Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is 1022 days older than Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 2% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U - 126 vs 123 FPS
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U
- Consumes up to 89% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 15 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Xeon E5-1620 v4
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U
Mobile • Apr 8th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Apr 8th, 2019 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 5 |
| Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Picasso |
| Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket FP5 |
Desktop | Segment | Mobile |
| 4 | Cores | 4 |
| 8 | Threads | 8 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.1 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
| 140 W | TDP | 15 W |
| 14 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 21.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 |
| No | Overclockable | No |
