Amd epyc vs xeon: the fight for the best server processor
Table of contents:
- AMD EPYC
- First generation (Naples)
- Second generation (Rome)
- Benchmarks
- Conclusion about EPYC vs Xeon
We bring you the showdown of the year: Epyc Vs Xeon. We have tested AMD and Intel server processors. Want to see it?
The EPYC release has ended with the party of Intel in the server sector because they are the AMD processors give a very good performance. The truth is that the Xeon range is still the rival to beat, so we have waited until now to make a good confrontation between both ranges.
Are you ready to see EPYC vs Xeon?
Index of contents
AMD EPYC
First, we start with the product that has made this confrontation possible: the EPYC processor. We say this because there would be no battle without the emergence of AMD, it would be an Intel monopoly in that regard.
First generation (Naples)
So far, AMD offers its two generations of EPYC processors . The first is characterized by 14 processors ranging from 8 cores and 16 threads, to 32 cores and 64 threads. The launch of this generation was a blow to the table by AMD, which occurred in March June 2017 and in the middle of 2018.
They follow Zen architecture and are manufactured at a 14nm node by GlobalFoundries. Its socket would be SP3, especially for servers. We leave a table for you to see what models this generation has.
Model | Socket configuration | Cores (threads) | Frequency
(GHz) |
Cache | PCIe lines | Memory support | TDP | Price
output |
Release date | ||
Base | Turbo | L2 | L3 | ||||||||
EPYC 7351P | 1 P | 16 (32) | 2.4 | 2.9 | 16 x 512 kb |
64 MB |
128 |
2666 MHz | 170 W | € 750 |
June 2017 |
EPYC 7401P | 24 (48) | 2.0 | 3.0 | 24 x 512 kb | € 1075 | ||||||
EPYC 7551P | 32 (64) | 3.0 | 32 x 512 kb | 180 W | € 2, 100 | ||||||
EPYC 7251 | 2 P | 8 (16) | 2.1 | 2.9 | 8 x 512 kb | 32 MB | 2400 MHz | 120 W | € 475 | ||
EPYC 7261 | 2.5 | 64 MB |
2666 MHz |
170 W | € 700 | Mid 2018 | |||||
EPYC 7281 | 16 (32) | 2.1 | 2.7 | 16 x 512 kb | 32 MB | 650 € | June 2017 | ||||
EPYC 7301 | 2.2 |
64 MB |
€ 800 | ||||||||
EPYC 7351 | 2.4 | 2.9 | € 1, 100 | ||||||||
EPYC 7371 | 3.1 | 3.8 | € 1, 550 | ||||||||
EPYC 7401 | 24 (48) | 2.0 | 3.0 | 24 x 512 kb | 180 W | € 1, 850 | End 2018 | ||||
EPYC 7451 | 2.3 | 3.2 | 170 W | € 2, 400 | June 2017 | ||||||
EPYC 7501 | 32 (64 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 32 x 512 kb | 180 W | € 3, 400 | |||||
EPYC 7551 | 2.0 | 170 W | € 3, 400 | ||||||||
EPYC 7551P | 2.2 | 3.2 | 180 W | € 4, 200 |
Second generation (Rome)
Its release took place on August 7, 2019 and they assemble the Zen 2 architecture (which was launched in November 2018), which means that its manufacturing process is 7nm and it was manufactured by TSMC. The performance improvement over the previous generation is more than remarkable. We see processors with 48 and 64 cores, as with 96 and 128 threads.
The SP3 socket was still maintained , but all processors would support DDR4 memory of up to 3200 MHz. All processors were released on August 7, but the latest processor of this generation is 7H12, which was introduced on September 18, 2019. Let's go with the table.
