CPU Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 and Intel Xeon E-2134 land in the same performance tier, with average benchmark scores of 2320 and 2319 respectively, a delta of just 0.1% in favor of the AMD part. Both processors sit at the 48th percentile of all CPUs, meaning they deliver nearly identical overall throughput despite radically different configurations. The Ryzen 7 2700 is an 8-core, 16-thread desktop chip based on the Zen architecture on a 12nm process, while the Xeon E-2134 is a 4-core, 8-thread workstation/server processor built on Coffee Lake at 14nm. The benchmark data reveals a clear split: the AMD chip dominates multi-threaded workloads, while the Intel part, despite having fewer cores, posts competitive single-thread scores in newer test suites.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic gap appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Ryzen 7 2700 scores 1551 against the Xeon E-2134’s 808. That is a 92% advantage for AMD, a massive margin driven by the doubling of cores and threads. In single-core R15, the Ryzen 7 2700 again wins, scoring 161 versus 114, a 41.2% lead. These two tests represent the only direct head-to-head comparisons available in the data, and the AMD chip wins both outright.

The picture changes when looking at newer Cinebench versions, though the Xeon E-2134 has no R15 single-core rival data beyond the head-to-head table. The Intel part’s own benchmark suite shows strong scaling: in Cinebench R20, it scores 3367 multi-core and 475 single-core; in R23, it reaches 8018 multi-core and 1132 single-core. The Ryzen 7 2700 lacks R20 and R23 results in the fact pack, so direct comparisons on those tests are impossible. However, the average benchmark scores tell the broader story: the Ryzen 7 2700 averages 2320, while the Xeon E-2134 averages 2319, a negligible 0.1% difference.

In Geekbench, the Ryzen 7 2700 posts 6475 multi-core and 1094 single-core. The Xeon E-2134 has no Geekbench entries in the data, so the AMD chip’s multi-core Geekbench lead cannot be directly measured against the Intel part. Still, the head-to-head table shows the AMD processor winning both available tests, with the multi-core R15 victory being particularly decisive. The single-core R15 result also favors AMD by a wide margin, though that test is older and less representative of modern workloads than R20 or R23.

The nearest rival data places both chips in a tight cluster. The Intel Core i7-8809G scores 2307 (0.6% behind the Ryzen 7 2700), the Intel Core i5-10400H scores 2303 (0.7% behind), and the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 scores 2348 (1.2% ahead). The Xeon E-2134’s own rival list shows the same figures, with a -0.1% delta against the Ryzen 7 2700. This suggests that while the Ryzen 7 2700 wins the head-to-head benchmarks, the overall average performance is effectively tied, with neither chip having a meaningful aggregate advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 7 2700 wins in multi-threaded throughput without question. Its 8 cores and 16 threads deliver 92% more Cinebench R15 multi-core performance than the Xeon E-2134’s 4 cores and 8 threads. For workloads that scale across cores, such as rendering, video encoding, or compilation, the AMD chip offers nearly double the compute capacity. The Geekbench multi-core score of 6475 reinforces this strength, though there is no Xeon equivalent to compare directly.

The Xeon E-2134 wins in single-thread efficiency relative to its core count. Despite having half the cores, it achieves an average benchmark score within 0.1% of the Ryzen 7 2700. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1132 and R20 single-core score of 475 indicate strong per-core performance, though the Ryzen 7 2700’s R15 single-core score of 161 beats the Xeon’s 114 by 41.2%. That said, the Xeon E-2134’s newer Cinebench versions show it holding up well in lightly threaded tasks, and its 3.50 GHz base clock and 4.50 GHz boost clock are both higher than the Ryzen 7 2700’s 3.20 GHz and 4.10 GHz respectively.

The Xeon E-2134 also wins on platform features for specific use cases. It supports ECC memory, which the Ryzen 7 2700 does not, making it suitable for error-sensitive server or workstation environments. It includes integrated UHD Graphics P630, while the Ryzen 7 2700 has no integrated graphics. The Xeon’s market segment is Server/Workstation, whereas the Ryzen 7 2700 targets desktop use. The Intel chip’s lower core count but higher clocks suggest it may perform better in latency-sensitive, single-threaded applications, though the benchmark data does not include direct comparisons for such workloads beyond R15 single-core.

