Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2620 v3 outperforms Ryzen 3 3250U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2620 v3 is 1946 days older than Ryzen 3 3250U.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 3250U
- Consumes up to 82% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 - 15 vs 85 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3
- Performs up to 5% better in Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege than Ryzen 3 3250U - 500 vs 478 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Ryzen 3 3250U - 12 vs 4 threads
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Ryzen 3 3250U
Mobile • Jan 6th, 2020
Xeon E5-2620 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen 3 3250U | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 |
|---|---|---|
Jan 6th, 2020 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Ryzen 3 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Picasso | Codename | Haswell-E |
| AMD Socket FP5 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
| 2 | Cores | 6 |
| 4 | Threads | 12 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.4 GHz |
3.5 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
15 W | TDP | 85 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 24.0x |
Radeon Vega 3 | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
