AMD Ryzen 7 1700 vs AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 and the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B are both 14nm Zen parts, but they target very different workloads. The 1700 is an eight-core desktop processor, while the V1807B is a four-core embedded chip with integrated graphics. Despite their different roles, their average benchmark scores are nearly identical, making their performance relationship surprisingly close.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains only two shared benchmark results, and the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 wins both outright. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 1700 scores 1414 against the V1807B's 701. That is a 101.7% advantage, meaning the desktop part delivers more than double the multi-threaded rendering performance. The gap is even more pronounced when expressed as a raw difference: 713 points separate the two processors in this test.

Single-core performance also favors the 1700, though by a smaller margin. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the 1700 scores 147 while the V1807B manages 98. This represents a 50% delta, or a 49-point lead for the desktop chip. The V1807B's higher boost clock of 3.80 GHz compared to the 1700's 3.70 GHz does not translate into a single-core win, suggesting that other architectural factors, such as cache configuration, play a larger role in this specific workload.

The overall win count is 2-0 in favor of the Ryzen 7 1700. However, the average benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story. The 1700 posts an average score of 2015, while the V1807B sits at 2012. That is a delta of just 0.2% in the 1700's favor. In the nearestRivals data, the V1807B sees the 1700 with a deltaPct of -0.1%, confirming that these two chips are effectively tied on aggregate performance despite the lopsided head-to-head results.

This discrepancy is explained by the benchmark sets. The 1700 has four recorded benchmarks (Cinebench R15 multi and single core, GeekBench multi and single core), while the V1807B has six, including newer Cinebench R20 and R23 tests. The V1807B's additional scores in R20 and R23, where it posts 2921 and 6957 respectively, pull its average up toward parity. The 1700 lacks those newer test results entirely, so its average is computed from older, less demanding workloads.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the Zen architecture, codenamed Zen, and fabricated on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process node. The transistor counts are close: the 1700 has 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die, while the V1807B has 4,950 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. The die sizes are nearly identical, but the V1807B packs slightly more transistors into a marginally smaller area.

The core configurations diverge significantly. The 1700 offers 8 cores and 16 threads, double the V1807B's 4 cores and 8 threads. This explains the massive multi-core advantage in Cinebench R15. The V1807B compensates with higher clocks: 3.35 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost, versus the 1700's 3.00 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost. Yet the 1700 still wins single-core, indicating that per-core performance is not solely clock-dependent.

Cache hierarchies are another major differentiator. The 1700 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a substantial 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The V1807B has 128 KB of L1 per core, the same 512 KB of L2 per core, but only 2 MB of shared L3. That is an 8x difference in L3 capacity, which likely contributes to the 1700's single-core win despite its lower clocks. The larger L3 allows more data to be cached locally, reducing memory latency in latency-sensitive workloads.

Memory support also differs. The 1700 supports ECC memory, while the V1807B does not. Both are dual-channel DDR4 designs, but the 1700 has a specified memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s; the V1807B's bandwidth is not listed. The 1700 also offers PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the V1807B has no PCIe specification provided. The V1807B compensates with integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics, which the 1700 lacks entirely.

The socket and platform targets are different as well. The 1700 uses AMD Socket AM4, a mainstream desktop socket with an unlocked multiplier. The V1807B uses AMD Socket FP5, a BGA package typical of embedded systems, and its multiplier is locked. The 1700 is part of the Ryzen 7 generation (Zen Summit Ridge), while the V1807B belongs to the Ryzen Embedded generation (Zen Great Horned Owl). The 1700 launched on 2017-03-01 with a launch MSRP of $329; the V1807B launched later on 2018-02-20 with no launch MSRP listed.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 7 1700 is the clear winner for multi-threaded desktop workloads. Its 8-core/16-thread configuration delivers 101.7% more performance than the V1807B in Cinebench R15 multi-core, making it the obvious choice for video rendering, compilation, and other heavily parallel tasks. The 16 MB of L3 cache also gives it an advantage in workloads that benefit from large, fast caches, such as database operations or complex simulations. The 1700's unlocked multiplier and AM4 socket further position it as a flexible desktop part that can be tuned for specific performance targets.

