AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B vs Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B and Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 are closely matched 4-core, 8-thread processors, but the recorded data shows a consistent, if narrow, edge for the AMD part across every tested workload. The Ryzen Embedded V1807B wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, with margins ranging from 1.0% to 1.2%. The Xeon E3-1285L v4, while holding its own in raw compute, is an end-of-life server part with a higher 65 W TDP, older memory support, and a lower overall benchmark percentile. For any workload where single-thread and multi-thread performance are the primary criteria, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B is the stronger choice according to the database. The Xeon E3-1285L v4 remains relevant only in scenarios requiring ECC memory and a specific legacy socket, as its performance deficit is too small to matter in most applications but its feature set is distinctly different.

The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B for general compute tasks. In every Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 test, both single-core and multi-core, the AMD processor posts the higher score. The largest margin is a 1.2% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core (701 vs 693) and Cinebench R20 single-core (412 vs 407), while the smallest is a 1.0% edge in Cinebench R15 single-core (98 vs 97) and Cinebench R20 multi-core (2921 vs 2891). The average benchmark score also favors AMD, with the V1807B at 2012 against the Xeon's 1991, placing them at the 45th and 44th percentiles of all CPUs respectively. This is a tight race in absolute numbers, but the consistency of the AMD wins across all six recorded tests indicates a slight architectural advantage in both single-threaded and multi-threaded execution.

The Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 is not without purpose. Its only distinguishing advantage in the database is ECC memory support, which the AMD part lacks. It also has a launch MSRP of $445, though that is a historical figure. For a system builder prioritizing data integrity over raw performance, the Xeon's ECC capability is the sole reason to select it. However, the Xeon carries a 65 W TDP compared to the AMD's 45 W, making the Ryzen the more power-efficient option per unit of performance. The Ryzen Embedded V1807B is also an active production part, while the Xeon is end-of-life, a practical consideration for long-term availability. In short, the verdict is clear: pick the AMD for performance and efficiency, pick the Intel only if ECC memory is a non-negotiable requirement.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and generations. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B is built on the Zen architecture, codenamed Great Horned Owl, using a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. It integrates 4,950 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. The Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 is a Broadwell-DT part, also on a 14 nm process but from Intel's own foundry, with 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. The transistor count difference is substantial, indicating a denser or more complex design in the AMD chip, though the Intel die is physically smaller.

Cache configurations differ notably. The AMD V1807B provides 128 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, with a 2 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, but compensates with a much larger 6 MB shared L3 cache. This means the Intel part has three times the L3 capacity, which can be beneficial for certain data-heavy workloads, but the AMD part has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches. Memory support is a clear split: the AMD supports DDR4 in a dual-channel configuration with no ECC, while the Intel supports DDR3 with ECC capability and specifies a 29.9 GB/s memory bandwidth. The Intel part also lists PCIe Gen 3 support, while the AMD part does not specify PCIe in the database.

The integrated graphics also differ. The AMD uses a Radeon RX Vega 11, while the Intel uses Iris Pro P6300. The database does not provide benchmark scores for these iGPUs, so no performance comparison is possible, but they are distinct solutions. The Xeon targets the Server/Workstation market segment, while the AMD is classified as Desktop, reflecting the Xeon's ECC and legacy socket orientation. The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP5 versus Intel Socket 1150. The AMD part is from the 1000 series, released in February 2018, and remains active, while the Intel part dates to June 2015 and is end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are uniform in direction but small in magnitude. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B scores 701 against the Intel Xeon's 693, a 1.2% win. The single-core R15 test shows the AMD ahead by 1.0%, scoring 98 to 97. Moving to Cinebench R20, the AMD repeats its multi-core win with 2921 against 2891, a 1.0% margin, and its single-core win with 412 against 407, a 1.2% margin. In the most recent Cinebench R23 tests, the AMD leads multi-core with 6957 versus 6884, a 1.1% delta, and single-core with 982 versus 971, also a 1.1% delta.

These deltas are consistent across all six tests, suggesting a stable performance advantage rather than a workload-specific fluke. The AMD's largest wins are in R15 multi-core and R20 single-core, both at 1.2%, while its smallest is a 1.0% lead in R15 single-core and R20 multi-core. The Xeon never wins a single test, with a record of 0 wins against 6 for the AMD. In the context of nearest rivals, the AMD's average score of 2012 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 (2015) and 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i5-8300H (2005). The Intel Xeon's average of 1991 is exactly matched by the AMD Ryzen 5 1500X (1992) and the Intel Core i7-7920HQ (1992), with a 0.1% delta. This places both CPUs in the same performance tier, but the AMD consistently sits at the top of that tier across the recorded Cinebench suite.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B has an average benchmark score of 2012, compared to 1991 for the Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B does not.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B has a 45 W TDP, while the Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 has a 65 W TDP.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 has a 6 MB shared L3 cache, which is larger than the 2 MB shared L3 cache on the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B is listed as active, while the Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 is end-of-life.

Q: In which Cinebench test does the AMD processor have its largest lead?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B has its largest lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core, with a 1.2% advantage over the Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B wins every benchmark category recorded in the database. It is ahead in all three multi-core tests (Cinebench R15, R20, R23) and all three single-core tests (Cinebench R15, R20, R23). The margins are narrow, between 1.0% and 1.2%, but they are universal. This makes the AMD the default choice for any workload that relies on Cinebench-style rendering or calculation, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded. Its 45 W TDP also gives it an efficiency advantage, as it achieves higher scores with lower power consumption. The AMD part is also the only one with active production status, which is a practical win for procurement.

The Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 has no benchmark wins, so its advantages are qualitative and feature-based. Its ECC memory support is the standout feature, making it suitable for error-sensitive server or workstation tasks where data corruption is unacceptable. The larger 6 MB L3 cache could theoretically help in cache-heavy workloads, but the database does not record any such test where it translates into a performance win. The Intel part also supports DDR3 memory and PCIe Gen 3, which may be relevant for systems with existing legacy components. For a user with a Socket 1150 motherboard and DDR3 RAM, the Xeon is the only option of the two, but for new builds, the AMD's performance and power profile are superior.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification field except for core and thread counts, both having 4 cores and 8 threads, and base and boost clocks, where the AMD runs at 3.35 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost, while the Intel runs at 3.40 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. The AMD is manufactured by AMD on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, while the Intel is on Intel's 14 nm process. The AMD die is larger at 210 mm² with 4,950 million transistors, versus 160 mm² and 1,400 million for the Intel.

Cache layouts diverge: the AMD has 128 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core with a 2 MB shared L3, while the Intel has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core with a 6 MB shared L3. Memory support is a major split, with the AMD using DDR4 dual-channel and no ECC, versus the Intel using DDR3 dual-channel with ECC and a specified 29.9 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part supports PCIe Gen 3, while the AMD does not list PCIe support. Integrated graphics are Radeon RX Vega 11 on the AMD and Intel Iris Pro P6300 on the Intel.

The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP5 versus Intel Socket 1150. The TDP is 45 W for the AMD and 65 W for the Intel. The AMD is in the Desktop market segment, released in February 2018, and is active. The Intel is in the Server/Workstation segment, released in June 2015, and is end-of-life, with a launch MSRP of $445. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part is from the 1000 series, while the Intel part number is SR2B1.