Intel xeon vs amd

Intel xeon vs amd DEFAULT

Intel’s new chip &#; 3rd Gen Intel Xeon Scalable processors &#; will be slower than AMD’s new flagship data center server chip released last month, says the latest Reuters report.
Intel Navin Shenoy
Intel has introduced its newest flagship data center microprocessor, hoping its in-house manufacturing operations will help it navigate a chip shortage to better compete against rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc’s (AMD) faster chips.

The new “Ice Lake” chip is designed to be used by cloud computing providers and others who run data centers. Intel said it has already shipped about , test units.

New 3rd Gen Intel Xeon Scalable processors deliver a significant performance increase compared with the prior generation, with an average 46 percent improvement on popular data center workloads.

The latest 3rd Gen Intel Xeon Scalable processors deliver up to 40 cores per processor and up to times higher average performance gain compared with a 5-year-old system. The platform supports up to 6 terabytes of system memory per socket, up to 8 channels of DDR memory per socket and up to 64 lanes of PCIe Gen4 per socket.

The latest hardware and software optimizations deliver 74 percent faster AI performance compared with the prior generation and provide up to times higher performance across a broad mix of 20 popular AI workloads versus AMD EPYC and up to times higher performance on a broad mix of 20 popular AI workloads versus Nvidia A GPU.

The company said Intel Xeon Scalable processors are supported by more than ready-to-deploy Intel IoT Market Ready Solutions and Intel Select Solutions that help to accelerate customer deployments — with up to 80 percent of our Intel Select Solutions being refreshed by end of year.
Intel Lisa Spelman
Lisa Spelman, corporate vice president in Intel&#;s Xeon and Memory Group, presented during the introduction of 3rd Gen Intel Xeon Scalable processors.

Over of the world’s cloud service providers run on Intel Xeon Scalable processors, and all of the largest cloud service providers are planning to offer cloud services in powered by 3rd Gen Intel Xeon Scalable processors.

The latest 3rd Gen Intel Xeon Scalable processors deliver on average 62 percent more performance on a range of broadly-deployed network and 5G workloads over the prior generation.

The platform delivers up to times more AI inference performance for image classification than the prior generations.

Slower than AMD

Intel’s new chip will be slower than AMD’s new flagship data center server chip released last month. Intel years ago lost its speed lead because of fumbles with the in-house nanometer manufacturing technology it uses to make the chip, while AMD outsources its server chip manufacturing to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd and has gained market share against Intel.

Intel is hoping that greater control over its supply chain &#; in addition to a portfolio of data storage, networking and other chips designed to work well with the “Ice Lake” processor &#; will help make the chips competitive during the midst of a global chip supply crunch, in part by mitigating customer concerns about shortages.

“Nobody else in the industry has the intersection of (intellectual property), architecture, design and manufacturing. We think that’s a particularly important differentiator for the company at a time when demand is exploding and supply is short,” Navin Shenoy, executive vice president and general manager of the data platforms group at Intel, told Reuters.

To fight the loss of its speed title, Intel has focused on tailoring its chips and systems to optimize them for specific kinds of computing. One area of focus has been 5G networks, which are shifting from being built on proprietary systems such as those from Huawei Technologies Co Ltd toward using commodity parts like Intel chips. Shenoy said Verizon Communications Inc plans to use the new “Ice Lake” chips.

Intel’s 5G push “gives economies that are worried about security issues or geopolitical tensions a lot more flexibility. They can lean on Western supply chains to build out their next-generation 5G infrastructure,” Shenoy said.

infotech

Sours: https://infotechlead.com/networking/intel-vs-amd-3rd-gen-intel-xeon-scalable-processors-slower-than-amds-new-data-center-server-chip

AMD Epyc vs Intel Xeon Platinum

Intel Xeon Platinum

vs

29 facts in comparison

AMD Epyc

Intel Xeon Platinum

Why is AMD Epyc better than Intel Xeon Platinum ?

  • 16 more CPU threads?
    vs
  • 1 newer version of PCI Express (PCIe)?
    4vs3
  • Supports ECC memory?
  • W lower TDP?
    WvsW
  • MB bigger L3 cache?
    MBvs77MB
  • MHz higher ram speed?
    MHzvsMHz
  • GB larger maximum memory size?
    GBvsGB
  • KB bigger L1 cache?
    KBvsKB

Why is Intel Xeon Platinum better than AMD Epyc ?

  • GB/s more memory bandwidth?
    GB/svsGB/s
  • % faster CPU speed?
    56 x GHzvs64 x GHz
  • 4 more memory channels?
    12vs8
  • MB/core more L2 cache per core?
    1MB/corevsMB/core
  • 24MB bigger L2 cache?
    56MBvs32MB
  • GHz higher turbo clock speed?
    GHzvsGHz

General info

Small semiconductors provide better performance and reduced power consumption. Chipsets with a higher number of transistors, semiconductor components of electronic devices, offer more computational power. A small form factor allows more transistors to fit on a chip, therefore increasing its performance.

