Xeon E3-1265L v4 vs Ryzen 5 2600
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms Xeon E3-1265L v4 by an impressive 89% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 5 2600 and Xeon E3-1265L v4 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 903 | 1342 |
| Place by popularity | 22 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 9.80 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 5 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 12.08 | 11.84 |
| Architecture codename | Pinnacle Riege (Zen+) (2018) | Broadwell-DT (2015) |
| Release date | 19 April 2018 (6 years ago) | 2 June 2015 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 5 2600 and Xeon E3-1265L v4 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 12 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 34 | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 3 MB | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 192 mm2 | 182 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 4,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 5 2600 and Xeon E3-1265L v4 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | FCLGA1150 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Xeon E3-1265L v4. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| eDRAM | no data | 128 MB |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| FDI | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
Ryzen 5 2600 and Xeon E3-1265L v4 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Xeon E3-1265L v4 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Xeon E3-1265L v4. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3L-1333, DDR3L-1600, DDR3L-1866 |
| Maximum memory size | 128 GB | 32 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 46.933 GB/s | 29.8 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | - | Intel Iris Pro P6300 |
| Max video memory | - | 32 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | - | 1.05 GHz |
| Execution Units | - | 48 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen 5 2600 and Xeon E3-1265L v4 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | - | 3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Xeon E3-1265L v4.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | 16 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.30 | 4.38 |
| Recency | 19 April 2018 | 2 June 2015 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 4 |
| Threads | 12 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 35 Watt |
Ryzen 5 2600 has a 89.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.
Xeon E3-1265L v4, on the other hand, has 85.7% lower power consumption.
The Ryzen 5 2600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E3-1265L v4 in performance tests.
Note that Ryzen 5 2600 is a desktop processor while Xeon E3-1265L v4 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 2600 and Xeon E3-1265L v4, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
