Xeon Bronze 3204 vs W-2102

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W-2102
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 120 Watt
3.25
+4.8%
Xeon Bronze 3204
2019
6 cores / 6 threads, 85 Watt
3.10

Xeon W-2102 outperforms Xeon Bronze 3204 by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-2102 and Xeon Bronze 3204 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking16011627
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.0713.11
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon WIntel Xeon Bronze
Power efficiency2.523.39
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2019)Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
Release date29 August 2017 (7 years ago)2 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$202$213

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Bronze 3204 has 116% better value for money than Xeon W-2102.

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-2102 and Xeon Bronze 3204 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads46
Base clock speed2.9 GHz1.9 GHz
Boost clock speed2.9 GHz1.9 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier2919
L1 cache256 KB384 KB
L2 cache4 MB6 MB
L3 cache8.25 MB (shared)8.25 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size484 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data77 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)66 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-2102 and Xeon Bronze 3204 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2066FCLGA3647
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt85 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-2102 and Xeon Bronze 3204. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
TSX++
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0--
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon W-2102 and Xeon Bronze 3204 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
SGX-no data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon W-2102 and Xeon Bronze 3204 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W-2102 and Xeon Bronze 3204. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400DDR4-2133
Maximum memory size512 GB1 TB
Max memory channels46
Maximum memory bandwidth76.805 GB/s102.403 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-2102 and Xeon Bronze 3204.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4848

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 W-2102 3.25
+4.8%
Xeon Bronze 3204 3.10

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 W-2102 5073
+5%
Xeon Bronze 3204 4832

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.25 3.10
Recency 29 August 2017 2 April 2019
Physical cores 4 6
Threads 4 6
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 85 Watt

Xeon W-2102 has a 4.8% higher aggregate performance score.

Xeon Bronze 3204, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads, and 41.2% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon W-2102 and Xeon Bronze 3204.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-2102 and Xeon Bronze 3204, 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 W-2102
Xeon W-2102
Intel Xeon Bronze 3204
Xeon Bronze 3204

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.


2.6 5 votes

Rate Xeon W-2102 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 22 votes

Rate Xeon Bronze 3204 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-2102 or Xeon Bronze 3204, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.