Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U outperforms Xeon E5-1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U is 2589 days newer than Xeon E5-1620.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U
- Performs up to 7% better in Minecraft than Xeon E5-1620 - 654 vs 614 FPS
- Consumes up to 88% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 - 15 vs 130 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 doesn't have integrated graphics
Minecraft
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Xeon E5-1620
Server/Workstation • Mar 6th, 2012
Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U
Mobile • Apr 8th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Apr 8th, 2019 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 5 |
| Sandy Bridge-EP | Codename | Picasso |
| Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | AMD Socket FP5 |
Server | Segment | Mobile |
| 4 | Cores | 4 |
| 8 | Threads | 8 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.1 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
| 130 W | TDP | 15 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 21.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 |
| No | Overclockable | No |
