Xeon E5-1620 v2 vs Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G
Xeon E5-1620 v2
Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. The Xeon E5-1620 v2 is positioned at rank #594 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Xeon E5-1620 v2
Performance Per Dollar Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Xeon E5-1620 v2 | Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($50) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($52) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge-E (2013) / 22 nm) | ✨ Modern (Zen+ (2018−2019) / 12 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Xeon E5-1620 v2 | Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+4%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($50) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($52) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Xeon E5-1620 v2 and Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G
Xeon E5-1620 v2
The Xeon E5-1620 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge-E (2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 10 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,523 points. Launch price was $315.
Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G
The Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 30 September 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Zen+ (2018−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 6,499 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
The Xeon E5-1620 v2 packs 4 cores / 8 threads, matching the Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.9 GHz on the Xeon E5-1620 v2 versus 4 GHz on the Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G — a 2.5% clock advantage for the Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G (base: 3.7 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Xeon E5-1620 v2 uses the Ivy Bridge-E (2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G uses Zen+ (2018−2019) (12 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon E5-1620 v2 scores 6,523 against the Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G's 6,499 — a 0.4% lead for the Xeon E5-1620 v2. L3 cache: 10 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-1620 v2 vs 4 MB on the Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G.
| Feature | Xeon E5-1620 v2 | Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 8 | 4 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 3.9 GHz | 4 GHz+3% |
| Base Clock | 3.7 GHz+3% | 3.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 10 MB (total)+150% | 4 MB |
| L2 Cache | 256 kB (per core) | 2 MB+700% |
| Process | 22 nm | 12 nm-45% |
| Architecture | Ivy Bridge-E (2013) | Zen+ (2018−2019) |
| PassMark | 6,523 | 6,499 |
Memory & Platform
The Xeon E5-1620 v2 uses the LGA2011 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Xeon E5-1620 v2 | Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA2011 | AM4 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR4-2933 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 64 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Xeon E5-1620 v2) / AMD-V (Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G). The Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G includes integrated graphics (Radeon Vega 8), while the Xeon E5-1620 v2 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G targets Desktop.
| Feature | Xeon E5-1620 v2 | Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Radeon Vega 8 |
| Unlocked | — | Yes |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Desktop |
Value Analysis
The Xeon E5-1620 v2 launched at $294 MSRP, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G debuted at $89. At current prices ($50 vs $52), the Xeon E5-1620 v2 is $2 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Xeon E5-1620 v2 delivers 130.5 pts/$ vs 125.0 pts/$ for the Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G — making the Xeon E5-1620 v2 the 4.3% better value option.
| Feature | Xeon E5-1620 v2 | Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $294 | $89-70% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-4% | $52 |
| Performance per Dollar | 130.5+4% | 125.0 |
| Release Date | 2013 | 2019 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Xeon E5-1620 v2 and Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G
