AMD Ryzen Embedded V2516 vs Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2516 and the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 are separated by four years of silicon evolution, yet their benchmark scores tell a surprisingly close story. The data shows the AMD part winning all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, but the margins are razor-thin, ranging from 0.3% to 0.6%. This is not a generational beatdown; it is a statistical tie broken by a modern architecture's efficiency.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results indicate a consistent, if narrow, advantage for the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2516 across every test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD scores 1141 against the Intel's 1137, a delta of 0.4%. The single-core R15 result is similar, with AMD at 161 and Intel at 160, a 0.6% edge. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core gap remains at 0.4% (4758 vs 4739), while the single-core difference narrows to 0.3% (671 vs 669). The pattern holds in Cinebench R23, where the AMD leads 11329 to 11285 in multi-core (0.4%) and 1599 to 1593 in single-core (0.4%). The AMD wins all 6 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel secures none.

These numbers reveal a fascinating dynamic. The Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 has a higher base clock (3.20 GHz vs 2.10 GHz) and two additional physical cores (8 vs 6), yet it cannot convert that hardware advantage into a performance lead. The AMD's boost clock of 3.95 GHz versus 3.80 GHz helps close the single-core gap, but the real story is architectural efficiency. The Zen 2 architecture delivers comparable throughput per thread despite lower raw frequencies and fewer cores. The largest margin anywhere is 0.6%, which is within run-to-run variance for most workloads, but the consistency of the AMD win across all six tests suggests a genuine, if modest, performance superiority.

The average benchmark scores corroborate this. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2516 posts an average score of 3277, while the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 averages 3264. The AMD's nearest rival, the Intel Core i3-12100T, matches its 3277 score exactly with a 0% delta, while the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 sits 0.4% below the AMD. Both processors land in the 53rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating they are squarely mid-pack performers. Neither processor dominates its peer group; they are simply two different routes to the same destination.

The Verdict

The data does not support a clear winner for every scenario. If the selection criterion is raw benchmark output, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2516 wins every single test, but the margins are so small that they would be imperceptible in real-world use. The AMD is the faster processor on paper, with a 0.4% average advantage across the six Cinebench tests. However, the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 offers two more cores and a much larger shared L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB), which the benchmarks do not fully exploit. Buyers who prioritize the highest possible Cinebench scores should choose the AMD. Buyers who need more physical cores for heavily threaded, non-Cinebench workloads might prefer the Intel, despite its benchmark deficit. The Intel also carries a launch MSRP of $1113, which is a data point worth noting, though no price is listed for the AMD.

The percentile rank of 53 for both processors means they are neither exceptional nor weak. They occupy the same performance tier. The decision hinges on platform features and longevity, not speed. The AMD is an active production part from 2020, while the Intel is end-of-life from 2016. The AMD's 7 nm process node and TSMC foundry contrast sharply with the Intel's 14 nm process and in-house fabrication. For a new system build, the AMD's active status and modern platform make it the more sensible choice, even if the performance gap is negligible.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2516 wins all six Cinebench benchmarks, making it the clear choice for rendering tasks measured by those tests. Its wins span both single-core and multi-core workloads, indicating a balanced architecture that excels across the board. The largest win is 0.6% in Cinebench R15 single-core, while the smallest is 0.3% in Cinebench R20 single-core. The AMD also leads in the average benchmark score, 3277 to 3264.

The Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 has no benchmark wins in this comparison, but it wins on paper in several specification categories. It offers 8 cores and 16 threads versus the AMD's 6 cores and 12 threads, which could benefit workloads that scale with core count beyond what Cinebench measures. Its 20 MB of shared L3 cache is 2.5 times larger than the AMD's 8 MB, potentially improving performance in cache-sensitive applications. The Intel also supports quad-channel memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s versus the AMD's dual-channel 51.2 GB/s, a 50% advantage in memory throughput. The Intel provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, double the AMD's 20 lanes, which matters for systems with many expansion cards or NVMe drives.

