Xeon w7-2565X vs EPYC 7532
Primary details
Comparing EPYC 7532 and Xeon w7-2565X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 118 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | AMD EPYC | no data |
| Power efficiency | 15.72 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 19 February 2020 (4 years ago) | 24 August 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $1,339 |
Detailed specifications
EPYC 7532 and Xeon w7-2565X 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 | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) | 18 (Octadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 64 | 36 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.3 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| Multiplier | 24 | no data |
| L1 cache | 2 MB | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 16 MB | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 256 MB | 37.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 79 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 7532 and Xeon w7-2565X 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | Socket SP3 | 4677 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 200 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7532 and Xeon w7-2565X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 7532 and Xeon w7-2565X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7532 and Xeon w7-2565X 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 EPYC 7532 and Xeon w7-2565X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 TiB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 8 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.763 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7532 and Xeon w7-2565X.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 64 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 19 February 2020 | 24 August 2024 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 18 |
| Threads | 64 | 36 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 200 Watt | 240 Watt |
EPYC 7532 has 77.8% more physical cores and 77.8% more threads, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.
Xeon w7-2565X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years.
We couldn't decide between EPYC 7532 and Xeon w7-2565X. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7532 and Xeon w7-2565X, 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.
