Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v2 outperforms Ryzen 7 3700U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v2 is 1944 days older than Ryzen 7 3700U.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 7 3700U
- Consumes up to 88% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v2 - 15 vs 130 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v2 doesn't have integrated graphics
Crysis 3 Remastered
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Xeon E5-1620 v2
Server/Workstation • Sep 10th, 2013
Ryzen 7 3700U
Mobile • Jan 6th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v2 | vs | AMD Ryzen 7 3700U |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 10th, 2013 | Release Date | Jan 6th, 2019 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 7 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Picasso |
| Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | AMD Socket FP5 |
Server | Segment | Mobile |
| 4 | Cores | 4 |
| 8 | Threads | 8 |
3.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.3 GHz |
| 3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
| 130 W | TDP | 15 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
37.0x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 10 |
| No | Overclockable | No |
