Ryzen 5 5600GT vs Xeon E3-1505L v6
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 5 5600GT outperforms Xeon E3-1505L v6 by a whopping 234% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E3-1505L v6 and Ryzen 5 5600GT processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1457 | 592 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 41 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.68 | 59.01 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Xeon E3 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 14.51 | 18.65 |
| Architecture codename | Kaby Lake (2016−2019) | Cezanne (2021−2024) |
| Release date | 3 January 2017 (7 years ago) | 8 January 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $433 | $140 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 5 5600GT has 3413% better value for money than Xeon E3-1505L v6.
Detailed specifications
Xeon E3-1505L v6 and Ryzen 5 5600GT 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 4.6 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 3.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 22 | no data |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB | 16 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | no data | 180 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 10,700 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E3-1505L v6 and Ryzen 5 5600GT 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 | no data | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E3-1505L v6 and Ryzen 5 5600GT. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Xeon E3-1505L v6 and Ryzen 5 5600GT technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E3-1505L v6 and Ryzen 5 5600GT are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E3-1505L v6 and Ryzen 5 5600GT. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3L-1600 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 34.134 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics P630 | AMD Radeon Vega 7 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E3-1505L v6 and Ryzen 5 5600GT.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 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.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.85 | 12.86 |
| Integrated graphics card | 3.11 | 7.46 |
| Recency | 3 January 2017 | 8 January 2024 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 6 |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 65 Watt |
Xeon E3-1505L v6 has 160% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 5 5600GT, on the other hand, has a 234% higher aggregate performance score, 139.9% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 7 years, 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Ryzen 5 5600GT is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E3-1505L v6 in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon E3-1505L v6 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 5 5600GT is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E3-1505L v6 and Ryzen 5 5600GT, 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.
