Xeon w7-3565X vs EPYC 7702P

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7702P
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 200 Watt
39.85
Xeon w7-3565X
2024
32 cores / 64 threads, 335 Watt
48.25
+21.1%

Xeon w7-3565X outperforms EPYC 7702P by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7702P and Xeon w7-3565X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking6436
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.6849.68
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency18.8613.63
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date7 August 2019 (5 years ago)24 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,425$2,689

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon w7-3565X has 644% better value for money than EPYC 7702P.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7702P and Xeon w7-3565X 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 cores64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Performance-coresno data32
Threads12864
Base clock speed2 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.35 GHz4.8 GHz
Multiplier20no data
L1 cache96K (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)82.5 MB
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size192 mm24x 477 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data79 °C
Number of transistors4,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7702P and Xeon w7-3565X 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketTR4FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt335 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7702P and Xeon w7-3565X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Precision Boost 2+no data
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

EPYC 7702P and Xeon w7-3565X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7702P and Xeon w7-3565X are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7702P and Xeon w7-3565X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR5-4800
Maximum memory size4 TiB4 TB
Max memory channels88
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7702P and Xeon w7-3565X.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data112

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

EPYC 7702P 39.85
Xeon w7-3565X 48.25
+21.1%

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.

EPYC 7702P 63300
Xeon w7-3565X 76649
+21.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 39.85 48.25
Recency 7 August 2019 24 August 2024
Physical cores 64 32
Threads 128 64
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 335 Watt

EPYC 7702P has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 67.5% lower power consumption.

Xeon w7-3565X, on the other hand, has a 21.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 5 years.

The Xeon w7-3565X is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7702P in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7702P and Xeon w7-3565X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD EPYC 7702P
EPYC 7702P
Intel Xeon w7-3565X
Xeon w7-3565X

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3 33 votes

Rate EPYC 7702P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon w7-3565X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7702P or Xeon w7-3565X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.