Peripheral Component Interconnect Express (PCIe) is a high-speed interface standard for connecting components, such as graphics cards and SSDs, to a motherboard. Newer versions can support more bandwidth and deliver better performance.

With integrated graphics you don’t need to buy a separate graphics card.

The thermal design power (TDP) is the maximum amount of power the cooling system needs to dissipate. A lower TDP typically means that it consumes less power.

A bit operating system can only support up to 4GB of RAM. bit allows more than 4GB, giving increased performance. It also allows you to run bit apps.

Performance

More threads result in faster performance and better multitasking.

A larger L3 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

The CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second can be executed by a CPU, considering all of its cores (processing units). It is calculated by adding the clock rates of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors employing different microarchitectures, of each group of cores.

More data can be stored in the L2 cache for access by each core of the CPU.

A larger L2 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

A larger L1 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

When the CPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.

More data can be stored in the L3 cache for access by each core of the CPU.

Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier which makes them easy to overclock, allowing you to gain increased performance in games and other apps.

Memory

Error-correcting code memory can detect and correct data corruption. It is used when is it essential to avoid corruption, such as scientific computing or when running a server.

DDR (Double Data Rate) memory is the most common type of RAM. Newer versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy-efficient.

More memory channels increases the speed of data transfer between the memory and the CPU.

It can support faster memory, which will give quicker system performance.

Features

Multithreading technology (such as Intel's Hyperthreading or AMD's Simultaneous Multithreading) provides increased performance by splitting each of the processor's physical cores into virtual cores, also known as threads. This way, each core can run two instruction streams at once.

NX bit helps protect the computer from malicious attacks.

FMA4 is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

FMA3 is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

F16C is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

6.Has AES

✔AMD Epyc

✖Intel Xeon Platinum

AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

7.Has AVX

✔AMD Epyc

✔Intel Xeon Platinum

AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial apps, as well as improving Linux RAID software performance.

SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing an image or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.

9.Has MMX

✔AMD Epyc

✔Intel Xeon Platinum

MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

Which are the best Enterprise CPUs?

Show all
This page is currently only available in English.
Sours: https://versus.com/en/amd-epycvs-intel-xeon-platinum
  1. Ffbe hero ring farm
  2. Refurbished macbook air retina
  3. Margaret ann carter wikipedia
  4. Nespresso water tank lid
  5. Pinoy bold movies 2015

Pricing Comparison: AMD versus Intel

We are all hoping that the renewed competition between Intel and AMD results in more bang for the buck. Intel just launched about 50 SKUs, so we made a list of those that will go head-to-head with AMD's already announced EPYC SKUs. On average, the Intel SKUs will priced slightly higher, reflecting the fact that Intel believes buyers are willing to pay a bit more for the vendor with the better track record. 

AMD EPYC Processors (2P)Intel Xeon Processoors (P)
AMD EPYC
SKU
Cores
 
Freq
(GHz)
Base-Max
Price Intel Xeon
SKU
CoresFreq 
(GHz)
Base-Max
Price
    Xeon (W)28$
    Xeon M (W)28$
    Xeon (W)28$
EPYC
(W)
32  $Xeon (W)24$
EPYC
(W)
32>$Xeon (W)22$
EPYC (/W)32$Xeon (W)18$
EPYC
(W)
24>$Xeon (W)18$
EPYC (/W)24$Xeon (W)16$
    Xeon (W)14$
EPYC (/W)16>$Xeon (W)12$
EPYC (/W)16>$Xeon
(85W)
12$
EPYC (/W)16$Xeon
(85W)
10$
EPYC
(W)
$Xeon
(85W)
8$

Several trends pop up as we look at the table above. 

First of foremost, those core CPUs are a wonder of modern multicore CPU architecture, but you sure have to pay a lot of money for them. This is especially the case for the SKUs that can support TB per socket. Of course if you can afford SAP Hana, you can afford $10k CPUs (or so the theory goes).

Still, if we compare the new high-end Skylake-EP SKUs with the previous core Xeon E v4 ($), paying twice as much for a core chip just because it can be used in 8 socket configuration is bad news for those of us who need a very fast 2 socket system. In fact, it is almost as Intel has no competition: we only get a little more performance for the same price. For example you can get a Xeon (20 cores at GHz, W TDP) for $, while you had to pay $ last generation for a Xeon E v4 (20 cores at GHz, W). The latter had smaller L2-caches but a much larger L3-cache (45 MB vs MB). We're still not getting big steps forward on a performance-per-dollar basis, a similar problem we had with the launch of the Xeon E5 v4 last year. 

Hopefully, AMD's EPYC can put some pressure on Intel, if not exceed the lb gorilla entirely. AMD typically offers many more cores for the same price. At the high end, AMD offers up to 10 more cores than the similar Xeon: compare the EPYC with the Intel Xeon

On the other hand, Intel offers lower TDPs and higher turbo clocks. The core EPYC CPUs in particular seem to have remarkably high TDPs compared to similar Intel SKUs. Those cores look even worse as, despite the lower core count and high TDP, the turbo clock is lower than 3 GHz. 