The V1807B wins in scenarios where the 1700 cannot compete at all. Its integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 GPU means it can drive displays without a discrete graphics card, a requirement for many embedded and compact systems. The 1700 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a separate GPU. The V1807B's lower 45W TDP, versus the 1700's 65W, makes it more suitable for thermally constrained environments. Its higher base clock of 3.35 GHz also gives it a slight edge in lightly threaded tasks that are not represented in the shared head-to-head benchmarks.

The average benchmark scores suggest that for general-purpose use, the two chips are nearly interchangeable. The 1700's 2015 average is only 0.2% higher than the V1807B's 2012. In the nearestRivals data, the V1807B is listed as a rival to the 1700 with a deltaPct of 0.2% (meaning the 1700 is 0.2% ahead), and the 1700 appears in the V1807B's rival list with a deltaPct of -0.1%. This mutual proximity indicates that in aggregate, neither chip dominates the other across all possible workloads.

The V1807B also has newer benchmark results available, including Cinebench R20 and R23, which the 1700 lacks. In R23 multi-core, the V1807B scores 6957, and in R20 multi-core it scores 2921. These newer tests are more demanding and often scale differently with core counts, so the V1807B's performance in modern software may be better than its older R15 results suggest.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. The core counts are the most obvious: 8 cores and 16 threads for the 1700 versus 4 cores and 8 threads for the V1807B. Clock speeds also differ, with the V1807B having a higher base clock (3.35 GHz vs 3.00 GHz) and a higher boost clock (3.80 GHz vs 3.70 GHz). TDP is lower on the embedded part: 45W versus 65W.

The sockets are completely different: AM4 for the 1700, FP5 for the V1807B. The cache configurations diverge in L1 and L3 sizes, with the 1700 having 96 KB L1 per core and 16 MB shared L3, while the V1807B has 128 KB L1 per core and only 2 MB shared L3. L2 is identical at 512 KB per core.

Memory features differ in ECC support (true for the 1700, false for the V1807B) and specified bandwidth (42.7 GB/s for the 1700, none listed for the V1807B). PCIe information is only provided for the 1700 (Gen 3, 16 lanes). The V1807B has integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics; the 1700 has none. The 1700 has an unlocked multiplier; the V1807B does not. The 1700 has a part number (YD1700BBAEBOX) and a launch MSRP of $329; the V1807B has neither listed.

Release dates differ by nearly a year: 2017-03-01 for the 1700 versus 2018-02-20 for the V1807B. Transistor counts are close (4,800 million vs 4,950 million) and die sizes are nearly identical (213 mm² vs 210 mm²), but the V1807B has slightly more transistors in a slightly smaller die. Both are active production parts.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 is significantly faster. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 1414 versus the V1807B's 701, a 101.7% advantage. This is due to its 8 cores and 16 threads, double the V1807B's 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Do the two processors have similar overall performance?

A: Yes, their average benchmark scores are nearly identical. The 1700 has an average score of 2015, while the V1807B scores 2012, a difference of only 0.2%. The V1807B's nearestRivals list shows the 1700 with a deltaPct of -0.1%, confirming aggregate parity.

Q: Why does the V1807B have a higher boost clock but lose in single-core?

A: The V1807B boosts to 3.80 GHz versus the 1700's 3.70 GHz, yet the 1700 wins Cinebench R15 single-core 147 to 98, a 50% lead. The 1700's larger 16 MB shared L3 cache, compared to the V1807B's 2 MB, likely offsets the clock disadvantage in this test.

Q: Can the Ryzen 7 1700 run without a discrete graphics card?

A: No. The 1700 has no integrated graphics. The V1807B includes Radeon RX Vega 11 integrated graphics, allowing it to drive displays without a separate GPU.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The 1700 has an unlocked multiplier, while the V1807B's multiplier is locked. This makes the 1700 more suitable for tuning, while the V1807B is a fixed-function embedded part.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two chips?

A: The 1700 has a 65W TDP, while the V1807B draws only 45W. This makes the V1807B more attractive for thermally constrained embedded systems, despite its lower core count.