Model | Socket configuration | Cores (threads) | Frequency (GHz) | Cache | TDP | Starting price | ||
Base | Turbo | L2 | L3 | |||||
EPYC 7232P | 1 P | 8 (16) | 3.1 | 3.2 | 8 X 512 kb | 32 | 120 W | € 450 |
EPYC 7302P | 16 (32) | 3 | 3.3 | 16 X 512 kb | 128 | 155 W | € 825 | |
EPYC 7402P | 24 (48) | 2.8 | 3.35 | 24 X 512 kb | 180 W | € 1, 250 | ||
EPYC 7502P | 32 (64) | 2.5 | 3.35 | 32 x 512 kb | € 2, 300 | |||
EPYC 7702P | 64 (128) | two | 3.35 | 64 X 512 | 256 | 200 W | € 4, 425 | |
EPYC 7252 |
2 P |
8 (16) | 3.1 | 3.2 | 8 X 512 kb | 64 | 120 W | € 475 |
EPYC 7262 | 3.2 | 3.4 | 128 | 155 W | € 575 | |||
EPYC 7272 | 12 (24) | 2.9 | 3.2 | 12 X 512 kb | 64 | 120 W | € 625 | |
EPYC 7282 | 16 (32) | 2.8 | 3.2 | 16 X 512 kb | 650 € | |||
EPYC 7302 | 3 | 3.3 | 128 | 155 W | € 978 | |||
EPYC 7352 | 24 (48) | 2.3 | 3.2 | 24 X 512 kb | € 1, 350 | |||
EPYC 7402 | 2.8 | 3.35 | 180 W | € 1, 783 | ||||
EPYC 7452 | 32 (64) | 2.35 | 3.35 | 32 x 512 kb | 155 W | € 2025 | ||
EPYC 7502 | 2.5 | 3.35 | 180 W | € 2, 600 | ||||
EPYC 7542 | 2.9 | 3.4 | 225 W | € 3, 400 | ||||
EPYC 7552 | 48 (96) | 2.2 | 3.3 | 48 X 512 kb | 192 | 200 W | € 4025 | |
EPYC 7642 | 2.3 | 3.3 | 256 | 225 W | € 4, 775 | |||
EPYC 7702 | 64 (128) | two | 3.35 | 64 x 512 kb | 200 W | € 6, 450 | ||
EPYC 7742 | 2.25 | 3.4 | 225 W | € 6, 950 | ||||
EPYC 7H12 | 2.6 | 3.3 | 280 W |
Intel Xeon Gold and Platinum
As for Intel Xeon, we have to go to the highest models in this range because the EPYC brute force is evident. Therefore, we will go to the Xeon Gold 6138 and Xeon Platinum 8280.
Both processors have a 14nm litho, but they have certain differences:
- Xeon Gold belongs to Skylake's range of Xeon Scalable Processors . It was launched in the fall of 2017 for the server sector or multinational companies. Its socket is the FCLGA3647 Xeon Platinum, on the contrary, it belongs to Cascade Lake. In your case, it hit the market in early 2019 for the FCLGA3647 socket .
To go straight to their specifications, here is a table with them.
Name | Cores (threads) | Base frequency | Turbo boost | L3 cache | TDP | Socket | Memory | Starting price | Departure date |
Xeon Platinum 8280 | 28 (56) | 2.7 GHz | 4.00 GHz | 38.5 MB | 205 W | FCLGA3647 | 6x DDR4-2933 MHz | € 10, 009 | April 2, 2019 |
Xeon Gold 6138 | 20 (40) | 2.00 GHz | 3.70 GHz | 27.5 MB | 125 W | FCLGA3647 | 6x DDR4-2666 MHz | € 2, 612 | July 11, 2017 |
We can see that the change from Zen to Zen 2 is much greater than from Skylake to Cascade Lake. But, let's stop talking and move on to assess the benchmarks.
EPYC vs Xeon
The time has come to face the processors, but we will not face all of course. Let's see who wins in this EPYC vs Xeon fight.
Benchmarks
We have compiled a series of benchmarks to illustrate how the EPYC vs. Xeon duel unfolds. When you see " 2 x " it will mean that they are two processors.
In the compilation of the Linux Kernel, the clear winner is the EPYC 7742 with 15.67 seconds, compared to the Xeon Platinum 8280. Remember that this time, the less late, the better processor it is.
The time has come for 1080p video encoding . As we can see in the graphics, the EPYC 7742 sweeps the enemy without discretion. Get more FPS.
The last test will be for Intel because the Xeon Platinum 8280 demonstrates great integrity, as better performance than its rivals.
Conclusion about EPYC vs Xeon
With the technical data in hand and the benchmarks exposed, this duel seems to have a winner: AMD EPYC. This has been shown by the facts, since here it does not happen as in the enthusiastic range, there is no need to do gaming tests.
Companies are advised by highly trained people in this regard. One of the biggest examples is Amazon and its contract with AMD EPYC for its AWS (Amazon Web Services) services. We are facing a fight that has not occurred in many years in the business sector and that will not have the same voice because consumers have nothing to do with it.
For those who think that we can Intel can lower the price of chips and thus continue selling… is a questionable opinion. These processors go directly to the servers or cloud services of companies that bill many millions of euros (or dollars) a year.
There would have to be an abysmal difference between the price of an Intel and the price of an AMD for companies to think twice. Still, the Platinum's starting price is more expensive than the best EPYC. This makes it even more ironic.
We recommend reading:
To finish, you have to wait for what comes from Intel, but even more what comes from AMD. Given the problems that Intel has to decrease its lithography, AMD is going to bring chips with a 4nm node in Zen 3, when Intel is still at 14nm.
What do you think about this fight? Do you think that Intel will improve or that it will only make your situation worse because of AMD?
ServethehomeAMD FontHuawei prepares the Kirin 950 to fight with the best
Huawei prepares the new HiSilicon Kirin 950 processor to fight with the best of the market, it could debut on the Ascend Mate 8
Intel prepares the xeon gold u cpus to fight amd epyc
Intel is secretly preparing Xeon Gold U processors to compete with AMD EPYC's P series in the single socket market.
▷ Directx 12 vs vulkan: the fight for the best graphics engine?
We bring you the comparison of the two most important graphics engines for PC: Directx 12 vs vulkan. History, how it works and performance.