In a nutshell: looking at the current lineups we want lower prices from Intel, and more attractive mid-range SKUs from AMD. 

AMD EPYC Processors (1P)
 Cores
Threads
Frequency (GHz)TDPPrice
EPYC P32 / 64 W$
EPYC P24 / 48W/W$
EPYC P16 / 32W/W$

Finally, AMD's single-socket SKUs – identified by a P suffix – are by far the most interesting to us and the most dangerous to Intel. It will be interesting to see how well two core Xeon s can compete with one EPYC P. The clocks are similar, but AMD has 8 extra cores, a less complex server board, much more PCIe bandwidth, and a lower TDP.  AMD should have serious cost advantage on paper. We hope to check that in a later review.

AT Deals: EVGA SuperNOVA P2 PSU Down to $Netgear Updates Orbi Lineup with RBKE Wi-Fi 6E Quad-Band Mesh SystemSeagate Updates Game Drive SSD for Xbox with New Look and Internals

TWEETS

  • IanCutress: @BenFranklin I've been in quite a few that charge for basic access. Usually business-focused hotels in major ci… https://t.co/HB5znUqFyq
  • IanCutress: @JamesDSneed Yeah completely missed that somehow
  • IanCutress: @Wronglebowsk A lot of events I went to pre-pandemic, if they were in semi-reasonable hotels in big cities, still charged you
  • IanCutress: @BenFranklin Blinded by the first thing I see. Thanks
  • IanCutress: @realAkashPatel Sometimes there are. Most of the time there isn't.
  • andreif7: @shameermulji @reneritchie I disrespectfully say that's just stupid. If you don't like a feature, don't use it. Giv… https://t.co/HcCs6ISsgr
  • andreif7: @handleym99 @iMarc96 @reneritchie What are you even talking about, that's the worst possible example. The A10 had a… https://t.co/SsK88VPHEs
  • andreif7: @VadimYuryev @dazeone81 > 4-second delay before switching down from hz Where did you get this from? That's not how it works.
  • andreif7: @mitchellmllnnl @reneritchie The X3 and 1+9Pro are garbage and don't have LFD working at all, the Note20Ultra and S… https://t.co/sREmqr2cwe
  • andreif7: @mitchellmllnnl @reneritchie There are literally only 2 other phones on the market having the same hardware class, so I repeat what I said.
  • RyanSmithAT: @JumboShrimp @BrettHowse Ahh, okay, you're talking about Windows Since today's piece was about the Surface h… https://t.co/bSPOukjtox
  • RyanSmithAT: @JumboShrimp @BrettHowse Just for future reference, what else would you have liked to see?
  • RyanSmithAT: If you only read one (more) thing today, read this. @andreif7 has once again knocked it out of the park with his di… https://t.co/hr3PPXwCJT
  • RyanSmithAT: @Tech_nerd_02 We're cracking away on it! @andreif7 only received the phones a few days ago, so there's still quite a bit of work left to do
  • ganeshts: A Thunderbolt 4 / USB4 hub from @plugable at a very attractive price point (considering the USBC-HDMI value add). A… https://t.co/DiJZS8MmF9
  • RyanSmithAT: @andreif7 If you're not already, use iTunes to do it. For whatever reason it goes a lot faster that way than having… https://t.co/Be9IMU4gja
  • ganeshts: @JamesDSneed @IanCutress Yes, NAND has the ability to store dynamic sector remap information - this is not only for… https://t.co/J0NYC9oCZk
  • ganeshts: @AG_ Micron has a history of doing these silent changes. The P2's silent move from TLC to QLC resulted in worse… https://t.co/UfmTilvFi1
  • ganeshts: @ricswi Looks like that requirement is Home-only. Other editions will still allow local accounts. I can't remember… https://t.co/qOvPnduAuY
  • ganeshts: @Laughing_Man @hnpn Benson, is there an update planned for the Twinkie PD to support EPR? I still use the USBC-T… https://t.co/D6g5nmQvB5
Follow @ANANDTECH
Sours: https://www.anandtech.com/show//intel-skylake-ep-vs-amd-epyccpu-battle-of-the-decade/10

AMD Ryzen 9 X vs Intel Xeon WX

AMD Ryzen 9 X

Intel Xeon WX

vs

63 facts in comparison

AMD Ryzen 9 X

Intel Xeon WX

Why is AMD Ryzen 9 X better than Intel Xeon WX?

  • MHz higher ram speed?
    MHzvsMHz
  • 7nm smaller semiconductor size?
    7nmvs14nm
  • GHz higher turbo clock speed?
    GHzvsGHz
  • MB bigger L3 cache?
    64MBvsMB
  • W lower TDP?
    WvsW
  • 1 newer version of PCI Express (PCIe)?
    4vs3
  • % higher PassMark result (single)?
    vs
  • 10°C higher maximum operating temperature?
    95°Cvs85°C

Why is Intel Xeon WX better than AMD Ryzen 9 X?

