AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 vs Intel Xeon E5-1681 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-1681 v3 and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 are two very different processors that land in the same performance neighborhood. The Xeon is a 2014 server/workstation part built on Intel's 22 nm Haswell architecture, while the Ryzen is a 2017 desktop chip from AMD's 14 nm Zen family. Benchmark results show the Xeon winning every single head-to-head test, but the margins are razor-thin. Across six Cinebench runs, the Intel part's largest advantage is 1.1% in single-core R15, and its smallest is 0.8% in several multi-core tests. The Ryzen counters with a lower TDP, a modern socket, and an unlocked multiplier. This is a classic case where raw scores tell only part of the story.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E5-1681 v3 takes all six benchmark wins, but the data shows a near-tie. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1269 against the Ryzen's 1259, a delta of 0.8%. Single-core R15 is 179 versus 177, a 1.1% edge for Intel. Moving to R20, the Xeon posts 5290 multi-core and 746 single-core, while the Ryzen manages 5246 and 740 — again a 0.8% gap in both. The R23 results follow the same pattern: 12597 for the Xeon, 12491 for the Ryzen in multi-core (0.8%), and 1778 versus 1763 in single-core (0.9%).

What does a 0.8% difference mean in practice? It is essentially a statistical tie. The average benchmark score for the Xeon is 3643, and for the Ryzen it is 3613, a gap of just 30 points. Both processors sit at the 55th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The nearest rivals for the Xeon include the Intel Core i9-10885H at 3651 (-0.2%) and the Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 at 3658 (-0.4%). The Ryzen's closest competitor is the Intel Xeon E-2276G at 3614, with a deltaPct of 0. The Xeon's average score edges out the Ryzen by 0.8%, which mirrors the Cinebench deltas.

The single-core results are particularly telling. The Ryzen has a higher base clock (3.00 GHz vs 2.90 GHz) and a higher boost clock (3.70 GHz vs 3.50 GHz), yet it still loses every single-core test by roughly a point. That suggests the Xeon's Haswell architecture extracts more work per clock in lightly threaded workloads. The multi-core results are closer, which makes sense given that the Xeon has 10 cores and 20 threads versus the Ryzen's 8 cores and 16 threads. The Xeon's two extra cores and four extra threads are almost exactly offset by the Ryzen's higher clocks in heavily threaded tests.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-1681 v3 wins every benchmark in the data, but the margins are so small that the practical advantage is negligible. Its strongest showing is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it leads by 1.1%. In multi-core tests, it consistently leads by 0.8%. If you are chasing the absolute highest Cinebench score, the Xeon is the pick — but the difference is less than 1% in every test except one.

The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700's wins are not in raw performance but in platform characteristics. It has a 65 W TDP versus the Xeon's 135 W, meaning it generates significantly less heat and requires less substantial cooling. The Ryzen uses the AMD Socket AM4, a mainstream desktop platform, while the Xeon requires the Intel Socket 2011-3, which is a server/workstation platform with a correspondingly more expensive motherboard ecosystem. The Ryzen also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, whereas the Xeon is locked. For a builder prioritizing efficiency, upgradability, or overclocking headroom, the Ryzen is the clear choice despite losing every benchmark.

The Xeon's advantages beyond the benchmark scores include a quad-channel memory bus with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth, versus the Ryzen's dual-channel 42.7 GB/s. The Xeon also offers 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the Ryzen provides 16. For memory-bandwidth-intensive workloads, the Xeon's platform-level features could translate into real-world wins that Cinebench does not capture. The Xeon's 25 MB of shared L3 cache is also larger than the Ryzen's 16 MB.

The Verdict

The data is clear: the Intel Xeon E5-1681 v3 is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded. It wins all six Cinebench tests, with margins ranging from 0.8% to 1.1%. Its average benchmark score of 3643 is 0.8% higher than the Ryzen's 3613. If you are choosing solely on benchmark scores, the Xeon is the answer.

