Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 3 3200G outperforms Xeon E5-2640 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 E5-2640 v3.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Ryzen 3 3200G - 16 vs 4 threads
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
- Performs up to 1% better in No Man's Sky than Xeon E5-2640 v3 - 168 vs 167 FPS
- Consumes up to 28% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 - 65 vs 90 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
No Man's Sky
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Xeon E5-2640 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Ryzen 3 3200G
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 | vs | AMD Ryzen 3 3200G |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 8th, 2014 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2019 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 3 |
| Haswell-E/EP, Sandy Bridge-EP/EX | Codename | Picasso |
| Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 4 |
16 | Threads | 4 |
| 2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
| 3.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
| 90 W | TDP | 65 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
| 26.0x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