For single-threaded responsiveness, the AMD's higher boost clock (3.95 GHz vs 3.80 GHz) gives it a slight edge, as reflected in the single-core benchmark wins. For heavily parallel workloads that saturate all cores, the Intel's two extra cores might compensate for its lower per-core efficiency, but the Cinebench multi-core results suggest it does not fully close the gap. The AMD's integrated Radeon Graphics with 384 SPs is a feature the Intel completely lacks, enabling display output without a discrete GPU.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2516 scores 11329, which is 0.4% higher than the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4's 11285.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 win any benchmark against the AMD?

A: No. The head-to-head results show the AMD winning all 6 Cinebench tests, with the Intel winning 0.

Q: What is the largest performance difference between the two?

A: The largest delta is 0.6% in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the AMD scores 161 versus the Intel's 160.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD averages 3277, which is 0.4% higher than the Intel's 3264. The AMD's nearest rival, the Intel Core i3-12100T, matches its 3277 score with a 0% delta.

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2516 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel supports quad-channel memory with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the AMD uses dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s. The Intel's bandwidth is 50% higher.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from completely different design eras. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2516 uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Renoir, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 9,800 million transistors into a 156 mm² die. The Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 uses the Broadwell architecture, specifically Broadwell-EP, on Intel's 14 nm process, with 3,400 million transistors on a larger 246 mm² die. The transistor density difference is stark: the AMD crams nearly three times as many transistors into a smaller area, which explains its vastly lower power draw despite similar performance.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The AMD provides 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3. The Intel also has 64 KB of L1 per core but only 256 KB of L2 per core, compensated by a much larger 20 MB shared L3. The Intel's total cache footprint is larger, but the AMD's per-core L2 is double, which helps with certain workloads. The AMD's memory controller is dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel's is quad-channel with 76.8 GB/s. Both support DDR4 and ECC memory.

The AMD includes integrated Radeon Graphics with 384 shader processors, a feature absent from the Intel. The AMD's PCIe implementation provides 20 Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel provides 40 Gen 3 lanes. The AMD uses Socket FP6, while the Intel uses Socket 2011-3. The AMD's process node advantage (7 nm vs 14 nm) and newer release date (2020 vs 2016) give it architectural improvements in instruction efficiency and power management. The Intel's larger core count and cache are its main architectural counterpoints. The AMD's TDP is 10 watts, while the Intel's is 140 watts, a 14-fold difference that is not reflected in performance.

Specification Differences

The processors differ in nearly every major specification field. The AMD has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 2.10 GHz for the AMD and 3.20 GHz for the Intel, a 1.10 GHz advantage for the Intel. Boost clocks are closer: 3.95 GHz for the AMD and 3.80 GHz for the Intel, a 0.15 GHz advantage for the AMD. The TDP difference is enormous: 10 watts for the AMD versus 140 watts for the Intel.

The AMD is built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel uses 14 nm at Intel. Transistor counts are 9,800 million for the AMD and 3,400 million for the Intel. Die sizes are 156 mm² and 246 mm², respectively. Cache configuration differs: the AMD has 512 KB L2 per core and 8 MB shared L3, while the Intel has 256 KB L2 per core and 20 MB shared L3. Both have 64 KB L1 per core.

Memory support is DDR4 for both, but the AMD uses dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel uses quad-channel with 76.8 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe is Gen 3 for both, but the AMD has 20 lanes and the Intel has 40 lanes. The AMD includes Radeon Graphics with 384 SPs; the Intel has no integrated graphics. The AMD's socket is FP6, while the Intel's is 2011-3. The AMD's production status is Active, while the Intel is End-of-life. The AMD was released in 2020, the Intel in 2016. The AMD's part number is 100-000000243, and the Intel's is SR2PK. The Intel has a launch MSRP of $1113; no launch MSRP is listed for the AMD. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.