Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U vs Xeon E5-1620 v3

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U vs Xeon E5-1620 v3 Performance Spectrum

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U

4 / 8

6,978

+0.3%

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Xeon E5-1620 v3

4 / 8

6,959

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 PRO 2700U 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 7 PRO 2700U 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 7 PRO 2700U

2018

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅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.
❌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: +8.8% 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

❌Lower PassMark (6,959 vs 6,978).
❌Launch MSRP is still $294 MSRP, while Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌833.3% higher power demand at 140W vs 15W.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U better than Xeon E5-1620 v3?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-1620 v3 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U 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 PRO 2700U is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E5-1620 v3 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $294 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.3% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon E5-1620 v3 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 8.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon E5-1620 v3 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (23.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2014) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U vs Xeon E5-1620 v3 Technical Specifications

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

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U

The Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 8 January 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Raven Ridge (2017−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 6,978 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 7 PRO 2700U and Xeon E5-1620 v3 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon E5-1620 v3 — a 5.4% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U (base: 2.2 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U uses the Raven Ridge (2017−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-1620 v3 uses Haswell-EP (2014−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U scores 6,978 against the Xeon E5-1620 v3's 6,959 — a 0.3% lead for the Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U vs 10 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-1620 v3.

Feature	Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U	Xeon E5-1620 v3
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz+6%	3.6 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	3.5 GHz+59%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	10 MB (total)+150%
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)+100%	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Raven Ridge (2017−2019)	Haswell-EP (2014−2015)
PassMark	6,978	6,959

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U 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.