Ryzen 7 1700 vs Xeon E5-2678 v3

Ryzen 7 1700 vs Xeon E5-2678 v3 Performance Spectrum

Ryzen 7 1700

8 / 16

14,772

+0.8%

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Xeon E5-2678 v3

12 / 24

14,653

0.0%

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 7 1700 vs Xeon E5-2678 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 7 1700 vs Xeon E5-2678 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 7 1700

2017

Why buy it

✅+0.8% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 65W instead of 120W, a 55W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E5-2678 v3.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2678 v3 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 30 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2678 v3, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $140 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2678 v3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E5-2678 v3

2015

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+87.5% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (14,653 vs 14,772).
❌84.6% higher power demand at 120W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 7 1700.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 7 1700 better than Xeon E5-2678 v3?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2678 v3 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 7 1700 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 7 1700 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

Ryzen 7 1700 is the better buy right now. Ryzen 7 1700 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $140 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.8% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon E5-2678 v3 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 3.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (105.5 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 7 1700 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2015) and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 12/24. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Ryzen 7 1700 vs Xeon E5-2678 v3 Technical Specifications

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

Ryzen 7 1700

The Ryzen 7 1700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 March 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 16384 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,772 points. Launch price was $329.

Xeon E5-2678 v3

The Xeon E5-2678 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB. L2 cache: 3072 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011-3. Thermal design power (TDP): 120 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,653 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 7 1700 packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-2678 v3 offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Xeon E5-2678 v3 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Ryzen 7 1700 versus 3.3 GHz on the Xeon E5-2678 v3 — a 11.4% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 1700 (base: 3 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Ryzen 7 1700 uses the Zen (2017−2020) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2678 v3 uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 7 1700 scores 14,772 against the Xeon E5-2678 v3's 14,653 — a 0.8% lead for the Ryzen 7 1700. L3 cache: 16384 kB on the Ryzen 7 1700 vs 30 MB on the Xeon E5-2678 v3.

Feature	Ryzen 7 1700	Xeon E5-2678 v3
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	12 / 24+50%
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+12%	3.3 GHz
Base Clock	3 GHz+20%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	16384 kB	30 MB+88%
L2 Cache	4096 kB+33%	3072 kB
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Zen (2017−2020)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	14,772	14,653
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,065	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,000	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 7 1700 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2678 v3 uses LGA2011-3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Ryzen 7 1700	Xeon E5-2678 v3
Socket	AM4	LGA2011-3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	24	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (Ryzen 7 1700) / not specified (Xeon E5-2678 v3). Primary use case: Ryzen 7 1700 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Ryzen 7 1700 rivals Core i7-7700K.