Ryzen Threadripper 2920X vs Xeon Phi 7210
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X outperforms Xeon Phi 7210 by a whopping 248% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon Phi 7210 and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1290 | 415 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 8.94 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen Threadripper |
| Power efficiency | 2.03 | 8.42 |
| Architecture codename | Knights Landing (2016) | ZEN+ (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 20 June 2016 (8 years ago) | 6 August 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $649 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Xeon Phi 7210 and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 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 | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 256 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 1.3 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 35 |
| L1 cache | 32 KB (per core) | 1.125 MB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 6 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB (shared) | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | no data | 213 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 8,000 million | 9600 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon Phi 7210 and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | 3647 | SP3r2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 215 Watt | 180 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Phi 7210 and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Xeon Phi 7210 and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Phi 7210 and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Phi 7210 and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR4 Quad-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 93.867 GB/s |
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.
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
| Performance score | 4.62 | 16.08 |
| Recency | 20 June 2016 | 6 August 2018 |
| Physical cores | 64 | 12 |
| Threads | 256 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 215 Watt | 180 Watt |
Xeon Phi 7210 has 433.3% more physical cores and 966.7% more threads.
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X, on the other hand, has a 248.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 19.4% lower power consumption.
The Ryzen Threadripper 2920X is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Phi 7210 in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon Phi 7210 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Threadripper 2920X is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Phi 7210 and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X, 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.
