AMD Ryzen 5 4600U vs Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600U and Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 represent two very different approaches to mobile computing, separated by roughly four and a half years of silicon evolution. The data shows a decisive performance gap, but the Xeon E3-1505M v5 retains specific workstation-oriented features that the Ryzen part lacks. This analysis walks through the benchmark results, architectural differences, and the practical implications of each processor’s profile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data in this comparison is unambiguous, with the AMD Ryzen 5 4600U winning both recorded tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 5 4600U scores 1089, while the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 scores 633. That is a 72% delta in favor of the AMD part. The multi-core result is a direct reflection of core count and thread efficiency: the Ryzen offers 6 cores and 12 threads against the Xeon’s 4 cores and 8 threads, and the newer Zen 2 architecture extracts substantially more work per clock cycle.

The single-core Cinebench R15 result is even more lopsided. The Ryzen 5 4600U posts a score of 175.5, whereas the Xeon E3-1505M v5 manages only 89. This translates to a 97.2% delta, meaning the AMD part is nearly twice as fast in this test. Single-core performance is critical for lightly-threaded workloads like legacy applications, spreadsheet macros, and general desktop responsiveness, so this margin is not academic. The Ryzen’s boost clock of 4.00 GHz, combined with the Zen 2 IPC advantage, overwhelms the Xeon’s 3.70 GHz boost on Skylake.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the two processors land in a similar overall percentile bracket. The Ryzen 5 4600U has a percentileVsAllCpus of 42, and the Xeon E3-1505M v5 also sits at 42. However, their average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story: the Ryzen averages 1832, while the Xeon averages 1817. The 15-point difference is minor, but it masks the fact that the Ryzen’s wins come from a completely different benchmark set. The Xeon’s average includes Cinebench R20 and R23 results (2639 multi-core, 6284 multi-core respectively), which are not present in the Ryzen’s data, so the averages are not perfectly comparable. The head-to-head Cinebench R15 data remains the cleanest apples-to-apples metric, and it heavily favors AMD.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental gap between these two processors is generational. The AMD Ryzen 5 4600U is built on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Renoir, and manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 uses the Skylake architecture, codenamed Skylake-H, on Intel’s 14 nm process. The process node difference alone — 7 nm versus 14 nm — explains a large portion of the power and efficiency gap, though the transistor counts also underline the disparity. The Ryzen packs 9,800 million transistors on a 156 mm² die, while the Xeon contains 2,300 million transistors on a 122 mm² die. That is more than four times the transistor density for the AMD part, enabling far more complex execution logic per square millimeter.

Cache hierarchies differ as well. Both processors have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The L2 cache, however, is doubled on the Ryzen: 512 KB per core versus 256 KB per core on the Xeon. For workloads that repeatedly access a working set that fits in L2, the Ryzen will suffer fewer stalls. Memory bandwidth is also substantially higher on the AMD side, rated at 51.2 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s for the Intel part, even though both use dual-channel memory buses. The Ryzen supports DDR4 and LPDDR4, while the Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4, giving the older platform more flexibility at the cost of modern speed.

The integrated graphics are another differentiator. The Ryzen 5 4600U includes Radeon RX Vega 6, a relatively modern iGPU for its era, while the Xeon E3-1505M v5 ships with HD Graphics P530. The Ryzen’s iGPU is clearly positioned for general consumer and light creative work, whereas the Xeon’s is more of a basic display output solution. The Xeon does support ECC memory, a critical feature for data integrity in workstation or server environments, while the Ryzen does not. Additionally, the Xeon’s PCIe implementation is listed as Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ryzen simply lists Gen 3 without a lane count in the provided data.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4600U is significantly faster. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, it scores 1089 versus the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5’s 633, a 72% higher score. This is consistent with its 6-core/12-thread configuration versus the Xeon’s 4-core/8-thread setup.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 have any advantage in single-core performance?

A: No. The data shows the opposite. The Ryzen 5 4600U scores 175.5 in Cinebench R15 single-core, while the Xeon scores 89, giving the AMD part a 97.2% edge. The Xeon’s higher base clock of 2.80 GHz does not compensate for the Ryzen’s newer architecture and higher 4.00 GHz boost clock.

Q: Can the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 be used in a system requiring ECC memory?

A: Yes. The Xeon E3-1505M v5 supports ECC memory, making it suitable for workstation or server workloads where data corruption is unacceptable. The AMD Ryzen 5 4600U does not support ECC memory, per the benchmark data.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth rating?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4600U has a memory bandwidth rating of 51.2 GB/s, which is 50% higher than the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5’s 34.1 GB/s. This can benefit memory-bound applications like large database queries or video editing.

