AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 vs Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 and Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 represent two very different approaches to multi-threaded computing: a modern, efficient 6-core desktop part against an older, high-core-count workstation Xeon. Despite the Xeon’s additional cores and threads, the benchmark data shows a remarkably consistent, albeit narrow, victory for the AMD processor across every tested workload, with all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons going its way.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are defined by their uniformity. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 wins all six benchmark comparisons, but the margins are consistently slim, never exceeding a 1.3% delta. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the AMD scores 1151 against the Intel’s 1137, a 1.2% lead. The single-core R15 test tells a similar story: AMD’s 162 beats Intel’s 160 by 1.3%.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 posts a multicore score of 4796 versus the Xeon’s 4741, again a 1.2% difference. In single-core R20, the AMD scores 677 while the Intel scores 669, another 1.2% advantage. The most recent Cinebench R23 results mirror this exactly: the AMD’s multicore score of 11420 surpasses the Intel’s 11289 by 1.2%, and its single-core score of 1612 beats the Intel’s 1593 by the same 1.2% margin.

That every deltaPct value is either 1.2% or 1.3% suggests these two processors are extremely close in raw throughput, with the AMD part holding a slight edge in both single-threaded and multi-threaded execution. The Intel Xeon, despite having 8 cores and 16 threads compared to the AMD’s 6 cores and 12 threads, cannot translate its additional hardware resources into a win. The average benchmark scores reinforce this: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 averages 3303, while the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 averages 3265.

In terms of overall standing, both CPUs sit at the 53rd percentile among all CPUs, placing them in the same performance tier. The AMD part’s nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 3 5300G with an identical average score of 3303, while the Intel Xeon’s closest competitor is the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 at 3264. The data indicates that the architectural efficiency of the newer AMD Zen design effectively neutralizes the core-count advantage of the older Haswell-EP Xeon.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a clear, one-sided picture: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 wins every single test. There are no categories where the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 comes out ahead. This means the AMD processor is the better choice for all measured workloads, from lightly-threaded tasks that rely on single-core performance to heavily-parallel rendering workloads.

For single-threaded applications, the Ryzen 5 PRO 2600’s advantage is consistent, winning R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests by 1.3%, 1.2%, and 1.2% respectively. This suggests better per-core instructions per clock, likely stemming from its newer 12 nm process node compared to the Xeon’s 22 nm process. Users running legacy software or applications that do not scale well across cores would see a slight performance benefit from the AMD part.

For multi-threaded workloads, the AMD processor also wins, but the margin is nearly identical to its single-core lead. The Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 wins R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests by 1.2% in each case. This is a significant finding: the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3, with 8 cores and 16 threads versus the AMD’s 6 cores and 12 threads, loses even in parallel tasks. The 20 MB of shared L3 cache on the Intel cannot overcome the efficiency of the AMD’s design. The Xeon’s only potential advantage lies in its memory subsystem, with quad-channel DDR4 support and a memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s, but this does not translate into Cinebench performance wins.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 has a higher average benchmark score of 3303, compared to the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3’s 3265.

Q: What is the performance difference in the Cinebench R23 multicore test?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 scores 11420, while the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 scores 11289, giving the AMD a 1.2% lead.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 win any benchmark tests?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 winning all six benchmark comparisons, with the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 recording zero wins.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in terms of overall performance percentile?

A: Both the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 and the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 are ranked at the 53rd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: What is the difference in single-core Cinebench R20 performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 scores 677, and the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 scores 669, resulting in a 1.2% advantage for the AMD processor.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in their specifications, reflecting their distinct market positions and release eras. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 is a desktop part from the 2000 series, while the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 is a server/workstation processor. The AMD has 6 cores and 12 threads, whereas the Intel has 8 cores and 16 threads. The AMD’s base clock is 3.40 GHz and boost clock is 3.90 GHz, while the Intel’s are 3.20 GHz and 3.80 GHz respectively.

The thermal design power (TDP) differs significantly: the AMD is rated at 65 W, while the Intel is rated at 140 W. The AMD uses the AMD Socket AM4, and the Intel uses the Intel Socket 2011-3. The AMD’s process node is 12 nm from GlobalFoundries, while the Intel is on a 22 nm process from Intel. The AMD processor has a die size of 192 mm² with 4,800 million transistors, while the Intel has a larger die of 356 mm² but only 2,600 million transistors. Cache configurations also differ: the AMD has 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3, while the Intel has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 20 MB of shared L3. The AMD supports dual-channel memory, while the Intel supports quad-channel memory with a bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. The Intel also has a specific part number (QFSSSR20H), whereas the AMD does not. The AMD’s production status is Active, while the Intel’s is End-of-life. The AMD was released on 2018-09-18, while the Intel was released on 2014-09-07.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two CPUs is substantial, explaining the benchmark results despite the core-count difference. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600 is built on the Zen architecture, specifically the Zen+ (Pinnacle Ridge) generation, while the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 is based on the Haswell architecture, specifically Haswell-EP. The AMD uses a 12 nm process node fabricated by GlobalFoundries, whereas the Intel uses a larger 22 nm process from Intel’s own foundry. This process advantage allows the AMD to pack 4,800 million transistors into a smaller 192 mm² die, compared to the Intel’s 2,600 million transistors on a larger 356 mm² die.

Both processors support DDR4 memory and have ECC memory support, but the memory controller configurations differ. The AMD uses a dual-channel memory bus, while the Intel uses a quad-channel bus with a listed memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. The cache hierarchy also reflects different design philosophies: the AMD allocates 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, while the Intel uses 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. However, the Intel has a larger shared L3 cache at 20 MB versus the AMD’s 16 MB. The Intel Xeon also features PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD’s PCIe configuration is not specified in the data. Both CPUs have an unlocked multiplier, and neither has integrated graphics. The market segments are also distinct: the AMD is aimed at Desktop, while the Intel is aimed at Server/Workstation, which is consistent with the Intel’s higher TDP and quad-channel memory support.