Xeon Gold 6538N vs Gold 6144

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Gold 6144
2017
8 cores / 16 threads, 150 Watt
13.06
Xeon Gold 6538N
2023
32 cores / 64 threads, 205 Watt
29.34
+125%

Xeon Gold 6538N outperforms Xeon Gold 6144 by a whopping 125% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Gold 6144 and Xeon Gold 6538N processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking601162
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.3021.61
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon Goldno data
Power efficiency7.9413.05
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2019)Emerald Rapids (2023)
Release date11 July 2017 (7 years ago)14 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,925$3,351

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Gold 6538N has 555% better value for money than Xeon Gold 6144.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Gold 6144 and Xeon Gold 6538N 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads1664
Base clock speed3.5 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz4.1 GHz
Multiplier35no data
L1 cache512 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache8 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache24.75 MB60 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data2x 763 mm2
Maximum core temperature75 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data85 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Gold 6144 and Xeon Gold 6538N 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 configuration4 (Multiprocessor)2
SocketFCLGA3647FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt205 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 6144 and Xeon Gold 6538N. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX++
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon Gold 6144 and Xeon Gold 6538N technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Gold 6144 and Xeon Gold 6538N are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Gold 6144 and Xeon Gold 6538N. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR5-5200
Maximum memory size768 GB4 TB
Max memory channels68
Maximum memory bandwidth128.001 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 Xeon Gold 6144 and Xeon Gold 6538N.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes4880

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.

Xeon Gold 6144 13.06
Xeon Gold 6538N 29.34
+125%

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.

Xeon Gold 6144 19993
Xeon Gold 6538N 44895
+125%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.06 29.34
Recency 11 July 2017 14 December 2023
Physical cores 8 32
Threads 16 64
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 205 Watt

Xeon Gold 6144 has 36.7% lower power consumption.

Xeon Gold 6538N, on the other hand, has a 124.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

The Xeon Gold 6538N is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Gold 6144 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 6144 and Xeon Gold 6538N, 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.


Intel Xeon Gold 6144
Xeon Gold 6144
Intel Xeon Gold 6538N
Xeon Gold 6538N

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 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6144 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon Gold 6538N on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Gold 6144 or Xeon Gold 6538N, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.