AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 vs Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a remarkably consistent picture for these two processors. The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the database, taking all six recorded tests across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 does not secure a single victory in any of the six comparisons.

The Intel part's advantage is narrow but uniform. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 1395 against the Ryzen Embedded's 1350, a 3.3% lead. Single-core R15 shows the same pattern: 196 versus 190, again 3.2% ahead. This consistency carries through every workload generation. The R20 multicore result has Intel at 5814 and AMD at 5626, a 3.3% gap, while single-core R20 sits at 820 versus 794, also 3.3%. The R23 results repeat the theme with the Xeon scoring 13843 against 13396 in multicore and 1954 against 1891 in single-core, both 3.3% advantages.

The use-case split is therefore not about which chip wins a given category, but about the nature of the workloads each can serve. The Xeon E5-2698B v3 is built for server and workstation duty with 16 cores and 32 threads, making it the choice for heavily threaded rendering, simulation, and database workloads where the extra core count can be utilized. The Ryzen Embedded V2718, with 8 cores and 16 threads, targets embedded and desktop scenarios where its much lower power envelope and integrated graphics matter more than raw throughput.

The average benchmark score reinforces the hierarchy. The Xeon posts an average score of 4004 across its benchmark suite, while the Ryzen Embedded averages 3875. Both chips sit near the same percentile tier, with the Xeon at the 57th percentile of all CPUs and the AMD part at the 56th percentile. The overall performance class is similar, but the Intel chip edges ahead in every measured category.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is substantial. The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 uses the Haswell architecture, specifically the Haswell-EP variant, built on Intel's 22 nm process node. The die measures 356 mm² and packs 2,600 million transistors. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 uses Zen 2 architecture under the Renoir codename, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm node. Its die is much smaller at 156 mm² but contains 9,800 million transistors, a reflection of the denser manufacturing process.

Core and thread counts differ sharply. The Xeon offers 16 cores and 32 threads, double the Ryzen Embedded's 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks favor Intel at 2000 MHz versus 1700 MHz, but the AMD part boosts much higher, reaching 4150 MHz against the Xeon's 3400 MHz. This higher boost clock helps the Ryzen Embedded stay competitive in single-threaded work despite the core deficit.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both chips use 64 KB of L1 cache per core. L2 cache is 256 KB per core on the Xeon versus 512 KB per core on the Ryzen Embedded. The L3 situation is inverted: the Xeon has 40 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD part has only 8 MB shared. The larger L3 on the Intel chip helps feed its 16 cores, while the per-core L2 advantage on the AMD side compensates somewhat for the smaller L3.

Memory support shows both platforms using DDR4, but the channel configurations differ. The Xeon runs quad-channel memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. The Ryzen Embedded uses dual-channel memory with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Both support ECC memory, which matters for reliability-focused workloads.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Xeon provides Gen 3 with 40 lanes from the CPU, while the Ryzen Embedded offers Gen 3 with 20 lanes. The Intel part has no integrated graphics, whereas the AMD chip includes Radeon Graphics with 448 shader processors. This makes the Ryzen Embedded a complete package for compact systems that need display output without a discrete GPU.

The process technology gap is generational. Intel's 22 nm Haswell design dates to an older era, while AMD's 7 nm Zen 2 is significantly more modern. The Ryzen Embedded also remains in active production, while the Xeon is end-of-life. Both processors have locked multipliers, so overclocking is not part of the equation for either.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 has 16 cores and 32 threads. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Ryzen Embedded V2718 features Radeon Graphics with 448 shader processors. The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two chips?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 has a TDP of 135 watts, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 has a TDP of just 10 watts.

Q: Which chip supports more PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 provides Gen 3 with 40 lanes from the CPU. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 provides Gen 3 with 20 lanes.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multicore performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 scores 13843, which is 3.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718's score of 13396.

Q: Which memory configuration does each processor use?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 uses quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 uses dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The Xeon E5-2698B v3 is an Intel server and workstation part on the Socket 2011-3 platform, while the Ryzen Embedded V2718 is an AMD desktop-focused embedded chip on Socket FP6. The Xeon comes from the Haswell-EP generation and is end-of-life, whereas the Ryzen Embedded belongs to the 2000 series, uses Zen 2 Renoir architecture, and remains in active production.

Core count is 16 versus 8, and thread count is 32 versus 16. Base clocks are 2000 MHz on the Intel part versus 1700 MHz on the AMD part. Boost clocks reverse the order: 3400 MHz for the Xeon and 4150 MHz for the Ryzen Embedded. TDP differs dramatically at 135 watts versus 10 watts.

The process node shows Intel at 22 nm with 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die, while AMD uses TSMC's 7 nm process with 9,800 million transistors on a 156 mm² die. Cache configurations differ in L2 and L3: 256 KB L2 per core and 40 MB shared L3 for Intel, versus 512 KB L2 per core and 8 MB shared L3 for AMD. L1 cache is identical at 64 KB per core.

Memory bandwidth favors Intel at 68.3 GB/s over AMD's 51.2 GB/s, with quad-channel versus dual-channel support. PCIe lanes are 40 versus 20, both Gen 3. The AMD part includes Radeon Graphics with 448 shader processors; the Intel part has none. The part numbers are SR21T for the Xeon and 100-000000242 for the Ryzen Embedded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Every benchmark in the database shows the Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 ahead, and the margins are strikingly uniform. The narrowest wins are in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon scores 196 against 190, a 3.2% advantage. The largest deltas are 3.3% across the remaining five tests.

In multicore workloads, the Xeon's 16 cores should theoretically dominate the Ryzen Embedded's 8 cores, yet the margin is only 3.3%. The R15 multicore result has Intel at 1395 and AMD at 1350. The R20 multicore test shows 5814 versus 5626. The R23 multicore test, the most demanding of the group, records 13843 for Intel and 13396 for AMD. The consistent 3.3% gap across all three generations of Cinebench suggests the Ryzen Embedded's much higher boost clock and modern architecture largely offset the Xeon's core-count advantage in these particular workloads.

Single-core results tell a similar story. The R15 single-core test has the Xeon at 196 and the AMD part at 190, a 3.2% margin. R20 single-core shows 820 versus 794, a 3.3% delta. R23 single-core records 1954 for Intel and 1891 for AMD, again 3.3%. The Ryzen Embedded's 4150 MHz boost clock is significantly higher than the Xeon's 3400 MHz, yet the older Haswell architecture still manages to edge out the newer Zen 2 design in single-threaded performance.

The average benchmark scores place these chips very close in the broader market. The Xeon averages 4004 and sits at the 57th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655G at 4010 (0.2% ahead), the Intel Core i5-12400T at 4019 (0.4% ahead), the Intel Xeon E-2336 at 3985 (0.5% behind), and the Intel Xeon D-2733NT at 3984 (0.5% behind). The Ryzen Embedded V2718 averages 3875 and sits at the 56th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-11700T at 3864 (0.3% behind), the AMD Ryzen 5 4600GE at 3906 (0.8% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS at 3924 (1.3% ahead), and the Intel Xeon E-2286M at 3822 (1.4% behind).

The data shows a processor pair separated by a small but consistent margin. The Xeon E5-2698B v3 wins all six head-to-head tests, but the Ryzen Embedded V2718 achieves this near-parity while consuming just 10 watts of power compared to 135 watts, offering integrated graphics, and remaining an active product. For systems where power efficiency and compact design take priority, the Ryzen Embedded is the sensible pick. For raw benchmark throughput in server and workstation roles, the Xeon holds a measured, if modest, lead.