AMD Ryzen 7 3750H vs Intel Xeon D-1528 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 3750H and Intel Xeon D-1528 represent opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet both fit within the same 35-watt thermal envelope. The data reveals a split personality: the AMD part dominates older single-threaded workloads, while the Intel server chip flexes its core advantage in modern multi-threaded rendering. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical—1690 for the Ryzen versus 1677 for the Xeon—placing both at the 40th percentile of all CPUs, but the path to those numbers could not be more different.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head comparison is the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where the Ryzen 7 3750H scores 144 against the Xeon D-1528’s 82. That is a 75.6% advantage for the AMD chip, a massive gap that reflects the Ryzen’s 4.00 GHz boost clock against the Xeon’s 2.50 GHz ceiling. This is not a marginal win; it is a generational chasm in raw per-thread throughput. The Ryzen’s lead persists in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it posts 971 versus 818, a more modest but still decisive 18.7% edge.

Multi-core results tell a different story, and it is a tale of two Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 7 3750H wins with 734 points against the Xeon’s 584, a 25.7% margin. This is surprising given that the Xeon has 6 cores and 12 threads versus the Ryzen’s 4 cores and 8 threads. The older R15 benchmark appears to favor the Ryzen’s higher clocks and newer Zen+ architecture. However, the script flips entirely in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Here, the Xeon D-1528 scores 5799, crushing the Ryzen’s 3897 by 32.8%. The Xeon’s two extra cores and four extra threads become decisive in this more modern, heavily threaded workload. The Ryzen’s 4 MB of shared L3 cache cannot compensate for the Xeon’s larger aggregate cache footprint—1.5 MB per core across six cores totals 9 MB.

Interpreting these results requires understanding the test generations. The Ryzen wins three of the four head-to-head tests, but the single loss is the most telling for long-term performance. Cinebench R23 is a more demanding and current benchmark, and its multi-core result suggests the Xeon D-1528 has superior sustained throughput under heavy parallel loads. The Ryzen’s wins are concentrated in single-threaded and older multi-threaded tests, where its clock speed advantage—2.30 GHz base versus 1.90 GHz base—carries the day. The Xeon’s 12 threads allow it to scale better in modern rendering engines, while the Ryzen’s 8 threads hit a wall.

The Verdict

The data points toward a clear division of labor. The Ryzen 7 3750H is the choice for applications that prioritize single-threaded responsiveness and older software workloads. Its 75.6% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core and 18.7% lead in R23 single-core make it the superior option for lightly threaded tasks, everyday productivity, and legacy application compatibility. The Ryzen also holds a 25.7% advantage in Cinebench R15 multi-core, indicating that it handles older multi-threaded software with greater efficiency, likely due to its higher base clock and newer architecture.

The Intel Xeon D-1528 is the pick for modern, heavily threaded workloads. Its 32.8% victory in Cinebench R23 multi-core is the single largest margin in the entire comparison, and it demonstrates that the Xeon’s 6-core/12-thread configuration scales far better in current rendering and server applications. The Xeon also offers ECC memory support, a feature the Ryzen lacks, which is critical for data integrity in server and workstation environments. The Xeon’s launch MSRP is $320, and its 14 nm process is two generations behind the Ryzen’s 12 nm node, yet it still wins the most demanding benchmark.

For a mobile user, the Ryzen’s integrated Radeon Vega 10 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU, making it a self-contained solution. For a server administrator, the Xeon’s 24 PCIe Gen 3 lanes and ECC support provide the foundation for a reliable, expandable system. Neither processor is a universal winner; the Ryzen excels at agility, the Xeon at endurance. The percentile rankings reflect this balance—both sit at the 40th percentile, confirming that neither is a high-performance flagship. The Ryzen’s nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-3770K, scores 1688 with a 0.1% delta, while the Xeon’s closest competitor, the Intel Core i5-4690K, scores 1682 with a -0.3% delta. These are peers, not leaders.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 3750H wins both single-core tests in the head-to-head data. It scores 144 versus 82 in Cinebench R15 (a 75.6% advantage) and 971 versus 818 in Cinebench R23 (an 18.7% advantage).

Q: Why does the Intel Xeon D-1528 win in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Xeon has 6 cores and 12 threads, compared to the Ryzen’s 4 cores and 8 threads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon scores 5799 against the Ryzen’s 3897, a 32.8% margin that reflects its superior thread count scaling in this modern benchmark.

Q: Do both processors have the same thermal design power?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 7 3750H and the Intel Xeon D-1528 have a TDP of 35 watts, despite their different market segments (mobile versus server/workstation).

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Xeon D-1528 supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 7 3750H does not list ECC support in its specifications.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: They are nearly identical. The Ryzen 7 3750H has an average benchmark score of 1690, while the Xeon D-1528 averages 1677. Both rank at the 40th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 3750H includes Radeon Vega 10 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon D-1528 has no integrated graphics listed, which is typical for server processors.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen 7 3750H offers 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Xeon D-1528 provides 6 cores and 12 threads. Clock speeds favor the AMD part significantly: the Ryzen runs at 2.30 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost, whereas the Xeon operates at 1.90 GHz base and 2.50 GHz boost. The Ryzen uses AMD Socket FP5, while the Xeon uses Intel BGA 1667. The Ryzen’s integrated graphics are Radeon Vega 10; the Xeon has none. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, while the Ryzen supports only DDR4. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not the Ryzen. The Xeon lists 24 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), while the Ryzen simply lists PCIe Gen 3 without a lane count. The Ryzen is marked as a Mobile segment product, and the Xeon is Server/Workstation. The Xeon has a launch MSRP of $320; the Ryzen has no listed launch MSRP. The Xeon’s part number is SR2DL, and the Ryzen’s is YM3700C4T4MFG. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is significant. The AMD Ryzen 7 3750H is built on the Zen+ architecture with the Picasso codename, manufactured on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. The Intel Xeon D-1528 uses the Broadwell architecture with the Broadwell-DE codename, manufactured on a 14 nm process at Intel. It contains 3,200 million transistors on a larger 246 mm² die. The Ryzen’s cache layout features 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon’s cache is smaller per core—64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2—but its L3 cache is 1.5 MB per core, which aggregates to a larger total cache size. The Ryzen uses the 3000 series branding with a generation of Ryzen 7 (Zen+ (Picasso)), while the Xeon’s generation is Xeon D (Broadwell-DE). The Ryzen was released on 2019-01-05, while the Xeon predates it by over three years, with a release date of 2015-10-31. The Ryzen’s memory bus is dual-channel DDR4, and the Xeon’s is dual-channel DDR3/DDR4. The process node difference—12 nm versus 14 nm—explains the Ryzen’s transistor density advantage: 4,940 million transistors on a smaller die versus 3,200 million on a larger one. Both processors have a 35-watt TDP, but the Ryzen’s newer architecture achieves higher clock speeds at that power level, whereas the Xeon’s older Broadwell design prioritizes core count and stability over raw frequency.