EPYC 7532 vs Xeon W-3225

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W-3225
2019
8 cores / 16 threads, 160 Watt
11.25
EPYC 7532
2020
32 cores / 64 threads, 200 Watt
33.21
+195%

EPYC 7532 outperforms Xeon W-3225 by a whopping 195% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-3225 and EPYC 7532 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking688118
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.46no data
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon WAMD EPYC
Power efficiency6.6515.71
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date3 June 2019 (5 years ago)19 February 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-3225 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads1664
Base clock speed3.7 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed4.4 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier3724
L1 cache512 KB2 MB
L2 cache8 MB16 MB
L3 cache16.5 MB256 MB
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Maximum core temperature68 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-3225 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketFCLGA3647Socket SP3
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt200 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-3225 and EPYC 7532. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® 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+
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon W-3225 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 W-3225 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 W-3225 and EPYC 7532. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size1 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 W-3225 and EPYC 7532.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes64no 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-3225 11.25
EPYC 7532 33.21
+195%

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-3225 17874
EPYC 7532 52755
+195%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.25 33.21
Recency 3 June 2019 19 February 2020
Physical cores 8 32
Threads 16 64
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 200 Watt

Xeon W-3225 has 25% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7532, on the other hand, has a 195.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 months, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7532 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon W-3225 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-3225 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 W-3225
Xeon W-3225
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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon W-3225 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 23 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 W-3225 or EPYC 7532, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.