Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G vs Xeon W-3275M
Aggregate performance score
Xeon W-3275M outperforms Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G by a whopping 522% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 270 | 1605 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.73 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Xeon W | AMD Ryzen 3 |
| Power efficiency | 4.74 | 2.41 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Cascade Lake (2019−2020) | Zen+ (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 3 June 2019 (6 years ago) | 30 September 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $7,453 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon W-3275M and Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G 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 | 28 (Octacosa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 56 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.6 GHz | 4 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 25 | 36 |
| L1 cache | 1.75 MB | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 28 MB | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 38.5 MB | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | no data | 209.78 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 76 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4940 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon W-3275M and Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCLGA3647 | Socket AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 205 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-3275M and Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® AVX-512 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
Security technologies
Xeon W-3275M and Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon W-3275M and Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W-3275M and Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2933 | DDR4-2933 |
| Maximum memory size | 2 TB | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | 6 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 140.8 GB/s | 46.933 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon Vega 8 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-3275M and Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 64 | 20 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 23.00 | 3.70 |
| Recency | 3 June 2019 | 30 September 2019 |
| Physical cores | 28 | 4 |
| Threads | 56 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 205 Watt | 65 Watt |
Xeon W-3275M has a 521.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 600% more physical cores and 1300% more threads.
Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 months, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 215.4% lower power consumption.
The Intel Xeon W-3275M is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon W-3275M is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 3 PRO 3200G is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