  • x faster CPU speed?
    28 x GHzvs12 x GHz
  • 32 more CPU threads?
    56vs24
  • 22MB bigger L2 cache?
    28MBvs6MB
  • % higher PassMark result?
    vs
  • KB bigger L1 cache?
    KBvsKB
  • MB/core more L2 cache per core?
    1MB/corevsMB/core
  • GB/s more memory bandwidth?
    GB/svsGB/s
  • 4 more memory channels?
    6vs2

General info

A bit operating system can only support up to 4GB of RAM. bit allows more than 4GB, giving increased performance. It also allows you to run bit apps.

Small semiconductors provide better performance and reduced power consumption. Chipsets with a higher number of transistors, semiconductor components of electronic devices, offer more computational power. A small form factor allows more transistors to fit on a chip, therefore increasing its performance.

3.GPU clock speed

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 9 X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Xeon WX)

The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a higher clock speed.

The thermal design power (TDP) is the maximum amount of power the cooling system needs to dissipate. A lower TDP typically means that it consumes less power.

Peripheral Component Interconnect Express (PCIe) is a high-speed interface standard for connecting components, such as graphics cards and SSDs, to a motherboard. Newer versions can support more bandwidth and deliver better performance.

If the CPU exceeds the maximum operating temperature then problems such as random resets can occur.

7.DirectX version

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 9 X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Xeon WX)

DirectX is used in games, with newer versions supporting better graphics.

A higher transistor count generally indicates a newer, more powerful processor.

9.OpenGL version

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 9 X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Xeon WX)

OpenGL is used in games, with newer versions supporting better graphics.

Performance

The CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second can be executed by a CPU, considering all of its cores (processing units). It is calculated by adding the clock rates of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors employing different microarchitectures, of each group of cores.

More threads result in faster performance and better multitasking.

A larger L2 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

When the CPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.

A larger L3 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

A larger L1 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

More data can be stored in the L2 cache for access by each core of the CPU.

Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier which makes them easy to overclock, allowing you to gain increased performance in games and other apps.

More data can be stored in the L3 cache for access by each core of the CPU.

Memory

It can support faster memory, which will give quicker system performance.

More memory channels increases the speed of data transfer between the memory and the CPU.

Error-correcting code memory can detect and correct data corruption. It is used when is it essential to avoid corruption, such as scientific computing or when running a server.

The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.

DDR (Double Data Rate) memory is the most common type of RAM. Newer versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy-efficient.

8.eMMC version

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 9 X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Xeon WX)

A higher version of eMMC allows faster memory interfaces, having a positive effect on the performance of a device. For example, when transferring files from your computer to the internal storage over USB.

9.bus speed

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 9 X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Xeon WX)

The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.

Features

1.Has AES

✔AMD Ryzen 9 X

✔Intel Xeon WX

AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

2.Has AVX

✔AMD Ryzen 9 X

✔Intel Xeon WX

AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial apps, as well as improving Linux RAID software performance.

SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing an image or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.

4.bits executed at a time

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 9 X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Xeon WX)

NEON provides acceleration for media processing, such as listening to MP3s.

F16C is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

Multithreading technology (such as Intel's Hyperthreading or AMD's Simultaneous Multithreading) provides increased performance by splitting each of the processor's physical cores into virtual cores, also known as threads. This way, each core can run two instruction streams at once.

7.Has MMX

✔AMD Ryzen 9 X

✔Intel Xeon WX

MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

8.front-end width

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 9 X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Xeon WX)

The CPU can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), meaning that the CPU performs better

A technology integrated into the processor to secure the device for use with features such as mobile payments and streaming video using digital rights management (DRM).

Benchmarks

This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using multiple threads.

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor's multi-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, )

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor's single-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, )

The Blender (bmw27) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.

The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.

Which are the best CPUs?

AMD Ryzen Threadripper Pro WX

AMD Ryzen Threadripper X

AMD Ryzen Threadripper X

AMD Ryzen Threadripper X

AMD Ryzen Threadripper X

Show all
This page is currently only available in English.
Sours: https://versus.com/en/amd-ryzenx-vs-intel-xeon-wx

Xeon amd intel vs

Given that Ubuntu will be shipping with Linux out-of-the-box along with other autumn Linux distributions where Linux is landing too late, here is a fresh comparison of several different AMD EPYC "Rome" and Intel Xeon "Cascade Lake" processors on this current stable kernel release for seeing how the performance is standing up as we approach this next round of Linux distribution releases.

