Intel Xeon W-2235 vs AMD Ryzen 5 3600X

Processor comparisons   17-03-2021
   For example you can't decide which processor to buy, you can make a choice after reading the full tests Intel Xeon W-2235 vs AMD Ryzen 5 3600X and see which is better for games or simple use for rendering, streaming, programming, video editing, machine learning. Here is all information from real video editing and streaming tests or different benchmarks. A step-by-step analysis of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to read, is made by the table.
   From the comparison video, you can get the results of parallel examination in software tests such as Furmark, VeraCrypt, Dolphin Emulator, 7zip, RealBench, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), WPrime, 3DMark, Gears 5, Prime95, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, PassMark, Handbrake, PCMark 10, AIDA64, UserBenchmark, DaVinci Resolve Studio, Blender, Blender, GeekBench 6, 5.2, MATLAB, SuperPi.
   Gaming performance of CPUs in:

Watch Dogs Legion
Fortnite
Halo Infinite
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Cyberpunk 2077
Apex Legends
Red Dead Redemption 2
Borderlands 3
Rainbow Six Siege
DOOM: Eternal
Valorant
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
Overwatch
Fallout 76
Death Stranding
Grand Theft Auto V
Valheim
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
Last Man Standing

After looking at the data of all benchmarks and videos, you can already make an informed decision about which processor is better to buy for gaming AMD Ryzen 5 3600X or Intel Xeon W-2235.

Summary benchmark results

As a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark

Xeon W-2235

54%

Ryzen 5 3600X

55%

The number of this parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, Ryzen 5 3600X is 1% better than Xeon W-2235. The data source is several popular tests. Detailed information can be found below.

Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.

Xeon W-2235

53%

Ryzen 5 3600X

54%

The maximum result in this parameter is 100 percent, which is the performance of the most powerful processor currently available. And of course, this is a server processor, on which no one will run games. Because this processor costs several tens of thousands of dollars. And if it seems to you that the selected CPU has a small game result, just look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the summary table below.
List of less popular games in which processors were compared: Horizon Zero Dawn, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Hitman 3, Forza Horizon 4, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Control, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Monster Hunter World, Ghostrunner, Metro Exodus, League of Legends (LOL), Battlefield V, Half-Life: Alyx, Microsoft Flight Simulator, NBA 2K20, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, DOTA 2A.

Gaming benchmark

Fortnite	94.9	96.0
Valorant	107.9	109.1
Cyberpunk 2077	60.4	61.1
Apex Legends	101.4	102.6
Call of Duty Warzone	80.9	81.9
Overwatch	87.4	88.4
Red Dead Redemption 2	74.4	75.3
DOOM Eternal	53.9	54.6
Warzone	84.1	85.1
Assassin's Creed	90.6	91.7
Valheim	89.5	90.6

The numbers in this table indicate the maximum FPS that was received on the device with the corresponding processor. Depending on the configuration of the computer (RAM size and Video Card) and graphics quality settings (Ultra, Medium, Normal), the results may differ quite significantly. We recommend that you better study the results of the Cinebench, GeekBench and Passmark becnmarks.
The computers participating in the comparisons not only were the equipped with different amounts of RAM and different video cards. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: 4K, 2K or FullHD. Therefore, the game benchmark data is approximate. But all video cards met the average system requirements of games. To be sure exactly how much performance the processor will be in games, if you get acquainted with the benchmarks that are made with the same video card that is installed in your computer.

Power consumption

Xeon W-2235

31%

Ryzen 5 3600X

47%

To make a final resolution on which processor is better, you should also consider the generation of its core. It is clear that the newer the generation, the better the performance of the processor in games and benchmarks, as well as its energy efficiency. In this case the Ryzen 5 3600X is more energy efficient than the Xeon W-2235 since it has less power consumption: 130W vs. 95W. Power consumption is especially important for laptops. And TDP should be taken into account when choosing a processor cooling system. It is necessary to calculate so that the TDP data specified in the cooler specification is greater than the TDP of the compared processor.

Software benchmarks

If you plan to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for machine learning, programming, streaming, video rendering or video editing, then first of all you need to pay attention to the performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, the processor includes all threads and cores that it has to the maximum to achieve maximum performance. You will learn this data from the benchmark tables below. Before using the data from these tests, be sure to make sure that the software that you are going to use on your computer can work in multi-threaded mode. Since there are still many programs that can use only one core to work, and all the benefit of multi-core mode are unused.
Cinebench 23, 20 an 15
The results of this benchmark show Single-threaded and Multi-threaded CPU performance

	Intel Xeon W-2235	AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
Cinbench 15 Single-core	206	204
Cinbench 15 Multi-core	1514	1647
Cinbench 20 Single-core	188	501
Cinbench 20 Multi-core	5853	3751
Cinbench 23 Single-core	502	1286
Cinbench 23 Multi-core	14141	9588

Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance

	Intel Xeon W-2235	AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
Single-Core	2638	2651
Multi-Core	14394	18377

GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance

	Intel Xeon W-2235	AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
Single-Core	1210	1341
Multi-Core	6788	7891

Comparison of specifications

In the specification comparison table, the processor release date and overclocking capability will be the most useful. The newer the processor, the longer it will last you. And the easier it will be to upgrade the system later. The same benefits from the presence of overclocking. When the processor can be overclocked, thereby increasing its performance, then it will still be able to produce maximum FPS even in new games. The economy are obvious! Accordingly, there is no longer a need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer.

	Intel Xeon W-2235	AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
Announcement date	April 01, 2020	July 07, 2019
Type	Server	Desktop
Socket	FCLGA2066	AM4
Core name	Cascade Lake	Matisse
Architecture	x86	Zen 2
Generation	3	3
Turbo Frequency	4.6 MHz	4.4 MHz
Frequency	3.8 MHz	3.8 MHz
Cores	6	6
Threads	12	12
Bus rate	8 GT/s
Bit	64	64
Lithography	14 nm	7 nm
Transistors count	4130 millions	4200 millions
Power consumption (TDP)	130 W	95 W
Memory type	DDR4 2933	DDR4
Max. Memory	1 Gb
Memory Frequency		3200
Memory bandwidth	93.85 GB/s
L1 cache		384KB
L2 cache		3MB
L3 cache	8.25 MB	32MB
Overclocking	No	Yes
Supports ECC	Yes	No
Part number		100-000000022 100-100000022BOX 100-100000022MPK

In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Also keep in mind that high CPU frequency affects battery life through power consumption (relevant for laptops).

Result:
The number of parameters for which Intel Xeon W-2235 is better: 10
The number of parameters for which AMD Ryzen 5 3600X is better: 25
Although it should be realized that all the data that you have looked at here do not mean that taking them into account you should undividedly trust a simple quantitative comparison. Better to watch the video tests and read the reviews of of people who bought Intel Xeon W-2235 and AMD Ryzen 5 3600X before deciding which of the processors to buy for gaming.

• Intel Xeon W-2235 specs and review.

• AMD Ryzen 5 3600X specs and review.