However, the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 is not a loser. A 0.8% performance deficit is imperceptible in real-world use. The Ryzen offers a 65 W TDP, which is less than half the Xeon's 135 W. It uses the AM4 socket, which is a mainstream desktop platform with a wide range of affordable motherboards, and it has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The Xeon is an end-of-life server part on the 2011-3 platform, which is harder to source and typically requires workstation-class boards.

Who should pick which? If you already have a Socket 2011-3 motherboard and need the quad-channel memory bandwidth or 40 PCIe lanes, the Xeon is the logical choice — it also happens to be the faster part in Cinebench. If you are building a new system, the Ryzen makes more practical sense: it is an active product, uses less power, fits a mainstream motherboard, and offers overclocking. The benchmark gap is so small that platform features should dominate the decision.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1681 v3 scores 12597, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 scores 12491. The Xeon leads by 0.8%.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 faster than the Intel Xeon in any benchmark?

A: No. The Xeon wins all six recorded Cinebench tests. The Ryzen's closest result is a 0.8% deficit in multi-core R15, R20, and R23.

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

A: The Xeon E5-1681 v3 has a 135 W TDP, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has a 65 W TDP. The Ryzen consumes less than half the thermal budget.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E5-1681 v3 and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1681 v3 has 10 cores and 20 threads. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Can the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 be overclocked?

A: Yes, the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel Xeon E5-1681 v3 does not.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Xeon E5-1681 v3 is built on Intel's Haswell architecture, specifically the Haswell-EP variant, using a 22 nm process node. It contains 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die, produced by Intel's own foundry. The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 uses AMD's Zen architecture (Summit Ridge) on a 14 nm node from GlobalFoundries, packing 4,800 million transistors into a 213 mm² die.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 25 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen offers 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, but only 16 MB of shared L3. The Xeon's larger L3 suggests an advantage in cache-sensitive workloads, though the benchmark data shows minimal impact.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The Xeon supports DDR4 over a quad-channel bus, delivering 68.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ryzen also supports DDR4 but over a dual-channel bus, yielding 42.7 GB/s. For memory-heavy server tasks, the Xeon's bandwidth advantage could be decisive. PCIe connectivity also favors the Xeon: 40 Gen 3 lanes from the CPU versus 16 Gen 3 lanes on the Ryzen.

The Xeon is a server/workstation part from 2014, now end-of-life, while the Ryzen is an active desktop product from 2017. The Ryzen's Zen architecture is newer and more power-efficient, reflected in its 65 W TDP versus 135 W. The Xeon compensates with more cores (10 vs 8) and more threads (20 vs 16), plus a larger L3 cache and wider memory bus.

Specification Differences

The processors differ in almost every major specification category. The Xeon E5-1681 v3 has 10 cores and 20 threads; the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 2.90 GHz for the Xeon and 3.00 GHz for the Ryzen, with boost clocks of 3.50 GHz and 3.70 GHz respectively. TDP favors the Ryzen heavily: 65 W versus 135 W.

Sockets are incompatible: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3, while the Ryzen uses AMD Socket AM4. The Xeon is built on a 22 nm process with 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die; the Ryzen uses 14 nm with 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. Cache per core differs: L1 is 64 KB per core on the Xeon versus 96 KB per core on the Ryzen, and L2 is 256 KB per core versus 512 KB per core. L3 totals are 25 MB for the Xeon and 16 MB for the Ryzen.

Memory bandwidth is 68.3 GB/s for the Xeon (quad-channel) and 42.7 GB/s for the Ryzen (dual-channel). PCIe lanes from the CPU are 40 for the Xeon, 16 for the Ryzen, both Gen 3. The Xeon is a server/workstation part, end-of-life, released in 2014; the Ryzen is an active desktop part from 2017. The Xeon's multiplier is locked; the Ryzen's is unlocked. Both support ECC memory and neither has integrated graphics.