Xeon E3-1105C vs Ryzen 7 PRO 1700
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and Xeon E3-1105C processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 823 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 7 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 13.47 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Gladden (2012) |
| Release date | 29 June 2017 (7 years ago) | 14 May 2012 (12 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and Xeon E3-1105C 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 1 GHz |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 30 | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 6144 KB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 192 mm2 | 216 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 4,800 million | 1,160 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and Xeon E3-1105C 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 | Intel BGA1283 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and Xeon E3-1105C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Security technologies
Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and Xeon E3-1105C technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and Xeon E3-1105C 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 Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and Xeon E3-1105C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 42.671 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and Xeon E3-1105C.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 29 June 2017 | 14 May 2012 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 25 Watt |
Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
Xeon E3-1105C, on the other hand, has 160% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and Xeon E3-1105C. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and Xeon E3-1105C, 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.
