EPYC 7F32 vs Xeon W-2175

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W-2175
2017
14 cores / 28 threads, 140 Watt
14.71
+1%
EPYC 7F32
2020
8 cores / 16 threads, 180 Watt
14.57

Xeon W-2175 outperforms EPYC 7F32 by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-2175 and EPYC 7F32 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking483494
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.783.68
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon WAMD EPYC
Power efficiency9.947.66
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2018)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date15 October 2017 (7 years ago)14 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,947$2,100

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon W-2175 has 84% better value for money than EPYC 7F32.

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-2175 and EPYC 7F32 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 cores14 (Tetradeca-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads2816
Base clock speed2.5 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz3.9 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier2537
L1 cache64K (per core)512 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)4 MB
L3 cache19.25 MB (shared)128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size484 mm274 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)66 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data3,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-2175 and EPYC 7F32 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)1
SocketFCLGA2066SP3
Power consumption (TDP)140 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-2175 and EPYC 7F32. 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+-
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Xeon W-2175 and EPYC 7F32 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
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-2175 and EPYC 7F32 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 W-2175 and EPYC 7F32. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400, DDR4-2666DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size512 GB4 TiB
Max memory channels48
Maximum memory bandwidth85.33 GB/s204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-2175 and EPYC 7F32.

PCIe version3.04.0
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 W-2175 14.71
+1%
EPYC 7F32 14.57

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-2175 23362
+1%
EPYC 7F32 23142

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.71 14.57
Recency 15 October 2017 14 April 2020
Physical cores 14 8
Threads 28 16
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 140 Watt 180 Watt

Xeon W-2175 has a 1% higher aggregate performance score, 75% more physical cores and 75% more threads, and 28.6% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7F32, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon W-2175 and EPYC 7F32.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-2175 and EPYC 7F32, 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-2175
Xeon W-2175
AMD EPYC 7F32
EPYC 7F32

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.


4.5 11 votes

Rate Xeon W-2175 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate EPYC 7F32 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-2175 or EPYC 7F32, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.