics remove the need for a separate GPU in basic systems. The unlocked multiplier offers overclocking potential, which the locked Xeon cannot match. The smaller die size and 7 nm process suggest a more modern manufacturing approach. The active production status means ongoing availability and support. For desktop users who do not need the Xeon's thread count, ECC support, or quad-channel memory bandwidth, the Ryzen's combination of low power, integrated graphics, and modern platform could be the more practical selection.

The benchmark data itself gives the Xeon a 6 to 0 win count, but the narrow margins mean the Ryzen remains competitive in Cinebench despite losing every head-to-head comparison. The choice ultimately rests on whether the user values the Xeon's server-oriented features and slight rendering edge, or the Ryzen's efficiency, graphics, and overclocking flexibility. The database records no scenario where the Ryzen outperforms the Xeon, but it also does not measure power consumption, graphics performance, or overclocked results, all of which could favor the AMD part in a broader evaluation.