AMD Ryzen 5 3500U vs Intel Xeon W-3175X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a lopsided picture. In every single head-to-head test recorded, the Intel Xeon W-3175X takes the win. The AMD Ryzen 5 3500U, a 15-watt mobile part, simply cannot match the sheer throughput of a 28-core workstation processor. The most decisive gap appears in multi-core workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 3900 against the Ryzen’s 650, a delta of -83.3% from the AMD side. That is not a marginal difference; it is a six-fold advantage in raw rendering throughput.

The single-core gap is narrower but still substantial. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Xeon posts 550 versus the Ryzen’s 143, a -74% deficit for the AMD chip. Geekbench single-core shows a closer contest: 1472 for Intel against 870 for AMD, a -40.9% difference. That result suggests that while the Xeon’s Skylake architecture has a clear per-thread advantage, the gap is less punishing in lighter, latency-sensitive tasks. The multi-core Geekbench result, however, reverts to form: 14331 for the Xeon versus 2508 for the Ryzen, a -82.5% delta.

The Ryzen 5 3500U records zero wins across the four head-to-head tests, with the Xeon claiming all four. The average benchmark scores in the database reflect the same hierarchy: the Ryzen sits at 11176, the Xeon at 10369. Both chips land at the 66th percentile among all CPUs tracked, which is an interesting quirk: the database’s percentile ranking places them in the same tier despite their wildly different performance envelopes. The Xeon’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N (delta 0.2%), the Xeon E3-1565L v5 (delta 0.5%), and the Xeon Gold 6312U (delta 0.8%). The Ryzen’s nearest rivals are the Xeon Gold 6336Y (delta -0.1%), the Core i3-1305U (delta -0.2%), and the EPYC 7542 (delta 0.2%). Neither chip is an outlier within its own weight class; they just occupy different weight classes entirely.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from opposite ends of the design spectrum. The AMD Ryzen 5 3500U uses a Zen+ architecture on a 12 nm process, fabricated by GlobalFoundries. It packs 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The silicon is built on a 210 mm² die containing 4,940 million transistors. Cache is arranged as 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 4 MB L3 pool. The chip is designed for the AMD Socket FP5 and targets the mobile segment.

The Intel Xeon W-3175X is a completely different beast. It uses a Skylake architecture on a 14 nm process, built at Intel’s own fabs. The die is enormous: 688 mm², housing 8,000 million transistors. It has 28 cores and 56 threads, with a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Cache is organized as 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a substantial 38.5 MB of shared L3. It fits into the Intel Socket 3647 and is classified as a server or workstation part. The production status is end-of-life, while the Ryzen remains active.

The process node difference is notable: 12 nm for AMD versus 14 nm for Intel. The newer node gives the Ryzen a density advantage on paper, but the Xeon compensates with vastly more silicon area and transistor count. The cache hierarchy also differs in philosophy: AMD uses a smaller per-core L1 but a larger L2, while Intel pairs a smaller L1 with a larger L2 and a much bigger L3. The Xeon’s 38.5 MB L3 is nearly ten times the Ryzen’s shared pool, which helps explain its multi-core dominance in cache-sensitive workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon W-3175X wins everywhere in the recorded benchmark suite, but that does not mean the Ryzen 5 3500U has no role. The data suggests a clear split by workload type and platform constraints. The Xeon’s wins are decisive in multi-threaded rendering, as shown by Cinebench R15 multi-core at 3900 versus 650. Any task that scales across cores, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or scientific simulation, will heavily favor the Intel part. Its 56 threads and 38.5 MB of L3 cache provide the resources needed for parallel throughput.

The Ryzen 5 3500U, despite losing all head-to-head tests, still holds relevance in its intended mobile segment. Its 15-watt TDP and integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power draw and heat are primary constraints. The Xeon, with a 255-watt TDP and no integrated graphics, requires a dedicated GPU and a robust cooling solution. The benchmark results do not capture these practical differences, but the specification data does.

In single-core tests, the Xeon leads by 40.9% in Geekbench single-core, which is significant but not overwhelming. For everyday responsiveness, web browsing, or office applications, the Ryzen’s 870 Geekbench single-core score is workable, especially when paired with its low power envelope. The Xeon’s 1472 single-core score is better, but the power cost is orders of magnitude higher. The database’s percentile ranking places both at 66, which suggests that when averaged across all CPUs, neither is an extreme outlier. The Ryzen’s average benchmark score of 11176 comes from a broader set of tests including PassMark workloads, while the Xeon’s 10369 average is drawn from a narrower set of Cinebench and Geekbench runs.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is core count: 4 versus 28. Threads follow suit at 8 versus 56. Clock speeds favor Intel: base 3.10 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, boost 4.30 GHz versus 3.70 GHz. TDP is a stark contrast: 15 watts for AMD, 255 watts for Intel. The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP5 versus Intel Socket 3647. Process node differs: 12 nm (GlobalFoundries) versus 14 nm (Intel). Die size is 210 mm² versus 688 mm², and transistor count is 4,940 million versus 8,000 million.

Cache layouts diverge: L1 is 96 KB per core on AMD versus 64 KB per core on Intel; L2 is 512 KB per core versus 1 MB per core; L3 is 4 MB shared versus 38.5 MB shared. Memory support is DDR4 for both, but the memory bus is dual-channel on AMD and six-channel on Intel. The Xeon also lists a memory bandwidth of 128.0 GB/s, a figure not recorded for the Ryzen. ECC memory support is present on the Xeon and absent on the Ryzen. PCIe is Gen 3 for both, but the Xeon offers 48 lanes (CPU only) while the Ryzen does not list a lane count. The Ryzen includes integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics; the Xeon has none. The Ryzen’s multiplier is locked; the Xeon’s is unlocked. The Ryzen’s release date is January 5, 2019; the Xeon’s is January 29, 2019. The Xeon has a launch MSRP of $2999; the Ryzen has no recorded launch price. The Xeon’s part number is SRF6LQRDK; the Ryzen’s is YM3500C4T4MFG.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon W-3175X has 28 cores and 56 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3500U has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R15 multi-core?

A: The Xeon W-3175X scores 3900, while the Ryzen 5 3500U scores 650, a delta of -83.3% for the AMD chip.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3500U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Intel Xeon W-3175X has a TDP of 255 watts.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon W-3175X supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 5 3500U does not.

Q: What is the L3 cache size on each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3500U has 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Xeon W-3175X has 38.5 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3500U features integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics. The Intel Xeon W-3175X has no integrated graphics.