Xeon W-3375 vs Phi 7290
Primary details
Comparing Xeon Phi 7290 and Xeon W-3375 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 87 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Power efficiency | no data | 13.04 |
| Architecture codename | Knights Landing (2016) | Ice Lake-W (2021) |
| Release date | 20 June 2016 (8 years ago) | 29 July 2021 (3 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon Phi 7290 and Xeon W-3375 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 | 72 (Doheptaconta-Core) | 38 |
| Threads | 288 | 76 |
| Base clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.7 GHz | 4 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 8 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 32 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB (shared) | 57 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 83 °C |
| Number of transistors | 8,000 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon Phi 7290 and Xeon W-3375 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 |
| Socket | 3647 | FCLGA4189 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 245 Watt | 270 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Phi 7290 and Xeon W-3375. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Xeon Phi 7290 and Xeon W-3375 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Phi 7290 and Xeon W-3375 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Phi 7290 and Xeon W-3375. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Phi 7290 and Xeon W-3375.
| PCIe version | no data | 4 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 64 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 20 June 2016 | 29 July 2021 |
| Physical cores | 72 | 38 |
| Threads | 288 | 76 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 245 Watt | 270 Watt |
Xeon Phi 7290 has 89.5% more physical cores and 278.9% more threads, and 10.2% lower power consumption.
Xeon W-3375, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Xeon Phi 7290 and Xeon W-3375. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Phi 7290 and Xeon W-3375, 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.
