AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS vs Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 and AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS represent two entirely different eras and market goals, yet they land within the same performance percentile overall. The data shows a 10-core, 20-thread server processor from 2015 facing an 8-core, 16-thread mobile chip from 2020, with the average benchmark scores falling within 1% of each other (2587 vs 2557). Despite this overall parity, the two processors diverge sharply in microarchitecture, power envelope, and the specific workloads where each demonstrates a clear advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS dominates the direct head-to-head comparisons, winning both available tests by substantial margins. In multi-threaded rendering, the Ryzen 7 4800HS scores 1700.5 in Cinebench R15 multicore, a 47% advantage over the Xeon’s 901. Single-core performance tells a similar story, with the AMD part scoring 186.5 against the Intel’s 127, a 31.9% lead. The Xeon E5-4620 v3 cannot claim a single benchmark victory in the shared test suite.

However, the Xeon’s strengths lie outside the limited Cinebench overlap. Its 25 MB of shared L3 cache dwarfs the Ryzen 7 4800HS’s 8 MB, and it supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth versus the AMD chip’s dual-channel 51.2 GB/s. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a critical feature for server and workstation reliability that the Ryzen 7 4800HS lacks. The Intel part’s market segment is listed as Server/Workstation, while the AMD part is Mobile, suggesting the Xeon’s wins would appear in memory-bandwidth-sensitive and error-tolerant workloads rather than in the consumer-oriented Cinebench tests provided.

The data indicates the Ryzen 7 4800HS wins on raw speed and efficiency, while the Xeon E5-4620 v3 wins on platform capabilities. The Ryzen 7 4800HS’s 45W TDP versus the Xeon’s 105W TDP further reinforces that the mobile part is designed for sustained performance in constrained thermal environments, whereas the Xeon is built for maximum throughput in a server chassis where power is less of a concern.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is generational and foundational. The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 uses the Haswell-EP architecture on a 22 nm process node, fabricated by Intel with 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die. The AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS uses Zen 2 (Renoir) on a 7 nm TSMC process, packing 9,800 million transistors into a 156 mm² die. This process advantage explains much of the performance delta: the AMD chip crams nearly four times as many transistors into less than half the silicon area.

Core configurations differ in count and cache layout. The Xeon provides 10 cores and 20 threads, while the Ryzen 7 4800HS provides 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part allocates 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, with a large 25 MB shared L3. The AMD part uses 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, but only 8 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L2 on the Ryzen 7 4800HS partially compensates for the smaller L3, but the Xeon’s overall cache capacity is substantially higher.

Memory support further separates them. The Xeon E5-4620 v3 runs DDR4 in quad-channel mode, achieving 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, and supports ECC. The Ryzen 7 4800HS supports DDR4 and LPDDR4 in dual-channel mode, with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Xeon provides Gen 3 with 40 lanes from the CPU, while the Ryzen 7 4800HS offers Gen 3 without a specified lane count. The AMD chip includes integrated Radeon Graphics with 448 SPs; the Xeon has no integrated graphics.

Clock speeds reveal the fundamental design philosophy. The Xeon runs at 2.00 GHz base and 2.60 GHz boost, reflecting a server focus on stability and power efficiency at scale. The Ryzen 7 4800HS runs at 2.90 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost, chasing single-thread responsiveness. The production statuses confirm the lifecycle gap: the Xeon is end-of-life while the Ryzen 7 4800HS is active.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two shared benchmarks in the data set provide a clear, if narrow, picture of the performance relationship. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS scores 1700.5 against the Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3’s 901. This 47% delta is remarkable given that the AMD chip has fewer cores (8 vs 10) and threads (16 vs 20). The Zen 2 architecture’s higher IPC and much faster boost clocks (4.20 GHz vs 2.60 GHz) more than compensate for the core deficit. The data suggests that per-core throughput on the Ryzen 7 4800HS is far superior, making it the better choice for lightly-threaded and moderately-threaded workloads.

Single-core performance in Cinebench R15 reinforces this conclusion. The Ryzen 7 4800HS scores 186.5, a 31.9% improvement over the Xeon’s 127. This gap is directly attributable to the boost clock difference and architectural efficiency. The Xeon’s 2.60 GHz maximum boost is a server-class compromise; the Ryzen 7 4800HS’s 4.20 GHz boost is a mobile design priority.

The deltaPct values in the nearestRivals data provide context. The Xeon E5-4620 v3’s closest rival is the Intel Xeon E-2174G with a deltaPct of 0, meaning they score essentially identically on average. The AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS’s nearest rival is the Intel Xeon E5-4640 v3, which it beats by 0.3%, and the Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3, which it beats by 0.5%. Interestingly, both processors are within 1% of the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS, indicating that the 4800HS is near the top of its class. The Xeon E5-4620 v3 trails the Intel Core i7-8850H by 0.7%, showing that even older mobile chips can match it on average.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 has 10 cores and 20 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Why does the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS win the multicore benchmark despite having fewer cores?

A: The Ryzen 7 4800HS scores 1700.5 in Cinebench R15 multicore versus 901 for the Xeon, a 47% lead. This comes from the Zen 2 architecture’s higher IPC, a 4.20 GHz boost clock versus 2.60 GHz, and a more efficient 7 nm process node.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon E5-4620 v3 supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Xeon E5-4620 v3 provides 59.7 GB/s via quad-channel DDR4, while the Ryzen 7 4800HS provides 51.2 GB/s via dual-channel DDR4 or LPDDR4.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS includes Radeon Graphics with 448 SPs. The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 has a 105W TDP, while the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS has a 45W TDP.

The Verdict

The data directs different buyers to different processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS is the clear performance winner in all shared benchmarks, delivering a 47% multicore advantage and a 31.9% single-core advantage in Cinebench R15. Its 4.20 GHz boost clock, 7 nm process, and 45W TDP make it the superior choice for any workload where per-core speed and power efficiency matter. The Ryzen 7 4800HS is also the only one of the two with integrated graphics, simplifying system builds that do not require a discrete GPU.

The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 is not without merit, but its advantages are platform-level rather than performance-level. The 25 MB of L3 cache, quad-channel memory, ECC support, and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes are all features that serve server and workstation environments. The data shows that its average benchmark score (2587) is nearly identical to the Ryzen 7 4800HS (2557), but that overall parity masks the fact that the Xeon loses decisively in every direct comparison available. Its 10 cores and 20 threads offer more parallel capacity, yet the architectural efficiency of Zen 2 overcomes that deficit.

For a mobile or desktop user prioritizing speed and efficiency, the Ryzen 7 4800HS is the only rational choice. For a server workload requiring ECC, extensive cache, and high memory bandwidth, the Xeon E5-4620 v3 remains a viable, if aging, option. The benchmark results clearly favor the AMD part in raw compute, while the Intel part’s value lies in its enterprise feature set.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 | AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS |

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

| Cores | 10 | 8 |

| Threads | 20 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 2.60 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| TDP | 105W | 45W |

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

| Architecture | Haswell | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Haswell-EP | Renoir |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

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

| Die Size | 356 mm² | 156 mm² |

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

| L3 Cache | 25 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, LPDDR4 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 40 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3 |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Radeon Graphics 448SP |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

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

| Release Date | 2015-05-31 | 2020-01-05 |

| Launch MSRP | $1668 | N/A |