Ryzen 3 3200G vs Xeon X5690

CPU

GPU

Ryzen 3 3200G

4 Cores4 Thrd65 WWMax: 4 GHz2019

Ryzen family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Xeon X5690

6 Cores12 Thrd130 WWMax: 3.73 GHz2011

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Ryzen 3 3200G vs Xeon X5690 Performance Spectrum

Ryzen 3 3200G

4 / 4

6,999

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Xeon X5690

6 / 12

7,031

+0.5%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Ryzen 3 3200G vs Xeon X5690 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Ryzen 3 3200G vs Xeon X5690: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Ryzen 3 3200G

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $150 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
✅Delivers 148.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 70.0 vs 28.1 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 130W, a 65W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon Vega 8, while Xeon X5690 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon X5690 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,999 vs 7,031).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon X5690, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.

Xeon X5690

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +13.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+200% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 4 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 28.1 vs 70.0 PassMark/$ ($250 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
❌100% higher power demand at 130W vs 65W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 3 3200G can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon X5690 better than Ryzen 3 3200G?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5690 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 3 3200G is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon X5690 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 13.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon X5690 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 4 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Xeon X5690 is still the better call for a fresh build. Xeon X5690 comes in 150.0% more expensive on MSRP at $250 MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you a 13.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Ryzen 3 3200G only looks stronger on raw value math because it is so cheap, but its absolute performance tier is too low to be the better recommendation now. At roughly 6,999 PassMark with 4 cores and 4 threads, it only really makes sense as a bare-minimum stopgap or a very constrained existing-platform upgrade.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Ryzen 3 3200G makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Ryzen 3 3200G vs Xeon X5690 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Ryzen 3 3200G

The Ryzen 3 3200G is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 July 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Picasso (2019−2022) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 6,999 points. Launch price was $99.

Xeon X5690

The Xeon X5690 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.46 GHz, with boost up to 3.73 GHz. L3 cache: 12288 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 7,031 points. Launch price was $205.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 3 3200G packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Xeon X5690 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon X5690 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the Ryzen 3 3200G versus 3.73 GHz on the Xeon X5690 — a 7% clock advantage for the Ryzen 3 3200G (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.46 GHz). The Ryzen 3 3200G uses the Picasso (2019−2022) architecture (12 nm), while the Xeon X5690 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 3 3200G scores 6,999 against the Xeon X5690's 7,031 — a 0.5% lead for the Xeon X5690. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Ryzen 3 3200G vs 12288 kB (total) on the Xeon X5690.

Feature	Ryzen 3 3200G	Xeon X5690
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	4 GHz+7%	3.73 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+4%	3.46 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	12288 kB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)+100%	256 kB (per core)
Process	12 nm-63%	32 nm
Architecture	Picasso (2019−2022)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	6,999	7,031
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	3,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 3 3200G uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5690 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2933 on the Ryzen 3 3200G versus DDR3-1333 on the Xeon X5690 — the Ryzen 3 3200G supports 120% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Ryzen 3 3200G) vs 3 (Xeon X5690). Chipset compatibility: AMD 300 series,AMD 400 series (Ryzen 3 3200G) and Intel X58,Intel 5520 (Xeon X5690).

Feature	Ryzen 3 3200G	Xeon X5690
Socket	AM4	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2933+120%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	3+50%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	12	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Ryzen 3 3200G) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon X5690). The Ryzen 3 3200G includes integrated graphics (AMD Radeon Vega 8), while the Xeon X5690 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Xeon X5690 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon X5690 rivals Core i7-980X.

Feature	Ryzen 3 3200G	Xeon X5690
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	AMD Radeon Vega 8	—
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	—	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Ryzen 3 3200G was priced at $100, while the Xeon X5690 came in at $250. On launch pricing ($100 vs $250), Ryzen 3 3200G was $150 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen 3 3200G delivers 70.0 pts/$ vs 28.1 pts/$ for the Xeon X5690 — making the Ryzen 3 3200G the 85.3% better value option.

Feature	Ryzen 3 3200G	Xeon X5690
MSRP	$100-60%	$250
Performance per Dollar	70.0+149%	28.1
Release Date	2019	2011

Search Ryzen 3 3200G on Amazon

Search Xeon X5690 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.