Ultra 7 265KF vs Xeon Silver 4316

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Silver 4316
2021
20 cores / 40 threads, 150 Watt
20.11
Core Ultra 7 265KF
2024
20 cores / 20 threads, 125 Watt
39.75
+97.7%

Core Ultra 7 265KF outperforms Xeon Silver 4316 by an impressive 98% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Silver 4316 and Core Ultra 7 265KF processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28573
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data100.00
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Power efficiency12.4529.54
Architecture codenameIce Lake-SP (2021)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date6 April 2021 (3 years ago)24 October 2024 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon Silver 4316 and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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)20 (Icosa-Core)
Threads4020
Base clock speed2.3 GHz3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz5.5 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)112 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)3 MB (per core)
L3 cache30 MB (shared)30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography10 nm3 nm
Die sizeno data243 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)84 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Silver 4316 and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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 configuration21
SocketFCLGA41891851
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Silver 4316 and Core Ultra 7 265KF. 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)++
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX++
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon Silver 4316 and Core Ultra 7 265KF technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB+no data
SGXYes with Intel® SPSno data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Silver 4316 and Core Ultra 7 265KF are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Silver 4316 and Core Ultra 7 265KF. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2667DDR5
Maximum memory size6 TBno data
Max memory channels8no data
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 Silver 4316 and Core Ultra 7 265KF.

PCIe version4.05.0
PCI Express lanes6420

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 Silver 4316 20.11
Ultra 7 265KF 39.75
+97.7%

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 Silver 4316 31341
Ultra 7 265KF 61964
+97.7%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.11 39.75
Recency 6 April 2021 24 October 2024
Threads 40 20
Chip lithography 10 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 125 Watt

Xeon Silver 4316 has 100% more threads.

Ultra 7 265KF, on the other hand, has a 97.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.

The Core Ultra 7 265KF is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Silver 4316 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon Silver 4316 is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 7 265KF is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Silver 4316 and Core Ultra 7 265KF, 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 Silver 4316
Xeon Silver 4316
Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF
Core Ultra 7 265KF

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.


3.4 21 vote

Rate Xeon Silver 4316 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 8 votes

Rate Core Ultra 7 265KF on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Silver 4316 or Core Ultra 7 265KF, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.