AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 vs Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 and AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 are both 4-core, 8-thread processors aimed at compact, low-power systems, but they come from different eras and design philosophies. Benchmark data shows the AMD part wins the majority of head-to-head comparisons, yet the Intel chip remains relevant in specific legacy scenarios. This analysis breaks down where each processor holds an advantage based strictly on the provided benchmark results and specifications.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 is the clear performance leader in multi-threaded workloads. It wins five out of six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, including all multi-core tests (Cinebench R15, R20, and R23) and two of the three single-core tests. Its single-core advantage is consistent, with a 1.1% to 1.2% lead in Cinebench R20 and R23 single-core runs. This makes it the better choice for any application that scales with core count or benefits from higher single-thread performance, such as modern compilation tasks, media encoding, or general productivity software.

The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 wins exactly one benchmark: Cinebench R15 single-core, where it ties the AMD part at a score of 84. This is a statistical dead heat, not a meaningful victory. However, the Intel chip holds advantages outside raw compute performance. It uses older DDR3 memory, which may be cheaper or more readily available for those upgrading an existing Socket 1150 platform. The Intel part also features the Iris Pro P6300 integrated graphics, which is a different class of iGPU compared to the AMD Radeon Vega 8, though the data does not provide direct graphics benchmarks to quantify the difference.

For a new system build, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 is the superior choice. For an upgrade to an existing DDR3-era motherboard, the Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 might make more sense, provided the performance deficit is acceptable.

Architecture Differences

These two processors represent different architectural generations and manufacturing approaches. The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 is built on the Broadwell-DT architecture using a 14 nm process from Intel, with a die size of 182 mm². The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 uses the Zen+ (Picasso) architecture on a 12 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with a larger die size of 210 mm² and 4,940 million transistors.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Intel part offers 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with a shared 6 MB L3 cache. The AMD part provides more L1 (96 KB per core) and L2 (512 KB per core) cache, but has a smaller shared L3 cache at only 4 MB. This means the AMD chip has faster access to its primary working set, while the Intel chip can hold more shared data in its larger L3.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The Intel Xeon uses DDR3 with dual-channel memory and a peak bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen Embedded supports DDR4 with dual-channel memory and a substantially higher peak bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. The AMD part also has a higher boost clock (3.70 GHz vs 3.30 GHz) but a lower base clock (2.10 GHz vs 2.30 GHz). In terms of platform, the Intel part uses Socket 1150, while the AMD part uses Socket FP5.

The production statuses are polar opposites. The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 is end-of-life, released in 2015 with a launch MSRP of $417. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 is active, released in 2022 as part of the 2000 series. The AMD part is a more modern design with a smaller process node and newer memory standard.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results show a narrow but consistent win for the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 across most tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD scores 603 versus the Intel's 595, a 1.3% difference. The single-core R15 test is a tie at 84 points for both. Moving to Cinebench R20, the AMD wins multi-core with 2513 against 2482 (1.2% ahead) and single-core with 354 against 350 (1.1% ahead). The pattern continues in Cinebench R23, where the AMD scores 5984 in multi-core versus 5910 (1.2% ahead) and 844 in single-core versus 834 (1.2% ahead).

The average benchmark score reinforces this picture. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 has an average score of 1730, putting it in the 41st percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 averages 1709, placing it in the 40th percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the AMD Athlon Gold PRO 3150GE (0.5% slower) and the Intel Core i7-4860HQ (0.6% faster). The Intel Xeon's closest competitors are the Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 (exact tie) and the Intel Core i7-990X (0.2% faster).

The deltas are small, meaning the real-world experience will be similar in lightly threaded tasks. However, the AMD part wins every multi-core test and the two newer single-core tests (R20 and R23). This suggests that the AMD architecture's higher boost clock and faster memory bandwidth provide a tangible, if modest, edge in sustained workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 has a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, while the Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 boosts to 3.30 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 and the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 support ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 supports DDR4 with a peak bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 supports DDR3 with a peak bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s.

Q: Which CPU has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 has a larger shared L3 cache at 6 MB, compared to the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514's 4 MB shared L3.

Q: Is one of these processors end-of-life?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 is end-of-life, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 is still an active production part.

Q: Which chip wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 scores 5984, beating the Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4's 5910, a 1.2% advantage.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward decision for new builds: choose the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514. It wins five of six head-to-head benchmarks, has a higher average score (1730 vs 1709), and is in the 41st percentile versus the Intel's 40th. It also offers a newer process node (12 nm vs 14 nm), faster memory support (DDR4 vs DDR3), and a higher boost clock. The fact that it's an active product while the Intel part is end-of-life further solidifies its position for any new system.

The only scenario where the Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 makes sense is if you are locked into a Socket 1150 platform with DDR3 memory and want to upgrade to a low-power Xeon. Its single-core tie in Cinebench R15 (84 vs 84) shows it's not a slouch in legacy tests, and its larger 6 MB L3 cache might help in specific workloads that benefit from a bigger shared cache. However, its end-of-life status and slower memory bandwidth make it a difficult recommendation for anything other than a drop-in replacement.

For a practical builder, the AMD part is the one to pick. The performance gap is small but consistent across modern benchmarks, and the platform advantages (DDR4, active support) are decisive. The Intel chip is a capable legacy option, but it is outclassed by a newer architecture with better memory throughput and a higher clock ceiling.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 | AMD Ryzen Embedded R2514 |

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

| Manufacturer | Intel | AMD |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.30 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1150 | AMD Socket FP5 |

| Architecture | Broadwell | Zen+ |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Die Size | 182 mm² | 210 mm² |

| Transistors | Not specified | 4,940 million |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 29.9 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Iris Pro P6300 | Radeon Vega 8 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2015-06-01 | 2022-09-29 |

| Launch MSRP | $417 | Not specified |

| Part Number | SR2B3 | YE2514C4T4MFH, YE2514C4T4MFHA |