CPU Comparison

The Intel Xeon E-2174G and AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS are near-statistical twins in aggregate benchmark score, with the Xeon averaging 2588 and the Ryzen 2573, a delta of just 0.6%. Yet this overall parity masks a complete divergence in workload character: the AMD part wins three of four head-to-head tests by decisive margins, while the Intel part claims only a single victory, in Geekbench single-core, where it leads by 18.9%. The data indicates these are not competing for the same user; they are competing for the same score bracket from opposite design philosophies.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is generational. The Intel Xeon E-2174G is built on a 14 nm process at Intel, using the Coffee Lake-S WS architecture from the Xeon E-2100 series. It is a 4-core, 8-thread part with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. Its cache layout is modest: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The die size is 126 mm², and it supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory, a hallmark of its server/workstation market segment, and includes integrated HD Graphics P630. The part is end-of-life and was released in July 2018, with a launch MSRP of $334. It uses the Intel Socket 1151 and is not multiplier-unlocked.

The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is a fundamentally newer design. It uses TSMC's 7 nm process and the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Renoir, from the 4000 series. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Its cache structure doubles the L2 per core to 512 KB, while keeping 64 KB of L1 per core and 8 MB of shared L3. The die is larger at 156 mm², and it contains 9,800 million transistors. Memory bandwidth is higher at 51.2 GB/s over dual-channel DDR4, but it does not support ECC memory. It uses the AMD Socket FP6 and targets the mobile market segment. Its integrated graphics are Radeon Graphics 512SP. The part is active and was released in March 2020. It is also not multiplier-unlocked.

The core-count difference is the primary driver of multi-threaded results, but the process node and memory bandwidth differences are equally significant for sustained workloads. The Xeon's higher clocks (4.70 vs 4.30 GHz boost) help it in lightly-threaded tasks, but the Ryzen's double core/thread count and 20% higher memory bandwidth dominate heavy parallel loads. The Xeon's ECC support and server socket target a different deployment environment than the Ryzen's mobile socket.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2174G has a marginally higher average benchmark score of 2588, compared to the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS's 2573. The difference is 0.6%, placing them in the same performance tier.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in Cinebench R15 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is the clear winner, scoring 1863 versus the Xeon's 815. This represents a 56.3% advantage for the AMD part in this multi-threaded test.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E-2174G win any benchmark over the Ryzen 9 4900HS?

A: Yes, the Xeon wins the Geekbench single-core test. It scores 1559 versus the Ryzen's 1311, a lead of 18.9%. This is the only head-to-head test the Xeon wins.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Xeon E-2174G has 4 cores and 8 threads. This gives the AMD part a 2x advantage in both metrics.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2174G supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS does not. This is a key feature for the Xeon's server/workstation market segment.

Q: What are the process nodes for each CPU?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2174G is fabricated on a 14 nm process at Intel. The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for multi-threaded workloads: the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is the superior processor. It wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 56.3% and Geekbench multi-core by 26.3%, with scores of 1863 and 6926 respectively, versus the Xeon's 815 and 5104. The Ryzen also wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 40.9%, scoring 193 versus 114. The Xeon's only meaningful victory is in Geekbench single-core, where its 1559 score beats the Ryzen's 1311 by 18.9%.

For users selecting a CPU for rendering, compilation, or any parallel task, the Ryzen 9 4900HS is the only choice here. Its double core count and higher memory bandwidth deliver crushing advantages in the multi-core tests. The Xeon E-2174G is a legacy part that retains relevance only in scenarios where its ECC memory support and specific server socket are required, or where its 18.9% single-core Geekbench lead matters more than the 40.9% single-core deficit in Cinebench. The Ryzen is the better all-around processor, and the Xeon is a niche workstation relic.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in Cinebench R15 multi-core. The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS scores 1863, while the Intel Xeon E-2174G scores 815. This is a 56.3% delta, meaning the Ryzen is more than twice as fast in this test. This is the largest margin in the entire comparison and directly reflects the 8-core versus 4-core design.

In Geekbench multi-core, the Ryzen continues its dominance. It scores 6926 against the Xeon's 5104, a 26.3% advantage. This is a substantial lead, though smaller than the Cinebench R15 result, suggesting the Geekbench workload scales less perfectly with core count.

The single-core results are contradictory between the two test suites. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ryzen wins with 193 versus the Xeon's 114, a 40.9% margin. However, in Geekbench single-core, the Xeon flips the script, winning 1559 to 1311, an 18.9% margin. The discrepancy indicates that the Xeon's higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz is more effective in Geekbench's specific workload, while the Ryzen's Zen 2 architecture and higher memory bandwidth benefit Cinebench's single-thread performance.

The overall win count is 3-1 in favor of the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS. The average scores are nearly identical, but the distribution of wins is heavily skewed. The data suggests that the Xeon's single Geekbench single-core win is an outlier rather than a trend, given its substantial losses in the other three tests.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS wins decisively in multi-threaded scenarios. It leads by 56.3% in Cinebench R15 multi-core and by 26.3% in Geekbench multi-core. This makes it the clear choice for video rendering, 3D modeling, code compilation, and any workload that can utilize 8 or more threads. Its 16 threads, 7 nm process, and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth provide the resources needed for sustained parallel performance. It also wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 40.9%, indicating that even in some lightly-threaded tasks, its architecture is superior.

The Intel Xeon E-2174G wins only in Geekbench single-core, with an 18.9% margin. This is a specific victory, not a general one, as it loses Cinebench single-core badly. The Xeon's 4.70 GHz boost clock is its key asset, but it only translates to a win in one benchmark. The Xeon also holds advantages in non-performance areas: it supports ECC memory, which is critical for data integrity in server environments, and it uses the Intel Socket 1151, which may fit existing workstation motherboards. Its 14 nm process and 71 W TDP are less efficient than the Ryzen's 35 W TDP, but the Xeon targets a different market segment.

In practical terms, the Ryzen 9 4900HS is the winner for any user seeking maximum throughput. The Xeon E-2174G is only preferable for users with a specific need for ECC memory or a legacy socket, and who prioritize its single Geekbench win above all other results.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in nearly every fundamental specification. The Intel Xeon E-2174G has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.80 GHz for the Xeon and 3.00 GHz for the Ryzen, while boost clocks are 4.70 GHz and 4.30 GHz, respectively. TDP differs massively: the Xeon is rated at 71 W, the Ryzen at 35 W.

The process node is a major divergence: 14 nm for Intel versus 7 nm for AMD, with the latter fabricated by TSMC. The Xeon's die is 126 mm², while the Ryzen's is 156 mm², and the Ryzen has 9,800 million transistors versus no listed figure for the Xeon. Cache configurations differ in L2, with the Xeon at 256 KB per core and the Ryzen at 512 KB per core; both have 64 KB L1 per core and 8 MB shared L3.

Memory bandwidth is higher on the Ryzen at 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s on the Xeon, though both support dual-channel DDR4. ECC memory is supported only on the Xeon. PCIe support is Gen 3 on both, but the Xeon specifies 16 lanes (CPU only) while the Ryzen just lists Gen 3. Integrated graphics differ: HD Graphics P630 on the Xeon versus Radeon Graphics 512SP on the Ryzen. Sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 1151 versus AMD Socket FP6. The Xeon is end-of-life with a launch MSRP of $334, while the Ryzen is active with no launch MSRP listed. The Xeon is a server/workstation part; the Ryzen is mobile.