Xeon 6746E vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Xeon 6746E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Ryzen 3 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Sierra Forest (2024) |
| Release date | 7 January 2018 (6 years ago) | 3 June 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $5,929 |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Xeon 6746E 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 112 |
| Threads | 4 | 112 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 4 MB (per module) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 96 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 84 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4500 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Xeon 6746E 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 | no data | 2 |
| Socket | AM4 | 4710 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 250 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Xeon 6746E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Xeon 6746E technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Xeon 6746E are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Xeon 6746E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Xeon 6746E.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 88 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 7 January 2018 | 3 June 2024 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 112 |
| Threads | 4 | 112 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 250 Watt |
Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U has 1566.7% lower power consumption.
Xeon 6746E, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, 5500% more physical cores and 2700% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Xeon 6746E. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U is a notebook processor while Xeon 6746E is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 PRO 2200U and Xeon 6746E, 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.