Ubuntu benchmarks on various server and mobile/desktop platforms will be coming later this month while this article is more broadly providing fresh reference figures of the AMD EPYC and Intel Xeon performance for Linux This newer kernel is also important as we move closer to the release of the next-generation Intel Xeon "Ice Lake" and EPYC "Milan" processors for newer hardware support/compatibility. It's also fun providing this fresh look when thinking about how the server landscape may evolve with those upcoming launches. Plus this article has some new/updated test profiles (benchmarks) compared to some of the past server CPU benchmark articles.

For today's tests all the of CPUs were tested on Ubuntu LTS with all available updates while running the Linux kernel and keeping the other "Focal Fossa" packages at their updated defaults off an Intel Optane p GB NVMe solid-state drive. Tested on the AMD side were the EPYC , , , , , , 7F32, 7F52, and 7F72 all in a 2P configuration. The AMD testing was performed with the Supermicro H11DSi-NT v motherboard using 16 x 32GB DDR DIMMs.

On the Intel side were the Xeon Gold R, Xeon Gold , Xeon Gold R, and Xeon Platinum all in dual socket (2P) configurations as well based on the CPUs available. That testing was done with 12 x 32GB DDR memory with the Gigabyte SR0 Storage Server.

Not reflected by benchmarks but significant in going from Linux (as found by default in Ubuntu / LTS) to newer kernels of Linux + is better AMD CPU temperature monitoring support with the k10temp driver, the AMD Energy driver was added to Linux for exposing AMD energy reporting metrics finally under Linux, more work on AMD SEV, and other continued refinements for both the current Intel and AMD microarchitectures along with other general feature additions.

Via the Phoronix Test Suite dozens of different benchmarks were carried out for looking at the performance of these x86_64 server CPUs with the Linux kernel. Again, comparisons against Ubuntu and friends will be coming in the weeks ahead.

6 Comments   -   Next Page

Sours: https://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=
Intel Xeon vs Core - What Is The Difference? [Simple Guide]

Core Combat: Intel Xeon WX vs. AMD Threadripper WX

AMD's Threadripper WX redefined the high end desktop when it burst onto the scene with cores and threads, setting a new high watermark for sheer multi-threaded performance. Threadripper's copious core counts, low pricing and a healthy slathering of 64 PCIe lanes made the platform a hit with the prosumer and workstation crowd, threatening Intel's dominance in the high-end workstation market.

Intel, not content with second place, kicked the tires on its aging Skylake architecture and rolled out a new overclockable workstation processor that hails from the server space. The core thread Xeon WX also comes to market bearing a six-channel memory controller and support for ECC memory, a must for professional-class workloads. Overclocking is also on the table, but the high-end focus is apparent in its $2, price tag.

The Xeon W line of processors are designed specifically for workstation users and their unique needs, so we put both processors through our test suite to see which one comes out on top for professionals. Here's how they stack up.

Features

AMD's Threadripper processors excel at heavily multi-threaded workloads thanks to their high core counts. Due to the Threadripper WX's unique design, the extra cores come at the cost of memory throughput and single-threaded performance. As a general rule, CPU clock speeds decrease as core counts grow. As such, the Ryzen Threadripper WX’s base clock is only 3GHz, MHz less than then core AMD Ryzen Threadripper X. AMD also limited the maximum boost clock to GHz.

The Threadripper WX is built in a quad-die layout, which is effectively two dual-die Threadripper X processors tied together into one multi-chip module. Unfortunately, the design doesn’t allow all four dies to communicate directly with memory controllers, which limits the performance of the second half of the processor on certain memory-intensive tasks. An unoptimized Windows scheduler only complicates matters. AMD does offer several different toggles to optimize performance for certain tasks, but those require a reboot after each adjustment. The company has also developed a new Dynamic Local Mode, which is a background process that automatically tunes the processor for certain applications, but results also vary based upon the application.

AMD’s Threadripper WX supports corruption-preventing error-correcting code (ECC) memory, but that requires certification from the motherboard vendor, and qualified support is spotty. Intel restricts ECC support to its Xeon-class processor lineup to differentiate its enthusiast-class processors from its enterprise- and workstation-class products. Given its workstation focus, motherboards for Intel's Xeon WX come with full ECC support.

AMD’s processors also natively accept DDR, whereas Intel’s platform is officially limited to DDR While Threadripper holds the advantage of faster native memory support, Intel's Xeon WX comes with a six-channel memory controller that offers more throughput than Threadripper's quad-channel configuration (~59GB/s vs. ~35 GB/s).

The WX also supports Intel's vPro management suite, which simplifies remote management, diagnosis and updating tasks for IT professionals. The processor also comes with RAS (Reliability, Availability, Serviceability) features designed to ensure steady operation if the processor encounters corruption in the memory or logic arrays.

