AMD Ryzen 7 1700 vs Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear and consistent picture: the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 dominates the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 in every measured workload. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 7 1700 scores 1414 against the Xeon’s 707, a 50% deficit for the Intel part. This is not a marginal gap; it is a doubling of raw throughput in a heavily threaded render task. The Ryzen’s 8 cores and 16 threads simply overwhelm the Xeon’s 4 cores and 8 threads, and the benchmark reflects that structural advantage directly.

Single-core performance tells a similar story, though the margin is narrower. The Ryzen 7 1700 posts 147 in Cinebench R15 single-core, while the Xeon E3-1260L v5 manages 99. That is a 32.7% lead for AMD. While single-core workloads are less dependent on core counts, the Ryzen still outperforms the Xeon by a substantial margin, indicating that its Zen architecture delivers better per-thread efficiency in this specific test despite the Xeon’s higher boost clock of 3.90 GHz versus the Ryzen’s 3.70 GHz.

The head-to-head table shows AMD winning both available comparisons, with zero wins for Intel. This is a decisive sweep in the data. The Xeon’s average benchmark score of 2029 versus the Ryzen’s 2015 is a negligible 0.7% difference, but that aggregate metric masks the real-world workload distribution. In the tests where they are directly compared, the Ryzen is far ahead. The Xeon’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 at an identical 2029 average score, and the Intel Core i7-5775R at 2031, placing it in a tight cluster of similar-performing parts. The Ryzen’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B at 2012 and the Intel Core i5-8300H at 2005, show it sits in a comparable average range, but the head-to-head results reveal where the real differences lie.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different designs. The Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 uses the Skylake architecture, manufactured on Intel’s 14 nm process with 1,750 million transistors on a 122 mm² die. The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 uses the Zen architecture, also on a 14 nm node, but fabricated by GlobalFoundries with 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The transistor count is nearly three times higher for AMD, which directly enables its larger core configuration.

Core and thread counts are the most visible divergence. The Xeon offers 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Ryzen provides 8 cores and 16 threads — exactly double in both respects. This explains the multi-core benchmark gap. Cache hierarchies also differ significantly. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The Ryzen has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Ryzen’s L3 is twice as large, and its per-core L1 and L2 caches are also larger, which can improve data locality and reduce memory latency in certain workloads.

Memory support diverges as well. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4, with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Ryzen supports only DDR4, also dual-channel, but with a higher bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, which is notable for the Xeon’s server/workstation positioning and also present on the Ryzen despite its desktop segment. PCIe connectivity is identical — Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes — and neither processor includes integrated graphics.

Process node sizes match at 14 nm, but the foundries differ: Intel for the Xeon, GlobalFoundries for the Ryzen. The Xeon is part of the Skylake-DT generation, while the Ryzen belongs to the Zen (Summit Ridge) generation. The Xeon was released in October 2015, the Ryzen in March 2017, and the Ryzen remains in active production while the Xeon is end-of-life. The Xeon’s launch MSRP is $294; the Ryzen’s launch MSRP is $329.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core score in Cinebench R15?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 scores 1414 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, which is 50% higher than the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5’s score of 707. This aligns with the Ryzen’s doubling of cores and threads (8 cores/16 threads versus 4 cores/8 threads).

Q: Is the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 better at single-core tasks than the AMD Ryzen 7 1700?

A: No. The Ryzen 7 1700 achieves 147 in Cinebench R15 single-core, which is 32.7% higher than the Xeon’s 99. Despite the Xeon’s higher boost clock (3.90 GHz versus 3.70 GHz), the Ryzen still wins this comparison.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes. Both the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 and the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 include ECC memory support. The Xeon supports DDR3 and DDR4, while the Ryzen supports only DDR4.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 has an average benchmark score of 2029, while the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 has an average score of 2015. This difference is small (less than 1%), but the head-to-head tests show the Ryzen winning by large margins in multi-core and single-core workloads.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, which is twice the 8 MB shared L3 cache on the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5. The Ryzen also has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches: 96 KB and 512 KB per core respectively, versus 64 KB and 256 KB per core on the Xeon.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. The Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 is end-of-life, while the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 is listed as active production. The Xeon was released in October 2015, and the Ryzen in March 2017.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 is the superior performer in every direct benchmark comparison available. Its 50% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 32.7% lead in single-core are decisive, and neither is close enough to suggest any workload where the Xeon would be preferable based on these numbers. The Ryzen’s 8 cores and 16 threads, larger cache hierarchy, and higher memory bandwidth all contribute to this outcome.

The Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 does hold advantages in specific areas that are not reflected in the benchmark scores. Its 45 W TDP is significantly lower than the Ryzen’s 65 W TDP, which matters for power-constrained server or workstation environments. It also supports both DDR3 and DDR4, offering flexibility in memory choice. However, these are platform-level benefits, not performance advantages. The Xeon’s lower clock speeds (2.90 GHz base, 3.90 GHz boost) do not compensate for its fewer cores, and its smaller caches place it at a structural disadvantage.

For users choosing between these two, the Ryzen 7 1700 is the clear pick for compute-heavy tasks like rendering, compilation, or any parallel workload. Its active production status also means it remains available, whereas the Xeon is end-of-life. The Ryzen’s unlocked multiplier further allows overclocking, a feature the Xeon lacks. The only scenario where the Xeon might be considered is one where the 45 W TDP is a critical constraint, and even then, the performance gap is substantial enough that the trade-off would need careful justification.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 | AMD Ryzen 7 1700 |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Cores | 4 | 8 |

| Threads | 8 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.90 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | AMD Socket AM4 |

| Architecture | Skylake | Zen |

| Codename | Skylake-DT | Zen (Summit Ridge) |

| Transistors | 1,750 million | 4,800 million |

| Die Size | 122 mm² | 213 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2015-10-18 | 2017-03-01 |

| Launch MSRP | $294 | $329 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | false | true |

| Part Number | SR2LH | YD1700BBAEBOX |

The two processors share identical PCIe capabilities (Gen 3, 16 CPU lanes) and both lack integrated graphics. Both are built on a 14 nm process, use dual-channel memory, and support ECC. The remaining differences are listed above, with the Ryzen 7 1700 offering more cores, threads, cache, memory bandwidth, and a larger die, while the Xeon E3-1260L v5 offers a lower TDP, higher boost clock, and broader memory compatibility.