AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B vs Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a remarkably consistent pattern across the entire Cinebench test suite. The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 wins all six head-to-head comparisons, though the margins are consistently narrow. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 707 against 701 for the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B, a 0.9% advantage. Single-core R15 shows the Intel part at 99 versus 98, a 1% edge. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon posts 2946 in multi-core compared to 2921 for the AMD chip, again a 0.9% lead, while single-core R20 sees 415 against 412, a 0.7% margin. The newest test in the suite, Cinebench R23, continues the trend: the Intel processor reaches 7015 in multi-core versus 6957, a 0.8% gap, and 990 in single-core versus 982, also a 0.8% difference.

These margins are small enough that they fall within typical run-to-run variation for synthetic benchmarks, but the direction is unambiguous. Every single test result favors the Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5, giving it a clean 6-0 sweep in the head-to-head table. The largest relative advantage appears in Cinebench R15 single-core at 1%, while the smallest is the R20 single-core test at 0.7%. Multi-core tests cluster tightly between 0.8% and 0.9%, suggesting that the two processors scale nearly identically when all cores are engaged.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 records an average of 2029 across all tests, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B averages 2012. That difference of 17 points translates to roughly 0.8% overall, consistent with the individual test deltas. Both processors sit at the 45th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same tier of overall performance despite the Intel part's slight edge in every measured workload.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 claims victory in every benchmark category recorded in the database, so the use-case split is straightforward for raw compute performance. For workloads that depend on single-threaded performance, such as lightly threaded applications, legacy software, or tasks where clock speed dominates, the data shows the Intel part ahead by 0.7% to 1% depending on the Cinebench version. The Xeon's higher base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.00 GHz, compared to 3.35 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost for the AMD chip, align with these single-thread results.

For multi-threaded workloads, including rendering, video encoding, and compilation tasks that scale across cores, the Intel processor also holds the advantage, though the margins are similarly slim. The multi-core deltas of 0.8% to 0.9% indicate that both processors extract nearly identical throughput from their 4-core, 8-thread configurations. Neither chip demonstrates a categorical superiority in any workload class; the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B wins zero head-to-head tests in the database.

The AMD part does bring an integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 GPU, a feature entirely absent from the Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5, which has no integrated graphics listed in its specifications. This means systems built around the AMD processor can drive displays without a discrete graphics card, a meaningful capability for compact embedded or desktop configurations. The Intel part, by contrast, requires a separate GPU for any visual output. That said, the database contains no graphics benchmarks for either processor, so any assessment of visual performance must remain qualitative.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 uses the Skylake architecture, specifically the Skylake-DT codename, built on Intel's 14 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B uses the Zen architecture, codenamed Zen with the Great Horned Owl generation identifier, also on a 14 nm process but manufactured by GlobalFoundries. Both parts feature 4 cores and 8 threads, making them direct competitors in the core-count bracket.

Transistor counts and die sizes reveal a significant difference in physical design. The Intel chip packs 1,750 million transistors into a 122 mm² die, while the AMD chip contains 4,950 million transistors across a 210 mm² die. The AMD processor's larger transistor budget reflects the inclusion of the Radeon RX Vega 11 integrated graphics and a different cache hierarchy. The Intel part allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part doubles the per-core L1 to 128 KB and per-core L2 to 512 KB, but offers only 2 MB of shared L3. This cache configuration means the Intel processor has substantially more last-level cache available to all cores, while the AMD processor compensates with larger private caches at the L1 and L2 levels.

Memory support for both processors is DDR4 over a dual-channel bus. The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 supports ECC memory, a critical feature for server and workstation reliability, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B does not list ECC support. The Intel part also specifies PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the AMD part's PCIe configuration is not listed in the database. The Intel processor is classified as a Server/Workstation part, whereas the AMD chip is classified as Desktop, despite its Embedded branding.

Clock speeds favor the Intel chip on paper: 3.70 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost versus 3.35 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost for the AMD. The power envelope tells the opposite story. The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 carries a TDP of 80 watts, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B is rated at just 45 watts. That 35-watt gap means the AMD part delivers nearly the same benchmark performance while drawing substantially less power under load, a significant consideration for embedded systems, small-form-factor builds, and thermally constrained environments.

The Intel processor launched on October 18, 2015, with a launch MSRP of $612, and is now end-of-life. The AMD processor launched on February 20, 2018, and remains in active production. The Intel part uses the Intel Socket 1151, while the AMD part uses the AMD Socket FP5. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking headroom is not part of the value proposition for either chip.

The Verdict

The benchmark data tells a clear story: the Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 is the faster processor in every recorded test. Its wins range from 0.7% to 1% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multi-core configurations. For anyone prioritizing raw compute performance in applications that mirror these Cinebench workloads, the Intel part is the correct choice based strictly on the numbers. The 6-0 sweep in head-to-head results, combined with the higher average benchmark score of 2029 versus 2012, leaves no ambiguity about which chip delivers more performance per unit of work.

However, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B is not simply a loser. Its 45-watt TDP, compared to 80 watts for the Intel part, makes it substantially more power-efficient. For embedded deployments, always-on systems, or builds where thermals and energy consumption matter more than a sub-1% performance difference, the AMD processor offers a compelling trade-off. The integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics also give the AMD chip a capability the Intel part lacks entirely: on-chip display output without a discrete GPU. A system builder who needs a compact, self-contained unit with graphics and modest power draw would find the AMD part more suitable, even though it loses every CPU benchmark.

The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 also brings ECC memory support and a larger 8 MB shared L3 cache, features that appeal to workstation and server users who prioritize data integrity and cache-sensitive workloads. The AMD part counters with double the L1 and L2 cache per core, though its total L3 is a fraction of the Intel chip's. The Intel processor's end-of-life status and 2015 release date, against the AMD part's active production status and 2018 release date, may influence platform longevity decisions.

The performance gap is real but small. The largest delta in the entire head-to-head table is 1%, and the average benchmark score difference is roughly 0.8%. For most real-world applications, this difference would be imperceptible. The decision between these two processors should therefore rest on secondary factors: power consumption, integrated graphics, ECC support, platform availability, and production status. If pure CPU benchmark scores are the only criterion, the Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 wins. If system-level flexibility, power efficiency, and graphics capability matter more, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B justifies consideration despite its benchmark deficit.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 wins all three multi-core tests: Cinebench R15 at 707 versus 701, R20 at 2946 versus 2921, and R23 at 7015 versus 6957. The margins range from 0.8% to 0.9%.

Q: How much power does each processor consume?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 has a TDP of 80 watts, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B is rated at 45 watts. The AMD part delivers nearly identical benchmark scores while drawing significantly less power.

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

A: Yes, the AMD part includes a Radeon RX Vega 11 integrated GPU. The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 has no integrated graphics listed in its specifications, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: Do either of these processors support ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B does not list ECC support in its specifications.

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

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 averages 2029, matching the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 exactly with a 0% delta, and trailing the Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 and Intel Core i7-5775R by 0.1%. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B averages 2012, sitting 0.1% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 and 0.3% to 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i5-8300H, Intel Xeon D-1712TR, and Intel Core i5-8400H.

Q: What are the cache configurations for each processor?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B has 128 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, but only 2 MB of shared L3.