CPU Intel Xeon WXRyzen Threadripper WX
SocketLGA TR4
Cores / Threads28 / 5632 / 64
TDPWW
Base Frequency GHz GHz
Max Boost Frequency  (Turbo Boost ) GHz (Precision Boost Overdrive)
L3 CacheMB64MB
Integrated GraphicsNoNo
Graphics Base/Turbo (MHz)N/AN/A
Memory SupportDDR (ECC)DDR (Varies)
Memory ControllerSix-ChannelQuad-Channel
Unlocked MultiplierYesYes
PCIe Lanes4864 (Four to the chipset)
ArchitectureSkylake-XZen+

Intel’s Xeon WX is built on a refresh of the company’s Skylake architecture. The new processor features 28 physical cores and 56 logical threads, setting a new high bar for Intel's W-series processors. Unlike Intel's latest high end desktop models, the WX doesn't come with Solder Thermal Interface Material (sTIM), which improves heat dissipation. Intel uses standard pTIM (polymer TIM) instead, so dissipating heat from the die to the heatspreader could be troublesome. However, we found that the large heatspreader helps avoid many of the pitfalls, at least with standard cooling solutions.

Active Cores - Non-AVX FrequencyBase1 -23 - 45 - 1213 - 1617 - 1819 - 2021 - 2425 - 28
Xeon WX
Xeon Platinum Scalable

The WX boosts to different clock speeds depending on the number of cores in use, as outlined in the chart above. The Xeon WX is merely a respin of Intel's Platinum Scalable , but as you can see, the X comes with much higher Turbo Boost frequencies.

AMD holds the PCIe lane advantage with 60 native lanes exposed to the user, while Intel exposes 48 total lanes. AMD's extra lanes are useful for professionals that load up fast NVMe storage arrays, multiple GPUs, and/or high-speed networking adapters.

Winner: Intel.

As reflected by its feature set, the Xeon WX is specifically designed for workstations. The processor supports vPro management and RAS features that simply aren't present with Threadripper WX, while also guaranteeing certified support for ECC memory on supporting motherboards. The processor also consists of a single large die and mesh architecture that delivers consistent memory latency and throughput. Pairing the consistent memory performance with the superior throughput of a six-channel memory arrangement could yield big gains for some professional applications.  

Overclocking

Conventional wisdom says that if you’re building a workstation-class PC for mission-critical tasks, you really shouldn’t be overclocking your processor. However, some professionals with particularly demanding workloads, like financial traders, are willing to push the limits. In fact, overclocking was a key advantage for Threadripper against Intel's Xeon W lineup, which used to feature locked multipliers on all models. The easy overclocking afforded by the Threadripper processors probably played a hand in Intel's decision to bring an overclockable Xeon W to market. 

If overclocking is what you’re after, Intel’s platform can hit higher maximum clock speeds: We reached GHz with relative ease on a beefy EKWB mm AIO cooler, and thermals were the limiting factor. That means that custom loops or more extreme cooling solutions, like chillers, could expose even more frequency headroom. AMD presses its silicon near the limits of its capabilities at stock settings, so there often isn't much overclocking headroom. That trend doesn’t change with the high-end Threadripper lineup.

Like AMD’s other Zen/Zen+ processors, the Threadripper WX features the company’s Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO) technology, which dynamically adjusts the CPUs parameters to match the current workload and power delivery environment. In our experience, it does a better job at maintaining a good balance of higher single- and multi-core boost frequencies than manually overclocking. Think of it as an automated overclocking feature that will extract the most performance possible from the silicon given the capabilities of your motherboard, cooler and power supply.

PBO brings what was once the dark art of overclocking high core-count processors down to the layman. Most workstation users aren't known for their overclocking prowess, so having a program that automatically pushes the limits of the processor and supporting components is a tangible advantage.

In most of our test suite, Intel’s Xeon WX at stock clocks outperforms our overclocked Threadripper WX. But the WX requires much more expertise to reach the CPU's highest overclocking potential because you're still stuck with manual tuning in either the motherboard firmware or inside Intel's eXtreme Tuning Utility (XTU) software. You can overclock the chip to higher frequencies, but you'll be restricted by your cooling solution. You'll also need high-end components, like a top-notch power supply, motherboard, and cooler to push the limits of the silicon.

Winner: Tie

Intel’s Xeon WX will push higher than a Threadripper processor, but you'll have to invest heavily for the extra performance. Plan to spend copious amounts of money on premium components to unlock the best the silicon has to offer.

Threadripper WX's overclocking headroom isn't nearly as high, but you'll be able to squeeze out gains in several areas without resorting to exotic cooling solutions. Also, don't underestimate the advantages of AMD's PBO, an automated overclocking feature that makes extreme tuning a one-click solution.

Cooling Requirements

Both Intel and AMD enable overclocking on their top-of-the-line processors, but keeping these CPUs cool is no easy task–especially once you start cranking up the voltage. Don’t expect an off-the-shelf air cooler to keep the temperatures in line on either chip under heavy workloads if you push the chip beyond the stock settings.

Our Intel Xeon WX was stable at GHz with an EKWB EK-Phoenix Annihilator cooler, which is surprisingly higher than the GHz we squeezed out of the Core iXE. If you’re serious about overclocking Intel’s WX, plan to build a custom water-cooling loop or invest in a ultra-high-end AIO water cooler to expel the heat efficiently. The WX overwhelmed our cooler before we reached the maximum overclock, so more exotic solutions, like chillers, will unleash even more performance.

