AMD Ryzen 7 3700U vs AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 3700U has an average benchmark score of 968, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 scores 958. The 3700U sits at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, and the R1600 also sits at the 26th percentile, meaning both are positioned similarly in the overall performance distribution.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Ryzen 7 3700U has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Ryzen Embedded R1600 has 2 cores and 4 threads. This gives the 3700U a 2x advantage in both core count and thread count, which directly impacts multi-threaded workloads.

Q: What is the clock speed difference between the two?

A: The R1600 has a higher base clock of 2.60 GHz compared to the 3700U's 2.30 GHz, but the 3700U has a significantly higher boost clock of 4.00 GHz versus the R1600's 3.10 GHz. The 3700U can reach higher peak frequencies when needed.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Ryzen Embedded R1600 supports ECC memory, while the Ryzen 7 3700U does not. This makes the R1600 more suitable for reliability-focused embedded applications where memory error correction is critical.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Ryzen 7 3700U includes Radeon Vega 10 integrated graphics, while the Ryzen Embedded R1600 has no integrated graphics at all. Systems built around the R1600 will require a discrete GPU or a different solution for display output.

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

A: The Ryzen 7 3700U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Ryzen Embedded R1600 has a TDP of 25 watts. Despite having more cores, the 3700U is designed for lower power consumption, making it more suitable for thin-and-light laptops.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split based on use case. For general mobile computing, the Ryzen 7 3700U is the obvious choice. It delivers over double the multi-core performance of the R1600 in the shared Cinebench R15 test, includes integrated graphics, and operates at a lower TDP of 15 watts. This combination makes it better suited for laptops and portable devices where both performance and power efficiency matter.

The Ryzen Embedded R1600, on the other hand, targets a different segment. Its higher base clock of 2.60 GHz, ECC memory support, and 25-watt TDP suggest it is built for embedded systems where stability and reliability take precedence over raw performance. The lack of integrated graphics means it is intended for industrial PCs, edge computing devices, or systems that always pair with a dedicated GPU.

Benchmark results confirm the performance gap: the 3700U outscores the R1600 by 140% in the Cinebench R15 multi-core test (672 vs 280). The average benchmark scores are closer (968 vs 958), but this is because the R1600's benchmark suite includes Cinebench R20 and R23 tests, which are more modern and may scale differently. Still, for anyone choosing between these two for a mobile device, the 3700U is the stronger performer.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Cinebench R15 multi-core. Here, the Ryzen 7 3700U scores 672, while the Ryzen Embedded R1600 scores 280. This represents a 140% advantage for the 3700U, meaning it completes the render workload more than twice as fast. This result aligns with the core count difference: the 3700U has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the R1600 has only 2 cores and 4 threads.

For single-core performance, the data is less directly comparable because the two chips were tested with different Cinebench versions. The 3700U scored 139 in Cinebench R15 single-core, while the R1600 scored 165 in Cinebench R20 single-core and 393 in Cinebench R23 single-core. These are different workloads, so direct comparison is not possible, but the R1600's higher base clock of 2.60 GHz likely helps it in lightly threaded tasks despite its lower boost clock.

The 3700U also has Geekbench scores: 2377 multi-core and 682 single-core. The R1600 has no Geekbench results in the database. Overall, the head-to-head data shows a lopsided victory for the 3700U in the one test where both were measured identically.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specifications. The 3700U has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the R1600 has 2 cores and 4 threads. The 3700U has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, while the R1600 has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.10 GHz. The 3700U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the R1600 has a TDP of 25 watts.

Both processors use the AMD Socket FP5, but they belong to different series: the 3700U is from the 3000 series, while the R1600 is from the 1000 series. The 3700U was released on 2019-01-05, while the R1600 was released on 2020-02-24. The 3700U includes Radeon Vega 10 integrated graphics, while the R1600 has none. The R1600 supports ECC memory, while the 3700U does not. The R1600 has a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the 3700U has no listed memory bandwidth figure. The R1600's PCIe support is described as "Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only)", while the 3700U simply has "Gen 3" PCIe.

The die size also differs: the 3700U has a die size of 210 mm², while the R1600 has a die size of 148 mm². Transistor counts are 4,940 million for the 3700U and 3,500 million for the R1600.

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen 7 3700U is built on the Zen+ architecture with the codename Picasso, while the Ryzen Embedded R1600 uses the original Zen architecture with the codename Banded Kestrel. This generational difference is reflected in the process node: the 3700U uses a 12 nm process, while the R1600 uses a 14 nm process. Both are manufactured by GlobalFoundries.

The 3700U is labeled as "Ryzen 7 (Zen+ (Picasso))" in the database, while the R1600 is labeled as "Ryzen Embedded (Zen (Banded Kestrel))". The cache hierarchy is identical between the two: 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. This means the 3700U's additional cores give it more total L2 cache (2 MB versus 1 MB), but the shared L3 remains the same at 4 MB.

The R1600 has ECC memory support, which is a notable architectural feature for embedded applications. The 3700U lacks this. The 3700U compensates with integrated Radeon Vega 10 graphics, which is absent on the R1600. The 3700U's newer Zen+ architecture also provides better instructions per clock compared to the original Zen design, though the database does not list specific IPC figures.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 7 3700U wins decisively in multi-threaded workloads. Its 140% advantage in Cinebench R15 multi-core, combined with double the cores and threads, makes it the clear choice for tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, compilation, or any workload that can use more than two cores. Its integrated Radeon Vega 10 graphics also means it can handle light gaming or GPU-accelerated tasks without a discrete card, which is a significant practical advantage for mobile systems.

The Ryzen Embedded R1600 wins in scenarios where reliability and stability are paramount. Its ECC memory support is a critical feature for embedded systems that cannot tolerate memory corruption, such as industrial controllers, network appliances, or medical devices. Its higher base clock of 2.60 GHz may also give it an edge in lightly threaded real-time tasks where consistent performance matters more than peak throughput. The R1600's lower transistor count (3,500 million versus 4,940 million) and smaller die size (148 mm² versus 210 mm²) could translate to lower production costs in high-volume embedded deployments, though the database does not list pricing.

For power-constrained mobile devices, the 3700U wins because of its 15-watt TDP versus the R1600's 25-watt TDP. This lower power draw allows for thinner cooling solutions and longer battery life. However, for embedded systems that run on constant power and prioritize data integrity, the R1600's ECC support and higher base clock make it the more appropriate choice.

The average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story: the 3700U averages 968, while the R1600 averages 958, a difference of only 10 points. This suggests that in the broader benchmark database, the two chips are closer than the core count disparity might suggest, likely because the R1600's benchmark suite includes newer Cinebench versions where its higher base clock helps. Still, for anyone weighing these two CPUs, the decision comes down to whether you need integrated graphics and multi-threaded muscle (choose the 3700U) or ECC memory and embedded reliability (choose the R1600).