AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 vs Intel Xeon Silver 4116 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 is the outright winner in every recorded benchmark, taking all six head-to-head tests against the Intel Xeon Silver 4116. The data shows a consistent 3.8% advantage across both multi-core and single-core workloads, from Cinebench R15 through R23. This is not a case where one chip wins in some areas and loses in others; the V2718 leads across the board.

For a builder choosing between these two, the AMD part is the clear pick if you need lower power consumption and integrated graphics. The V2718 draws 10 watts, while the Xeon Silver 4116 draws 85 watts. That is an enormous difference in thermal and power requirements. The V2718 also includes Radeon Graphics with 448 shader processors, so no discrete GPU is necessary for basic display output. The Xeon Silver has no integrated graphics at all.

The Intel part, however, does have one structural edge: it offers 12 cores and 24 threads versus the AMD's 8 cores and 16 threads. Yet the benchmark data shows that core count advantage does not translate into a performance win. The V2718 still manages to outscore the Xeon in every Cinebench test, despite having fewer cores and a lower base clock. The AMD's higher boost clock of 4.15 GHz versus 3.00 GHz on the Intel, combined with the Zen 2 architecture, closes the gap and then some.

The production status also differs. The V2718 is listed as Active, while the Xeon Silver 4116 has no production status recorded in the database. For new system builds, the AMD part is the safer choice from a availability standpoint.

Neither chip has a launch MSRP recorded in the database, so no pricing comparison is possible from the data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and manufacturing processes. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 uses the Zen 2 architecture with the Renoir codename, built on TSMC's 7 nm process. It packs 9,800 million transistors into a 156 mm² die. The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 uses the Skylake architecture with the Skylake-SP codename, built on Intel's 14 nm process, with 8,000 million transistors. The Intel die size is not recorded in the database.

The manufacturing process difference is significant. The 7 nm TSMC process versus the 14 nm Intel process helps explain why the AMD chip can deliver comparable or better performance while consuming only 10 watts versus 85 watts. The transistor density advantage of the smaller node allows the V2718 to fit more transistors in a smaller die while using far less power.

Cache configurations also differ. The V2718 uses 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The Xeon Silver 4116 uses 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16.5 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has more L2 and L3 cache per core, but this does not translate into a benchmark win in the recorded data.

The socket situation is entirely different. The V2718 uses AMD Socket FP6, while the Xeon Silver 4116 uses Intel Socket 3647. These are not interchangeable platforms, so the motherboard selection forces a choice between the two ecosystems.

The V2718 supports PCIe Gen 3 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Xeon Silver's PCIe configuration is not recorded in the database. Both support DDR4 memory and both support ECC memory. The V2718 uses dual-channel memory with a recorded bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The Xeon Silver's memory bus and bandwidth are not recorded.

The V2718 includes integrated Radeon Graphics with 448 shader processors. The Xeon Silver has no integrated graphics recorded. The V2718 is classified as a Desktop market segment part, while the Xeon Silver is classified as Server/Workstation. The release dates differ by over three years: the V2718 launched in November 2020, and the Xeon Silver launched in July 2017.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent. Every single test shows the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 winning by exactly 3.8%. This uniformity suggests the performance gap is architectural rather than workload-specific.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the V2718 scores 1350 against the Xeon's 1301, a 3.8% win. The single-core R15 test shows 190 versus 183, again 3.8%. This is notable because the Xeon has 12 cores against the AMD's 8, yet loses the multi-core test. The AMD's higher boost clock of 4.15 GHz versus 3.00 GHz, combined with the Zen 2 core efficiency, overcomes the core count deficit.

Cinebench R20 follows the same pattern. Multi-core shows 5626 for the AMD versus 5421 for the Intel, and single-core shows 794 versus 765. Both are 3.8% margins. The R20 results reinforce that the advantage holds regardless of rendering workload intensity.

Cinebench R23, the newest test in the database, continues the trend. Multi-core shows 13396 for the V2718 versus 12908 for the Xeon, and single-core shows 1891 versus 1822. Again, 3.8% in both.

The average benchmark scores tell the same story. The V2718 averages 3875 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Xeon Silver 4116 averages 3733. The V2718's nearest rival in the database is the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS with an average score of 3924, a 1.3% difference. The Xeon Silver 4116's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE at 3732, essentially identical. Both chips sit at the 56th percentile of all CPUs in the database, meaning their overall position is similar, but the V2718 is consistently ahead in direct comparison.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Xeon Silver 4116 beat the AMD V2718 in any benchmark?

A: No. The database records six head-to-head Cinebench tests, and the AMD V2718 wins all six. The Intel part does not win a single recorded test, with the AMD leading by 3.8% in every case.

