EPYC 7272 vs Xeon Gold 6209U

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Gold 6209U
2019
20 cores / 40 threads, 125 Watt
16.31
+1.1%
EPYC 7272
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 120 Watt
16.14

Xeon Gold 6209U outperforms EPYC 7272 by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Gold 6209U and EPYC 7272 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking416423
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation17.6511.66
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon GoldAMD EPYC
Power efficiency12.1212.49
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date2 April 2019 (5 years ago)7 August 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,350$625

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Gold 6209U has 51% better value for money than EPYC 7272.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Gold 6209U and EPYC 7272 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 cores20 (Icosa-Core)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads4024
Base clock speed2.1 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz3.2 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier2129
L1 cache1.25 MB96 KB (per core)
L2 cache20 MB512 KB (per core)
L3 cache27.5 MB64 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die sizeno data192 mm2
Maximum core temperature87 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data3,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Gold 6209U and EPYC 7272 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFCLGA3647SP3
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt120 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 6209U and EPYC 7272. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon Gold 6209U and EPYC 7272 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Gold 6209U and EPYC 7272 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 Xeon Gold 6209U and EPYC 7272. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size1 TB4 TiB
Max memory channels68
Maximum memory bandwidth140.8 GB/s204.763 GB/s
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 6209U and EPYC 7272.

PCIe version3.04.0
PCI Express lanes48128

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 6209U 16.31
+1.1%
EPYC 7272 16.14

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 6209U 25430
+1.1%
EPYC 7272 25161

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.31 16.14
Recency 2 April 2019 7 August 2019
Physical cores 20 12
Threads 40 24
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 120 Watt

Xeon Gold 6209U has a 1.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 66.7% more physical cores and 66.7% more threads.

EPYC 7272, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 4.2% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon Gold 6209U and EPYC 7272.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 6209U and EPYC 7272, 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 6209U
Xeon Gold 6209U
AMD EPYC 7272
EPYC 7272

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon Gold 6209U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 21 vote

Rate EPYC 7272 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Gold 6209U or EPYC 7272, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.