AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 vs Intel Core i7-3820 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-3820 and AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 are two very different processors that arrive at nearly identical benchmark results. Both CPUs post an average benchmark score of approximately 1424 and 1415, respectively, and both sit at the 37th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The head-to-head data shows a perfect sweep for the Intel part, but the margins are extraordinarily thin, with the largest single advantage being a 0.7% lead in Cinebench R20 and R23 single-core tests. In practice, these chips are performance twins, separated by fractions of a point that are unlikely to be perceptible in real-world workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals a consistent, if narrow, pattern of Intel superiority across every single test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-3820 scores 496 against the R2314's 493, a 0.6% advantage. The single-core result in the same test is an exact tie at 69 points each, making it the only benchmark where neither part can claim a win. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Intel part again takes the multi-core test with a 2067 score versus 2055, and the single-core test with 291 versus 289, translating to a 0.6% and 0.7% delta, respectively. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R23, where the i7-3820 posts 4923 in multi-core (0.6% ahead of 4893) and 695 in single-core (0.7% ahead of 690).

The data shows a clear trend: the Intel chip wins all six head-to-head matchups, yet the largest margin of victory is just 0.7%. This is a statistical dead heat. The i7-3820's higher base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 3.80 GHz, combined with 8 threads, give it a slight edge over the R2314's 4 threads and lower 2.10 GHz base clock, even though the AMD part boosts to 3.50 GHz and features a newer Zen+ architecture. The differences are so small that they fall within typical run-to-run variance for most benchmarks.

When placed against their respective nearest rivals, both CPUs show they are firmly mid-pack performers. The i7-3820's average score of 1424 is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Xeon Bronze 3106 (1422) and 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i7-3720QM (1421), while being 0.2% behind the Intel Core i5-4570S (1426). The R2314 ties the AMD Ryzen 7 2700U and Intel Core i5-4460 at exactly 1415, and sits 0.1% behind the Intel Core i7-3840QM (1416) and 0.3% behind the Intel Core i7-2700K (1419).

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data gives the Intel Core i7-3820 a win in every category, but the practical implications are minimal. The largest edge is in single-core performance, where the i7-3820 leads by 0.7% in both Cinebench R20 and R23. This suggests a very slight advantage in lightly-threaded applications that depend on a single core's speed, such as legacy productivity tools or certain database queries that cannot leverage multiple threads. The multi-core victories, though uniform at 0.6% across R15, R20, and R23, indicate that the Intel part's 8 threads provide a marginal benefit in heavily parallel workloads like video encoding or 3D rendering compared to the R2314's 4 threads.

For the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314, the wins are entirely architectural rather than performance-based. It is the only one of the two with integrated graphics, featuring a Radeon Vega 6 GPU, which makes it the sole option for systems that require a display output without a discrete graphics card. It also supports ECC memory, a feature the Intel part lacks, which is critical for systems that demand error correction in memory operations. The R2314's 15 W TDP is dramatically lower than the i7-3820's 130 W, making it the clear winner for fanless designs or power-constrained embedded environments.

The R2314 also brings newer platform features to the table. It uses DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas the i7-3820 relies on older DDR3 with a quad-channel bus that delivers 51.2 GB/s. The AMD part's PCIe Gen 3 interface (16 lanes) is a generation ahead of the Intel part's PCIe Gen 2 (40 lanes), offering higher per-lane bandwidth for connected peripherals. None of these advantages appear in the Cinebench scores, but they define where each chip is best deployed.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: for pure compute performance, the Intel Core i7-3820 is the marginally faster processor. It wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, and its 0.7% peak advantage in single-core tests is the only measurable performance gap. Any user selecting between these two strictly on Cinebench scores should choose the i7-3820, as it is ahead in every metric with no single test going to the AMD part.

However, the benchmark results are so close that other factors must dominate the decision. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 is the only viable option for embedded systems requiring ECC memory support, integrated graphics via Radeon Vega 6, or a 15 W power envelope that allows for passive cooling. The Intel part's 130 W TDP and lack of integrated graphics disqualify it from those use cases entirely. Conversely, the i7-3820's quad-channel DDR3 memory subsystem provides 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 20% higher than the R2314's 42.7 GB/s, a feature that may matter for memory-bandwidth-sensitive workloads despite not showing up in Cinebench.

The production status is a decisive factor. The i7-3820 is end-of-life, having been released in 2012, while the R2314 is active and was released in 2022. The Intel part also has a launch MSRP of $305, whereas the AMD part has no recorded launch price. For new system designs, the R2314 is the only one of the two that is currently available and supported, making the performance difference moot in practical procurement scenarios. The verdict is simple: pick the i7-3820 if you already own it and want maximum compute output; pick the R2314 for any new embedded build.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i7-3820 scores 695, which is 0.7% ahead of the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314's 690.

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

A: The Intel Core i7-3820 wins all three multi-core tests, with a 0.6% lead in Cinebench R15 (496 vs 493), R20 (2067 vs 2055), and R23 (4923 vs 4893).

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i7-3820 does not.

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

A: The Intel Core i7-3820 has a 130 W TDP, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 has a significantly lower 15 W TDP.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 includes integrated graphics, featuring a Radeon Vega 6 GPU. The Intel Core i7-3820 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Are both processors at the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i7-3820 and the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 are at the 37th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different eras and design philosophies. The Intel Core i7-3820 is built on the Sandy Bridge-E architecture using a 32 nm process node, manufactured by Intel, with 1,270 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. It features 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus a 10 MB shared L3 cache. The memory controller is quad-channel DDR3, delivering 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and the CPU provides 40 PCIe Gen 2 lanes. The multiplier is unlocked, and it uses the Intel Socket 2011.

In contrast, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 is based on the Zen+ (Picasso) architecture on a 12 nm process node, manufactured by GlobalFoundries, with 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. It has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz. The cache layout is larger per core, with 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2, but the shared L3 is smaller at 4 MB. It uses dual-channel DDR4 memory with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth and provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. The multiplier is locked, and it uses the AMD Socket FP5.

Other key differences include the integrated graphics on the AMD part (Radeon Vega 6) versus none on the Intel part, and the ECC memory support on the AMD part versus none on the Intel part. The Intel part is a desktop-market, end-of-life product from 2012, while the AMD part is an active embedded-market product from 2022. The transistor count is dramatically higher on the AMD part (4,940 million vs 1,270 million), reflecting the newer process and integrated GPU, while the Intel part has a larger die size (294 mm² vs 210 mm²) despite the older node.