For gaming or general desktop use, the Ryzen 7 2700’s unlocked multiplier allows overclocking, a feature the Xeon E-2134 lacks. The AMD chip’s 16 MB of L3 cache versus the Xeon’s 8 MB also helps in cache-heavy workloads. However, the Xeon E-2134’s smaller die size (126 mm² versus 213 mm²) and lower transistor count (no figure provided) suggest a more efficient design per area, even though the Ryzen 7 2700 uses a more advanced 12nm process versus 14nm.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for multi-threaded workloads: the AMD Ryzen 7 2700 wins both head-to-head benchmarks, including a 92% margin in Cinebench R15 multi-core. Anyone running heavily parallel tasks should pick the Ryzen 7 2700, as its 8 cores and 16 threads provide nearly double the throughput of the Xeon E-2134 in the tested render workload. The AMD chip’s average benchmark score of 2320 versus 2319 for the Intel part is effectively a tie, but the specific multi-core win is decisive.

The Xeon E-2134 makes sense for users who need ECC memory support or integrated graphics, as those features are absent on the Ryzen 7 2700. Its 71W TDP is slightly higher than the Ryzen 7 2700’s 65W, but it offers higher clock speeds at 3.50 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. For single-threaded performance in newer test suites, the Xeon’s R23 single-core score of 1132 indicates strong per-core capability, though the older R15 test favors the Ryzen 7 2700. Since the Xeon E-2134 is marked as end-of-life, while the Ryzen 7 2700 remains active, long-term availability also favors the AMD part.

The overall verdict from the benchmark data: choose the Ryzen 7 2700 for raw multi-core performance and overclocking flexibility; choose the Xeon E-2134 for ECC memory, integrated graphics, and a server/workstation feature set. The 0.1% average score difference means neither chip is categorically faster overall, but the workload profile should dictate the pick.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 scores 2320, while the Intel Xeon E-2134 scores 2319, a difference of 0.1% in favor of AMD.

Q: How much faster is the Ryzen 7 2700 in Cinebench R15 multi-core?

A: The Ryzen 7 2700 scores 1551 versus the Xeon E-2134’s 808, a 92% advantage for AMD.

Q: Does the Xeon E-2134 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Xeon E-2134 supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 7 2700 does not.

Q: What are the core counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon E-2134 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2134 includes UHD Graphics P630, while the AMD Ryzen 7 2700 has no integrated graphics.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 has a 65W TDP, while the Intel Xeon E-2134 has a 71W TDP.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 uses the Zen architecture on a 12nm process node manufactured by GlobalFoundries, with 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is dual-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s, and ECC memory is not supported. The chip uses AMD Socket AM4 with PCIe Gen 3, 16 lanes from the CPU. It has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking and a launch MSRP of $299. The market segment is desktop, and the production status is active.

The Intel Xeon E-2134 is built on the Coffee Lake architecture using a 14nm process node by Intel, with a die size of 126 mm² and no transistor count provided. It has 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The cache includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s and includes ECC memory support. The socket is Intel Socket 1151, and it uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Integrated UHD Graphics P630 is included. The multiplier is locked, and the launch MSRP was $256. The market segment is server/workstation, and the production status is end-of-life.

Key architectural differences include the process node (12nm versus 14nm), core count (8 versus 4), L3 cache size (16 MB versus 8 MB), memory bandwidth (46.9 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s), and ECC support (absent versus present). The Ryzen 7 2700’s larger die and transistor count reflect its higher core count, while the Xeon E-2134’s smaller die and integrated graphics target a different use case. The AMD chip’s unlocked multiplier and active production status contrast with the Intel chip’s locked multiplier and end-of-life status. Both use dual-channel DDR4 and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, but the Ryzen 7 2700 has a 65W TDP versus the Xeon’s 71W.