Xeon Phi 7285 vs Opteron 4332 HE
Primary details
Comparing Opteron 4332 HE and Xeon Phi 7285 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
Place in the ranking | 1746 | not rated |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Market segment | Server | Server |
Series | no data | Intel Xeon Phi |
Power efficiency | 3.59 | no data |
Architecture codename | Seoul (2012) | Knights Mill (2017) |
Release date | 4 December 2012 (11 years ago) | 18 December 2017 (6 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Opteron 4332 HE and Xeon Phi 7285 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 68 (Octahexaconta-Core) |
Threads | 6 | 272 |
Base clock speed | 3 GHz | 1.3 GHz |
Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 1.4 GHz |
Multiplier | no data | 15 |
L1 cache | 288 KB | 4.25 MB |
L2 cache | 6144 KB | 34 MB |
L3 cache | 8192 KB (shared) | 0 KB (shared) |
Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
Die size | 315 mm2 | no data |
Maximum core temperature | no data | 72 °C |
Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 8,000 million |
64 bit support | + | + |
Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
VID voltage range | no data | 0.550-1.2V |
Compatibility
Information on Opteron 4332 HE and Xeon Phi 7285 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 | 2 | 1 |
Socket | C32 | SVLCLGA3647 |
Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 250 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 4332 HE and Xeon Phi 7285. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® AVX-512 |
AES-NI | + | + |
FMA | + | - |
AVX | + | + |
Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
Idle States | no data | + |
Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
Security technologies
Opteron 4332 HE and Xeon Phi 7285 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
TXT | no data | - |
EDB | no data | + |
SGX | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Opteron 4332 HE and Xeon Phi 7285 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 Opteron 4332 HE and Xeon Phi 7285. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-2400 |
Maximum memory size | no data | 384 GB |
Max memory channels | no data | 6 |
Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 115.212 GB/s |
ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Opteron 4332 HE and Xeon Phi 7285.
PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
PCI Express lanes | no data | 36 |
Pros & cons summary
Recency | 4 December 2012 | 18 December 2017 |
Physical cores | 6 | 68 |
Threads | 6 | 272 |
Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 250 Watt |
Opteron 4332 HE has 284.6% lower power consumption.
Xeon Phi 7285, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, 1033.3% more physical cores and 4433.3% more threads, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Opteron 4332 HE and Xeon Phi 7285. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Opteron 4332 HE and Xeon Phi 7285, 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.