AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 vs Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data is remarkably consistent across every Cinebench workload: the Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 wins all six head-to-head comparisons, but by narrow margins that rarely exceed three percent. In the R15 multi-core test, the Xeon scores 503 against the Ryzen Embedded R2314's 493, a 2% advantage. The single-core R15 result widens slightly to 2.9%, with the Intel part at 71 points versus 69 for the AMD chip.

Moving to R20, the pattern holds. The Xeon produces 2099 in multi-core, beating the Ryzen's 2055 by 2.1%. Single-core R20 shows 296 versus 289, a 2.4% gap in favor of Intel. The R23 results are nearly identical in percentage terms: 4999 against 4893 in multi-core (2.2% ahead) and 705 versus 690 in single-core (2.2% ahead).

What these numbers mean in practice is that neither chip has a commanding performance lead. The Xeon is consistently faster, but the deltas are small enough that real-world application differences would be difficult to perceive without instrumentation. The largest single margin is the R15 single-core test at 2.9%, still a modest gain.

Looking at the broader database context, both processors sit near the 37th to 38th percentile of all CPUs. The Xeon's average benchmark score is 1446, placing it in company with the AMD Opteron 6378 (1447, 0.1% behind) and the Intel Core i5-7300HQ (1448, 0.1% behind). It edges out the AMD Ryzen 5 2400G (1439) by 0.5%. The Ryzen Embedded R2314's average of 1415 ties the AMD Ryzen 7 2700U and Intel Core i5-4460 exactly, with the Intel Core i7-3840QM at 1416 (0.1% ahead) and the Intel Core i7-2700K at 1419 (0.3% ahead).

The benchmark database shows these two chips are effectively performance peers. The Xeon wins every test, but the Ryzen is always within striking distance. If the scores were plotted on a chart, the lines would run nearly parallel, with Intel holding a thin but consistent edge across all three Cinebench generations.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow choice. The Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 wins all six recorded benchmarks, making it the faster processor in every measured workload. However, the margins are small: the largest gap is 2.9% in R15 single-core, and the rest cluster around 2% to 2.4%. For a user prioritizing raw Cinebench performance, the Xeon is the pick.

That said, the Ryzen Embedded R2314 offers some counterbalancing advantages that appear in the specification data. It has a higher boost clock (3.50 GHz versus 2.80 GHz), a lower TDP (15 watts versus 25 watts), and a newer 12 nm process node compared to Intel's 14 nm. It also comes from an active production line, whereas the Xeon is listed as end-of-life. The Ryzen's memory bandwidth is higher at 42.7 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s for the Intel part.

Who should pick the Xeon? A user whose workload is dominated by the exact Cinebench-style multi-threaded rendering tasks represented in the database, where every point of score matters. The Xeon also supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, offering flexibility in system design.

Who should pick the Ryzen? A user building a low-power, actively produced embedded system where the 15-watt TDP and newer process node are more important than a 2% benchmark delta. The R2314's higher boost clock suggests it can reach higher peak frequencies on lightly threaded tasks, even if the recorded single-core scores do not fully reflect that advantage.

Strictly from the recorded scores, the Xeon is the winner. From a system-level perspective, the Ryzen's efficiency and production status make it a rational alternative.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 has an average benchmark score of 1446, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 scores 1415. The Xeon sits at the 38th percentile of all CPUs, and the Ryzen at the 37th.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two in any single test?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon leads by 2.9% (71 versus 69). All other tests show gaps between 2% and 2.4%.

Q: Does the AMD chip ever win a benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows 6 wins for the Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 and 0 wins for the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 across all recorded Cinebench tests.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Xeon's 1446 average score places it within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 5 2400G (1439), AMD Opteron 6378 (1447), and Intel Core i5-7300HQ (1448). The Ryzen's 1415 average exactly matches the AMD Ryzen 7 2700U and Intel Core i5-4460, with the Intel Core i7-3840QM 0.1% ahead.

Q: Which processor has the lower TDP?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 has a TDP of 15 watts, compared to 25 watts for the Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 is listed as active, while the Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 is marked as end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 uses an Intel BGA 1440 socket, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 fits AMD Socket FP5. The Xeon has 4 cores and 8 threads, whereas the Ryzen has 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning the Intel part supports simultaneous multithreading and the AMD part does not.

Base clocks are close: 2.00 GHz for the Xeon and 2.10 GHz for the Ryzen. Boost clocks diverge more significantly, with the Ryzen reaching 3.50 GHz versus the Xeon's 2.80 GHz. TDP favors AMD at 15 watts against Intel's 25 watts. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, while the Ryzen supports only DDR4. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Ryzen's bandwidth is higher at 42.7 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s. Both support ECC memory and have PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics differ: the Xeon includes HD Graphics P530, and the Ryzen includes Radeon Vega 6. The release dates are far apart, with the Xeon launching on 2015-10-26 and the Ryzen on 2022-06-20. The launch MSRP of the Xeon was $433; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ryzen. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is substantial. The Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 is built on Skylake-H, a 14 nm process from Intel, using 2,300 million transistors on a 122 mm² die. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 uses a Zen+ architecture, specifically the Picasso codename, manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 12 nm process with 4,940 million transistors and a 210 mm² die.

Cache configurations also differ. The Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen offers 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, but only 4 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip has more L1 and L2 per core, while the Intel chip has double the L3 capacity.

The process node advantage belongs to AMD: 12 nm versus 14 nm. The transistor count is more than double on the AMD part (4,940 million versus 2,300 million), likely reflecting the integrated Radeon Vega 6 graphics and the larger die. The Xeon's smaller die and lower transistor count suggest a more streamlined design, but the Ryzen's newer architecture and process node contribute to its lower 15-watt TDP despite having more transistors.

The market segment classifications differ as well: Intel labels the Xeon for server or workstation use, while AMD labels the Ryzen Embedded R2314 for desktop. The production status reflects this: the server-oriented Xeon is end-of-life, while the embedded desktop chip remains active.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 wins in: All six recorded Cinebench benchmarks, including multi-core and single-core variants across R15, R20, and R23. The largest margin is 2.9% in R15 single-core. The Xeon also offers more L3 cache (8 MB versus 4 MB) and supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, which can be advantageous in legacy or mixed-memory systems. Its 4-core, 8-thread configuration provides better multi-threading capability in workloads that scale with thread count.

AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314 wins in: Efficiency and system integration. The 15-watt TDP is 40% lower than the Xeon's 25 watts, making it more suitable for passively cooled or thermally constrained embedded chassis. The higher boost clock of 3.50 GHz versus 2.80 GHz gives it headroom for bursty, lightly threaded tasks, even though the recorded single-core scores do not show an advantage. The 12 nm process node is newer than Intel's 14 nm, and the chip remains in active production, ensuring long-term availability. Memory bandwidth is higher at 42.7 GB/s, which can benefit memory-intensive workloads. The larger L1 and L2 caches per core (96 KB and 512 KB versus 64 KB and 256 KB) may help with certain access patterns, even if the overall L3 pool is smaller.

The practical split is this: choose the Xeon when absolute Cinebench scores are the priority and the system can accommodate a 25-watt part with older production status. Choose the Ryzen when power efficiency, active production, and newer architecture matter more than a 2% benchmark delta. For most embedded deployments, the Ryzen's combination of lower TDP and higher boost clock may be the more attractive package, despite losing every recorded benchmark.