Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1650 v4 outperforms the cheaper Ryzen 3 3200G on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Ryzen 3 3200G is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Xeon E5-1650 v4 is 1112 days older than the cheaper Ryzen 3 3200G.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4
- Performs up to 2% better in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 than Ryzen 3 3200G - 103 vs 101 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Ryzen 3 3200G - 12 vs 4 threads
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
- Up to 15% cheaper than Xeon E5-1650 v4 - $80.0 vs $94.05
- Up to 13% better value when playing Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 than Xeon E5-1650 v4 - $0.79 vs $0.91 per FPS
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 - 65 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
103
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.91/FPS
86%
Price, $
$94.05
85%
FPS Winner
Buy for $94.05 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 280361 minutes ago
Buy for $80 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 280361 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 | vs | AMD Ryzen 3 3200G |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2019 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 3 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Picasso |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 4 |
12 | Threads | 4 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 |
No | Overclockable | Yes |