Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 3 3200G outperforms Xeon E5-2660 v3 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 3 3200G is 1763 days newer than Xeon E5-2660 v3.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2660 v3
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Ryzen 3 3200G - 20 vs 4 threads
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
- Performs up to 2% better in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 than Xeon E5-2660 v3 - 101 vs 99 FPS
- Consumes up to 38% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2660 v3 - 65 vs 105 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2660 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
FPS
101
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.65/FPS
100%
Price, €
€66.05
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €66.05 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 18628 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2660 v3 | vs | AMD Ryzen 3 3200G |
---|---|---|
Sep 8th, 2014 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2019 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 3 |
Haswell | Codename | Picasso |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
10 | Cores | 4 |
20 | Threads | 4 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
3.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
105 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 |
No | Overclockable | Yes |