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

A: Yes, both have a percentileVsAllCpus of 42. Their average benchmark scores are also close, with the Ryzen 5 4600U at 1832 and the Xeon E3-1505M v5 at 1817. However, the head-to-head Cinebench R15 results show a large performance delta in favor of the AMD part.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4600U is listed as "Active" in production, while the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 is "End-of-life." The Xeon also has a launch MSRP of $434, which can be stated once as historical context, but no pricing comparison is made here.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the AMD Ryzen 5 4600U and Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5, based solely on the FACT PACK:

• Cores: 6 (AMD) vs 4 (Intel)
• Threads: 12 (AMD) vs 8 (Intel)
• Base Clock: 2.10 GHz (AMD) vs 2.80 GHz (Intel)
• Boost Clock: 4.00 GHz (AMD) vs 3.70 GHz (Intel)
• TDP: 15 W (AMD) vs 45 W (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket FP6 vs Intel BGA 1440
• Architecture: Zen 2 vs Skylake
• Process Node: 7 nm (TSMC) vs 14 nm (Intel)
• Foundry: TSMC vs Intel
• Transistors: 9,800 million vs 2,300 million
• Die Size: 156 mm² vs 122 mm²
• L2 Cache: 512 KB per core vs 256 KB per core
• Memory Support: DDR4, LPDDR4 vs DDR3, DDR4
• Memory Bandwidth: 51.2 GB/s vs 34.1 GB/s
• ECC Memory: No vs Yes
• Integrated Graphics: Radeon RX Vega 6 vs HD Graphics P530
• Market Segment: Mobile vs Server/Workstation
• Production Status: Active vs End-of-life
• Release Date: 2020-01-05 vs 2015-10-26
• Part Number: 100-000000105 vs SR2FM

The shared specifications are also noteworthy: both have 64 KB L1 cache per core, 8 MB shared L3 cache, dual-channel memory bus, PCIe Gen 3, and are multiplier-unlocked (false for both).

The Verdict

The benchmark data is clear: the AMD Ryzen 5 4600U is the faster processor in raw compute. It wins both head-to-head tests by margins of 72% and 97.2%, and it does so at a TDP of 15 W versus the Xeon’s 45 W. The Ryzen is also a modern, active product built on a 7 nm process, whereas the Xeon is an end-of-life 14 nm part from 2015. For anyone choosing between these two based on performance per watt or absolute speed, the Ryzen 5 4600U is the only rational selection.

However, the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 is not without a niche. Its support for ECC memory is a hard requirement in certain data-integrity-sensitive environments, and its server/workstation market segment suggests it was designed for reliability over speed. The Xeon also has a higher base clock (2.80 GHz vs 2.10 GHz), which could benefit sustained loads that do not boost, though this is a minor point given the Ryzen’s single-core dominance. The Xeon’s launch MSRP was $434, but that is historical data and does not factor into current performance comparisons.

For most mobile users, the Ryzen 5 4600U is the superior choice. Its 6-core/12-thread configuration, higher memory bandwidth, and dramatically better Cinebench scores make it suitable for a wide range of tasks, from productivity to content creation. The Xeon E3-1505M v5 should only be considered if ECC memory support is non-negotiable, as no other specification in the data compensates for its performance deficit.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Ryzen 5 4600U wins on:

• Multi-core compute: 1089 vs 633 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, a 72% lead.
• Single-core compute: 175.5 vs 89 in Cinebench R15 single-core, a 97.2% lead.
• Power efficiency: 15 W TDP versus 45 W, meaning significantly less heat and longer battery life in a mobile chassis.
• Memory bandwidth: 51.2 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s, benefiting memory-intensive applications.
• L2 cache capacity: 512 KB per core versus 256 KB per core, reducing cache misses.
• Modern platform: Active production status, 7 nm process, and 2020 release date versus the Xeon’s end-of-life status from 2015.

Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 wins on:

• ECC memory support: A critical feature for workstation reliability that the Ryzen lacks.
• Base clock frequency: 2.80 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, which may provide consistent performance in non-boosting scenarios.
• Memory type flexibility: Supports both DDR3 and DDR4, while the Ryzen only supports DDR4 and LPDDR4.
• Market segment fit: Positioned for server/workstation use, which may align with legacy IT procurement requirements.

The data does not show any benchmark test where the Xeon outperforms the Ryzen. The Xeon’s wins are purely feature-based, not performance-based. For users who prioritize compute speed, the choice is obvious. For users who need ECC memory in a mobile workstation, the Xeon remains the only option between these two parts.