AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B vs Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a remarkably consistent picture across the entire Cinebench suite. The Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests, though the margins are consistently narrow. In the multi-core tests, the Intel part takes the Cinebench R15 test with a score of 707 against the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B’s 701, a delta of 0.9%. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20, where the Xeon scores 2948 versus the Ryzen’s 2921, again a 0.9% lead. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result shows the same spread: 7020 for the Xeon, 6957 for the AMD, with the same 0.9% delta.

Single-core results follow the same trajectory but with slightly larger deltas. The Xeon E3-1240 v5 posts a 99 in Cinebench R15 single-core, while the Ryzen Embedded V1807B manages 98, giving Intel a 1% advantage. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the scores are 416 and 412 respectively, again a 1% margin. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows 991 for the Intel chip and 982 for the AMD chip, with the delta narrowing slightly to 0.9%.

The overall average benchmark score reinforces this hierarchy: the Xeon E3-1240 v5 averages 2030, while the Ryzen Embedded V1807B averages 2012. That 18-point gap places the Intel chip slightly ahead in the aggregate, and the nearest rival data contextualizes both parts. The Xeon sits just 0.1% behind the Intel Core i7-5775R, which scores 2031, and 0.1% ahead of the Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 at 2029. The Ryzen Embedded, meanwhile, trails the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 by 0.1% (2015 versus 2012) and leads the Intel Core i5-8300H by 0.3% (2005 versus 2012). Both parts land at the 45th percentile among all CPUs in the database, indicating that neither is a top-tier performer, but rather they occupy a similar mid-range standing.

The data shows that the Xeon’s wins are consistent but never dominant. A 0.9% or 1% margin in any single test is within the range of run-to-run variation, yet the fact that the Intel chip wins every single test across three different Cinebench versions suggests a genuine, if slim, performance advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 wins in every recorded benchmark category, which makes the use-case split straightforward for raw compute performance. Any workload that relies on multi-threaded rendering, such as Cinebench R15, R20, or R23 multi-core tests, will favor the Intel part. The margins are small, but they are uniform: 707 versus 701, 2948 versus 2921, and 7020 versus 6957. For single-threaded tasks, the Xeon also holds the edge, with scores of 99 versus 98 in R15, 416 versus 412 in R20, and 991 versus 982 in R23.

However, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B has a distinct advantage that is not captured in the Cinebench scores: it includes integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics. The Xeon E3-1240 v5 has no integrated graphics at all. For systems that need a display output or GPU-accelerated compute without a discrete card, the AMD part is the only option between the two. Additionally, the Ryzen Embedded consumes significantly less power, with a 45 W TDP versus the Xeon’s 80 W TDP. The data does not include a performance-per-watt metric, but the TDP figures alone indicate that the AMD chip will generate less heat and require less robust cooling in dense embedded deployments.

The AMD chip is also an active production part, while the Intel Xeon is end-of-life. For long-term supply guarantees in embedded or industrial applications, the Ryzen Embedded V1807B has a clear lifecycle advantage. The Intel part, released in October 2015, is two and a half years older than the AMD chip, which launched in February 2018. For new designs, the AMD part’s active status is a practical consideration that the benchmark scores do not reflect.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 is built on the Skylake architecture, specifically the Skylake-DT codename, and uses a 14 nm process node fabricated by Intel. It packs 1,750 million transistors into a 122 mm² die. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B is based on the Zen architecture, codenamed Zen (Great Horned Owl), and is also built on a 14 nm node, but by GlobalFoundries. Its die is substantially larger at 210 mm² and contains 4,950 million transistors, nearly three times the transistor count of the Intel chip.

Cache configurations differ markedly. The Xeon E3-1240 v5 provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen Embedded V1807B doubles the per-core L1 to 128 KB and the L2 to 512 KB per core, but its shared L3 cache is only 2 MB. The Intel chip’s larger L3 is likely a contributor to its slight edge in the single-threaded tests, despite the AMD chip’s larger per-core caches.

Memory support also diverges. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Ryzen Embedded supports only DDR4, also dual-channel, though the database does not list a bandwidth figure for it. The Intel chip supports ECC memory, a critical feature for server and workstation reliability, while the AMD part does not. The Xeon also exposes PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the database does not record PCIe information for the AMD chip.

The integrated graphics situation is a major differentiator. The Ryzen Embedded V1807B includes Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics, making it a complete system-on-chip solution. The Xeon E3-1240 v5 has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for any display output. The Intel part uses the Intel Socket 1151, while the AMD chip uses the AMD Socket FP5. Both processors have locked multipliers, so neither supports overclocking.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 707 versus 701 in R15, 2948 versus 2921 in R20, and 7020 versus 6957 in R23, a consistent 0.9% lead over the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics. The Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B does not list ECC support in the database.

Q: How do the two processors compare in power consumption?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B has a 45 W TDP, while the Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 has an 80 W TDP. The AMD chip consumes significantly less power.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 is end-of-life, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B is listed as active. The AMD part was released in February 2018, while the Intel part launched in October 2015.

Q: Are the benchmark wins for the Intel chip consistent across all tests?

A: Yes, the Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests, with deltas ranging from 0.9% to 1% across single-core and multi-core Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 benchmarks.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category in the database. The Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B runs at 3.35 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. The Intel chip has an 80 W TDP versus the AMD chip’s 45 W TDP. The sockets differ: Intel Socket 1151 for the Xeon, AMD Socket FP5 for the Ryzen Embedded.

The cache hierarchy is distinct: the Xeon provides 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3, while the Ryzen Embedded provides 128 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 2 MB shared L3. Memory support differs, with the Xeon accepting DDR3 and DDR4 and the Ryzen Embedded accepting only DDR4. The Xeon has a recorded memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s; the database does not list a bandwidth for the AMD chip. ECC memory support is present on the Intel part but absent on the AMD part.

The Xeon supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the database records no PCIe information for the AMD chip. The integrated graphics situation is reversed: the AMD part has Radeon RX Vega 11, while the Intel part has none. The market segment for the Xeon is Server/Workstation, while the Ryzen Embedded is classified as Desktop. The Xeon has a launch MSRP of $282; no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD part. The Xeon’s part number is SR2LD, while the AMD chip has no recorded part number. The transistor counts and die sizes also differ substantially: 1,750 million transistors on a 122 mm² die for Intel versus 4,950 million transistors on a 210 mm² die for AMD. The foundries are different as well, with Intel fabricating its own chip and GlobalFoundries fabricating the AMD part.