EPYC 7532 vs Xeon Platinum 8160M

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Platinum 8160M
2017
24 cores / 48 threads, 150 Watt
33.47
+0.8%
EPYC 7532
2020
32 cores / 64 threads, 200 Watt
33.21

Xeon Platinum 8160M outperforms EPYC 7532 by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Platinum 8160M and EPYC 7532 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking117119
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.18no data
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon PlatinumAMD EPYC
Power efficiency21.1215.71
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2018)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date25 April 2017 (7 years ago)19 February 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$7,704no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon Platinum 8160M and EPYC 7532 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 cores24 (Tetracosa-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads4864
Base clock speed2.1 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz3.3 GHz
Multiplier2124
L1 cache1.5 MB2 MB
L2 cache24 MB16 MB
L3 cache33 MB256 MB
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Maximum core temperature85 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Platinum 8160M and EPYC 7532 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 configuration8 (Multiprocessor)no data
SocketFCLGA3647Socket SP3
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt200 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Platinum 8160M and EPYC 7532. 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+

Security technologies

Xeon Platinum 8160M and EPYC 7532 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 Platinum 8160M and EPYC 7532 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 Platinum 8160M and EPYC 7532. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size1.5 TB4 TiB
Max memory channels68
Maximum memory bandwidth128.001 GB/s204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Platinum 8160M and EPYC 7532.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes48no data

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 Platinum 8160M 33.47
+0.8%
EPYC 7532 33.21

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 Platinum 8160M 53158
+0.8%
EPYC 7532 52755

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.47 33.21
Recency 25 April 2017 19 February 2020
Physical cores 24 32
Threads 48 64
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 200 Watt

Xeon Platinum 8160M has a 0.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7532, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon Platinum 8160M and EPYC 7532.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Platinum 8160M and EPYC 7532, 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 Platinum 8160M
Xeon Platinum 8160M
AMD EPYC 7532
EPYC 7532

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.


3.3 20 votes

Rate Xeon Platinum 8160M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 28 votes

Rate EPYC 7532 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Platinum 8160M or EPYC 7532, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.