Q: How does the V2718 win multi-core tests despite having fewer cores?

A: The V2718 has 8 cores and 16 threads versus 12 cores and 24 threads on the Xeon Silver 4116, but it also has a boost clock of 4.15 GHz versus 3.00 GHz. The Zen 2 architecture and 7 nm process allow higher clock speeds at much lower power, which offsets the core count disadvantage in the recorded Cinebench tests.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The V2718 has a TDP of 10 watts, while the Xeon Silver 4116 has a TDP of 85 watts. That is a 75-watt difference in thermal design power, which has major implications for cooling requirements and power delivery design.

Q: Does the Xeon Silver support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both processors support ECC memory. The Xeon Silver 4116 supports DDR4 with ECC, and the V2718 also supports DDR4 with ECC. The V2718 additionally records a dual-channel memory bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Xeon's memory bus details are not recorded.

Q: Do these chips have integrated graphics?

A: The AMD V2718 includes Radeon Graphics with 448 shader processors. The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 has no integrated graphics recorded in the database, so a discrete GPU would be required for display output.

Q: Which processor is newer?

A: The AMD V2718 was released on November 9, 2020. The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 was released on July 10, 2017. The AMD part is over three years newer and its production status is listed as Active, while the Xeon's production status is not recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2718 wins every recorded benchmark, so the performance case is one-sided. But "wins" in a practical sense extends beyond raw scores. The V2718 wins in efficiency by a massive margin. With a 10 watt TDP against 85 watts, the AMD chip can be cooled by much simpler solutions and integrated into power-constrained systems. The 7 nm TSMC process makes this efficiency possible. The V2718 also wins on platform simplicity because it includes Radeon Graphics, eliminating the need for a separate GPU in systems that only need display output for management or basic tasks.

The V2718 is also the better choice for compact or fanless designs. The 10 watt TDP allows for passive cooling in many chassis configurations, which is a major advantage for embedded applications. The Xeon Silver's 85 watt TDP demands active cooling and a more robust power delivery system.

The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 does have some areas where it wins on paper. It has more cores and threads, with 12 cores and 24 threads versus 8 cores and 16 threads. It also has more cache, with 1 MB of L2 per core against 512 KB, and 16.5 MB of shared L3 against 8 MB. For workloads that scale with core count and are highly cache-sensitive, the Xeon's specifications are theoretically superior. However, the recorded Cinebench results do not show this advantage materializing in practice. The V2718 wins all multi-core tests despite the Xeon's core advantage.

The Xeon Silver 4116 is classified as a Server/Workstation part, while the V2718 is classified as Desktop. For builders targeting server or workstation platforms with Socket 3647 motherboards, the Xeon is the only option between these two, simply because the V2718 uses Socket FP6. Platform availability and ecosystem fit can be decisive factors regardless of raw performance.

In terms of benchmark percentiles, both chips sit at the 56th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The V2718's average score of 3875 places it near the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS, which averages 3924, and ahead of the Intel Core i7-11700T at 3864. The Xeon Silver 4116's average of 3733 is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE at 3732 and slightly behind the Intel Core i5-11600T at 3742. Neither chip is a top-tier performer, but the V2718 is consistently at the higher end of this mid-range band.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The AMD V2718 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon Silver 4116 has 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: 1700 MHz for the AMD versus 2100 MHz for the Intel. Boost clocks also differ, with the AMD reaching 4.15 GHz against the Intel's 3.00 GHz.

Power consumption is the largest gap. The V2718 is rated at 10 watts TDP, while the Xeon Silver 4116 is rated at 85 watts. The sockets are incompatible: Socket FP6 for the AMD, Socket 3647 for the Intel.

The manufacturing process differs by node generation. The AMD uses TSMC's 7 nm process with 9,800 million transistors on a 156 mm² die. The Intel uses its 14 nm process with 8,000 million transistors; the die size is not recorded.

Cache layouts differ. The V2718 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The Xeon Silver has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16.5 MB of shared L3.

Memory support is DDR4 for both, with ECC support on both. The V2718 records a dual-channel memory bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon's memory bus configuration and bandwidth are not recorded in the database.

The V2718 has integrated Radeon Graphics with 448 shader processors and supports PCIe Gen 3 with 20 CPU lanes. The Xeon Silver has no integrated graphics and no PCIe configuration recorded.

The V2718 is from the 2000 series with the part number 100-000000242. The Xeon Silver 4116 has the part number SR3HQBX806734116CD8067303567200. The V2718's production status is Active; the Xeon's is not recorded. The V2718 launched in November 2020, and the Xeon launched in July 2017. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either platform.