Xeon L5335 vs Ryzen 3 1200

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 3 1200
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
4.03
+270%
Xeon L5335
2007
4 cores / 4 threads, 50 Watt
1.09

Ryzen 3 1200 outperforms Xeon L5335 by a whopping 270% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 3 1200 and Xeon L5335 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking14082402
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.210.11
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesAMD Ryzen 3no data
Power efficiency5.872.06
Architecture codenameSummit Ridge (Zen) (2017)Clovertown (2006−2007)
Release date27 July 2017 (7 years ago)13 August 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109$380

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 3 1200 has 3727% better value for money than Xeon L5335.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 3 1200 and Xeon L5335 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed3.1 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier31no data
L1 cache96K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)4 MB (per die)
L3 cache8 MB (shared)8 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography14 nm65 nm
Die size192 mm22x 143 mm2
Maximum core temperature95 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data60 °C
Number of transistors4,800 million582 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.1V-1.25V

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 3 1200 and Xeon L5335 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2
SocketAM4PLGA771
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt50 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Xeon L5335. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHAno data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Ryzen 3 1200 and Xeon L5335 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Xeon L5335 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Xeon L5335. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR2, DDR3 Depends on motherboard
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Xeon L5335.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes20no data

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.

Ryzen 3 1200 4.03
+270%
Xeon L5335 1.09

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.

Ryzen 3 1200 6407
+269%
Xeon L5335 1737

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.03 1.09
Recency 27 July 2017 13 August 2007
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 50 Watt

Ryzen 3 1200 has a 269.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

Xeon L5335, on the other hand, has 30% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 3 1200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon L5335 in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 3 1200 is a desktop processor while Xeon L5335 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 1200 and Xeon L5335, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Ryzen 3 1200
Ryzen 3 1200
Intel Xeon L5335
Xeon L5335

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 2798 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 1200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 3 votes

Rate Xeon L5335 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 3 1200 or Xeon L5335, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.