Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U vs Xeon E5-1620 v3

Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U vs Xeon E5-1620 v3 Performance Spectrum

Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U

4 / 8

6,928

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Xeon E5-1620 v3

4 / 8

6,959

+0.4%

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 5 PRO 3500U vs Xeon E5-1620 v3 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 5 PRO 3500U vs Xeon E5-1620 v3: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U

2019

Why buy it

✅Draws 15W instead of 140W, a 125W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-1620 v3 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,928 vs 6,959).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 10 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-1620 v3, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Xeon E5-1620 v3

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 4 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 0.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $294 MSRP, while Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌833.3% higher power demand at 140W vs 15W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-1620 v3 better than Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-1620 v3 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U 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 E5-1620 v3 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.0% 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 E5-1620 v3 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 150% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 4 MB).

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

Xeon E5-1620 v3 is the better buy right now. Xeon E5-1620 v3 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $294 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (23.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2014). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U vs Xeon E5-1620 v3 Technical Specifications

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

Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U

The Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 8 April 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Picasso (2019−2022) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 12 nm process technology. Socket: FP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 6,928 points. Launch price was $149.

Xeon E5-1620 v3

The Xeon E5-1620 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Haswell-EP (2014−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 10 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 140 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1333, DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 6,959 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U and Xeon E5-1620 v3 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon E5-1620 v3 — a 2.7% clock advantage for the Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U (base: 2.1 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U uses the Picasso (2019−2022) architecture (12 nm), while the Xeon E5-1620 v3 uses Haswell-EP (2014−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U scores 6,928 against the Xeon E5-1620 v3's 6,959 — a 0.4% lead for the Xeon E5-1620 v3. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U vs 10 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-1620 v3.

Feature	Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U	Xeon E5-1620 v3
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+3%	3.6 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz	3.5 GHz+67%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	10 MB (total)+150%
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+100%	256K (per core)
Process	12 nm-45%	22 nm
Architecture	Picasso (2019−2022)	Haswell-EP (2014−2015)
PassMark	6,928	6,959

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U uses the FP5 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-1620 v3 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.