So I went ahead and ran Sandra myself just to compare:
1. Ryzen 9 5950X 16 core with Kingston DDR4-3200 and 22 clock timings I get slightly better than 36GB/s bandwidth with dual channel memory and a rather unimpressive sounding 73ns of latency. The various caches, including 2x32MB of L3 seem to help alleviate that, because the machine is certainly no slouch.
2. Haswell Xeon E5-2696v3 18 core with Micron DDR3-2133 and 15 clock timings I get 51,3GB/s bandwidth because it's 4 channels and a much better sounding 42nm of latency. Again the unified 45MB L3 as well as dedicated L1/L2 should help with workloads that have good locality.
The first system actually started with a Ryzen 7 5800X and at that point the two very almost an exact match for multicore workloads like Blender, even energy consumption for the CPUs ware fairly similar at around 110Watts, even if the Haswell is officially a 150 Watt TDP SKU. Of course the monolithic Intel chips was vastly bigger at 22nm and vastly more expensive at official prices.
But I got mine cheap from China, where the OEM top bin E5-2696v3 (with 3.8GHz peak clock) were sold to hyperscalers at a fraction of E5-2699v3 list prices. Of course on single threaded workloads the Ryzens thrash any Haswell and the 5950X adds another 60% to what the 5800X can do with only 30 more Watts (140 instead of 110).
Yes ECC DIMMs rarely qualify as speed daemons and Sandra has RAM look rather bad on AMD Zen3, but thankfully that doesn't seem to translate to applications. For pure gamers ECC most likely is a waste of money but if you're also running long money maker workloads, ECC won't put you back too much: neither in money nor in performance.