Xeon Gold 5412U vs Ryzen 5 3400G

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 5 3400G
2019
4 cores / 8 threads, 65 Watt
6.05
Xeon Gold 5412U
2023
24 cores / 48 threads, 185 Watt
34.34
+468%

Xeon Gold 5412U outperforms Ryzen 5 3400G by a whopping 468% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 3400G and Xeon Gold 5412U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1108119
Place by popularity92not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data93.03
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5no data
Power efficiency8.4916.93
Architecture codenamePicasso (2019−2022)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date12 June 2019 (5 years ago)10 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,113

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 3400G and Xeon Gold 5412U 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)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads848
Base clock speed3.7 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz3.9 GHz
Bus typePCIe 3.0no data
Multiplier37no data
L1 cache384 KB80K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache4 MB (shared)45 MB
Chip lithography12 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size210 mm2no data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data81 °C
Number of transistors4940 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 3400G and Xeon Gold 5412U 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)1
SocketAM4FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt185 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 3400G and Xeon Gold 5412U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Ryzen 5 3400G and Xeon Gold 5412U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 3400G and Xeon Gold 5412U are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 3400G and Xeon Gold 5412U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR5-4400
Maximum memory size64 GB4 TB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidth46.933 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon RX Vega 11no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 3400G and Xeon Gold 5412U.

PCIe version3.05
PCI Express lanes2080

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 5 3400G 6.05
Xeon Gold 5412U 34.34
+468%

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 5 3400G 9252
Xeon Gold 5412U 52557
+468%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.05 34.34
Recency 12 June 2019 10 January 2023
Physical cores 4 24
Threads 8 48
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 185 Watt

Ryzen 5 3400G has 184.6% lower power consumption.

Xeon Gold 5412U, on the other hand, has a 467.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads.

The Xeon Gold 5412U is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 3400G in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 5 3400G is a desktop processor while Xeon Gold 5412U is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 3400G and Xeon Gold 5412U, 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 5 3400G
Ryzen 5 3400G
Intel Xeon Gold 5412U
Xeon Gold 5412U

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.


4.1 2114 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 3400G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 8 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 5412U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 3400G or Xeon Gold 5412U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.