Xeon Phi 7210 vs Opteron 142
Primary details
Comparing Opteron 142 and Xeon Phi 7210 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1290 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Power efficiency | no data | 2.03 |
| Architecture codename | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) | Knights Landing (2016) |
| Release date | September 2003 (21 year ago) | 20 June 2016 (8 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Opteron 142 and Xeon Phi 7210 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 256 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 32 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 193 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 106 million | 8,000 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Opteron 142 and Xeon Phi 7210 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 | 940 | 3647 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 215 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 142 and Xeon Phi 7210. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Security technologies
Opteron 142 and Xeon Phi 7210 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Opteron 142 and Xeon Phi 7210 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Opteron 142 and Xeon Phi 7210. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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
| Physical cores | 1 | 64 |
| Threads | 1 | 256 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 215 Watt |
Opteron 142 has 152.9% lower power consumption.
Xeon Phi 7210, on the other hand, has 6300% more physical cores and 25500% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Opteron 142 and Xeon Phi 7210. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Opteron 142 and Xeon Phi 7210, 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.
