Xeon Gold 5218 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen Threadripper 1950
2017
16 cores / 32 threads, 180 Watt
14.16
+1.9%
Xeon Gold 5218
2019
16 cores / 32 threads, 125 Watt
13.89

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 outperforms Xeon Gold 5218 by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Xeon Gold 5218 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking526541
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data14.79
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataIntel Xeon Gold
Power efficiency7.3110.32
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
Release date29 July 2017 (7 years ago)2 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,273

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Xeon Gold 5218 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads3232
Base clock speed3.2 GHz2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz3.9 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rateno data4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data23
L1 cache96K (per core)1 MB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)16 MB
L3 cache32 MB22 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size213 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data87 °C
Number of transistors9,600 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Xeon Gold 5218 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 configuration14 (Multiprocessor)
SocketSP3r2FCLGA3647
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Xeon Gold 5218. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, 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-
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Xeon Gold 5218 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Xeon Gold 5218 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 Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Xeon Gold 5218. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Quad-channelDDR4-2667
Maximum memory sizeno data1 TB
Max memory channelsno data6
Maximum memory bandwidthno data128.001 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Xeon Gold 5218.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data48

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.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 14.16
+1.9%
Xeon Gold 5218 13.89

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.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 22077
+2%
Xeon Gold 5218 21651

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.16 13.89
Recency 29 July 2017 2 April 2019
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 125 Watt

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 has a 1.9% higher aggregate performance score.

Xeon Gold 5218, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 44% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Xeon Gold 5218.

Note that Ryzen Threadripper 1950 is a desktop processor while Xeon Gold 5218 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Xeon Gold 5218, 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 Ryzen Threadripper 1950
Ryzen Threadripper 1950
Intel Xeon Gold 5218
Xeon Gold 5218

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.


4.4 20 votes

Rate Ryzen Threadripper 1950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 22 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 5218 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen Threadripper 1950 or Xeon Gold 5218, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.