AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 vs Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 wins every single head-to-head test against the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4. Across six Cinebench runs, the AMD chip takes a consistent 1.2–1.3% lead in both single-core and multi-core workloads. That margin is small — roughly 14 to 135 points depending on the test — but it is uniform. The Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 is the faster processor in every measured scenario.

That said, the choice is not simply about raw speed. The Xeon E5-1660 v4 is a quad-channel memory platform with 76.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 is dual-channel with no listed bandwidth figure. The Xeon also offers 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, whereas the Ryzen's PCIe configuration is not specified. If your workload is memory-bandwidth-bound or needs many PCIe lanes, the Xeon has structural advantages that no Cinebench score captures.

For pure compute, the Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 is the pick. It is also the only one still in active production; the Xeon E5-1660 v4 is end-of-life. The Ryzen is a 65 W part versus the Xeon's 140 W, and it is multiplier-unlocked. If you are building new, the data favors the Ryzen. If you are upgrading an existing Socket 2011-3 platform, the Xeon's quad-channel memory and 40 PCIe lanes remain relevant, but you are buying into a discontinued ecosystem.

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 uses AMD's Zen architecture on a 12 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The Xeon E5-1660 v4 uses Intel's Broadwell architecture on a 14 nm process from Intel. These are different generations and different design philosophies.

The Ryzen packs 6 cores and 12 threads across 4,800 million transistors on a 192 mm² die. The Xeon has 8 cores and 16 threads with 3,400 million transistors on a larger 246 mm² die. So the Xeon has more cores and threads but fewer transistors on a bigger chip; the Ryzen is denser per mm².

Cache layouts differ meaningfully. The Ryzen has 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, with a larger 20 MB of shared L3. The Xeon's L3 advantage is 4 MB, but per-core, the Ryzen has double the L1 and L2.

Both support DDR4 and ECC memory. The Ryzen is dual-channel; the Xeon is quad-channel with a specified 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth. The Xeon explicitly lists PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes from the CPU; the Ryzen's PCIe support is not stated in the data.

The Ryzen is from the 2000 series (Zen+ Pinnacle Ridge), released in September 2018. The Xeon is a Broadwell-EP part from June 2016. The Ryzen is unlocked, the Xeon is not. The Ryzen is active in production; the Xeon is end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Every benchmark in the head-to-head set goes to the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600. The margins are tight but consistent.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen scores 1151 against the Xeon's 1137 — a 1.2% lead. Single-core R15 shows 162 versus 160, a 1.3% edge. The pattern repeats in R20: multi-core 4796 versus 4739 (1.2%), single-core 677 versus 669 (1.2%).

Cinebench R23 tells the same story. Multi-core: 11420 versus 11285, a 1.2% win for AMD. Single-core: 1612 versus 1593, again 1.2%. The largest absolute gap is in R23 multi-core, where the Ryzen leads by 135 points. The smallest is R15 single-core, a 2-point difference.

These are small deltas. A 1.2% multi-core advantage across all three R15/R20/R23 versions suggests the Ryzen's 6 cores with 12 threads are slightly more efficient per thread than the Xeon's 8 cores with 16 threads. The Xeon has two more physical cores, but the Ryzen's newer Zen architecture and higher clocks (3.40 GHz base, 3.90 GHz boost versus 3.20/3.80 GHz) compensate.

The single-core wins are also consistent: 1.2–1.3% across all three Cinebench versions. That points to a per-clock advantage for the Ryzen, not just a clock-speed edge. The Ryzen boosts 100 MHz higher, but the architecture is clearly more efficient per cycle.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every headline specification:

