EPYC 7H12 vs Xeon W-3275M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W-3275M
2019
28 cores / 56 threads, 205 Watt
26.08
EPYC 7H12
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 280 Watt
45.60
+74.8%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Xeon W-3275M by an impressive 75% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 7H12 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19146
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.95no data
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon WAMD EPYC
Power efficiency11.5814.82
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date3 June 2019 (5 years ago)18 September 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$7,453no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 7H12 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 cores28 (Octacosa-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads56128
Base clock speed2.5 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed4.6 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier2526
L1 cache1.75 MB96K (per core)
L2 cache28 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache38.5 MB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die sizeno data192 mm2
Maximum core temperature76 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 7H12 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)
SocketFCLGA3647TR4
Power consumption (TDP)205 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 7H12. 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
StatusLaunchedno data
Precision Boost 2no data+
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 7H12 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-3275M and EPYC 7H12 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-3275M and EPYC 7H12. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size2 TB4 TiB
Max memory channels68
Maximum memory bandwidth140.8 GB/s204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 7H12.

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-3275M 26.08
EPYC 7H12 45.60
+74.8%

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-3275M 39834
EPYC 7H12 69633
+74.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.08 45.60
Recency 3 June 2019 18 September 2019
Physical cores 28 64
Threads 56 128
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 205 Watt 280 Watt

Xeon W-3275M has 36.6% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7H12, on the other hand, has a 74.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 months, 128.6% more physical cores and 128.6% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon W-3275M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 7H12, 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-3275M
Xeon W-3275M
AMD EPYC 7H12
EPYC 7H12

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 63 votes

Rate Xeon W-3275M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 450 votes

Rate EPYC 7H12 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-3275M or EPYC 7H12, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.