AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U vs Intel Xeon E-2336 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E-2336 and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U occupy separate market segments—a server/workstation part versus a mobile processor—yet their average benchmark scores place them within 0.4% of each other. The Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U holds a perfect 6-0 sweep in the head-to-head Cinebench tests, but the margins are consistently narrow, ranging from 2.3% to 2.5%. Both processors sit at the 57th percentile among all CPUs, and their average scores of 3985 (Intel) and 3971 (AMD) make them statistical equals in overall compute capability, despite fundamentally different underlying designs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U wins every single benchmark in the comparison, but the victories are remarkably tight. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD scores 14102 against the Intel's 13777, a 2.3% advantage. That edge carries through the entire Cinebench suite: R20 multi-core shows 5922 versus 5786 (2.3%), and R15 multi-core shows 1421 versus 1388 (2.3%). The single-core results mirror the same pattern—R23 single-core gives the AMD a 1990 to 1945 win (2.3%), R20 single-core gives 835 to 816 (2.3%), and R15 single-core gives 200 to 195 (2.5%).

The consistency of the delta across every test is notable. A 2.3% margin in multi-threaded workloads suggests the AMD's two extra cores (8 versus 6) and four extra threads (16 versus 12) are nearly offset by the Intel's higher boost clock. The Intel's 4.80 GHz boost clock exceeds the AMD's 4.50 GHz, yet the AMD still wins single-core tests by 2.3-2.5%. This indicates the Zen 3 architecture's instructions-per-clock advantage is real but modest in this specific matchup.

In the broader context, both chips trade places with the same rivals. The Intel's nearest rival list includes the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G at 3977 (0.2% behind) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U itself at 3971 (0.4% behind). The AMD's list includes the Intel Core i7-6900K at 3970 (0.0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 3 7330U at 3958 (0.3% ahead). Neither processor decisively outperforms its peer group; they are clustered within a 0.4% band.

The AMD also has Geekbench results that the Intel lacks: 5702 multi-core and 1594 single-core. These scores are not directly comparable to the Intel's absence of Geekbench data, but they confirm the AMD's competitive standing in cross-platform workloads. The Intel's only benchmark data comes from Cinebench, where it loses every test, so the data offers no scenario where the Intel comes out ahead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent divergent design philosophies. The Intel Xeon E-2336 uses Rocket Lake-E architecture on a 14 nm process built by Intel's own foundry, with a die size of 276 mm². The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U uses Zen 3 (Cezanne-U) on a 7 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of 180 mm² and 10,700 million transistors. The smaller, denser AMD die packs two more cores into a substantially smaller area.

Cache hierarchies differ in structure. The Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 12 MB of shared L3. The AMD uses 64 KB of L1 per core, the same 512 KB of L2 per core, but a larger 16 MB of shared L3. The AMD's extra 4 MB of L3 cache helps compensate for its lower base clock of 2000.00 MHz versus the Intel's 2.90 GHz.

Memory support is identical in type and bandwidth: both use DDR4 in dual-channel configuration with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. However, the Intel supports ECC memory while the AMD does not—a critical distinction for server deployments. PCIe connectivity also diverges sharply: the Intel offers Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, while the AMD provides Gen 3 with only 8 CPU lanes. The Intel's platform is built for expansion; the AMD's is built for efficiency.

The AMD includes integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics, while the Intel has no integrated graphics listed. The Intel's TDP is 65 W, over four times the AMD's 15 W, reflecting the server socket design versus the mobile FP6 socket. The AMD's process node advantage (7 nm versus 14 nm) and transistor count (10,700 million versus no listed figure) explain how it achieves comparable performance at a fraction of the power envelope.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2336 has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, which is 0.30 GHz higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U's 4.50 GHz boost clock. Despite this advantage, the AMD still wins all single-core Cinebench tests by 2.3-2.5%.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U scores 14102, while the Intel Xeon E-2336 scores 13777. The AMD leads by 2.3%, a margin that persists across R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests.

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

A: The Intel Xeon E-2336 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U has 8 cores and 16 threads. The AMD has two more cores and four more threads, yet its multi-core win is only 2.3%.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Xeon E-2336 supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U does not list ECC support, making the Intel the only option for error-correcting memory workloads.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores and percentiles for these CPUs?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2336 has an average benchmark score of 3985 and ranks at the 57th percentile. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U has an average score of 3971 and also ranks at the 57th percentile. Their average scores differ by only 0.4%.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U includes Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon E-2336 has no integrated graphics listed, meaning a discrete GPU is required for display output.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E-2336 | AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 2000.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1200 | AMD Socket FP6 |

| Architecture | Rocket Lake | Zen 3 |

| Codename | Rocket Lake-E | Cezanne-U |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 10,700 million |

| Die Size | 276 mm² | 180 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 3, 8 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Radeon Vega 8 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2021-09-07 | 2022-04-18 |

| Launch MSRP | $284 | Not listed |

| Part Number | SRKN5 | 100-000000581 |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow winner: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U outperforms the Intel Xeon E-2336 in every measured Cinebench test. The AMD's 8 cores and 16 threads, combined with Zen 3's efficiency on a 7 nm process, deliver a 2.3% advantage in multi-core workloads and a 2.3-2.5% edge in single-core tests. Its 15 W TDP versus the Intel's 65 W makes it dramatically more power-efficient, and the integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics remove the need for a discrete GPU in basic display scenarios.

The Intel Xeon E-2336 is not without justification, however. It is the only one of the two with ECC memory support, which is essential for data integrity in server and workstation environments. Its PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes provides four times the lane count and a newer generation versus the AMD's Gen 3 with 8 lanes, making it the better choice for expansion-heavy systems with multiple GPUs or NVMe drives. The Intel also has a higher boost clock at 4.80 GHz and a larger die size, though these do not translate into benchmark wins.

For buyers who prioritize raw compute performance in a low-power mobile form factor, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U is the data-backed pick. It wins all six head-to-head benchmarks and offers integrated graphics at a fraction of the thermal budget. For buyers who need ECC memory, extensive PCIe expansion, or a server-grade socket with a 65 W TDP, the Intel Xeon E-2336 is the only option that satisfies those requirements, even though it trails in every performance test. The 0.4% difference in average benchmark scores between the two means the deciding factors should be platform features, not raw speed.