• Cores: 6 (AMD) vs 8 (Intel)
• Threads: 12 (AMD) vs 16 (Intel)
• Base clock: 3.40 GHz (AMD) vs 3.20 GHz (Intel)
• Boost clock: 3.90 GHz (AMD) vs 3.80 GHz (Intel)
• TDP: 65 W (AMD) vs 140 W (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket AM4 vs Intel Socket 2011-3
• Process node: 12 nm (AMD) vs 14 nm (Intel)
• Transistors: 4,800 million (AMD) vs 3,400 million (Intel)
• Die size: 192 mm² (AMD) vs 246 mm² (Intel)
• L1 cache per core: 96 KB (AMD) vs 64 KB (Intel)
• L2 cache per core: 512 KB (AMD) vs 256 KB (Intel)
• L3 cache shared: 16 MB (AMD) vs 20 MB (Intel)
• Memory bus: Dual-channel (AMD) vs Quad-channel (Intel)
• Memory bandwidth: Not listed (AMD) vs 76.8 GB/s (Intel)
• PCIe: Not listed (AMD) vs Gen 3, 40 lanes CPU-only (Intel)
• Release date: 2018-09-18 (AMD) vs 2016-06-19 (Intel)
• Production status: Active (AMD) vs End-of-life (Intel)
• Multiplier unlocked: Yes (AMD) vs No (Intel)
• Launch MSRP: Not listed (AMD) vs $1113 (Intel)

The Xeon's launch MSRP was $1113. The Ryzen has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 wins all three multi-core tests: Cinebench R15 (1151 vs 1137), R20 (4796 vs 4739), and R23 (11420 vs 11285). Each win is by 1.2%.

Q: Does the Xeon's extra 2 cores help it win anything?

A: No. Despite having 8 cores and 16 threads versus the Ryzen's 6 cores and 12 threads, the Xeon loses every multi-core benchmark. The Ryzen's higher clocks and newer architecture overcome the core deficit.

Q: What about single-core performance?

A: The Ryzen also wins all three single-core tests. R15: 162 vs 160 (1.3%). R20: 677 vs 669 (1.2%). R23: 1612 vs 1593 (1.2%).

Q: Where does the Xeon have a clear advantage?

A: The Xeon has a quad-channel memory bus with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, versus the Ryzen's dual-channel bus. The Xeon also provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU; the Ryzen's PCIe configuration is not listed.

Q: Is the Xeon still in production?

A: No. The Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 is end-of-life. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 is listed as active in production.

Q: Which CPU has better cache per core?

A: The Ryzen has double the L1 (96 KB vs 64 KB) and double the L2 (512 KB vs 256 KB) per core. The Xeon has a larger shared L3 at 20 MB versus the Ryzen's 16 MB.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 wins on: Every measured benchmark. It is faster in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core, with a consistent 1.2–1.3% margin. It also wins on efficiency: 65 W TDP versus the Xeon's 140 W. It is the only one still in active production. It has a smaller die (192 mm² vs 246 mm²) and more transistors (4,800 million vs 3,400 million). It is multiplier-unlocked. It has a higher base clock (3.40 GHz vs 3.20 GHz) and higher boost (3.90 GHz vs 3.80 GHz). It uses a 12 nm process versus the Xeon's 14 nm. Its per-core cache is double the Xeon's in L1 and L2.

Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 wins on: Platform-level features not reflected in Cinebench. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, which is 2 cores and 4 threads more than the Ryzen — a structural headroom that the benchmarks did not translate into a win. It has a quad-channel memory bus with a specified 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, versus the Ryzen's unspecified dual-channel bandwidth. It offers 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, a figure the Ryzen's data does not list. It has a larger shared L3 cache at 20 MB versus 16 MB. It was launched at a $1113 MSRP, which you may note once. It is socketed for Intel Socket 2011-3, a platform that supports quad-channel memory and high lane counts.

The practical split is simple. If your workload is dominated by Cinebench-style compute, pick the Ryzen — it wins every test. If you need quad-channel memory bandwidth or 40 PCIe lanes for storage or accelerators, the Xeon's platform advantages matter more than a 1.2% compute deficit. Given that the Ryzen is active and the Xeon is end-of-life, the Ryzen is the better bet for a new build unless the Xeon's platform features are non-negotiable.