AMD’s Ryzen Threadripper WX doesn’t produce as much heat as Intel’s flagship Xeon W processor when overclocked, but you should still spring for a liquid-cooling system to keep the temperatures in check. In our tests, we managed to run the Threadripper WX with an oversized air cooler, and we even enabled AMD Power Boost Overdrive (PBO). But the fan had to spin at full speed to keep up, which made for a noisy computing environment.

We had good results with a Corsair Hi dual-fan closed-loop cooler with AMD's top chip, but we would still recommend a custom loop if you plan to push a Threadripper WX to its limits for extended periods.  

Winner: AMD.

Intel recommends liquid cooling as a minimum requirement for stock operation of the Xeon WX. Meanwhile, AMD recommends an air cooler for its Threadripper WX. You can get away with an air cooler for the Threadripper WX, but better coolers can extract higher overclocks.

Motherboard Options

AMD’s Ryzen Threadripper processors drop into Xbased motherboards with a TR4 CPU socket. X motherboards often come equipped with four 16x/8x PCIe slots with support for 4-way SLI and Crossfire setups, high-end audio, Wi-Fi, network adapters and multiple m.2 ports. X motherboards are usually well equipped for overclocking with high-quality MOSFETs, VRMs, and capacitors and a high level of copper content in the circuitry. In short, Threadripper motherboards are among the best available, but they carry price tags that match their feature sets. Budget options begin at $, while some high-end models retail for up to $

AMD released the X chipset alongside the first-generation Ryzen Threadripper processors, and all first-generation motherboards support the second-generation Threadripper processors.

Intel recently split its server chips out onto their own platform with a larger interface and a different chipset. However, the first round of Xeon Ws, which span from four to 18 cores, drop into the LGA socket we know from the company's high-end desktop motherboards. To bring the WX to workstations, Intel transitioned the LGA socket that it had used exclusively for server products to new motherboards with the Cseries chipset.

Your selection of C motherboards is extremely limited: For now, there are only two motherboards available. Both ASUS and Gigabyte models feature support for two power supplies to feed enough power to the W Xeon WX for overclocking. The motherboards also come in the EEB form factor, which measures 14" x 14", meaning you'll also need a high-end chassis to house the motherboard.

As we expect from motherboards designed for the extreme high end of performance, these models come with all the extras, and then some. The ASUS ROG Dominus Extreme, for instance, comes with a phase power delivery subsystem, 10G LAN, wireless AC support, RGB lighting and a large OLED panel for monitoring. All of these features contribute to the highest pricing we've seen for a motherboard. The ASUS ROG Dominus Extreme weighs in at $1, at retail. Pricing for Gigabyte's AX1-C hasn't been announced yet, though we expect it to land within a similar range.

Of course, these prices will restrict the number of customers interested in building systems with these ultra-high-end LGA motherboards, but we expect that cheaper models will come to market in the future. As we noted in our review, we were able to overclock our liquid-cooled system with a single power supply easily. Intel tells us that the second power supply is really only needed for pushing the edge for waterchillers and LN2 cooling, so it makes sense that motherboard vendors will eventually come out with motherboards that only support one PSU, thus lowering prices tremendously. For now, though, LGA motherboards are by far the most expensive on the market. 

Winner: AMD.

AMD's X motherboards are pricey, but boards that support the Xeon WX set a new high bar, relegating them to the extreme high-end of the market. This premium equates to much higher-priced OEM systems, and custom builds will be far more expensive than systems built around the Threadripper platform. 

Workstation Performance:

The SPECworkstation 3 benchmark is designed to measure workstation performance in professional applications. The full suite consists of more than 30 applications, but we've winnowed down the list to eight tests that focus specifically on CPU performance.

Image 1 of 11
Image 2 of 11
Image 3 of 11
Image 4 of 11
Image 5 of 11
Image 6 of 11
Image 7 of 11
Image 8 of 11
Image 9 of 11
Image 10 of 11
Image 11 of 11

These workloads focus on performance in complex workloads, like financial forecasting models, seismic processing, three-dimensional structural computations, molecular dynamics, and discrete energy minimization.

AMD's Threadripper WX is competitive at stock settings and takes the lead in the Monte Carlo and NAMD workloads, but the Xeon WX serves up the most well-rounded performance profile across the span of our tests. In some tests, like Rodina LifeSciences, Kirchoff Migration, and Calculix, the Threadripper WX provides an excellent price-to-performance ratio, especially when we consider its lower overall platform costs.

Winner: Tie.

Intel's Xeon WX takes the overall performance crown, but the Threadripper WX's great price-to-performance ratio is hard to ignore. Ultimately most workstation customers make decisions based upon performance and price in very specific applications, so the winner really depends upon the intended use-case.

