EPYC 7532 vs Xeon Platinum 8353H
Primary details
Comparing Xeon Platinum 8353H and EPYC 7532 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
Place in the ranking | not rated | 118 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Market segment | Server | Server |
Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
Power efficiency | no data | 15.71 |
Architecture codename | Cooper Lake-SP (2021) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
Release date | 6 April 2021 (3 years ago) | 19 February 2020 (4 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon Platinum 8353H 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 cores | 18 (Octadeca-Core) | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) |
Threads | 36 | 64 |
Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
Multiplier | no data | 24 |
L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 2 MB |
L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 16 MB |
L3 cache | 24.75 MB (shared) | 256 MB |
Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
64 bit support | + | + |
Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon Platinum 8353H 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 configuration | 8 | no data |
Socket | FCLGA4189 | Socket SP3 |
Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 200 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Platinum 8353H and EPYC 7532. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 | no data |
AES-NI | + | + |
AVX | + | + |
vPro | + | no data |
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
Speed Shift | + | no data |
Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
TSX | + | - |
Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
Security technologies
Xeon Platinum 8353H 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 8353H 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 8353H and EPYC 7532. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
Supported memory types | DDR4 RDIMM | DDR4-3200 |
Maximum memory size | 1.12 TB | 4 TiB |
Max memory channels | 6 | 8 |
Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.763 GB/s |
ECC memory support | + | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Platinum 8353H and EPYC 7532.
PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
PCI Express lanes | 48 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
Recency | 6 April 2021 | 19 February 2020 |
Physical cores | 18 | 32 |
Threads | 36 | 64 |
Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 200 Watt |
Xeon Platinum 8353H has an age advantage of 1 year, and 33.3% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7532, on the other hand, has 77.8% more physical cores and 77.8% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Xeon Platinum 8353H and EPYC 7532. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Platinum 8353H and EPYC 7532, 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.