AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 vs Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 occupy different corners of the hardware world, yet their benchmark scores land remarkably close together. The Xeon is a 12-core, 24-thread Haswell-EP server part built on Intel's 22 nm process, while the Ryzen is an 8-core, 16-thread Zen desktop chip fabricated on a 14 nm node. Across six Cinebench tests, the Intel part wins every single matchup, but by margins so thin—never more than 1.2%—that the two effectively trade blows in real-world workloads. The data shows a server processor with more physical cores barely edging out a newer, higher-clocked desktop part. This head-to-head is less about raw dominance and more about architectural philosophy: one relies on core count and memory bandwidth, the other on clock speed and efficiency.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 wins all three multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 12647 against the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700's 12491, a 1.2% advantage. The lead is consistent in Cinebench R20 (5311 vs 5246) and Cinebench R15 (1274 vs 1259).

Q: How do the two compare in single-core performance?

A: The Intel chip also edges out the AMD part in every single-core test. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1785 for the Xeon versus 1763 for the Ryzen, a 1.2% gap. The margins are similarly tight in R20 (749 vs 740) and R15 (179 vs 177), each favoring Intel by 1.1–1.2%.

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

A: The Xeon E5-2658A v3 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Despite having 50% more cores, the Xeon's multi-core lead over the Ryzen is only about 1.2% in Cinebench tests.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 is slower on paper, with a 2.20 GHz base and 2.90 GHz boost. Higher clocks do not translate into a benchmark win for AMD here.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these two CPUs?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 has a TDP of 105 watts, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 is rated at 65 watts. The Ryzen delivers nearly identical benchmark scores while drawing significantly less power according to the spec sheets.

Q: Which platform supports more memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 uses dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite this difference, their multi-core scores remain close.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design eras. The Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 is built on the Haswell-EP architecture, manufactured on a 22 nm process at Intel's fabs. The chip packs 2,600 million transistors into a 356 mm² die. In contrast, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 uses the Zen architecture, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. AMD's design fits 4,800 million transistors into a smaller 213 mm² die, showing the density advantage of the newer process node.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Intel part allocates 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, with a large 30 MB shared L3 cache. The AMD chip offers 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, but only 16 MB of shared L3. The Xeon's larger L3 pool likely helps feed its 12 cores, while the Ryzen's bigger per-core L2 reduces latency for its 8 cores.

Memory architecture is another clear divide. The Xeon E5-2658A v3 runs a quad-channel DDR4 memory bus with a peak bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s, typical for a server/workstation part. The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 uses a dual-channel bus capped at 42.7 GB/s, reflecting its desktop orientation. Both support ECC memory, but the Intel CPU pairs its higher bandwidth with 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the AMD chip provides only 16 Gen 3 lanes.

The platform sockets reinforce the market split. Intel uses Socket 2011-3, an LGA platform designed for scalable server deployments. AMD uses Socket AM4, a mainstream desktop socket. The Xeon is marked as end-of-life and targets the server/workstation segment, while the Ryzen is an active desktop product from the 1000 series, released on 2017-06-28. The Xeon's multiplier is locked, whereas the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The Intel chip carries a launch MSRP of $1832, while the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP in the data.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents an unusual verdict: the Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 wins all six Cinebench comparisons, yet the practical difference is almost negligible. The largest margin is 1.2%, which appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core. The smallest is 1.1% in Cinebench R15 single-core. For any real-world application, these deltas fall well within run-to-run variance.

Pick the Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 if you prioritize raw core count, quad-channel memory bandwidth, and PCIe lane availability. Its 12 cores and 24 threads provide a structural advantage for heavily threaded server workloads, and the 68.3 GB/s memory bandwidth gives it headroom for memory-intensive tasks. The 30 MB L3 cache also supports larger working sets. The trade-off is a 105 W TDP and a locked multiplier on an end-of-life platform.

Pick the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 if you value efficiency, clock speed, and platform longevity. It runs at 3.00 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost, significantly higher than the Xeon's 2.20 GHz and 2.90 GHz. It draws only 65 W, uses a smaller 213 mm² die with more transistors, and sits on the active Socket AM4 platform with an unlocked multiplier. Its 8 cores and 16 threads deliver nearly identical Cinebench scores, making it the more practical choice for desktop workloads where power and flexibility matter more than core count.

The data suggests that for most users, the choice comes down to platform and efficiency, not performance. The Xeon's 1.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core (12647 vs 12491) is a statistical tie. The real differentiators are the 40 PCIe lanes versus 16, the quad-channel memory bus versus dual-channel, and the 105 W TDP versus 65 W. Neither chip offers integrated graphics, so both require a discrete GPU.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on nearly every major specification. The Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 features 12 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks favor AMD at 3.00 GHz versus Intel's 2.20 GHz, and boost clocks follow the same pattern: 3.70 GHz for AMD versus 2.90 GHz for Intel. TDP ratings differ significantly, with the Intel part at 105 watts and the AMD part at 65 watts.

Socket compatibility is entirely different. Intel uses Socket 2011-3, while AMD uses Socket AM4. The process nodes reflect their generations: Intel's 22 nm Haswell-EP versus AMD's 14 nm Zen. Transistor counts and die sizes also differ, with Intel at 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die, and AMD at 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. Cache layouts are distinct, with Intel providing 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core plus 30 MB shared L3, while AMD offers 96 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core plus 16 MB shared L3.

Memory support shows a split in bus width. Intel supports quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth; AMD supports dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s. PCIe lane counts also differ, with Intel offering 40 Gen 3 lanes from the CPU and AMD offering 16. Both support ECC memory. The Xeon is a locked-multiplier, end-of-life server part, while the Ryzen is an unlocked, active desktop part. The Xeon's launch MSRP is $1832; the Ryzen has no launch MSRP listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3, but the margins tell a story of near-parity. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1274 against the Ryzen's 1259, a 1.2% win. Single-core R15 is closer: 179 versus 177, a 1.1% edge for Intel. These are the tightest margins in the entire comparison.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. Multi-core shows 5311 for the Xeon and 5246 for the Ryzen, again a 1.2% delta. Single-core in R20 is 749 versus 740, another 1.2% gap. The consistency of these results—three tests at exactly 1.2% and one at 1.1%—suggests a stable performance relationship between the two chips.

Cinebench R23 reinforces the outcome. Multi-core results are 12647 for Intel and 12491 for AMD, a 1.2% difference. Single-core is 1785 versus 1763, also 1.2%. Across all six tests, the Xeon wins by a total margin that never exceeds 1.2%, while the Ryzen's higher clock speeds (3.70 GHz boost versus 2.90 GHz) are not enough to overcome the Xeon's 50% core advantage (12 cores versus 8).

The average benchmark scores reflect this near-tie. The Xeon E5-2658A v3 has an average benchmark score of 3658, placing it in the 56th percentile of all CPUs. The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 averages 3613, good for the 55th percentile. The Xeon's nearest rival is the Intel Core i9-10885H with an average score of 3651 (0.2% delta), while the Ryzen's closest competitor is the Intel Xeon E-2276G at 3614 (0% delta). For practical purposes, these two processors are interchangeable in Cinebench workloads, making the decision hinge on platform features rather than performance metrics.