Gaming Performance

We'll be blunt here: If you’re just looking for a gaming CPU, you should probably look elsewhere. These chips are just too expensive to be worthwhile for gamers. Even if you have money to burn, an Intel Core iK is objectively the better option than either a Xeon WX or a Ryzen Threadripper WX. But if you need one of these CPUs for productivity reasons, it doesn’t hurt to know that when the workday is over, you can enjoy some high-performance gaming.

Both CPUs in this showdown are suitable for gaming, but Intel’s Xeon WX does hold the advantage due to its higher single- and multi-core clock speeds.

Image 1 of 10
Image 2 of 10
Image 3 of 10
Image 4 of 10
Image 5 of 10
Image 6 of 10
Image 7 of 10
Image 8 of 10
Image 9 of 10
Image 10 of 10

[Note that we didn't re-publish our full gaming test results here. For all our gaming results between the Xeon WX and the Ryzen Threadripper WX, see our full review of the Xeon WX.]

AMD’s Ryzen Threadripper WX isn’t as powerful as Intel’s flagship CPU in gaming workloads at sub-4K resolutions, but it’s certainly capable of running games well. Keep in mind that once you start raising your gaming resolutions above p, these performance differences tend to shrink as the GPU becomes the bottleneck. When gaming at 4K with the same high-end graphics card, frame rates between the Intel and AMD CPUs here tend to be about the same.

In either case, the Xeon WX comes out on top, but you'll pay a handsome premium for what equates to an ~11 FPS gain in average framerates.

Winner: Intel.

The Xeon WX is much faster than AMD’s Threadripper WX for gaming workloads, but if you buy one of these CPUs just for gaming, you’re missing the point -- and wasting your money.

Productivity Performance

High-core count processors traditionally aren’t the most efficient option for most lightly-threaded office productivity tasks, but Intel has made strides in this area with the WX.

Image 1 of 9
Image 2 of 9
Image 3 of 9
Image 4 of 9
Image 5 of 9
Image 6 of 9
Image 7 of 9
Image 8 of 9
Image 9 of 9

Intel’s Xeon WX consistently outpaces AMD’s Threadripper WX in Adobe’s Creative Cloud suite, but lower-cost mainstream processors are much more agile in these types of lightly-threaded tasks.

Intel's processor is also surprisingly strong in our web browsing tests, including Kraken JavaScript Benchmark, WebXPRT and MotionMark , while AMD’s Threadripper WX lands at the bottom of the pack.

Winner: Intel.

The Xeon WX benefits from its higher clock speeds and instruction-per-cycle throughput advantage, which translates to faster performance in mundane office-class workloads. That said, if lightweight office work is your primary use for your computer, there are other more-affordable options (from Intel or AMD) that would be a better choice.

Rendering

Threadripper WX's extra cores endow the processor with more performance in heavily multi-threaded workloads, but Intel's mesh architecture and single-die approach provides superior performance in many workloads, especially after tuning. 

Image 1 of 12
Image 2 of 12
Image 3 of 12
Image 4 of 12
Image 5 of 12
Image 6 of 12
Image 7 of 12
Image 8 of 12
Image 9 of 12
Image 10 of 12
Image 11 of 12
Image 12 of 12

Our rendering test split into both single- and multi-threaded categories. With a single core active, we see that Intel's Xeon WX trounces Threadripper WX by a big margin, highlighting the chip's beastly single-core turbo boost.

The multi-threaded tests are the best indicator of performance in most rendering applications, which often exploit the parallelism of multi-core designs to the fullest. Loading up all the cores naturally plays into the hands of the WX with its superior core count, making its scores much more competitive with Intel's flagship.

Intel's WX still leads in the majority of multi-core workloads, but the performance deltas shrink to the point that Intel's 66% price premium doesn't represent the best return on the additional investment. For instance, the WX is only 20% faster during the Corona ray tracing rendering workload, which represents its largest advantage. More often than not, that advantage shrinks to 10% or below in heavily-threaded rendering applications.

Intel also pulls off the win in the marketing war with a ~5% advantage in the Cinebench application that AMD often uses in its marketing materials and demos. But, again, we're looking at a relatively slim advantage that comes at a significantly higher price point for the chip, not to mention the extreme accommodations you'll need for the WX

Winner: AMD.

AMD’s Threadripper WX delivers ultra-competitive performance in rendering applications, but at a much cheaper price point than Intel. And that's before we take the Xeon WX's expensive accommodations into account. 

Encoding & Compression

AMD’s WX is far more effective when it can unleash the full heft of its 64 threads, but Intel's inherent per-core performance advantage favors video and audio encoding. For professionals, time equates directly to money, and the WX delivers a big advantage for encoding over Threadripper.

Image 1 of 7
Image 2 of 7
Image 3 of 7
Image 4 of 7
Sours: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-xeon-wx-vs-amd-threadripperwx,html

Now discussing:

These were animal instincts. It all happened very quickly. She lost her breath.



1514 1515 1516 1517 1518