Xeon W-11955M vs EPYC 7F32
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7F32 outperforms Xeon W-11955M by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 476 | 505 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.61 | 48.41 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | AMD EPYC | Intel Tiger Lake |
| Power efficiency | 7.77 | 38.43 |
| Architecture codename | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Tiger Lake-H (2021) |
| Release date | 14 April 2020 (4 years ago) | 11 May 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,100 | $623 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon W-11955M has 1241% better value for money than EPYC 7F32.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 5 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 37 | no data |
| L1 cache | 512 KB | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 128 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 14 nm | 10 nm SuperFin |
| Die size | 74 mm2 | 190 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 3,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M 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 | 1 |
| Socket | SP3 | FCBGA1787 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| SIPP | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M 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 EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 TiB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 8 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.763 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel® UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel® Processors |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.45 GHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 32 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 4 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 7680x4320@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 15.05 | 14.48 |
| Recency | 14 April 2020 | 11 May 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 35 Watt |
EPYC 7F32 has a 3.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
Xeon W-11955M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 414.3% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M.
Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7F32 and Xeon W-11955M, 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.
