Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2650 v3 outperforms Ryzen 3 3200U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2650 v3 is 1581 days older than Ryzen 3 3200U.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 3200U
- Consumes up to 86% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 - 15 vs 105 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3
- Performs up to 4% better in War Thunder than Ryzen 3 3200U - 151 vs 145 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Ryzen 3 3200U - 20 vs 4 threads
War Thunder
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Movie
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Movie
Ryzen 3 3200U
Mobile • Jan 6th, 2019
Xeon E5-2650 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen 3 3200U | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 |
|---|---|---|
Jan 6th, 2019 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Ryzen 3 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Picasso | Codename | Haswell |
| AMD Socket FP5 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
| 2 | Cores | 10 |
| 4 | Threads | 20 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.3 GHz |
3.5 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
15 W | TDP | 105 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
Radeon Vega 3 | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
