AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS vs Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS and Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 represent two very different eras and market segments, yet their average benchmark scores place them almost exactly level. The Ryzen 7 4800HS averages 2557, while the Xeon E5-1650 v3 averages 2545, a mere 0.4% difference. However, this statistical tie in average score conceals dramatic differences in how each processor achieves its results, with the Ryzen winning every head-to-head benchmark in the data by a substantial margin, despite occupying opposite ends of the mobile and server/workstation spectrum.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a complete sweep for the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS across the two shared benchmark tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen scores 1700.5 against the Xeon's 887, a decisive 91.7% advantage. This is not a marginal win; the Ryzen nearly doubles the Xeon's multi-threaded throughput in this test, reflecting the massive generational and architectural leap between the two parts.

The single-core results tell a similar, though less extreme, story. The Ryzen 7 4800HS posts a Cinebench R15 single-core score of 186.5, compared to 125 for the Xeon E5-1650 v3. That is a 49.2% lead for the Ryzen, a significant gap that underscores how much faster the newer Zen 2 core is per thread compared to the older Haswell design. The Xeon's single-core performance is not just behind; it is left in a different performance class.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the Xeon does hold advantages in other tests not shared with the Ryzen, but these are not head-to-head comparisons. The Xeon E5-1650 v3 scores 3696 in Cinebench R20 multi-core and 8800 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, with single-core scores of 521 and 1242 respectively. These numbers are not directly comparable to the Ryzen's data since the Ryzen has no corresponding R20 or R23 entries, but they establish the Xeon's absolute capabilities. In the only tests where both processors were measured, the Ryzen 7 4800HS wins both, giving it a 2-0 record in head-to-head matchups.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental divide between these processors is the manufacturing node and core architecture. The AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS is built on TSMC's 7 nm process, packing 9,800 million transistors into a 156 mm² die. In contrast, the Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 uses Intel's 22 nm process, with 2,600 million transistors on a much larger 356 mm² die. The Ryzen's smaller, denser process allows it to achieve higher performance while consuming dramatically less power.

Core configurations also differ significantly. The Ryzen 7 4800HS features 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-1650 v3 offers 6 cores and 12 threads. This two-core, four-thread advantage for AMD is compounded by clock speeds. The Ryzen has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, whereas the Xeon operates at a higher base of 3.50 GHz but a lower boost of 3.80 GHz. The Ryzen's superior boost clock, combined with its newer architecture, explains its decisive performance wins.

Cache hierarchies also differ. Both share 64 KB of L1 cache per core, but the Ryzen has 512 KB of L2 per core versus 256 KB for the Xeon. For L3 cache, the Xeon actually holds an advantage with 15 MB shared, compared to 8 MB shared on the Ryzen. This larger L3 pool on the Xeon is a legacy of its server-oriented design, but it does not compensate for the architectural efficiency of Zen 2. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a server staple, while the Ryzen does not, and the Xeon's memory bandwidth is higher at 68.3 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s for the Ryzen, due to its quad-channel memory bus compared to dual-channel on the AMD part.

The platform targets are entirely different. The Ryzen 7 4800HS is a mobile processor on AMD Socket FP6, with a 45 W TDP, and includes integrated Radeon Graphics with 448 SPs. The Xeon E5-1650 v3 is a server/workstation part on Intel Socket 2011-3, with a 140 W TDP and no integrated graphics. The Ryzen's production status is Active, while the Xeon is End-of-life, and the release dates reflect this: January 2020 for the Ryzen versus September 2014 for the Xeon.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS wins every category where direct comparison is possible. In multi-threaded workloads, its 91.7% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core makes it the clear choice for heavily parallel tasks like video rendering, 3D modeling, or software compilation. The Ryzen's 8-core, 16-thread configuration, combined with its higher boost clock, gives it a massive throughput advantage over the Xeon's 6-core, 12-thread design.

Single-threaded performance also belongs to the Ryzen, with its 49.2% advantage in Cinebench R15 single-core. This translates to better responsiveness in everyday desktop tasks, legacy applications that rely on single-core speed, and games that are not fully multi-threaded. The Ryzen's 4.20 GHz boost clock, a full 400 MHz higher than the Xeon's 3.80 GHz, is the primary driver here, alongside the efficiency of the Zen 2 architecture.

The Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 does have areas where it is not outperformed in the data, but these are not wins. Its larger 15 MB L3 cache, quad-channel memory support, and higher 68.3 GB/s memory bandwidth suggest it could be competitive in memory-bandwidth-sensitive server workloads, but the benchmark results do not support a superiority claim. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which is a critical feature for data integrity in server environments, but this is a reliability feature, not a performance advantage. For users requiring ECC, the Xeon is the only option between the two, but for raw performance, the Ryzen dominates.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS scores 1700.5 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, compared to 887 for the Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3, giving AMD a 91.7% advantage.

Q: How do the single-core performances compare?

A: The Ryzen 7 4800HS leads with a Cinebench R15 single-core score of 186.5, versus 125 for the Xeon E5-1650 v3, a 49.2% difference in favor of AMD.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS does not.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Ryzen 7 4800HS has a TDP of 45 W, while the Xeon E5-1650 v3 has a TDP of 140 W.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each?

A: The Ryzen 7 4800HS averages 2557, and the Xeon E5-1650 v3 averages 2545, a difference of 0.4% in favor of AMD.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS | Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 16 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.20 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 140 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP6 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Haswell |

| Codename | Renoir | Haswell-EP |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 22 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 9,800 million | 2,600 million |

| Die Size | 156 mm² | 356 mm² |

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

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 15 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 68.3 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics 448SP | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

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

| Release Date | 2020-01-05 | 2014-09-07 |

| Unlocked Multiplier | No | Yes |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS is the superior processor for any workload captured in the benchmarks. It wins both head-to-head tests by margins of 91.7% and 49.2%, which are not incremental improvements but generational leaps. The Ryzen achieves this while consuming only 45 W compared to the Xeon's 140 W, making it dramatically more power-efficient. Its 7 nm process, 8 cores, and higher boost clock simply outclass the Xeon's 22 nm Haswell design in every measured metric.

The Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 does retain relevance for specific use cases. Its ECC memory support and quad-channel memory bus with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for server or workstation environments where data integrity and memory throughput are priorities over raw compute performance. The Xeon's unlocked multiplier also allows for manual overclocking, which could narrow the performance gap in some scenarios, though the benchmark data does not reflect this potential.

For most users, the choice is clear. Anyone selecting between these two based on the benchmark results should pick the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS. It offers higher multi-core and single-core performance, lower power consumption, a modern 7 nm process, and active production status. The Xeon E5-1650 v3 is an end-of-life product from 2014 that, despite its server features, cannot compete with the Ryzen's performance in the tests where both were evaluated. The Ryzen wins every head-to-head benchmark, and its 2-0 record in wins is a perfect summary of the performance hierarchy.